Trying Children As Adults....My Pet Peeve With This Country

[Lou]

Perhaps I need some input on this subject because it's starting to DRIVE ME NUTS!
I remember the days when we occasionally tried children as adults. Usually the crime had to be horrendous and the "kid" in question was 17.
Things have taken a DRAMATIC turn and it just doesn't make sense. It seems that every week I hear of another child being tried as an adult! And it doesn't make any sense to me.

For instance, there is one around here where a 14 year old girl allowed her 21 year old boyfriend to kill her parents because they had said they couldn't date.
Sure, the girl was aware that this was supposed to happen. But, it was the boyfriend's idea and HE'S 21. The general plan was to kill the parents and run off to Georgia to live.
I find it bizarre to charge this girl with 1st degree murder as an adult. Sure, she knew and probably knew it was "wrong". On the other hand, I don't believe the girl did (or because of her age and the influence of this MUCH older guy) was aware of the ins and outs of this. Like she HONESTLY thought they'd just bop off to Georgia and live happily ever after. She had no idea about running from the law forever. She had no thought of what happens when she gets married and may want her Dad around. No idea about what it might be like to have a baby someday. Nothing. She's FOURTEEN!

There were TONS of things I did at 14 that weren't very smart, STUPID in fact, but I was scared of DAD finding out, not being put away for LIFE.

There were kids on the news last night that, from what I understand, lured a girl to their house and picked on her and "beat her up", although the tape they showed seemed more mean that brutal. They're talking of trying THEM as adults and getting them on kidnapping charges that could result in life in prison.

I'm not making excuses for these kids. They've done something wrong and SHOULD be punished.

On the other hand, in this country a 14 year old can't vote, can't drive, can't have a job, can't buy beer or cigarettes, can't get an apartment, in some states are still too young to ride in the front seat of a car, they can't do much of ANYTHING. And WHY? Because as a nation we've said, "Children are irresponsible. They aren't capable of making these decisions on their own. They can't think long term. They make POOR decisions and can't foresee the consequences of their actions."

So, let's see....they can't have a voice in who can be Mayor of Po-dunk-ville, but they ARE capable of realizing that tormenting another child equates to KIDNAPPING and life in PRISON? How is that anywhere close to the same as an adult, who KNOWS they can't take a child or person they have no custody of and hold them against their will? They couldn't foresee that.
And, on top of that, these kids in the video looked like normal middle class kids. I would imagine that between family court, perhaps thrown into Juvenile Hall for a bit, community service, their parents having to hire a lawyer....I would be willing to bet these kids could be rehabilitated. They just did something REALLY STUPID and mean. Life in prison hardly seems necessary.

The age of children being tried as an adult seems to be getting younger and younger and the crimes less and less horrendous.

I cringe when I hear news about the 12 year old boy who killed the 6 year old while imitating pro-wrestlers and how he should have KNOWN he could kill her. I'd like to know exactly HOW we can deduce that he would know that, or SHOULD know that. They don't get hurt on TV. I've seen parts where giant men are fighting smaller ones. Are we assuming all parents have a talk about weight and mass in proportion to stuff like that. My son's 8 and I STILL catch him picking up the cat in ways that make me leap up and scream. He doesn't mean to hurt the cat. He loves the cat. But, he still doesn't understand that he's bigger and could hurt him. I could make a case for maybe he thought he'd WIN the wrestling match, but I seriously doubt he thought he'd KILL the girl, or was trying to. Granted, they eventually overturned it, but more based on the fact that he could have been mentally disabled and not that he was only a kid.
They WANTED to give him the death penalty for goodness sake! They would have if he had been a few years older.

I just don't get it. And the kicker is, this isn't a deterent for other children. Because kids aren't checking their law books before they do something stupid without thinking.
I think it should all be written out VERY clearly on what we can try children for. If you're not an adult until your 18, then draw the line. If you want to make it 16, draw the line. However, I don't think you can go any lower than 16 unless you intend to make that the "adult" line. In my opinion, if we can't trust them to VOTE, then we can't trust them to do much else.

 

[TrueVengeance]

At age fourteen, they are old enough to know better. Charged for first degree murder? Maybe not, but in no way should she just get away with it. She was plenty old enough to know, and to have her own parents killed like that? That's sick, and she needs punishment. She's not eight, she knows better. Even most eight year olds would know that. If these kids don't get punishment, then it won't stop at all. They'll think they can kill and just get community service or whatever. It needs to be stopped.

As far as the twelve year old killing the six year old, that sounds like that was an accident, and shouldn't be put in jail for life. But, should he get away with it? No. I knew better than that at age twelve. People think "Oh they're not eighteen, they don't know better". But that's not the case. Kids know more than we give them credit for.

But really who's to blame? The parents because they did a pretty crappy job of teaching the kids what was right and what was wrong.

 

[Lou]

AH, yes, the 14 year old should have known better. And, I'm sure she is old enough to know right from wrong.
On the other hand, being TOLD right from wrong and understanding it is a horse of a different color.
My kids KNOW not to hit each other. They KNOW I say it's wrong and that they'll get in trouble. But, they do it. Because they don't understand all the consequences that could go with that. If one of them REALLY hurt the other, even with just a black eye, it would be because they don't have the forethought to see all the things that could go wrong.
They also know not to play with matches. But, they don't have the ability to foresee that it could burn down the whole house, it could kill a family member, it could travel to the neighbor's house and kill them. They don't get it.

She SHOULD have known that this was bad. On the other hand, she had a 21 year old boyfriend. HE'S an adult and HE told her this was the only way, and HE did the murder. If an adult talks a child into sleeping with them, it's still rape because we say they aren't old enough to make such a decision.

We tell kids MUCH older not to drive fast, drive drunk, have sex, run away and they don't see the problem because they see the immediate future not the WHOLE picture. If they did, we'd let them vote. I'm sure she saw, "This is what I want, and my boyfriend says this is the only way to get it." But, she wasn't thinking of exactly HOW this would work or what this would mean. Not in the same way her boyfriend did anway.

I'm just saying, that we can't really be telling kids, "You can't do this and you can't do that" because your brain isn't developed enough to understand such decisions and responsibilities and then at the same time say they are capable of making MUCH BIGGER decisions in an adult manner.

 

[Randy Giles]

Anyone who thinks a kid should be tried as an adult for accidentally killing someone while trying to imitate a WRESTLING move should be put away themselves, for stupidity. It's not like the kid thought the other kid was going to die.

 

[Angels baby101]

Honestly depending on the crime... If its something stupid like the 12 year old that seems to me to be an accident i'm not saying he shouldn't get punished because even though it was an accident it still happened, but he should be tried as a child the 14 year old however i say she deserves it... she is old enough to know better i mean she knew about it yet said nothing thats Conspiracy...I mean if its something she had no part in what so ever then i'd say its completely stupid but the fact that she did have a major part I'm sorry but when i was 14 and someone said killing my parents was the only way to do anything i'd be so freaked out i'd run crying to them.....

She is 14 not stupid....

 

[palabravampiress]

I agree that if we are going to have a separate system for children and adults, then we need to pick an age and stick to it.

In fact, I don't think we should ever charge children as adults. The idea of crime and punishment is one of a social contract. Citizens have certain rights and responsibilities. If a citizen acts in such a way as to ignore his responsibilities, (by taking action that unlawfully restricts the rights of another citizen) then that citizen forfeits his rights as determined by the law and the courts. That social contract does not apply to children, who are not granted rights. Children are not free to make their own decisions, so how can we hold them responsible to the same extent as that to which we hold adults? It makes no sense. Trying children as adults is a practice that arises out of vengeance. As a method of revenge, people want to charge minors as adults so that the court can pursue harsher punishments. Even worse, this presumes guilt rather than innocence. Charging children as adults is not a practice that stems from a dispassionate, well-reasoned approach to law and law enforcement. Instead, it stems from pack mentality and the desire to seek revenge against those popularly believed (but not yet proven) to have committed a crime. Saying "it depends on the crime" is not a rational response; it is an emotional response. The law should be applied fairly and consistently at all times, not disregarded whenever a crime upsets the populace.

 

[Joyce Summers]

I think it all varies with the situation.
How old the child is as regards to- are they old enough to know what exactly they were doing.
For example, a five year old pushing her Father down the stairs, ending with him breaking his neck and dying. No, I don't think she should be tried as an adult or for Murder in any degree, because she's too young to know what she was doing or even perhaps that what she did was dangerous.
Young kids rough playing (in a random play fight or mimicing a show etc) ending in accidental death, no, not tried as an adult. For one it was accidental and the child might not have known how dangerous a thing they were doing. I mean we used to play all sorts of dangerous games as kids that now I think 'Oh my god! What we were doing?!'

However, a 14 year old getting her boyfriend to kill her parents because they said they couldn't date? Yes, I agree with her being tried as an adult. She's old enough to know right from wrong, knows that murder is wrong and against the law, she will have known all this. Someone who plans something so maliciously (and she should have been charged for malice aforethought too as this was a planned murder) should be tried as an adult. However, her boyfriend commited the act so he should be tried for murder while she should be brought to court for accomplice to murder and malice aforethought.

My point is, I don't think we can ever have a rigid break off point of 'at this age you're tried as a child, at this age you're an adult' as it does all depend on situation. Generally I think for any crime 14 year olds should be tried as children, but in this particularly case mention, yes I believe in her being tried as an adult.

 

[Lou]

The 14 year old didn't GET her 21 year old boyfriend to do it. HE thought this was a good idea. And HE'S 21!

So, I'm not saying she's stupid or that she didn't know good and bad and right from wrong. All I'm saying is that she's not old enough, her brain developed enough to actually think out this decision in the same way an adult would, thus shouldn't be tried as one.

For instance...let's just look at the idea of Kill Parents, move to Georgia, live Happily Ever After. That seems like LOGICAL ADULT THINKING? That's fairy tale talk. Not even a thought to what it would mean...even if they DIDN'T get caught.
Children are BORN selfish. They're only care is for themselves, not others. Babies don't wake up from a nap and say, "Well, Mom could use a little more rest, I think I'll lay here quietly a bit". They cry. It's not because they're "bad" it just is.
I took my daughter to the store to get gifts for a birthday present and we had the talk AGAIN as to why we were getting gifts for her FRIEND instead of HER.
In most cases, it's been shown that it takes almost 20 years to grow from the baby selfish phase to the adult logical phase where you can think through things in a rational way.

For all those who claim this girl DID know (like an ADULT would know, because we are talking about trying her as an ADULT and not letting Juvenile Court handle it) what the ramifications of letting your boyfriend kill your parents....let me ask a question. Does that mean that a 14 year old should be allowed to drop out of school on a whim? Should she be allowed to move out of her parents house, become a stripper and rent an apartment? Should she be allowed to buy alcohol...drive a car? I mean, why not? She's not "stupid"? She is perfectly capable of making major life altering decisions, right? She knows right from wrong. So, why doesn't the law let her do it?

This girl came from a decent family. She had parents that found out she had a 21 year old boyfriend and said, "NO FREAKING WAY". Now, exactly how can it be that a 14 year old seduced by his teacher be a victim, but a 14 year old who's told by their boyfriend that killing her parents is a good idea and the only way to get what they want NOT a victim?

Sure, I think she should get in trouble. LOTSA trouble. I don't think she should be patted on the head and sent back to school and to live with Grandma who bakes nice cookies. But, there is a BIG difference between that and life in prison. That would be LIFE, whole life, no way out. That's insane. You make a bad decision at an age when the country, most doctors and psychologists say you're not capable of making ANY good, rational, adult decisions so they don't let you do anything and you get no chances for anything else? EVER? Not locked up for 10 years, FOREVER.

Seems to me, any 14 year old dating a 21 year old needs some mental help anyway. I seriously doubt this relationship was all cupcakes and puppy dogs. Who knows what kind of hold he had over her. How can we POSSIBLY put this girl in the same boat as say, men who kill their wife for the life insurance or serial killers?

Sure, they need punishment. And, if our current child prosecution sentence is not harsh enough, then as a country we should make it harsher. But, trying them as adults and treating children as if they have the capability of, not knowing right from wrong, but UNDERSTANDING the impact their decisions make on the outside world the same way a 30 year old does is ridiculous. When I was 14 I hadn't even lost a Grandparent yet. What the heck did I know about death or the impact it has?

 

[RogueHunter]

Actually she was 15 at the time the crime was committed, just for the sake of accuracy.
Her actions led to the deaths of two people and that cannot be taken lightly. The rights of the victim supersede the rights of the killer. I don't want a clear definition of who can or can't be charged as an adult because there will always be an exception. The system has enough checks and balances already.
This isn't acting out, this is murder.

As for the girls attacking the other girl, well just go on youtube and see how often it happens. Something drastic needs to be done and if these girls have to set the example, so be it. Parents need to realize they have to PARENT, and not be buddies with their kids. As a parent, if this were my daughter being smacked around like that, I sure as hell would want to see something severe done.
You can't have more compassion for the attacker than you can for the victim.

 

[Lou]

But, can you prosecute the parent? They didn't really do it. And, since I WAS a teen once, I know you can't watch them ALL the time. Eventually, you have a dinner party or a wedding for a friend. At some point you have to let them out of the house alone. Even "good attentive" parents have kids that get into trouble at some point.

I'd be mad if it was MY kid too. I'd also be mad if it was my kid doing it. But, the key to life is not finding the harshest way to strike back at people who wrong you. It's learning something from the bad things that happen and moving on. Giving to others, helping others, maybe even the people who wronged you in the first place.

I just think there HAS to be a better answer than trying them as adults. Looking at life in prison is a little out there. Sometimes we ARE talking about Murder and there may be exceptions to every rule. I might feel different if we were talking about a 17 year old who had a record a mile long of animal torture and intentionally dragging children off the street to beat to a bloody pulp. I dealt with it when it was once in a blue moon they deemed someone "bad enough" to try as an adult. But, things are going too far, it's right and left.

I don't think making an "example" helps with teens. I'm not sure it helps with ANY crime, but certainly not with children. There is no way those girls beating up the other girl had the fore-thought to equate kidnapping charges to what they were doing. Maybe assault, but not kidnapping. And the NEXT time it happens, the kids aren't going to have that fore-thought either. It's not like they're planning their crimes beforehand and scanning the news for past ones.

If we HAVE a Juvenile Court we should be USING it. If it's not harsh enough to keep up with today's world....we should be voting on ways to bring it up to speed, maybe find a mid-way place where they can stay until 25. Maybe go REALLY nuts and find a way to educate them so they have some skills when we spit them back out!

 

[Joyce Summers]

Even "good attentive" parents have kids that get into trouble at some point.

Yes, I agree. But that kind of trouble that happens there usually isn't considering murder or being any kind of hate crime.

The 14 year old didn't GET her 21 year old boyfriend to do it. HE thought this was a good idea. And HE'S 21!

So, I'm not saying she's stupid or that she didn't know good and bad and right from wrong. All I'm saying is that she's not old enough, her brain developed enough to actually think out this decision in the same way an adult would, thus shouldn't be tried as one.

Fine, I accept that she didn't 'get' her boyfriend to do it; I will take that concept into consideration.But saying she couldn't think out a decision the way an adult could? She's fourteen. I know for a fact that at fourteen I was perfectly capable of think through things like an adult. At least enough to know what is right and what is wrong and certainly to think 'Hey maybe allowing him to kill my parents isn't such a good idea'. You can't possibly say at fourteen that you are unable to have such a thought process. If she was in a mind set that this was a perfectly okay thing to do, at the age of fourteen when she should know better, then maybe no she shouldn't be put on a trial as an adult. She should be in a mental institution.

For instance...let's just look at the idea of Kill Parents, move to Georgia, live Happily Ever After. That seems like LOGICAL ADULT THINKING? That's fairy tale talk. Not even a thought to what it would mean...

I refer back to my 'go into a mental institution' point here.

Children are BORN selfish. They're only care is for themselves, not others. Babies don't wake up from a nap and say, "Well, Mom could use a little more rest, I think I'll lay here quietly a bit". They cry. It's not because they're "bad" it just is.
I took my daughter to the store to get gifts for a birthday present and we had the talk AGAIN as to why we were getting gifts for her FRIEND instead of HER.

Children are selfish. Okay, I'll accept that at face value, but how the hell does that relate to allowing someone to kill your parents? That isn't selfishness, that's crazy troll logic.

For all those who claim this girl DID know (like an ADULT would know, because we are talking about trying her as an ADULT and not letting Juvenile Court handle it) what the ramifications of letting your boyfriend kill your parents....let me ask a question. Does that mean that a 14 year old should be allowed to drop out of school on a whim? Should she be allowed to move out of her parents house, become a stripper and rent an apartment? Should she be allowed to buy alcohol...drive a car? I mean, why not? She's not "stupid"? She is perfectly capable of making major life altering decisions, right? She knows right from wrong. So, why doesn't the law let her do it?

That's taking it entirely out of context in my opinion. All those things you mentioned are life choices that affect herself, not others. As a minor under her parents guardianship they have, until she's 18, he ability to be able to dictate to some extent how she lives her life. This includes the government making her go to school, not allowing to have sex, live alone etc etc. But murder, or consideration of murder is a choice just like the others mentioned above that have serious ramifications for other people and for herself. She actively made that decision and she should have to deal with the consequences. Besides as awful as it is fourteen year olds have dropped out of school, have moved out from their parents' house, and I don't think any of us can be in denial of how young some strippers are. But those are ramifications only for the teen themselves and don't effect anyone else directly (such as the murder of person would, let's say) so they are seen as lesser cases in the eyes of the court. Murder no matter the age, is ALWAYS a big deal and understandably so. You've taken someone's life. In my opinion that means you have to face the same consequences as everyone else. Though I am definitely leaning towards the mental institution option here.

This girl came from a decent family. She had parents that found out she had a 21 year old boyfriend and said, "NO FREAKING WAY". Now, exactly how can it be that a 14 year old seduced by his teacher be a victim, but a 14 year old who's told by their boyfriend that killing her parents is a good idea and the only way to get what they want NOT a victim?

It's all in the fact that she didn't try to stop him and/or didn't warn her parents or the authorities. This is seen as agreement, and therefore accomplice to murder, making her consenting in the entire arrangement. I agree in the 21 year old boyfriend getting a harsher sentence, I do, but that doesn't mean that I don't think the girl should be tried as an adult as well. This act was all too horrendous for it not to be taken in a deadly serious way.

Sure, I think she should get in trouble. LOTSA trouble. I don't think she should be patted on the head and sent back to school and to live with Grandma who bakes nice cookies. But, there is a BIG difference between that and life in prison. That would be LIFE, whole life, no way out. That's insane. You make a bad decision at an age when the country, most doctors and psychologists say you're not capable of making ANY good, rational, adult decisions so they don't let you do anything and you get no chances for anything else? EVER? Not locked up for 10 years, FOREVER.

I stick to my mental institution theory. The girl is, if she's making decisions like this at fourteen, criminally insane. Who's to say she's going to get better in years to come? It's shown in studies that more than likely she will just get worse. She needs to be in a mental institution, locked away from the general public, while being seen to by lots and lots of professionals.

Sure, they need punishment. And, if our current child prosecution sentence is not harsh enough, then as a country we should make it harsher. But, trying them as adults and treating children as if they have the capability of, not knowing right from wrong, but UNDERSTANDING the impact their decisions make on the outside world the same way a 30 year old does is ridiculous. When I was 14 I hadn't even lost a Grandparent yet. What the heck did I know about death or the impact it has?

I had friends who at fourteen had never experience death (I say friends as I can't claim to the same thing myself as the first death I experienced was of a relative when I was five years old) but they knew enough about it's impact to never want it to happen. To anyone! Certainly not to family and friends. I just don't think fourteen is a young enough age to say 'She didn't know the impact of actions'- of course she knew the impact, the only impact she hadn't counted on was being caught and taken to court. No, fourteen year olds are unable to make the same life decisions as an adult in the sense of marriage, jobs, choosing a house etc but they ARE old enough by then to know the wrongness and the consequences of murder and death. She was old enough to know better and so should be tried as such.

And throughout that I'm still sticking to the whole white-padded-room-for-one option.

 

[palabravampiress]

Guys, why are we talking about charging her as an adult in order to pursue a harsher sentence before she's even been indicted? I mean, by the time she's been indicted, we've already had to figure out whether or not to charge her as an adult, so we can't even have an indictment at the point at which the child/adult debate begins, right?

We're jumping the gun, here. We're already talking about sentencing. We're already talking about having more compassion for the victim than for the criminal. We're actively pursuing charging this girl as an adult not because we think she's an adult, but because we want to pursue a harsher sentence. On what planet is that a fair trial? If, based on how much the crime shocks and appalls us, this girl is charged as an adult so that we can really stick it to her later on during sentencing, doesn't that presume guilt from indictment forward? And doesn't she have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty?

THIS is what's wrong with charging minors as adults. It presumes guilt and it robs suspects of fair trials.

 

[RogueHunter]

Raising kids is like getting fat. You don't wake up on Tuesday and realized you gained 280lbs from last night's pizza. Kids don't just wake up one morning and say, "Hmm, Tuesday, eat cheerios, brush my teeth, have mom and dad murdered." There are lots of indicators along the way.
And yes, setting an example DOES cause teens to stop and think, if not, the majority of teens would be doing these horrendous crimes. If this were a case of a 15 year old girl arguing with her mother and whacking her in the head with a frying pan, I would say thats the act of an impulsive reaction from a teenager and not an adult crime. However, plotting and carrying out an execution isn't 'acting out'. Its an adult crime and it should carry adult consequences.
And I don't mean this as an insult to Joyce, but the mental institution theory is the reaction of normal people to something incomprehensible. "Its so horrendous, she must be insane." Its easier to think that than to think of a human that could live next door, that understands right and wrong and doesn't care. That is truly frightening. Insane would be thinking she had to kill mom and dad because they were vampires. Killing mom and dad cause I don't get my way is an extreme tantrum from a teenager who was never told no.
I have an 8yr old and a 5yr old. Last year one of our dogs died, and they still well up when they think of her. If an 8 & 5 yr old understand death, then this 15 year old surely knew what it was.

 

[Lou]

That's taking it entirely out of context in my opinion. All those things you mentioned are life choices that affect herself, not others. As a minor under her parents guardianship they have, until she's 18, he ability to be able to dictate to some extent how she lives her life. This includes the government making her go to school, not allowing to have sex, live alone etc etc. But murder, or consideration of murder is a choice just like the others mentioned above that have serious ramifications for other people and for herself. She actively made that decision and she should have to deal with the consequences. Besides as awful as it is fourteen year olds have dropped out of school, have moved out from their parents' house, and I don't think any of us can be in denial of how young some strippers are. But those are ramifications only for the teen themselves and don't effect anyone else directly (such as the murder of person would, let's say) so they are seen as lesser cases in the eyes of the court. Murder no matter the age, is ALWAYS a big deal and understandably so. You've taken someone's life. In my opinion that means you have to face the same consequences as everyone else. Though I am definitely leaning towards the mental institution option here.

That's not out of context. It's the same "big decision making" skills that are involved. Sure, maybe there ARE some young strippers and kids who run away, but it's ILLEGAL. Which is the point here. We say, a 14 year old can not MAKE big life decisions because they aren't adults and aren't capable, but then turn around and say, "Well, now you have to pay like an adult."

It's not ME saying kids don't think like adults. It's been proven. Their brains aren't developed. Yes, they know right from wrong, but they don't think in the same way adults do because their brains are not physically the SAME as adults and do not work the same. They're not capable of thinking out all the ramifications OR empathizing the same way adults do.

Why adolescents put themselves first - being-human - 08 September 2006 - New Scientist

Why adolescents put themselves first
12:24 08 September 2006
NewScientist.com news service
Helen Thomson, Norwich

Teenagers are more selfish than adults because they use a different part of their brain to make decisions compared to adults, new research suggests.

Previous work has shown that when children reach puberty, there is an increase in connections between nerves in the brain. This occurs particularly in the area involved in decision-making and awareness of other people’s feelings, called the "mentalising network".

Now Sarah-Jayne Blakemore, a cognitive neuroscientist from University College London, UK, has used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to scan the brains of 19 adolescents (aged 11 to 17) and 11 adults (aged 21 to 37) whilst they were asked questions relating to decision-making. Questions such as: “You’re going to the cinema, where do you look for film times?”

Blakemore found that teenagers rely on the rear part of the mentalising network to make their decisions, an area of the brain called the superior temporal sulcus. In contrast, adults use the front part, called the prefrontal cortex.

The superior temporal sulcus is involved in processing very basic behavioural actions, whereas the prefrontal cortex is involved in more complex functions such as processing how decisions affect others. So the research implies that "teenagers are less able to understand the consequences of their actions", says Blakemore.

Taken care of
In a separate experiment, Blakemore asked 112 participants (aged from 8 to 37) to make decisions about other people’s welfare and timed how long it took them to respond. The questions included: "How would your friend feel if she wasn’t invited to your party?"

She found that the response time got shorter as the participants got older, suggesting that the older people found it easier to put themselves in other people's shoes.

Blakemore suggests that both findings might be explained by an evolutionary mechanism in which the development of the brains of adolescents takes precedence over its performance. “You don’t need to be on a par with other people because you are looked after until reproductive age. Only then do you need to start to take into account other people’s perspectives.”

Work in progress
The work has implications for the types of responsibility given to adolescents, Blakemore says: “Teenager’s brains are a work in progress and profoundly different from adults. If you’re making decisions about how to treat teenagers in terms of the law, you need to take this new research into account.”

Sam Lewis, a specialist in youth crime and justice, from the University of Leeds, says there has in fact been a shift away from welfare-focused approaches to youth punishment in the UK: “Today, responses to youth crime tend to emphasise offender responsibility, accountability and punishment. It seems likely that the concerns of many, including those of Dr Blakemore, may be lost in the tide of punitive policies being pursued by the government.”

The research was presented at the British Association for the Advancement of Science Festival in Norwich, UK.

These are .pdfs and I'm not sure how to put them in but I'll try.

http://www.abanet.org/crimjust/juvjus/Adolescence.pdf
http://physiciansforhumanrights.org/juvenile-justice/factsheets/braindev.pdf

It seems to me, it's not just the children who can't empathize, it's also the people prosecuting.
And, by the way, it IS possible to BE a good and attentive parent and still run into trouble. I hear a LOT of "If my kid was the victim" but what if you let your daughter have a slumber party, made brownies with them, rented age appropriate movies and went to bed, listening to them laugh and make noise, only to find out 2 weeks later when another parent calls that when you were asleep, they decided to gang up on one of their friends who they deemed a "slut" or a boyfriend stealer? Can you honestly say you'd be okay with your daughter getting life in prison because teenage "pack mentality" went too far?

Edit:

As an added note, it's one of the foundation of this country that you be tried by a jury of your "peers". But, a child's peers can't be on a jury.
Which means they're being tried as adults, by adults with a just of adults who are also sitting and saying, "Well, I had a superior brain and mine worked the same at 14 as it does now." When the science says that's not true. They're ALSO saying, "We want this kid off the street before it influences MY kid" and want to slap them with the harshest punishment possible.

Type in Children and Crime. When I did, every article I clicked was about how children's brains work differently than adults. It seems to me, that's enough reason to try them differently than adults.

SORRY! I typed in Brain Development and Child Crime...children and crime brings up a bunch about child molestation

 

[RogueHunter]

In the history of mankind, no one needed a Phd to conclude a kids brain acts differently than an adult. Society always knew kids wouldn't think about consequences, so those consequences were driven into their heads. In the 30's, 40's, 50's and early 60's there was family structure, and therefore societal structure. Every week families would go to church and here a priest or pastor with a big message of consequence. Schools (before the feel good policies of the left) used to be huge repositories of consequence, and most importantly parents would pound consequence into the kids skulls. But in came the 60's, the narcissistic generation of stupidity that knew so much better than their parents. They chucked the accumulated wisdom of generations out the window.
Everyone knew kids couldn't think of consequences, thats why the cliches of 'stupid kid' and the like have always been universal. The thing was though, that every time a kid was gonna do something dumb, they heard a voice inside their head. The voice of a parent, priest or pastor, teacher, principal etc telling them what would happen to them if they did it. Kids knew enough not to mess with the kid who had a big, tough older sibling that would kick their ass if they messed with them. Kids had constant reminders around them about what would happen if they do it.
Adults need to DEMAND that kids stop and think. More importantly reinforce the consequences that will happen when you do something profoundly stupid.
In order to decide objectively, we must make these decisions calmly and rationally. We need to decide what to do with criminals when they aren't your kid, simply because when it IS your kids you can't be impartial. The justice system is there to speak for the victim and in my opinion the last thing we need is another excuse for why Johnny can't read.

 

[Lou]

I'm a little at a loss for what this means.

For instance I'm not sure what "feel good policies of the left" is or what it has to do with schools. They've done away with paddling students?
And, as for children of the past generations, THOSE children were also allowed to be spanked and beaten when they did something wrong. Children were scared of their parents. I was scared of MY Dad. I did dumb things as a kid, and my fear was my DAD finding out.
But, there is no paddling, there is no spanking or beating allowed. It came from victim's rights. Maybe it IS causing more victims, but they've made these things against the law because protecting victims.
Children don't have the "fear" of their parents that they once did. I was joking with my Dad the other day that my kids aren't as scared of us as we were of him. I asked him if he took us out when we turned 2 and beat us to a bloody pulp. Too long ago for us to remember, but old enough to instill fear.

So, just how do we DEMAND a child think something through? I talk to my daughter every day after school about putting herself in other children's shoes, to be nice to the kids that are mean to her because that's how she'd like them to treat her. But, the day will come when she no longer tells me everything that happens. Should I just sit here down every day with different scenarios saying, "If you ever think about doing this, here's a list of consequences" for the next 12 years?
Especially, how do we demand something of them that they can't do?
I've yet to find anything refuting the reports on a child's brain. That doesn't make it an excuse for them to get away with everything. But, it IS a reason to treat them as "stupid kids" and not as diabolical adults.

We all know they think they're invincible, that nothing will happen to THEM, and that they think they're smarter than anyone trying to tell them something. That's not an excuse and we DON'T need a PhD to know it, and we don't even need all the brain scans and proof to know it. But, the proof IS there. So is the state of affairs today. And the "olden days" weren't so great. I hear the stories my parents tell me about their Mom sending them outside and locking the door behind them, being terrified to get their school clothes dirty because their Dad would spank them to where their little butts would bleed.
Was that better? I don't know. But, it's not the fault of the parents OR the children these days that doing these things are now illegal. There are certainly LOTS of times I've wanted to slap a snotty comment right off my kid's faces and say, "Oh no you don't. You say YES MOMMY and you DO NOT TALK BACK"....but I can't.

It's fruitless to blame things we can't change for the way things are today. We can't do anything to make the clock roll back and take a good hard look at how it was before. And we can't pick bits and pieces of how it was before and plop it in now and expect it to work. All we can do is practice what we preach. If we're supposed to teach our children empathy and beat it into their heads and demand that they listen....we need to practice it.
If our own common sense and science together say, "Children can't think like adults" then we shouldn't be showing vengeance to our kids by tossing children in jail for life like we do adults. AS adults, we should be showing that empathy. Not writing off what we know and chucking kids in jail for life. Because at this point we're ALL victims and the idea of victims rights has turned into "I'm due everything and hell hath no fury like what happens when you wrong me."

 

[palabravampiress]

I'm not sure what the question of whether or not to try murdering children as adults has to do with spanking or with the politics of the left. It's like we're saying that because SOME kids are murderers, all kids should be punished more harshly for minor, daily infractions in the hope that that will somehow curtail the behavior of the murderous kids. Not only is that completely unfair to the kids who really don't deserve to be beaten because they didn't finish their chores, but it's also woefully ineffective. Society can't prevent murder; all it can do is respond to it. Murder has existed for as long as history has been recorded. Being harsher on innocent children won't change that.

The past wasn't perfect. There were murderers in earlier generations, too. A small percentage of any given human society will be murderers. That percentage will increase according to circumstances. Some will be children. Most will be adults. I wouldn't be surprised if a great number would be adolescents, given the crazy, hormone-driven mood swings that go hand in hand with that life stage. Every society has murderers. If you think we can return to some halcyon period in which beating kids prevented crime, well, then you can think again. Anti-drug laws inflate our crime rates, not changing attitudes on what constitutes child abuse.

This issue isn't about how we discipline kids on an every day basis. This is about how we hold them accountable when they commit serious crimes. If we're not going to allow them to be responsible for themselves when it comes to voting or having sex or drinking beer, I don't see how we can up and expect them to make the right decision about larger matters with any sort of consistency. For goodness' sake, this fourteen-year-old girl isn't even legally allowed to work in most industries! She can't work. She can't pay taxes. She can't drop out of school. She can't live on her own. All of these restrictions are due to the fact that she is a child. But when she is an accomplice (or maybe just an accessory) to murder, she's suddenly an adult? There is no consistent, fair and dispassionate application of the law, there.

A fourteen-year-old is not an adult. She doesn't have the same rights and privileges that an adult has; therefore, she should not have the same responsibilities. Most importantly, responsibility should not be determined after-the-fact and on a case-by-case basis that is based on how badly we want to throw the book at any one kid. That is NOT a fair trial. How would you like it if your state's penalty for spending too much time on the internet was a week in prison, but when you were suspected of spending that time online looking at porn, (gasp!) society suddenly decided to try you under a different, harsher system with a penalty of two years in prison? In a fair trial, you don't fix the results from the get-go like that! But, apparently, kids really don't have any rights... not even the right to a fair trial and an impartial jury of their peers.

 

[RogueHunter]

Here is basic problem with this line of thinking. If kids can't think about the consequences of their actions, then every adolescent would be committing crimes, however its obviously the vast minority that behaves this way.
The truth is we don't really know enough about how the brain works. it is unimaginably complex with overlapping systems. If we understood it, we wouldn't have anti depressants that make patients suicidal. We turn on an imaging monitor and say we know what causes something because a certain spot got warm.
If kids can't make decisions like adults, how come there are many children that are described as "mature" for their age?
I see this process every day with my children, and they understand fully what consequences are. They understand what happens when they disobey or get defiant. My 8yr old son came downstairs Saturday morning. I asked why he didn't come and eat. He responded that he was sorry and he forgot he wasn't allowed to play his video game before breakfast, and that this meant he would lose his privileges, but he felt he should be honest.
My 5yr old daughter hit her brother in the face with an air hockey paddle and promptly hid under a beanbag chair. Why? Because she knew there was a consequence. She hasn't done it since. I DEMAND they follow the rules and most of the time they do. Pretty impressive since those parts of their brain won't engage for another 16 years.
Everyday my kids come up to me and hug me and ask me to play, and come to me when something hurts or to ask for help with homework. They love and adore me but they are afraid of me when they break the rules. I do not enjoy it but its part of the role of father.
Its called teaching and they learn. Its conditioned response so they can recall similar situations and what happened the last time. It works, because if it didn't humanity wouldn't be here because every young generation would have a 90% mortality rate. Most kids know better despite their 'incomplete brains'.
Do they work as well as adults? Depends on the adult, but on average, no.
But they still know right from wrong. Every one of those kids in Florida KNEW it was wrong! They knew it and did it anyway. This wasn't a playground fistfight. They lured her to a house, they beat this girl, knocked her unconscious and beat her again when she woke up. Yes, damn it they deserve to be severely punished. If they grow up and kill someone do we say "Oops, sorry your dead, but at least we know she used her prefrontal cortex when she decided to kill you."
What the science shows is that they may process information DIFFERENTLY but they can indeed process it. They may not process out that driving too fast can kill, but they know beating someone up gets you in jail.

You say you talk to your daughter every day about being in another persons shoes. Why bother if her brain can't process that? Does she follow your rules or does she disregard them?
I hate to say it but kids will NOT tell you everything, no matter what. They will keep their secrets. I have a 27 yr old niece, 24 yr old nephew, and 20 yr old nephew, 17 and 12. Most of my friends have kids that are much older than mine. Do you have any idea how many times I have heard the parents say "I can't believe they didn't tell me. We have such a good relationship".

Also, I don't understand this terror that you see the 'old days' inspiring. I'm almost 41 and both my parents grew up in the depression. I never experienced terror and violent beatings. I was spanked, but not often. Once was enough to get the message across. They never said they were abused. In fact I can't say I know anyone who thinks they were abused and I also don't know anyone of advanced age that doesn't exaggerate on the 'old days'.
As far as the left leaning policies go, school has become feminized. Outlawing dodgeball and tag and everything focused solely on emotions. When I was in school I was afraid of my teachers, mostly that they would tell my parents. I'm not talking about paddling but these days we have teachers that are afraid to discipline kids for fear of lawsuits. They call the parents (You know the ones that are buddies with their kids) and they get no support.
I was a manager at a supermarket. One day I pull onto the lot and see every shopping cart on the lot. I walk into the building and see the cart boy on the phone. I walk over to his supervisor and I say "Brian, is the utility clerk on break?" "No, he went for his fifteen minute break at least 45 minutes ago."
I brought Brian with me to the lobby area and the kid is no longer on the phone. He is headed INSIDE towards the back of the store. So i stop him and ask him why I have no carts for my customers to use and the person I'm paying to get the carts isn't doing it.
"I'm on break"
I look at Brian.
"no you're not, your break has been over for quite some time."
I added "And what would you be taking a break from, because from the look of the lot, you haven't done anything."
I then told him to clock out and go home. He didn't do his job and he lied to me, so i fired him.
His father called me and kept me on the phone for 35 minutes explaining to me how I should have had someone watching his son to make sure he did his job. I should pay two people to make sure one job gets done. I shouldn't fire his son because it was his supervisor's fault for not checking on him. I shouldn't be upset that I had to pull four people, myself included to do the job that his son refused to do.
Please don't take this like I'm attacking you, because I don't mean it that way. I am just very skeptical of experts. Experts generally mistake facts for wisdom. The fact is that the superior temporal sulcus shows more activity in young people than adults. Every person in jail is there because of a bad decision and every one of them has an excuse.

 

[palabravampiress]

^ Well, I for one am not saying anything about their brains and said I find the child discipline train of thought irrelevant for largely the same reason you find the brain scan argument irrelevant: no matter how you discipline children, a small subset of society will be murderers.

What I'm talking about is the right to a fair trial. Our legal system denies kids that right when it changes the rules mid-game and decides they're only adults when it suits the system. If you're not going to give kids rights, how can you up and give them not only responsibility, but increase that responsibility after-the-fact?

 

[Lou]

That is an awful simplistic and naive view.
Just because your skeptical of dozens of tests on the brain, doesn't mean it's not true. Especially if every test is saying the same thing. Developing medications without any side effects isn't quite the same as doing a scan of the brain to see which parts light up the brightest. And it's NOT about knowing right from wrong.
I also have an 8 year old son and a 5 year old daughter. And YES, they DO follow the rules in this house and when they don't there are consequences. They talk back, they go to the corner. They leave their stuff laying around, it's taken away. They hit or smack or even say mean things and they KNOW punishment is coming. In fact, they'll start to bawl as soon as they think I know what's going on. My kids are also very honest, but let's get real here....THEY'RE 8 and 5!

The question would be, if your daughter KNOWS she'll be in trouble for smacking her brother in the face...WHY does she do it? Is it because she's a felon or because she's a kid? If she hauls off and smacks some kid at school, should she be sent to Juvenile Hall for a year? What if, while waiting in the pick-up line at school someone says something to her and she pushes them into the street in front of a car? Is she a bad seed? Surely, you've taught her that hitting isn't the answer to a problem and I'm SURE you've given her rules about the road. But, she's FIVE!

When she's 15, are you going to question her before a slumber party to make sure that ALL of the kids there are wanted, that they won't pick on anyone, that they won't gang up on one person or another and end up going to prison for life? How does she know the consequences of that if you don't tell her? How do you cover EVERY possible scenerio to make sure they know the consequences? And how do you battle the "it won't happen to me" that goes on in kid's heards?

Kids can BE mature for their age, but that doesn't mean they ARE mature And, the ones that IS said about, are hardly the ones committing crimes. They're called that because they work hard.
But, it's NOT just a "vast minority" of kids committing crimes. There are kids doing drugs, dealing drugs, stealing drugs. They're having sex, they're cheating in school, they're getting in fights, raping, driving fast, driving drunk, committing vandalism, stealing cars, smoking, identity theft, driving without a license....if you're not aware of this, you have only a few years to learn. Because that's just normal kids. Watch more Dateline. And they're not coming CLOSE to catching them!

I never said my daughter can't PROCESS what I tell her. She can. And, even if she couldn't, I'd "bother" because some day she will. I never said children were STUPID or can't think. Even a dog can learn when it's in trouble to cower, tuck it's tail and give you the sad puppy face. I said, and the research said, that their brain works differently. They naturally think of themselves first.

Think of it this way, 15 year old kid wants to sneak out of the house and meet his friends. One of his friends is sneaking out his Mom's car and they want to drive down to the lake. He may think it's wrong. He may worry his parent's will catch him. He MAY worry the cops will catch him. He's NOT worried about leaving a note for Mom and Dad so they know he's not been kidnapped or has run away. He's NOT thinking that technically, taking the car would be auto theft. He's not thinking that there could be drunks leaving the bars soon and driving too. While they're driving down the road, they may see speeding as breaking the law, but NOT to why that's the speed limit. Like it might be a dangerous winding road. There could be a deer in the road, or a lady home from work late who has to cross the road to get her mail. How would her family feel if they mowed her down? How would their families feel if they killed her or were killed themselves?
Sure, he'd know sneaking around was "wrong", but not the ins and outs of everything that could happen.
And, that's just if they were hanging out...no smoking, drugs or drinking involved!

And, as Palabra said, it's not right to decide the penalty after the fact. If the teenagers beating up (and I use that term lightly because it hardly looks like a BEATING on TV) the other girl had been a group of adults instead, it MIGHT have ended up on Judge Judy if they're lucky. Because they're kids, it's on The Insider. But, because it's appalling, they're judged as adults.
We can't wait until a crime is committed and then say, "Well, we're REALLY appalled so the punishment has changed". If your kids know there are consequences and the USUAL consequence for, say, talking back is going to the corner, you can't just decide one day that because you're really mad the punishment is beating them with a stick and locking them in their rooms for three days.

It's not right to say, "Well, we know you're not responsible enough to vote for Mayor, but when we're really upset, you WILL be held responsible for your actions." If they have none of the benefits of being adults because we don't deem them fit, we can't turn around and give them the consequences, while at the same time taking the right to a jury of their peers away. And, that is true whether you choose to believe the research or not.
They're either people with good judgement skills and can go out into the world on their own, or they're not. They can't be both just because society is upset.

And, by the way, my parents, in-law, even grandparents DON'T think of themselves as "abused" they say that's just how it was. I see it as just how it was. That doesn't stop the fact that it's abuse NOW. Comparing now with "then" is really neither here nor there.