When The Kids Do The Crime Who Should Be Held Responsible?

Seth — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 18:49:28 +0000

The long argued debate over parents paying for their kid’s crimes was opened up again when the Los Angeles City Council was scheduled to discuss passing a law that would hold parents financially responsible for the graffiti vandalism caused by their children. Under the proposed law, parents would be made to compensate for such vandalism and the money would be used to help clean and restore damaged property. Parents also would be required to participate in parenting classes. L. A. County Sheriff Lee Baca announced publicly, the arrest of two adults and 10 juveniles in an anti-graffiti sweep targeting two main areas in city. An Australian court, in July 2004, ordered the parents, of two teenagers, to pay (on an appeal) $60,000 to the owners of two properties, set alight by the teenagers. They had caused $400,000 worth of damage and one of the homes had to be totally rebuilt. The ruling is believed to be an Australian legal first. Judge Denis Reynolds said the parents had generally been responsible around the time of the arson attacks. But he said they had not adequately supervised their children, who were using amphetamines and cannabis, as well as drinking alcohol. Judge Reynolds said the compensation order was not to be seen as further punishment for the parents. Kalgoolie lawyer, Carmel McKenzie, the lawyer representing the teenagers’ parents, argued her clients acted appropriately and responsibly during the period of the children’s upbringing. She said the parents did not deserve to be punished for their crimes of their children. She went on to say, “We’re used to, in our society, people being punished for what they have done but the concept of punishing somebody for something somebody else has done is obviously an unusual situation”. One of the victims of the fire said, “At the end of the day, these are your children and they are your responsibility whether you like it or whether you don’t”. There are however, others who would argue that the guardian cannot be held liable for willful actions committed by the child unless there is proof that the child was specifically led to the end result that a crime was committed. While the argument over whether parents should be held responsible for their children’s crimes has raged for many years, Texas passed ordinances that imposed fines on both the parents and the underage criminals. Silverton, Oregon, was the first state to adopt such a law in 1995, where parents can be charged up to $1,000 if their child is found carrying a gun, smoking cigarettes, or using illegal drugs. Parents who agree to participate in parenting classes may avoid the fines. In the first two months after the law was passed at the beginning of 1995, seven parents were fined and many others enrolled to take part in parenting classes. The Oregon law applies to parents “failing to supervise a child”. It covers misdemeanours like breaking a curfew or skipping school. Fines range up to $1,000, with a payment of up to $2,500 to be paid to a victim. Juvenile crime rate has dropped 53%, since the law came into being. Thirty-three states, across America, now require parents to pay retribution for crimes committed by their children.

Dr Wendy Stenberg-Tendys and her husband are CEO’s of YouMe Support Foundation (http://youmesupport. org) providing high school education grants for children who are without hope. Kids with education, particularly in third world countries, are less likely to end up committing crimes. Take a few minutes to check out how you could bepart of this exciting project (http://winareosrt. com).

Feel free to contact Wendy on admin@youmesupport. org

Desert Eagle Powerwash - Arizona » Responsible

When The Kids Do The Crime Who Should Be Held Responsible?