I'm Just Sayin...
When Should A Child Be Charged As An Adult?
10/21/2011 9:43:24 AM
Florida, and the death of one of its children, has yet again jumped into the international spotlight. 

This time it's David, a two and a half year old toddler who lost his life because he was allegedly slammed twice into a bookcase by his 12 year old half brother, Christian Fernandez. Afterwards, Christian called his mom, Biannela Susana, 25, who came home right away.
 
Instead of calling 911, Susana conducted searches on the computer for information on ‘knocked out’, ‘unconscious’ and ‘concussions,’ while her baby lay unconscious nearby. The computer log also showed music downloads, searches for screen savers and even YouTube clips.

 Finally, after all that, there was a search of St. Luke's Hospital. Did she finally call 911? No way, she put the unconscious child in the car and drove him to the hospital. 
 
Florida State Attorney, Angela Corey, is proceeding with prosecuting the boy as an adult, and Christian at the age of 12 is facing life in prison if found guilty. Corey claims she's going strictly by the book. 

Turns out, Florida leads the nation in trying children as adults. In 1995, prosecutors sent over 7,000 children to adult court, almost as many as the rest of the nation combined. 
 
So the question here is exactly what constitutes justice for David? The brain of a 12 year old child is not equivalent to the brain of even a 16 year old. Their logical thinking isn't as refined, decision making is still developing and impulse control is limited. 

This fact alone is enough to say that there is never a justification to place any 12 year old boy in prison with violent men. And there is never a justification to try any 12 year old as an adult, with the possibility of life in prison if found guilty.
 
But the evidence here is even more overwhelming that Christian needs help, not prison time. Christian had, by no means, an easy life. He was born when his own mom was 12, and suffered severe emotional, physical and sexual abuse at the hands of his stepfather. 

If that's not bad enough, Christian witnessed his stepfather shoot and kill himself, rather than be charged with that abuse. All he knew was violence and dysfunction in his sad life.
 
So, if we’re looking for justice here we need to focus squarely on the mom. A St. Luke physician says that if she had immediately called for help, little David would most likely be alive today. 

Who is responsible for this child's death? The parent who conducted searches on the computer and never once called 911, or the child who had a warped sense of what really constituted right from wrong? If someone deserves to face life in prison why not her?
 
It’s high time we as a society start holding parents accountable for the acts of their minor children. Violence is running rampant, parents barely know where their children are and many take little time or effort to teach right them right from wrong. 

The answer is, oh so simple. If you want to have a child, you are responsible for the behavior of that child -- period. That would clearly serve as more of a deterrent then trying a 12 year old for murder.
 
There are already laws on the books for parental liability for a minor under 18. If a child destroys someone's property, the parent must pay for the repair or replacement. That liability is in place, regardless of whether the damage was intentional or accidental. Why should that not apply to injury and murder? Isn't that more serious than vandalism?
 
Parenting is said to be the hardest job, and it truly is. Susana knew her son had previously hurt her baby. She knew he was facing his own demons, and was prone to violence. These children were living dangerously; this was a ticking time bomb just waiting to explode. 

Christian needs help, and desperately so. Intense counseling, therapy and learning how to like and eventually love would be in his and society's best interest. In the end, the responsibility for little David’s death rests squarely on the mother and she should pay the price.

For more, visit Fox Forum

Watch video on Fox 
 
Posted by: Dr. Dale Archer | Submit comment | Tell a friend

Categories:

Share and enjoy: Del.icio.us   Digg This   Facebook   Google Bookmarks   Stumble Upon   Windows Live Bookmark   Yahoo Bookmark
21 Comments
10/21/2011 6:36:35 PM
Here is a quote from WCTV:
"In early March, Cristian was left alone with his two year-old brother, David, despite having broken David’s leg a year prior. While the two boys were alone, Cristian allegedly pushed his brother against a bookcase, and David sustained a head injury. After their mother returned home, she waited six hours before taking David to the hospital, where he eventually died."

This extra bit of information is significant for two reasons. One, it shows that there is a pattern of extreme violence by the 12-year-old against his brother. Two, it shows further negligence on the part of the parent for leaving him alone at home with him.

Of course, when I grew up there were many people who considered a 12-year-old perfectly capable of babysitting a younger sibling, though in recent years this thinking has come under fire with regard to latchkey kids and the like. Certainly it's not acceptable to leave him alone with him after he's already acted violently in the past, violent enough to break his little brother's leg. For anyone who is assuming these were accidents, as one who witnessed some extreme child-on-child violence, I can tell you that anything that extreme is likely not accidental, any more than a husband giving his wife a concussion and then insisting "I only pushed her, it was an accident." I sat on the floor next to my best girlfriend when we were about 9 while her older brother took her leg and broke it over his knee like you would do a twig. I've seen another girl's 12-year-old brother thrown 2-by-12's down on her head while she was down in a dirt pit the city was digging near where we lived. There are plenty of violent kids out there.

It is said that any fifth-grade teacher can tell you which children in her class will end up as violent abusive adults and/or end up in prison. There is plenty of research to back this up, and profilers also generally agree that the propensity for violence is set at an early age and often appears to be 'hard-wired.' Certainly any kid who has been bullied by a 12-year-old would be all for them going to prison, so perhaps we should ask the victim what they want. Whether a 12-year-old can be rehabilitated depends on, as you know better than me, the nature of their pathology. While a 12-year-old who has had bad modeling and is simply imitating a violent parent may be changed, no one has found any evidence that antisocial personality can be cured at any age. If this child is antisocial and violent, they may as well put him away now and spare future victims, because there will assuredly be some, but he should first be thoroughly evaluated to see if his condition is something that could be improved with therapies.
Sam
10/22/2011 8:09:52 PM
I agree with you on the parents being held accountable, but with technology where it is today, kids are exposed a lot earlier to what is right or wrong via the internet, TV, etc... twelve is the new 15. this kid should be held accountable as well. I think the biggest problem today is that a lot of women have children to get government support. I call it "babies for checks." It is a huge problem in my eyes. As long as the checks keep coming, what does it matter what the kids are up to. The more kids they have, the more checks they get, the more the home life gets out of control. Mothers strung out, daddies not around, kids have free reign, and respect for nothing and no one. It's sad. Mix in the illegals having huge broads as well, and it is only going to get worse. Please
10/23/2011 5:26:44 AM
What a sad story, it sounds like both the mother and son have experienced many hardships in their lives. What a shame supports and counselling were not put in place before this tragic event occured. This story really highlights how important it is to have (free) supports available for people who need it, in society. Having a child at the age of 12 is bad enough, but it seems like things went from bad to worse for this mother. The dysfunction in this family is probably intergenerational and will continue this way unless major supports are put in place.

This child it would seem did not have a chance because of his abusive back ground. Now he has to live with killing his sibling. Charging this child as an adult would simply be one injustice after another.

Leanne
Sue
10/24/2011 12:30:00 PM
This story breaks my heart. Being the mom of a 12yr old boy myself I cannot imagine what this poor child has endured. In my opinion he does not need prison time. His mom needs it though big time! What this 12yr old needs is to find God and someone who will care for him and help him. He won't learn anything good in prison, only bad. I just hope and pray he gets the right help ASAP! I also hope and pray his mother pays for the crime she committed which was doing a horrible job at raising her 12yr old child and allowing her 2yr old baby to lie there and die!
10/24/2011 12:32:19 PM
I CAN NOT FINISH READING THIS BECAUSE MY HEART HURTS BUT;THIS IS WHAT I SAY 2 THIS ,I HAVE SEEN A 4 YEAR OLD CURSE HIS MOTHER CALL HER BITCHES,I HAVE SEEN A 11 YEAR OLD WHIP HIS MOTHER ASS,,,I THINK THAT PARENTS SHOULD- B-CHARGED WITH UNFIT
10/25/2011 3:28:26 PM
Parents hands are tied as to punishing there children, Blame the ones
in control of our society.
10/25/2011 6:21:27 PM
There are many, many parents who should be declared unfit and lose their children, but the already completely overburdened foster system has no place for these children to go. It's something our country needs to work on once we recover some financially. It's a very difficult problem because adoptive parents aren't necessarily perfect either, and there are only so many willing to adopt. If we incentivize adoption, that can attract people who only want to profit from the incentive, so it is just a very bad catch-22. I think we all know that warehousing kids isn't much of an answer either, because they're still subject to certain types of neglect and the care workers may have the same weaknesses as their birth parents did. Truly, the long-term answer lies in increasing funding and making parenting classes mandatory and begin in high school, as well as funding for mandatory family therapy once a problem child is detected because the whole family needs to go to solve the problem. Even if we had budget for all those wonderful programs, the worst of them would still slip through the cracks, because everyone is simply not rehabable.
DDA
10/25/2011 9:33:57 PM
As always great points Lola, but I have to disagree. No 12 year old child, no matter how heinous the crime, should be incarcerated with a prison full of violent adult men. This does nothing to stem the tide of violence.
DDA
10/25/2011 9:34:42 PM
I get where you're coming from, Sam. To say this is a huge problem is, frankly, an understatement. But if the parents of these kids were held accountable and faced prison time, then maybe they would think twice before having a baby for a little extra cash. That said, will justice be served when this 12 year old child is placed -- for life -- within a prison with violent adult men? If it is, then we as a nation have failed our children.
DDA
10/25/2011 9:35:09 PM
Well put, Leanne. Christian really never did have a chance.
DDA
10/25/2011 9:35:42 PM
Yes, Sue. Neglect can sometimes be as destructive as abuse, and this child had both in large amounts.
DDA
10/25/2011 9:36:31 PM
I've seen it too, Tammie. The scariest part is the thought that these children, acting like that at such a young age.... become adults and then what?
10/26/2011 6:40:09 PM
Here are some relevant 2008 stats from Bureau of Justice Statistics and Nat'l Center for Juvenile Justice:

Juveniles commit 25% of all serious violent crimes, including 9% of all homicides.
Of the 31 million juveniles seen in juvenile court, 79% were between the ages of 12 and 15.

The percentage breakdown of crime type by detained juveniles:
30% crimes against persons (includes all violent crime and homicide)
9% drugs
29% public order
30% crimes against property.

Of the juveniles who committed crimes against persons (violent crime), 60% of them were between the ages of 12 and 15.

Note that the breakdown of crime type indicates that 68% of detained juveniles are NOT in for violent crime against persons. This raises the question whether that 68% should have to share space with the 32 percent of seriously violent juvenile offenders. Dr. Archer makes an excellent point that a 12-year-old shouldn't have to share space with adult detainees, but unfortunately, neither should nonviolent juveniles have to be exposed to extremely violent juveniles while detained. So there lies the problem. We do not have nearly enough prisons. It would be nice to have more age-specific and crime-specific facilities so we could protect nonviolent offenders from violent ones, but again, it comes down to funds and the lack thereof.

One statistic that totally supports Dr. Archer's view is that recidivism rate is 30% less for for juveniles who were kept within the juvenile detention system rather than escalated to adult facilities. This study is a Florida state study from 1997. However, it did not break down the crime type. It would be interesting to see broke down for just violent offenders.

Juvenile justice is a fascinating and frightening phenomenon. Again, so much could be prevented by pouring money into early parenting education and family therapy and more oversight, something many Americans still shudder at. I'd rather throw my money at that than into more prisons, but we need both. I'd love to see all juveniles receive thorough psychological evaluation before sentencing and for treatment to continue while incarcerated. It would be a huge expense and is apparently one most Americans have not cared to fund. The flip side of pouring money into rehab'ing the juvenile is should we not also then pour money in to rehab his victims?
10/27/2011 5:45:07 PM
Just saw this on a Huff Post article: "A new audit of the California foster care system has revealed that over 1,000 foster home addresses match those of registered sex offenders, according to the Los Angeles Times." They were supposed to run a comparison in 2008, it says, to prevent this, and they failed to do it. This is shocking! Heads will roll.
DDA
10/28/2011 12:47:35 AM
Gotta disagree with you on that one, Terrill. Parents' hands might be tied when it comes to beating or abusing their children, and that's a good thing. But their hands are definitely not tied when it comes to disciplining them, teaching them right from wrong and how to respect others.
DDA
10/28/2011 12:49:44 AM
Perfect, Lola! How about if we take it one step further: There needs to be a parenting license with a test before you can have children. We devote more resources on who can drive a car than we do on who can be a parent.
10/28/2011 8:04:48 PM
Well, in my mind, it's a nice dream, but Constitutional freedom of religion (and therefore a belief by many that it's sinful to use birth control) will prevent us from ever being able to mandate that only responsible people parent. In nature, some animals breed less when the environment has caused a shortage of food and resources; others breed more in the same circumstance and if one survives out of many, then that propagates the species. Humans fall into both categories, as do some other species.

Of course, there is also the problem of who decides what is acceptable and if our two political parties can't even agree on the most basic issues, they would hardly be able to agree on that.

The less cumbersome tactic and one which has been tried by private funding in the past (since the government has never seen fit to fund anything to do with birth control) is to incentivize repeat offenders and addicts/alcoholics by offering to pay for their sterilization, with an extra stipend thrown in (because a drug addict won't turn down cash). There has been some localized success with this type program over the decades, though it is highly controversial, but there is never sufficient private funding to keep it going and many fear litigation fallout (just as most doctors still refuse to sterilize women until after they've had a child - which I think is criminal).

We need to redo the social welfare system to stop incentivizing the birth of more children once a person is in the program by increasing the money they receive. Of course, the biggest obstacle to this is the "baby blackmail" problem. No one wants to make a child suffer just because the parent is irresponsible. We need to mandate that not only will no additional funds be available because there is another baby on the way that the parent cannot provide for; but if the parent does not meet a certain standard of providing for that child, the child will be removed. But again, this all comes right back to the central issue of an already overburdened foster system and the practical need to instead prevent the problem with early education, parenting classes, and family therapy.

So nothing ever changes. If there's one thing that ought to be free to everyone, it's birth control. If there's one thing that ought to be taught to everyone, it's parenting.
DDA
10/29/2011 5:52:20 PM
Great stats, Lola!
DDA
10/29/2011 5:52:42 PM
That is quite disturbing; heads should roll.
11/11/2011 3:09:41 PM
Did Cristian really do this is the big question? according to people who knew him NO. I think he was thrown under the bus by his mother.
DDA
11/16/2011 7:32:46 PM
Excellent point, Judy.
Submit a Comment
Name
E-mail  (optional)
Web Site  (optional)
Comment
HTML tags are not allowed.
Categories:
All
 

 

© Copyright 2012, Dr. Archer, Inc.. All rights reserved.