Too much too young?

 

Despite this song being released 40-odd years ago, the subject matter is still very much applicable to today. 

I read an article this week which said childhoods ended age twelve. For me this is an incredibly sad fact, but it certainly isn't surprising when you think many 14-16-year-olds actually have children of their own; they are mere children themselves.

 

We all know the stereotypical image: a nice pink tracksuit, a fag hanging out of their mouth.

 

 

You know the ones. The ones who call their child McKenzie or Bourbon. The ones who are piercing their children's ears at 6 months, and putting sparkling Nike Airmax trainers on their feet before they can even walk. 

I walk past groups of girls in town who are parading around with pushchairs like the child in it, is a mere accessory, a fashion statement.

 

(This video does contain explicit content)

 

We laugh at sketches such as this and Vicky Pollard, but this kind parenting is genuinely quite common. One only needs to watch the horrors on Jeremy Kyle: it's all real life. 
 

Last weekend I was horrified to watch a man crash into a concrete pillar with a buggy. In this particular Tescos, there is a promenade lined with concrete pillars on each side, and around each of them are metal handrails that are head height for a child sitting in a buggy. The guy wasn't particularly young, maybe 22? So it wasn't his age that shocked me, but purely his atrocious parenting. He clearly just wasn't concentrating as he managed to drift from the path into the post with considerable force, to cause this kid to absolutely scream the place down. It made me think though, what if he'd have drifted the other way, into the road? When the kid's a little bit older, toddling around, will he be concentrating then? It's this kind of parenting which gives young people a bad name and genuinely concerns me at the people who are left in charge of a living being, I wouldn't have trusted this guy with a goldfish. 

Now it seems out of order for me to judge something that you can't even imagine until you've experienced it. I've said before that it's wrong to judge, but we judge what is different, what we don't understand ... recently, teenage pregnancy has touched closer to home than I ever cared to imagine. One of my friends from school, aged 19, is expecting a baby in just over a months time. It wasn't planned, she'd hadn't even been with her boyfriend a year and she'd just landed several great opportunities in her career; the timing couldn't have been worse. Quite frankly I'm scared for her. A life is such a huge responsibility and it's going to change life as she knows it. However, watching her endure the last eight months has been almost inspiring. I can't say I'd have been so calm, collected and realistic in her position. During this time, she's carried on with her college course, her full time job and moved into a house of her own, she's supporting herself. Although it's going to be hard, that baby is going to be so loved and she will be a great Mother. 

 

It is when I spend time with her, that I realise that not every teenage pregnancy is a tragedy. All it takes is a basic education in humanity, support of great family and friends and love.

 

What's more, why is today's society being criticised so heavily for teenage pregnancy? It happened 50 years a go, possibly more so. The difference being, the Grandparents brought it up as their own, or the girl was whisked away to some sinful hospital, and the baby adopted before they could even hold it. It's interesting how conventions change ...

 

This post wasn't to suggest a solution, criticise or condone teenage pregnancy, but maybe challenge the way we view it. There is no solution; this generation have had the privilege of more education and contraception than ever before and it's still happening. It's easy to judge with the array of social stereotypes, but I don't see us judging the many other poor parents who are actually over the age of 25.

 

Don't judge them on their age but their parenting. Many young Mums and Dads are doing an inspiring job, what were you doing at their age? Getting drunk, laughing around for the next five years until your life finally starts getting serious. They love their children. That counts for a lot in today's society and I have the greatest respect and admiration for them.

 

It's time to eliminate this negative stigma.

Do the crime, do the time.

At what age is a child no longer a child? Some say 16, some say 18. The fact that the boundaries are so blurred and subjective, leaves the law in a very difficult position. 

If you are 16 or younger and you are arrested, you are entitled to a responsible adult. After this point however, you are not allowed a parent with you and thus at 17, it begs the question whether you are old enough to know what's best or understand what is going on. 

Based on previous posts, you will realise by now I have fixed opinions about the law and judicial system and thus it will come as no surprise that I was pretty disgusted to hear about parents pleading for 17-year-olds to be treated as children in the eyes of the law. I'm sorry, but if you're old enough to commit the crime, you're old enough to do the time. 

This particular case came about after 17-year-old Joe Lawton committed suicide last summer after he was arrested for drink-driving. The parents believe the fact he was arrested and had no support affected his mental state and that they should have been able to support him whilst he was in custody. Don't get me wrong, this is an awfully tragic situation and my sympathies do go out to his family, but at the end of the day, he broke the law. It was not the fact that he didn't have any support during the interview process that cut his life short. Despite not being old enough to drink, Joe saw himself as old enough to consume alcohol, and he was old enough to be in charge of a vehicle. There should be no further questions needed. He stupidly broke the law, and he's more than old enough to deal with what he's done. 

The parents claim he was 'frightened to death' which is probably true but I'm pretty sure the victim he could have killed would have been scared to death as would their family and friends...

75,000 17-year-olds are held in custody every year and although Joe's crime may have been stupid and irresponsible, he didn't harm anyone but himself, and it's not the worst crime committed by a 17-year-old. If we had made the exception for one boy, what would happen if we made an exception for the 75,000 others? Do they deserve rights, in light of atrocities such as murder or rape? 

Age is just a number. If in a different situation, a 17-year-old was being discriminated against for being too young, all Hell would break loose. There's just no pleasing people. Even if the offender is a child based on his numerical age, if they have the mentality to commit crime with intent, then they are an adult morally and old enough to take responsibility. 

Leading the campaign is a charity Just for Kids Law. The fact this charity even exists worries me; how some people sleep at night is beyond me. They believe everybody under the age of 18 should be treated as a juvenile. This however throws up all kind of problems particularly, when like Joe, driving offences are involved. You can legally drive at 17, even 16 on scooters. How can we allow such people to be in charge of vehicles potentially capable of murder, if they will be tip-toed around like children when they have done wrong?

To be fair, it's an incredibly tough subject when 'children' are involved, but offenders are getting younger and younger, one only needs to look at the overpopulation of juvenile prisons. The longer we tip-toe around youths, wrapping them up in cotton wool, reassuring them everything's going to be okay, worse crimes will be committed. There is no form of deterrent if you're allowed your Mum to fight your corner for you. 

Quite frankly, the whole system is a mess, and with such campaigns and distorted views on children and their rights, the future is worrying.