Kristen Gyles | Rehabilitation and the magic of 18

Earlier this month, Police Commissioner Major General Antony Anderson indicated that a total of 875 major crimes reported between 2019 and this year were committed by youngsters between the ages of 15 and 17 years. While this came as a shocker to some, it shouldn’t seem too far-fetched for persons who have been observing the drifting tide of social norms in our society.

The big issue is not so much a reluctance by our youth to utter artificial ‘good mornings’ when passing strangers on their way to school. The more problematic issue is the ease with which students get triggered into throwing hands and pulling weapons on each other. The social climate has certainly been shifting.

How can we reverse the shift? Can we? The commissioner made mention of early social intervention initiatives undertaken by the Jamaica Constabulary Force (JCF) including programmes under its Community Safety and Security Branch (CSSB), intended to reduce crime through partnerships with schools, youth clubs and other social institutions. He also reiterated the call for all institutions of society to play their part in curbing violent attitudes in our youth through early surveillance.

In other words, all hope isn’t lost.

The glimmer of hope starts with the current crop of critical ‘Carl’s and ‘Carla’s who ironically raised the so-called problem generation. When the stork delivers the baby, it usually takes enough care to ensure it is a blank-slated impressionable child and not a criminal disguised as one. No child is born a criminal. Children are raised. So, when a 15-year-old chooses to participate in a shoot-out, it is likely to have something to do with the values they were raised with (or the lack thereof) and their overexposure to criminality.

VICTIMS OF CIRCUMSTANCES

Children are therefore, in many cases, victims of their hard circumstances. Victims of amoral cultures that glorify and worship self, victims of parent absenteeism and lovelessness, and victims of want and impoverishment – the perfect recipe for utter misery. And misery loves company.

But as I contemplated the social intervention measures being explored by the JCF, I couldn’t help but think about the other thousands of major crimes that would have been committed during the same four-year period. Why exactly do we regard those differently? And at what age do we start holding people accountable for their actions?

A child could callously commit murder only for a tear-jerking explanation to be made that the child was never loved, probably abused at home, severely neglected, and the list goes on. And again, all that might very well be true. But is it not also true of the adult murderers we say should be sent straight to the gallows?

While there is usually some pity for the child murderer, who it is assumed the society has failed, there is usually a thirst for the adult murderer’s blood, because he is irredeemably wicked. But at what age does a murderer become irredeemably wicked and at what point does he become responsible for his actions? It genuinely appears that the moment a child hits the ripe old age of adulthood is the moment the effects of their childhood, and the circumstances they were raised in, begin to lose relevance.

Simply cherry-picking an age and using that as a benchmark of adulthood might make sense legally. But socially speaking, I think sometimes we forget that nothing magical happens at age 18. There is no magical transformation, neither cognitively, socially nor physically that should cause us to expect different things from a 17-year-old as opposed to an 18-year-old. Further, the same children who grow up doing some rather debased things because of a depraved social upbringing don’t just drop these behaviours at the welcome mat of their 18th birthday bash. Corrupted children typically grow into corrupt adults.

CURIOUS ISSUE

And then there’s the curious issue of the incongruence between the age of consent and the legal age of adulthood. An adult of any age can have sex with a 16-year-old and face no issues, but no one can sell that same 16-year-old a beer. No wonder 16-year-olds are so confused. Even the society is yet to figure out whether they are children or adults. But, I digress.

The real question is, what is the significance of adulthood in how we view these social issues? On the matter of criminality, I highly doubt there is a specific age at which rehabilitation becomes of none effect. A few weeks of rehabilitative training won’t likely undo decades of damage, but in the same way we try to save the children we can at least try to save men and women too. This doesn’t absolve them of culpability but makes the society less likely to face a reoccurrence of offence by the same criminal years after their release. The simple reality is that it is easier to see children as victims and adults as perpetrators. But what is easy is not necessarily what is rational.

Kristen Gyles is a free-thinking public affairs opinionator. Email feedback to kristengyles@gmail.com.