Coining a phrase for impact, efficiency, and to capture the essence
of a moment in history is an American tradition. Some of the more notable:
"Where's the beef?"; "Have a nice day"; "Make love not war"; and, more
recently, "Show me the money!" Whether a cliché is for commercial purposes
or simply to captivate the mood of the day, its free speech roots make
it at one and the same time both possible to exist and optional for
the listener to support or ignore.
In "The Coming of the Super-Predators," published in The Weekly Standard's
November 1995 issue, Professor John Dilulio defined his title phrase
as a cohort of youthful offenders created from a moral poverty that
"begins early in life in homes where unconditional love is nowhere,
but unmerciful abuse is common." In the publish-or-perish world of academia,
creating drama around an issue to ensure that editors will accept it
is sometimes necessary. Unfortunately, this hyperbole did not end with
Dilulio's article.
On May 29, 1996, U.S. Rep. Bill McCollum of Florida introduced the
Violent Youth Predator Act of 1996, which is intended to prosecute chronic
violent offenders as adults and increase mandatory prison time for juveniles
who use firearms when committing violent federal crimes or drug-trafficking
offenses. Although the demonizing language was ultimately removed from
the legislation (now called The Violent and Repeat Juvenile Offender
Act of 1997), the die had been cast.
References to youthful offenders has escalated from "delinquents"
to "super-predators." Politicians, news commentators, journalists, and
justice and law enforcement officials, now use Dilulio's postulated
projections as a statement of fact. However, as Franklin E. Zimring,
a University of California-Berkeley law professor pointed out in "Desperados
in Diapers," in the August 19, 1996, Los Angeles Times, many of the
super-predators Dilulio would have us fear have yet to be born.
The key question is where do we draw the line between democratic political
debate and harmful polemic rhetoric? For starters, we ought to be saying
"no" to destructive characterizations, polarizations, and demonizations
of children and adolescents who commit serious crimes. This country's
incompetent juvenile justice system obviously must provide consequences
for these acts. But we, can, should, and must do more.
The Public Broadcast Station (PBS) recently conducted a nationwide
search for the U.S. city, county, or jurisdiction that could serve as
a national model for a documentary on a community that was doing the
right things for children in need. PBS discovered that the Land of Oz
was nowhere to be found. The network was left with the option of highlighting
exemplary programs it found and altering the documentary's theme to
profile how a model jurisdiction would operate if the patchwork of programs
existed in one community.
Like primary and secondary teeth, nature provides caring, responsible
adults two opportunities to help young children achieve psychological
and emotional health. In the human developmental cycle, children first
learn to trust, then gain confidence in independent thought and action.
Later, they learn to appreciate sex roles and gender differences, and
finally to develop respect for rules and other people's rights. Many
of the children and adolescents we see in dependency proceedings and,
eventually, in juvenile, family, and criminal courts are like rotten
primary teeth. We lose these "baby" teeth, and nature gives us a second
set to better care for. "Rotten" children--those who are abused, neglected,
and who do not receive adequate nurturing and guidance for healthy development--get
a second chance during adolescence to acquire the necessary character
traits that allow them to lead successful adult lives.
Unfortunately, policymakers too often ignore decades of human development
research. The above-mentioned childhood lessons can be reintroduced
successfully during the adolescent development stage. Trust may be learned
through positive, long-term mentoring relationships; independence through
work and chores; sex-role mastery through adult supervision of adolescent
choices such as dating; respect for others' mores and rights through
participation in organized activities. These second chances are viable,
but, as PBS's research pointed out, do not currently exist comprehensively
in any jurisdiction. The "falling through the cracks" scenario has taught
that when bad things can happen, they will happen.
Our troubled kids need the very best support, training, and retraining
we can provide. We can now transmit and receive faxes and e-mail and
talk on the phone while flying in an airplane. Yet our elected officials
seem more concerned about conjuring up hollow slogans about our lost
generations than about saving and reviving them. Civilized societies
are judged by what they do for the least among them.
Congressional members assert that the states rather than the federal
government are better equipped to address youth in trouble. As a result
of this attitude, numerous proposals are now circulating in the House
and Senate, including block grant funding to the states, as well as
enhanced federal funding to the states, with requirements to enact legislation
to sanction youthful offenders more severely. One proposal calls for
the elimination of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act's
four mandates: 1) removing status offenders housed in delinquent youth
facilities; 2) requiring sight and sound separation of adult inmates
from juveniles in adult jails; 3) removing juveniles from those adults
jails; and 4) developing strategies to reduce the disproportionately
high number of minority youth in secure juvenile facilities.
Suggesting that these problems are local concerns trivializes the
complexities involved and deprecates the urgent needs of juveniles and
their families for competent, comprehensive, wraparound services. We
need national imperatives to fill this gaping void in our juvenile justice
system interventions. If the U.S. Congress is sufficiently alarmed to
rely on mere speculation about the 21st century's super-predators, then
surely we can develop proactive, fact-based responses to the clear and
present danger. Unless and until we do, maybe we should consider that
super-predators are not born, they are un-legislated.
Michael Lindsey is with Nestor Consultants, Inc. a management and
consulting firm in Dallas, Texas.
Copyright © American Bar Association. Reproduced by permission.
All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may not
be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or downloaded
or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the
express written consent of the American Bar Association.