+- Carlton Supporters Club (http://new.carltonsc.com)
+-- Forum: Social Club (http://new.carltonsc.com/forum-6.html)
+--- Forum: Blah-Blah Bar (http://new.carltonsc.com/forum-23.html)
+--- Thread: Melbourne CBD Incident (/thread-3096.html)
Re: Melbourne CBD Incident - kruddler - 02-01-2017
(02-01-2017, 11:01 PM)Thryleon link Wrote:If its in their nature, can they be nurtured?
Or are they lost causes from the get go?
Im trying to understand something here, and I cannot figure out for the life of me why some people proceed through life one way yet their siblings go a completely different route and sure there are learning components for parenting in the process as the very few examples I can show you are the eldest children being the ones who stuff up more, yet in one family, 4 kids, we have the eldest and youngest both being terrors and the middle children being "good" kids, which makes me wonder if they are not shaped more by their experiences with their peers than the parenting.
IMHO, parenting is the easy target. Ive yet to meet too many parents who "don't care" about their kids and as a consequence they turn into bad eggs, but I've met plenty who are molly coddled and turn into terrors. (Note, the perpetrator of the bourke street incident is very much next level to anything I have witnessed.)
Nurture is not limited to their parents, but it is the obvious factor.
You can argue about this topic for ever and a day and there are plenty of studies on it.
I made a comment previously about limited adults having children as being the best fix (albeit most unlikely) in order to stop this problem. Meaning i believe its more nurture than nature.
Re: Melbourne CBD Incident - Lods - 02-01-2017
I spent forty years working in the juvenile justice system.
Over that period of time I met countless parents.
The large majority of them appeared to be genuinely caring...but (judgmentally on my part) inadequate.
They appeared to lack the ability to make good judgements or establish boundaries and controls.
Often these meetings would also take place with a grandparent and you could see that the parents were unprepared largely because their own childhood had lacked that parental guidance.
Single parent families were also common and more often than not it was the mother who was left to raise the child...in such cases the father had often been abusive to both mother and children.
Poverty or living on the fringe, which often accompanied such family breakups, contributed to the pressures on parents.
Without strong parental influences in their lives kids turn to peer groups which provide a more positive atmosphere of acceptance....but not necessarily of behaviour.
So that's basically your foundation for building a young offender.
Yes, there were kids who were off the rails despite having stronger family backgrounds and siblings who were never in trouble.
In most cases these were the result of a mental condition... maybe not an obvious one, but there all the same.
(02-01-2017, 11:01 PM)Thryleon link Wrote:I'm trying to understand something here, and I cannot figure out for the life of me why some people proceed through life one way yet their siblings go a completely different route and sure there are learning components for parenting in the process as the very few examples I can show you are the eldest children being the ones who stuff up more, yet in one family, 4 kids, we have the eldest and youngest both being terrors and the middle children being "good" kids, which makes me wonder if they are not shaped more by their experiences with their peers than the parenting.
Just taking the mental condition aspect out of it for a second...Elder children will often be the more difficult because they're the "first attempt". Folks learn from their mistakes with subsequent kids. They're also born at a time when parents are still establishing themselves so attention is often on other things like careers, buying a home, change of lifestyle created by the new baby. As for the youngest ones...they're just bad eggs ;D
Re: Melbourne CBD Incident - LP - 02-01-2017
(02-01-2017, 11:44 PM)Lods link Wrote:So that's basically your foundation for building a young offender.
Yes, there were kids who were off the rails despite having stronger family backgrounds and siblings who were never in trouble.
In most cases these were the result of a mental condition... maybe not an obvious one, but there all the same.
So if the problem cannot be cured upgrading societal skills, where does the "Kennett" rational come from to close all the asylums, I assume it was primarily a fiscal decision that comes at the expense of the general public?
Lods, posters will happily argue the causes with you, that is for sure. But from your experience, what is the fundamental solution?
I gather allowing troubled youth to run riot in detention is not going to make things better. That probably just reinforces bad behavior.
Sending kids to big persons prison won't be the answer either, that will just institutionalise them long term.
Where should we spend the smart money?
Re: Melbourne CBD Incident - PaulP - 02-02-2017
Lods, top post. There's many factors and forces working together that create the problem.
Re: Melbourne CBD Incident - Lods - 02-02-2017
(02-01-2017, 11:50 PM)LP link Wrote:So if the problem cannot be cured upgrading societal skills, where does the "Kennett" rational come from to close all the asylums, I assume it was primarily a fiscal decision that comes at the expense of the general public?
Lods, posters will happily argue the causes with you, that is for sure. But from your experience, what is the fundamental solution?
I gather allowing troubled youth to run riot in detention is not going to make things better. That probably just reinforces bad behavior.
Sending kids to big persons prison won't be the answer either, that will just institutionalise them long term.
Where should we spend the smart money?
We had a similar situation occur in NSW many years ago.
At one stage the Community Services Department ran both State Ward homes and Juvenile detention Centres.
I worked in both.
The State Ward homes catered for a range of kids so that we had specialist centres for intellectually disabled, emotionally disturbed and just basically neglected kids...To tell you the truth they weren't great places and there are a number of horror cases that were no doubt looked at during the commission into institutional abuse...however they did serve a purpose in that these kids (Wards), especially the ones with emotional disturbance, were kept separate from the juvenile detention system.
Like with the Kennett situation these were gradually closed down, replaced in some part by smaller group homes...but large numbers of these kids then began showing up in the Juvenile Detention system.
Many may have ended up there anyway but their introduction into that system was fast tracked.
What to do?
Separate them, get them before they become entrenched in the JJ system. Provide the kids with emotional disturbance or more serious psychiatric disorders with a more suitable and hopefully productive program....but that costs money.
So the question then becomes one of cost effectiveness.
At the very least trial a few.
Look, Juvenile Detention centres are streets ahead of what they used to be in terms of providing educational and rehabilitative opportunities for kids....but they're being called upon to do too much if they're also being asked to function as mental health facilities.
Mixing the populations is detrimental to both groups.
(and get some bloody razor wire on the roof of your JJ centres to stop the kids climbing all over them.....they'll fall and hurt themselves!)
Re: Melbourne CBD Incident - DJC - 02-02-2017
One thing I wasn't aware of is that a young offender who enters the juvenile justice system as a minor can stay there until they're 25. I would imagine that a bloke in their early 20s could wield quite an influence over first time offenders in their mid teens.
While I'm not advocating moving all young offenders to adult prison once the reach a certain age, it should happen when deemed appropriate.
Re: Melbourne CBD Incident - Lods - 02-02-2017
(02-02-2017, 12:32 AM)DJC link Wrote:One thing I wasn't aware of is that a young offender who enters the juvenile justice system as a minor can stay there until they're 25. I would imagine that a bloke in their early 20s could wield quite an influence over first time offenders in their mid teens.
While I'm not advocating moving all young offenders to adult prison once the reach a certain age, it should happen when deemed appropriate.
Not sure about 25...don't know how it works down there.
But we've had them up to about 20..usually undertaking some educational program or work release.
They stay because their behaviour is excellent.
Put a foot wrong, including intimidating younger ones, and they're gone.
Re: Melbourne CBD Incident - DJC - 02-02-2017
(02-02-2017, 12:53 AM)Lods link Wrote:Not sure about 25...don't know how it works down there.
But we've had them up to about 20..usually undertaking some educational program or work release.
They stay because their behaviour is excellent.
Put a foot wrong, including intimidating younger ones, and they're gone.
My son works in the system Lods, in a professional development capacity, and recently told me about the 25 year old rule. A significant number of the young offenders now housed in an adult prison because they trashed a youth detention centre are in their 20s.
I fully support the idea of older young offenders staying in the youth system while they complete educational or vocational programs, but not if they muck up ...
Re: Melbourne CBD Incident - Thryleon - 02-02-2017
Would any of the above have helped in this instance?
Would any of the above have helped avoid the Bourke street incident??
I don't think it would have unless I dont have the full background of this individual.
Re: Melbourne CBD Incident - Lods - 02-02-2017
(02-02-2017, 03:39 AM)Thryleon link Wrote:Would any of the above have helped in this instance?
Would any of the above have helped avoid the Bourke street incident??
I don't think it would have unless I dont have the full background of this individual.
Probably not, but you can never be sure...the offender was a product of a whole range of influences (including mental health issues) over a lifetime that led him to this point.
But many could be helped by alternative or earlier intervention