Youth Violence

Kids gone wild, parents gone missing
By Richard Cohen
Tuesday, April 6, 2010; A13

It is either significant or merely interesting that William Golding dedicated his classic, “Lord of the Flies,” to his mother and father. It is precisely the absence of parents, or any adult actually, that enables the boys of the island to descend into savagery, and it is the sudden appearance of an adult at the end that restores what we would now call law and order. This tale, way before its time, was a precursor to South Hadley High School in Massachusetts and the suicide of Phoebe Prince. It was the only way she could get off the island.
After a lengthy investigation, District Attorney Elizabeth D. Scheibel had nine students arrested on criminal charges. At the same time, she alleged that while the teenagers had tormented Phoebe to the point where she hanged herself, teachers and administrators were somehow complicit because they knew — or should have known — that Phoebe was being bullied by a coterie of aspiring fascists. Phoebe was a newcomer from Ireland and thus, as anyone with the slightest novelist bent would know, the stranger with no champions, no defenders and, in her mind, no way out.
This appalling story, seemingly concocted for the “Today” show’s heavy-eyed audience, has of course created quite a stir because it is about cruelty, which we do not understand; lack of empathy, which we find frightening; and conformity and coercion. But mostly it is about how little we know our kids, the little beasts who live among us and can sleep with a teddy bear by night and text-message a 15-year-old colleen to her death by day. Who are these kids?
You will notice that in all the finger-pointing — the students, the teachers, the administrators — not a digit is aimed at the parents. Their children are accused of hounding a classmate to death and the parents apparently knew nothing. Not only that, they are somehow not expected to know anything. The teachers are supposed to know what’s going on. The principal. Maybe even the school nurse. But the parents? No. They’re off the hook.
Not as far as I’m concerned. This tendency to blame teachers or administrators for all that happens in the schools is both unfair and unrealistic. Jaime Escalante, who died just recently, proved that a great teacher can make a great difference (he was the inspiration for the movie “Stand and Deliver”). And we know, too, the central importance of good principals. But parents, too, are important — most important — yet they, of course, cannot be fired. They have tenure.
Philadelphia has been the lucky host for a series of mini-riots. These are violent variants of the “flash mob,” in which, in this case, throngs of youths assembled by text message so that they could then run amok through downtown areas, looting and assaulting to their hearts’ content. As could be expected, some people do not think that either the kids or their parents (if any) are responsible. They point instead to the lack of funding for sufficient youth violence prevention programs. Mine, as I recall, was a withering look from my father.
No district attorney is going to call a public meeting to berate parents for not knowing what their junior sadists are up to. That would be politically perilous and, besides, somehow teachers have a contractual obligation — we pay ‘em, don’t we? — to know what the children are up to while the parents are busy. Mothers are moms, after all, and therefore sacrosanct. As for fathers — well, where the hell are they, anyway? We fail schools but never parents.
I am the emeritus parent of a former teenager, and so I know the difficulties. Teenager is a synonym for crazy, and their world is too often nuts — superficial, cruel, conformist, hedonistic and self-absorbed; they’re convinced by virtue of their spending power of their importance and judgment. (I am exempting your own child from this blanket indictment.) But however the criminal case turns out, the South Hadley Nine clearly needed some parenting — some intercession or maybe, even probably, a parent to do what their child all the time wanted: force them to stop.
Golding’s book is about evil. Kids can be mean. They want to belong. They mistake the strength of empathy for weakness. They need help. An invisible umbilical cord should connect them to a mature conscience. At South Hadley High School, the kids were running the island and the adults were missing. Where were the teachers? Where was the principal? But where, above all, were the parents?
cohenr@washpost.com

Michael Brewer was brutally attacked by a group of boys in Ft. Lauderdale, Fla., over a $40 video game. During an interview shortly after the incident, his mother made a plea to the world to stop youth violence. The incident came on the heels of an Oct. 7, 2009 press conference held by US Education Secretary Arne Duncan and US Attorney General Eric Holder in Chicago to bring attention to the problem of youth violence in the United States after the fatal beating of student Derrion Albert.

Last month Michael Brewer was doused with alcohol and set on fire by a group of boys in Ft. Lauderdale, Fla., over a $40 video game. The incident came on the heels of an Oct. 7 press conference in Chicago held by US Education Secretary Arne Duncan and US Attorney General Eric Holder to bring attention to the problem of youth violence in the US after the fatal beating of student Derrion Albert. Click here to donate to the Michael Brewer Foundation. http://www.facebook.com/michaelbrewerfoundation

  • Current News

  • Quotes

    We preach the virtues of democracy abroad. We must practice its duties here at home. Voting is the first duty of democracy. — Lyndon B. Johnson

  • Seminole Chronicle Endorses Bean

    VIEWPOINTS Consider Bean when casting vote By Tyler Yeargain | July 21, 2010 I am typically not someone who sees the value in voting for or endorsing independent candidates for office. In my view, it is wasting your vote if the person that you cast your ballot for receives 1 percent (or less) of the vote. Typically, in most races, it is relatively obvious as to which candidate best represents my values and beliefs. However, in the U.S. Senate election in Florida, I have had no epiphany as to which candidate is even remotely qualified to represent our state. Gov. Charlie Crist, for example, represents exactly what is wrong with politics in our country. He is a political panderer and overly ambitious office-seeker who will happily abandon his principles if it means more power and more potential for power. Typically, first-term governors do not abstain from running for re-election just so that they can run for the Senate. However, Crist saw himself as a potential Republican candidate for president in 2012 or 2016, and he needed to expand his national profile. For this same reason, in 2008, when rumors were floating that he was Sen. John McCain's pick for vice president, he announced that he was suddenly engaged. Despite being married for about one year before getting a divorce, being single for nearly all of his life, and having no children, he hoped that this would create the image of a "family man" that appeals to the conservative Christian "pro-family" voters. I used to believe that Marco Rubio stood for principles, not politics, and that he would be a better representative in the Senate than Crist would. He actually appeared to have some moral grounding. However, the combination of the revelations that Rubio used Republican Party money, donated by supporters of the conservative cause, for his personal expenses, and his endorsements have made me question that notion. I never think that it is appropriate for people to use any money, whether "belonging" to the government or an organization, that has been provided by private citizens, for their own, apolitical lives. To me, it is not a partisan issue so much as it is a common sense issue. And I will gladly call out any Democrat who does the same. However, Rubio brings a sense of arrogance to the table that somehow, because he is conservative, he is just right for the Senate. His endorsements bring me chagrin. Why on Earth would I support someone endorsed by Karl Rove, Dick Cheney or Newt Gingrich? Besides, it is difficult to offer any meager support for someone who will blindly filibuster and block anything the Democratic majority will try to do. Kendrick Meek was my preferred candidate for Senate before I realized that I was only reluctantly supporting him because he supposedly shared my values. Yet it appears that Rep. Meek is nothing but an empty suit who was elected to his position because his mother was his predecessor. Meek, who has been "re-elected" thrice without any opposition in his gerrymandered congressional district, has done nothing of importance during his tenure in Washington. He seems so surprisingly bland and weak that I doubt that he could ever hold his ground on any issue of importance to himself or the people of Florida. Why I even include Meek in my characterization of this race is a mystery to me. His campaign is so remarkably disorganized, weak and unimportant in the election that he really is functioning as a third-party candidate. I know little about Jeff Greene, other than the fact that he attained his billions in a potentially shady way and that he is not afraid to spend his fortune on television advertising. However, I do know that I like the fact that he is limiting individual contributions to $100 and that he is accepting no corporate or political action committee donations. Minus the fact that he is running the risk of being an out-of-touch billionaire, this seems to detach Greene from the "necessity" in Washington to curry favor with lobbyists and corporate special interests. Point being, other than knowing that I prefer Greene over Meek to be the Democratic nominee, it is difficult to endorse one of the "major" candidates. I reserve my endorsement for a third-party candidate by the name of Bobbie Bean. Most people have no idea who Bean is and will not remember who he is other than maybe seeing his name on the long list of independent candidates for Senate on Election Day. However, something about Bean stands out to me. He is not a career politician; instead, he entered politics in a different way as an anti-school violence activist when his son was severely injured by a bully. He does not hail from the extreme left or the extreme right; rather, he appears to be a centrist with commonplace, moderate political views that fairly represent most people. I realize I have no weight to throw around with regard to endorsing candidates for any office, but if you are undecided as to whom you plan on voting for, or simply are not devout in your preference, I would ask that you consider Bobbie Bean.
  • Disclaimer

    Paid for by the Bobbie Bean Committee for US Senate.