All Children Should Be Delinquents

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/13/opinion/sunday/all-children-should-be-delinquents.html

by jmgrosen • 12 years ago

73 75 12 years ago

krrishd3• 12 years ago

As a student who's followed the rules and essentially played by the book for pretty much my whole life, part of me regrets not doing stuff that defies norm, but another part of me is scared to think what I would look like if I got caught up in the 'wrong' things and never got interested in something useful.

I'd say this article is not necessarily the biggest advocate for delinquency, rather, it advocates for self-discovery in children, which is rare in modern parenting and educational systems. Sometimes this 'self-discovery' can lead to incidents of delinquency, but I think it's best to do dumb stuff young so you learn bad from good based on experience.

PavlovsCat• 12 years ago

This may not exactly be delinquency, but as kids I and a friend loved to explore construction sites on weekends. We never did anything dangerous really, it was just highly fascinating. But as we grew older, people who saw us started threatening to call the police, assuming we might be stealing something :( So in hindsight, I do wish we had used that "window of opportunity" even more. I have no idea how I would feel about my own children, should I have those; but we personally weren't reckless, stupid or malicious about it, just very curious and creative. The things you can get away with as a child, used well, can be a beautiful thing ^^ Not that we did anything great or learned anything useful, but it sure beat watching TV.

krrishd3• 12 years ago

So in hindsight, I do wish we had used that "window of opportunity" even more

^ sums up my feelings about this topic almost exactly.

rdtsc2• 12 years ago

but as kids I and a friend loved to explore construction sites on weekends.

Hehe that reminds me I did that with my dad, once. Looking back it was very dangerous but it was great fun. It was a new site for a 9 story residential building right next to ours. Once we thought we'd get caught by the guard, as we heard steps, so we hid, and it turns out it was some other people also exploring the site.

Another thing we did was climb a parachute training tower, and also hopped on a slow moving cargo train to hitch a 3 km ride towards my grandparents' house.

Aside from that (which if anyone knows me would totally uncharacteristic of me, but I guess it was more my dad than me), I was a pretty awkward nerd that liked tinkering with electronics (and later computers) and had only a few friends.

e40• 12 years ago

I believe it's the guilt of those things we did as children that makes us such restrictive parents. We realize that the things we did were dangerous and we don't want that for our kids.

Also, back then was a different time. You could do stuff like that, get caught, and not pay a huge price. Now, that's not true, in the US, at least. The climate is one of zero tolerance for stuff mentioned in the article. Example: some kids in the middle school my son goes to played a prank in the computer lab: they swapped a bunch of keys of some of the keyboards. The result? They were banned for life from using computers in the school district (yes, this would follow them to high school). A complete over reaction, but the norm for punishment in the US.

pmh• 12 years ago

Not to mention that when you do make a mistake, if it's publicized at all it will follow you for a good while by being Googleable.

copperx• 12 years ago

I spent my teenage years in a third-world country. I would be convicted of the following if I had spent those years in the US:

1) Trespassing private property

2) Theft

3) Willful and malicious destruction of property

4) Arson

5) Indecent exposure

6) Consensual rape (my girlfriend was 2 years younger than me)

7) Driving under the influence

I consider myself a highly moral individual, and some people consider me the most level-headed and patient person around.

I would argue that being a vandal in your teenage years may have a positive impact on the rest of the life of some people. You have to be smart about it and try not to hurt you or anyone else too much in the process.

cookiecaper• 12 years ago

To be fair, you probably wouldn't have been caught for most of that stuff unless you were doing it during school hours, on school grounds. The knee-jerk massive overreaction stuff is mostly perpetrated by school administrations, whose primary concern is preventing a lawsuit, not contributing to the child's development.

rtpg4• 12 years ago

You have to be smart about it and try not to hurt you or anyone else too much in the process.

So theft, destruction of property, driving under the influence, and arson are victimless crimes?

Maybe I'm a stickler for rule of law but when you start fucking with other people's stuff, that's not cool (understatement). Especially if it's just because you're bored.

anodari• 12 years ago

Nothing unusual for kids: jumping a fence to steal a fruit or play with fireworks. It is quite unlike anything illegal done for profit.

ryandrake• 12 years ago

If I was a 14 year old in school today and did the stuff I did as a 14 year old in the 1980's, I'd be suspended, expelled, or in jail by now. Kids can't even be kids anymore, it's pretty sad.

kenrikm• 12 years ago

I seriously don't know how myself and my brothers survived. The article was more then just familiar it was growing up. Now that I'm a dad it's hard to think of letting my son do the same crazy/stupid things however I know it's better that he does rather then be scared of the world.

keithpeter4• 12 years ago

"Example: some kids in the middle school my son goes to played a prank in the computer lab: they swapped a bunch of keys of some of the keyboards. The result? They were banned for life from using computers in the school district (yes, this would follow them to high school)."

Seems a little harsh. Is there any 'process' available (appeal against ban &c)?

In UK that would be telling off and phone call to parents with perhaps a formal disciplinary depending on age.

colordrops• 12 years ago

In the very early 90s I put a fake virus on the library computer as a prank. The "virus" was in-memory only and would disappear on reboot. It mimicked the real DOS virus that caused letters to start to drip down from the screen. I was contacted as the resident "computer expert" to come in and fix it. In retrospect I realize two things: 1. This virus was probably the inspirations for the Matrix lettering effect. 2. The school must have known it was me that installed that shit on their computers.

xorcist• 12 years ago

I think the trend is common all over the western parts of the world, but most pronounced in the US. It saddens me. People must be allowed to change and better themselves.

The keycaps punishment sounds completely over the top. Surely both administration and parents can see that? It is not possible to have a rational discussion about it?

mjfl• 12 years ago

I was very bookish as a child, and rarely did anything quite as exciting as the author describes, so I have a hard time relating. I also wonder if the author would look down on me for that, as the more "adventurous" kids did when I was a child.

kstenerud• 12 years ago

It's about the FREEDOM to do it. Whether you actually do it or not is irrelevant.

lifeisstillgood2• 12 years ago

As a parent of two young kids, I agree - as long as the delinquency does not actually injure them or others badly, and they stay away from red-heads with loaded fucking guns!

Which is the whole problem - the reason we say "dont do that it will hurt" is that it probably will hurt. Yes kids need to learn their own limits, and I want that to happen. I just would prefer not to have the lesson end in A&E.

I think mobile technology will enable a longer "lead" - but then who wants to be on a lead.

I think ultimately - I am my dad :-)

saraid216• 12 years ago

Um. ...red-heads...? Do you mean hotheads, perhaps?

e28eta• 12 years ago

I believe it's a reference to the article

smoyer• 12 years ago

I took my kids to play with loaded guns ... when they end up bruised from the kick-back of a shot-gun and see a clay pigeon turn to powder mid-air, they gain an appreciation for why guns aren't really toys. We played with toy guns while growing up, but I never would have considered trying to open my dad's gun cabinet.

callmeed• 12 years ago

I am the "free range" parent and my wife is more of a helicopter parent–which is weird because my wife got in way more trouble as a teen.

When I was a kid, I took my BB guns places I shouldn't have, I never owned a bike helmet, and trampolines didn't have safety nets. Other than some things like that, I let my kids (ages 6, 8, 9) do as they please during their free time. My over-arching rules for them are "have fun, be kind to each other, and be safe". I'm sure I'll have to set more specific boundaries as they get old but for now it's fun to watch them just be fun, wild, dirty, creative kids.

(on a side note, I'm not sure "delinquency" is the term Id use)

menssen• 12 years ago

I think it's reasonable to replace "which is weird because" with "which makes sense because" in this remark.

The version of your rules that I grew up with was "trust God and do Good". Religious angst aside, I don't think there's a minimum age for being able to tell the difference between serious, considered principles and ridiculous, unfounded assertions like "If you don't wear a helmet, you will get hit by a car and die."

mschuster91• 12 years ago

If the US were not that culturally focused on suing each other until death for stuff like spilling yourself with hot coffee and then suing McD for damages, kids in the US could be kids again.

rb2e• 12 years ago

The woman in Liebeck v. McDonald's [1] suffered third degree burns to 6% of her body and had to have skin grafts. The coffee was served around 180-190F (82-88C).

On the face of it, it may sound like a frivolous law suit but if you look into the details, it was far from it.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restauran...

PM_Tech2• 12 years ago

Did she think it was ice-coffee? Had she ordered an ice-frappe and been delivered hot coffee which is typically made with freshly boiled water?

param2• 12 years ago

Aside from certain areas of abuse like software patents trolling and the huge monetary loss of being involved in lawsuits even if you are innocent, as an immigrant I think that the US judicial system works more-or-less.

Specifically, the hot-coffee lawsuit for McD was IMHO a genuine lawsuit that only gets bandied about because it 'sounds frivolous'. The plaintiff sued because McD was significantly overheating the coffee to reduce costs, much more than expected, and all Liebeck was looking for was to cover her medical expenses for third degree burns. There was the usual - "ignore and be dismissive about the problem" perspective from McD officials that led to heavy punitive damages being awarded by the jury. See more details here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restauran...

NoPiece• 12 years ago

You say McDonalds overheated the coffee, but the wiki page you linked to says that is a normal temperature, McDonalds still brews in that range, and Starbucks brews in that range.

Since Liebeck, McDonald's has not reduced the service temperature of its coffee. McDonald's policy today is to serve coffee between 80–90 °C (176–194 °F),[28] relying on more sternly-worded warnings on cups made of rigid foam to avoid future liability, though it continues to face lawsuits over hot coffee.[28][29] The Specialty Coffee Association supports improved packaging methods rather than lowering the temperature at which coffee is served. The association has successfully aided the defense of subsequent coffee burn cases.[30] Similarly, as of 2004, Starbucks sells coffee at 175–185 °F (79–85 °C), and the executive director of the Specialty Coffee Association of America reported that the standard serving temperature is 160–185 °F (71–85 °C). Retailers today sell coffee as hot or hotter than the coffee that burned Stella Liebeck.

The National Coffee Association also suggest 195-205F.

http://www.ncausa.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=71

qdog• 12 years ago

Seems to be a meme that "back in my day kids just played and that was good!" Yeah, sure I played with Lawn Darts that were basically 12" long pieces of flying death, but I'm pretty sure I was lucky not to get injured. I try and get my son off the computer to do things, but I feel all these articles are more anecdotal than factual. I let my son fire of fireworks and what have you, but having had to rush the neighbor's kid "who doesn't get much supervision" to the hospital, I can say there is no invulnerability shield around children. They should play and have some risks, but as I was recounting just yesterday how I engulfed my childhood best friend in a giant fireball from a a gasoline fire, I was thinking maybe there are some things kids don't need to be doing...

meric• 12 years ago

Either way, it's likely that reducing the child mortality rate down to zero might have more consequences than just having a bigger percentage of children being able to grow into adults.

A_COMPUTER• 12 years ago

You're right, you were lucky. Kids who do stuff sometimes die. Life is a deeply, profoundly unfair thing, in ways that cannot be fixed. If you want to have a life worth living, you have to do stuff, but that entails risk that something terrible might happen. I was tempted to say "but that doesn't mean you should take stupid risks like playing with gasoline" but then I realized even that was wrong. We took away chemistry sets and only later did somebody ask a bunch of scientists what got them interested in science, and it seems like quite a few of them say things like "burning/blowing stuff up."

http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/14.06/chemistry.html

"Vint Cerf – who became one of the architects of the Internet – spent months blowing up thermite volcanoes and launching backyard rockets. Growing up in Colorado, David Packard – the late cofounder of Hewlett-Packard – concocted new recipes for gunpowder. The neurologist Oliver Sacks writes about his adolescent love affair with “stinks and bangs” in Uncle Tungsten: Memories of a Chemical Boyhood. “There’s no question that stinks and bangs and crystals and colors are what drew kids – particularly boys – to science,” says Roald Hoffmann of Cornell University, who won the Nobel Prize for chemistry in 1981. “Now the potential for stinks and bangs has been legislated out.”"

Maybe you don't get these great people if you remove their freedom to explore in their formative years. But that freedom also meant a bunch of kids blew their hands off or worse, and if your kid dies in a gasoline accident, it's your fault as a parent and nobody says "well he just wanted his kid to be Nobel Prize material, valiant effort." It's unfair, but reality doesn't care. All you can possibly change is the societal attitude, not the actual fact that freedom means some unsupervised kids always are gonna die and it might be yours.

probably_wrong• 12 years ago

I think this article argues a bit too strong. I personally prefer Leonore Skenazy's blog[1], which argues for the same idea, but with simpler arguments.

As a side note, Skenazy was called "World's worst mom" for allowing her son to ride the subway by himself[2].

[1] http://www.freerangekids.com/

[2] http://theweek.com/article/index/96342/the-last-word-advice-...

PM_Tech2• 12 years ago

The article fails to realise that in most of the anecdotes retold; today the state would intervene at the behest of a neighbour and "I read it in the New York Times" will not really prevent the investigation into why you allowed your child to play with knives, live for 3 days at the top of a slag heap of rubble or hold a loaded handgun.

Also - teenage mortality has reduced drastically[1]. It's hard to argue that could be a bad thing.

It is probably because we don't let them (wherever possible) carry out activities that might kill themselves.

I am a parent of 3; I will happily take my children mountain climbing, skiing, snowboarding, trekking, wild swimming. In a few years we plan to trek to Everest Base Camp and they are coming with me to the Andes.

We engage in controlled risk. If they break a limb skiing then they break a limb skiing. They pushed beyond their abilities in some way. I don't need to give them wrappers of cocaine from a criminal and a handgun to be a better parent.

There is also a very real risk of the "Tom Sawyer" bias. Each generation thinks their generation took greater risks and had more vivid adventures than the one previous. The cognitive dissonance curiously avoids the higher levels of child abuse, abduction, injury, poisoning, asphyxiation, malnutrition and disease. My father used to have great adventures playing as a child in asbestos riddled houses. You can talk to his friends about it sometimes...well the few that have not died before 60.

Oh look here is a group of kids that used lethal asbestos as chalk. [2] They really learned a valuable lesson about ad-hoc citizenry there.

[1]http://www.cbs.nl/en-GB/menu/themas/gezondheid-welzijn/publi... [2]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-24942338

walid• 12 years ago

We engage in controlled risk.

This is probably why your children are much less prone to socially objectionable activities; they get it out of their system.

On the other hand, I think it is the easy access of information and videos on the Internet about everything that help younger people be less curious about what will happen if they do this and that. I don't think it is parents stopping their kids or the neighbours calling the police. Neighbours used to call the police in the past too. Those police were the parents themselves.

emn136• 12 years ago

Right, but the linked articles actually state that the main cause in reduced mortality was reduced traffic accidents. Almost all of the things in the NYT article would not have qualified as traffic accidents. On the face of it, this doesn't really surprise me: many things are "dangerous" yet it's not that easy to kill someone (or yourself) in an accident. Heavy machinery changes that equation, and virtually all heavy machinery we come in contact with are motor vehicles.

In other words: the data doesn't immediately suggest that increased caution has lead to reduced mortality outside of traffic. The NYT article is still plausible from this perspective.

harywilke• 12 years ago

When did swimming become "wild swimming"? Is this just the first time I'm seeing this phrase?

randallsquared• 12 years ago

Probably to differentiate from swimming-pool swimming?

keithpeter4• 12 years ago

"There was one notorious kid with invisible parents who, when he was an eighth grader, already wore the blond bristles of a beard."

Wonder what happened to him? Sounds like he was on a trajectory leading to problems.

doctorstupid2• 12 years ago

If his path did lead to downfall, I'd say it was because he didn't fit into society's structure. In times past he might have become a great leader or warrior.

keithpeter4• 12 years ago

Absolutely. One watches people as they move through life and there are 'cusps' (catastrophe theory reference deliberate). Things can go one way or another.

rtpg4• 12 years ago

In times past he might have become a great leader or warrior.

Is it a bad thing that warlord is no longer a thing we put onto our resumes?

netcan• 12 years ago

As a child, I had all sort of dangerous adventures. As a 5 year olds (I don't really remember this one), we built a bonfire and got caught. As nine year olds we snuck out and went canoeing on "borrowed" canoes. At 12 we played around a farm with petrol. We climbed barn rafters hunting pigeons.

At 15-16 I smoked a lot of grass. We misused it and smoked much more than I would now. I had deeply tripy experiences dozens of times. Some of them scary. I don't think grass is bad, but I think it's tricky for kids, especially as it is basically open criminal activity. It create a distance between them and the police/teachers/parents.

I wouldn't take any of those experiences back. I find I like people who had such experiences as kids and that when I meet 19-20 year olds without them, I kind of think it's impoverished.

OTOH, I can't imagine standing by and letting 15 year olds smoke large quantities of grass or 9 year olds go canoeing by moonlight unsupervised.

All those things take casualties.

Catch 22.

chrisbennet• 12 years ago

"A ship is safe in harbor, but that's not what ships are for."

tokenadult• 12 years ago

In some ways, the most startling thing about this essay is the work affiliation of its author: "John Beckman is an English professor at the United States Naval Academy and the author of 'American Fun: Four Centuries of Joyous Revolt.'" On my own part, as a parent of four children, I encourage my children to be defiant in applying higher principles to analyzing whether or not to follow arbitrary rules. My oldest son coined the phrase "conform to nonconformity" when he was stifled by some of the silly customs at JHU-CTY camp. But for the most part, although young people try random misbehavior all over the world, there is a lot more personal development to be had from self-discipline in pursuit of curiosity and independence than from mindless thrill-seeking.

visakanv• 12 years ago

Relevant: One of my favorite pg quotes, from http://www.paulgraham.com/word.html:

"Like real world resourcefulness, conversational resourcefulness often means doing things you don't want to. Chasing down all the implications of what's said to you can sometimes lead to uncomfortable conclusions. The best word to describe the failure to do so is probably "denial," though that seems a bit too narrow. A better way to describe the situation would be to say that the unsuccessful founders had the sort of conservatism that comes from weakness. They traversed idea space as gingerly as a very old person traverses the physical world."

Since reading that, I've loved the idea of traversing idea space the way you might look for easter eggs in video games- click all the things, flip over all the stones!

KMag• 12 years ago

At the tail end, this goes tragically wrong. The author mentions cocaine, alcohol, and a loaded handgun.

One of my kindergarten friends got drunk one night and started playing with a handgun when he was 14. He'll be in prison until he's 45, without help from any cocaine. [1]

I think getting into a bit of mischief is a proper part of growing up, but I think the author advocates a bit too much.

[1] http://law.justia.com/cases/minnesota/court-of-appeals/1996/...

All Children Should Be Delinquents

Related Stories