Affluenza defense explains a situation where an individual is too privileged that they end up breaking the law. The parents, for example, do not train the child what is wrong and right. Such an individual is provided with material privilege and does not worry about breaking the law as they have enough money to hire the best defense. Ethan Coach is an example of a privileged child who broke the law due to a lack of knowledge between right and wrong and provision of material advantages.
I agree with the psychologist and the judge that an individual can be too privileged to differentiate between right and wrong. Ethan Coach grew in a background where he received all the required, and his parents mostly ensure that he got what he wanted. The parents, however, forget the duty of teaching Ethan to differentiate right and wrong. Ethan attended Anderson Private School, showing that he started receiving advantages from a young age. At the age of thirteen, Coach used to drive himself to school, which is wrong, but his parents never taught him that it was wrong. At one time, the head of that school questioned the act, and Ethan’s father threatened to buy the entire school (Mooney, 2015). It shows that the family had enough money to provide Ethan with anything he required without considering whether he was doing the right or wrong thing.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Despite Ethan having caused the death of four people and causing injuries to others, he never got a jail sentence. It is an indication of privilege as he received a ten years’ probation, indicating that he would go on with his normal life, without paying for the deaths he caused as long as he was under supervision. Ethan’s parent had the money to hire a legal team to represent him. In most times, Ethan stayed on his own as his parents had the wealthy to give him a house and thus never had anyone to monitor his actions and teach him to act right. Lack of knowledge of right and wrong actions made Ethan run away to Mexico with his mother despite being on probation (Schmall, 2016). It is clear that Ethan was ignorant of the law or doing good, as the privileges he received made him feel special.
I agree with “it takes a village to raise a child” concept. The village is composed of the villages members, religious institutions, educational institutions and other people involved in the welfare of children. Parents do not spend all the time with their children and may not be able to guide them on doing the right thing when they are out. Other villagers should thus ensure that children are learning the difference between right and wrong when playing in the village or school. When villagers participate, it is a combined effort, and children will learn what is good and wrong despite coming from wealthy backgrounds. Parents may be too busy with work and never get enough time to educate their children with the help of others; children grow up learning that they will receive punishment for wrongdoing.
In the case of Ethan Coach, the community should have been involved. The head of the primary school where Ethan attended, for instance, should have reported Ethan’s father to the authority. In that way, measures of ensuring that Ethan was not driving when underage, showing him that was he was special could have been avoided. The community members should have also made sure that Ethan was not living alone.
The recommendation to Ethan’s parents is that I would have approached and asked them to stay with their son until he was of age to live on his own. I would also have reported Ethan on reckless driving and ensure that he did not go unpunished despite his parents being wealthy enough to afford any representative. As a judge, I would have ensured that Ethan was jailed for murder as a way of teaching him that he was not privileged and had to be punished for breaking the law.
To conclude, it is the duty of the parents to teach their children between right and wrong. Material wealth should not be a reason why children break the law. Instead, they should be exposed to a situation where they are accountable for the wrongdoing so that they can grow up being responsible.
References
Mooney, M. J. (2015). The worst parents ever: Inside the story of Ethan Couch and the “affluenza” phenomenon. D Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.dmagazine.com/publications/dmagazine/2015/may/affluenza-the-worst-parents-ever-ethan-couch?single=1.
Schmall, E. (2016). “Affluenza” teen Ethan Couch: What happened? What’s next? Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/affluenza-teen-ethan-couch-whatsnext_5686c8bee4b014efe0da908f.
