Debate Philosophy

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 5

(Widom, 1992).

The abused or neglected participants were also 53% more likely to have been arrested as
a juvenile. Physical abuse was more likely to lead to subsequent arrest for a violent crime
than was sexual abuse or neglect (Widom, 1992).

Stouthamer-Loeber and her colleagues (2001)

In a separate prospective longitudinal study of at-risk boys, Stouthamer-Loeber and her


colleagues (2001) reported that boys with a history of abuse or neglect (defined as having
a referral to children and youth services by age 18) were more likely to display overt
disruptive delinquent behaviors and conflicts with authorities through late adolescence
than were boys who had not been abused or neglected.

Rochester Youth Development Study

Similarly, using data from the Rochester Youth Development Study, Thornberry and his
colleagues (Ireland, Smith, & Thornberry, 2002; Smith & Thornberry, 1995; Thornberry,
Ireland, & Smith, 2001) have found that substantiated abuse or neglect (according to
child protective services records available from birth through adolescence) is related to
delinquency, drug use, and other problem behaviors when adolescents are 14 to 18 years
old.

Grotevant and his colleagues (2006)

early maltreatment (abuse, neglect, or both) predicted aggressive antisocial behavior at


age 21

Cicchetti & Rogosch, 1997; Rogosch, Cicchetti, & Aber, 1995


Arias, 2004; Riggs, O'Leary, & Breslin, 1990
Small & Luster, 1994
Sansone, Dakroub, Pole, & Butler, 2005

In addition to links between early physical abuse and later aggression and delinquency,
the literature also demonstrates links between early physical abuse and numerous other
subsequent social and psychological problems, including internalizing mental health
problems such as depression and anxiety (e.g., Cicchetti & Rogosch, 1997; Rogosch,
Cicchetti, & Aber, 1995), being the victim or perpetrator of violence in romantic
relationships (Arias, 2004; Riggs, O'Leary, & Breslin, 1990), early sexual activity (Small
& Luster, 1994), and problems at work (Sansone, Dakroub, Pole, & Butler, 2005).

Lansford et al., 2002

Our own previous work has illustrated that children who were physically abused prior to
kindergarten were absent from school more than 1.5 times as many days than were
nonabused children, were less likely to anticipate attending college than were nonabused
children, and had levels of mother-reported anxiety or depression, dissociation,
posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms, social problems, thought problems, and social
withdrawal

Attachment Theory

Attachment theory and research also offer insight into potential mechanisms underlying
the association between early abuse and later problems (Berlin & Dodge, 2004;
Lyons-Ruth & Jacobvitz, 1999; van IJzendoorn, Schuengel, & Bakerman-Kranenburg,
1999; Zeanah & Zeanah, 1989). According to attachment theory and research, in
maltreating dyads, the parent comes to serve as both a source of comfort and a source of
harm, which in turn leaves the child in a protracted state of confusion and anxiety.

Article 2180 of the Civil Code

imposes civil liability upon the father and, in case of his death or incapacity, the mother,
for any damages that may be caused by a minor child who lives with them. Hence,
parents are liable for the acts or omissions of their minor child living in their company

This “parental liability” can be easily understood as the natural or logical consequence of
the duties and responsibilities of parents — their parental authority — which includes the
instructing, controlling and disciplining of the child. In this sense, parental liability can be
viewed as a sub-classification of vicarious liability subject of Article 2180 above.

Araneta vs. Arreglado


In the case of Araneta vs. Arreglado, G.R. No. L-11394, prom. September 9, 1958,
Benjamin Araneta was talking with other students of the Ateneo de Manila, seated atop a
low ruined wall. Dario Arreglado, a former student of the Ateneo, chanced to pass by.
The boys twitted him on his leaving the Ateneo and enrolling in the De la Salle College.
Arreglado, resenting the banter, pulled a Japanese luger pistol (licensed in the name of his
father Juan Arreglado), fired the same at Araneta, hitting him in the lower jaw. Dario was
indicted for frustrated homicide and pleaded guilty. But in view of his youth, he being
only 14 years of age, the Court suspended the proceedings (Art. 80 of the Revised Penal
Code). Thereafter, action was instituted by Araneta and his father against Juan Arreglado,
his wife and their son Dario to recover material, moral and exemplary damages. The
Court of First Instance sentenced the Arreglados to pay P3,943.00 as damages and
attorney's fees. The Aranetas appealed in view of the meager amount of indemnity
awarded. This tribunal affirmed the decision but increased the indemnity to P18,000.00.
This decision was predicated upon the fact that Arreglado's father had acted negligently
in allowing his son to have access to the pistol used to injure Benjamin. And this was the
logical consequence of the case, considering the fact that the civil law liability under
Article 2180 is not respondeat superior but the relationship of pater familias which bases
the liability of the father ultimately on his own negligence and not on that of his minor
son (Cuison vs. Norton & Harrison, 55 Phil. 23), and that if an injury is caused by the
fault or negligence of his minor son, the law presumes that there was negligence on the
part of his father (Bahia vs. Litonjua y Leynes, 30 Phil., 625)

Spanish Commentator, Spanish Civil Code

Since children and wards do not yet have the capacity to govern themselves, the law
imposes upon the parents and guardians the duty of exercising special vigilance over the
acts of their children and wards in order that damages to third persons due to the
ignorance, lack of foresight or discernment of such children and wards may be avoided. If
the parents and guardians fail to comply with this duty, they should suffer the
consequences of their abandonment or negligence by repairing the damage caused"

Williams V. Garcetti

The most influential authority regarding criminal prosecution of parents for their
children's crimes comes from California. In Williams v. Garcetti, the California Supreme
Court heard a case where the mother of a child who participated in a gang rape was
charged with violation of Section 272 of California's Penal Code. Mrs. Williams allowed
her son to participate in a gang and was not only knowledgeable of the gang-related
activity, but apparently encouraged his activities. The mother was charged by the State of
California for contributing to the delinquency of her son based on the facts that
circumstantial evidence culminated in her knowledge of his gang-related activity. The
court reasoned that her conduct resulted in criminal negligence based upon the statute,
which recognizes a duty by the parent to exercise reasonable control over his/her
children.

Tyson V. State of Florida

Tyson v. State is the only Florida appellate decision regarding the use of Section
784.05(3) of the Florida statutes. In Tyson, the State of Florida charged Tracy S. Tyson
with culpable negligence for allowing her minor child access to a loaded firearm, which
the minor then used to injure another person. The Florida Court of Appeals did not
review the constitutionality of the statute on its face nor did the court review the
application of the statute as applied to the parent. Rather, the court simply found that the
statute should be upheld and the parent should be liable.

Access to firearms statutes worked their way into our nation's criminal law jurisprudence
to add incentive to keep firearms out of the hands of minors. The desire to provide
negative incentives for adults to keep firearms out of the hands of minors propelled the
enactment of access to firearm statutes. The Tyson case exemplifies a tragic situation in
which a statutorily derived heightened parental awareness to the dangers of easy access to
firearms may have prevented the injuries to the other party

Clark, 1965

Michael Clark, sixteen (16), who was a Boy Scout, Sea Scout and member of his high
school band and who did not use drugs, alcohol or display any psychological instability,
took to the streets. 05 On April 24, 1965, he started the atrocity by leaving his parents'
Long Beach home around 8 p.m. in his parents' car, outfitted with his parents' credit cards
and his father's 6.5 millimeter Swedish Mauser with telescopic site.

Around 6 a.m. the following morning, Michael positioned himself overlooking a busy
highway and proceeded to fire the Mauser at passing automobiles. Three people were
killed and several others were wounded before Michael ultimately shot himself.

You might also like