Bypassing Parental Consent

The group of people that I chose to do intelligence research on was psychopaths, particularly serial killers. I did not focus on any particular subgroup, however there are subtypes of psychopaths such as primary and secondary and among those two subtypes it is further broken down into distempered and charismatic subtypes. In the article Psychopathy: Manipulation, Deception, and Evil, author Pamela Kulbarsh (2012) defines a psychopath as “a morally depraved individual who represent the ‘monsters’ in our society; an unstoppable and untreatable predator whose violence is planned, purposeful and emotionless” (p.1). While in the article it states that not all psychopaths are law-breakers that is a different story with serial killers

In some states there are similarity to this historical “Common Law Principle of Responsibility”. As to be expected, states have different laws regarding matters of juveniles. Many states vary when determining whether or not a children should be tried as an adult or what the minimum or maximum ages courts must follow or what crimes they are allowed try are. Taking Illinois for example, the set age required by law for a children to be transferred into adult court is seventeen. However, in Illinois there is a major exception to this rule. State law changes the minimum age to fifteen when crimes of murder of the first degree, aggravated sexual assault, armed robbery, robbery with possession of a firearm, and use of weapons on school grounds are committed (Carp, Stidham, and Manning, 67). Illinois considers these offenses the most serious.

In these cases, we saw even though they are minors that if the courts wanted to hold juveniles accountable for their crimes as they would adults then guidelines had to be set to ensure the violation of juvenile liberties are not continued. We can see the cases that set the precedent for changes in the juvenile justice system for example, the graph below:

As stated in Minors, Parents, and Minor Parents, “Laws requiring parental involvement in minor abortion decisions have been constitutional, provided that the laws offer an alternative, such as judicial bypass.” (Manian 144) This may be an option but can cause emotional distress. Most judges in these cases end up asking inappropriate or unnecessary questions relating to the teenagers sexual activities. Some teenagers are not even able to afford or get to a court. For most this is not a suitable alternative to getting parental consent.

717). However, later cases argue against the autonomy of minors, allowing the state to override minors and their parents (Woolley, 2005, p. 717). Minors are refused the right to make their own decisions based on the assumption that they are immature and therefore do not possess the decision-making capacities to make a rational choice (Chen, 2007, p. 645).

Kristin (2009) argues that having the power of enacting laws concerning juveniles is important because the different states have different kinds of environments and different people who lead life in different ways. For example Texas and Oklahoma states have juvenile laws that cannot be applied in New England which has a heavy population. By giving each state power to enact their own laws is a way of enhancing democracy since people make their own decisions on how they want to be governed.

Imagine a future where minors have more rights in society. There are many laws in our society that are crucial for living in a peace filled society. Some laws however, are not as crucial to our society and are not necessary for our daily lives. All people are supposed to be created equal, including children, yet our society still excludes them from many rights. This defies the rights of human equality in the United States. Minors should have equal rights as adults.

In the past years, there have been hundreds of cases reported of children committing horrible, unthinkable crimes. It is hard to believe that anyone, especially children, could ever commit such horrendous acts. Whether or not a child who commits such a malicious crime is an actual psychopath or not is a common asked question. As soon as the public finds out that a malicious crime has been committed by a young child, they could easily assume that the child who committed the crime is psychopathic and will be for the rest of their lives. But is it possible that someone who commits a horrible crime as a child could grow up and realize what they did was wrong, and feel remorse for what they have done in the past? We have to consider what behaviors the child had shown before and after they had committed the crime, and what motivated the child to commit the crime, before we permanently label them a psychopath. All of the information in this paper was based off a review of literature. The review of literature was retrieved from various experts such as Carl Jung, Jacqueline Stenson, Christian Keysers, Ryan Schill, Paul Mattaiuzzi, and Katherine Ramsland. This review of literature indicates that not all children who commit such crimes can automatically be labeled a psychopath and that they are able to grow up into adults that exhibit normal behavior.

A third exception to minor consent is birth control. In the setting of contraception and sexual healthcare, “The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) believe that policies supporting adolescent consent and protecting adolescent confidentiality are in the best interests of adolescents” (AAP, 2014). The contraception pill is significant in reducing pregnancy rates, but can be contentious when it comes to ethical, moral and religious views. It can also cause distress with parents when they find out if parental consent is not required. This can be challenging for nurses who do not understand state and federal laws and how they apply to minors and the use of birth control. The study states that, “Nearly half of US high school students report ever

When I first began to read this article the first thing that popped in my head was the movie “Minority Report.” In this movie people were incarcerated for crimes that they did not yet commit because people believed that three individuals could foresee the future. Which to some extent I believe that brain pathology and neurocriminology. Yes, there have been studies where some criminal’s brains function differently than a normal individuals. However, there needs to be a lot more research done because not everyone who may have these same disorders are going to make the same decision on becoming a criminal. In the article they say that there are many different factors that could influence an individual into a life of crime such as environment,

Thank you for providing the information from the IRB. After looking at varies links, I found the first step is to protect the participants in the study is obtain parental consent (IRB, 2014). I will further into the IRB information about participants. Is there any specific link that would be helpful for the action research project? Does Concordia require the use of IRB services? The fact I was think of when I was typing that phrase was the fact that there are under a thousand people in the village I currently reside.

One of today’s biggest debates sweeping the nation is about sexually active teens and if teenagers should be allowed to get birth control with parental consent?” Age groups ranging between 12 and 25 year old's, pregnancy rate has dropped. Within the past few years, teen pregnancy has decreased in the United States due to different form of contraception and the use of protection. Even though birth control is given to teens at women’s clinics and such, it should be made easier because it can decrease the rate of unwanted pregnancy, our teen’s rights stay protected and any lack of family communication the teen may have.

Fischman discusses how he was able to see distinct patterns of brain development, or lack thereof, in the youth, some as young as 3, in his study. He was able to find some similarities between the breakdown of certain areas of the brain and a predictor of violent crimes. He also eluded to the fact that knowing this could save a future victim from this malformed criminal mind. What his research did not show is, how many of these “pre-criminal minds” have malformations of the brain, but never commit a crime. In Clara Moskowitz’s article, “Criminal minds are different from yours, brain scans reveal”, she details that there is no clear way to determine who will commit a crime and who will resist the urges for criminal activity. Moskowitz does conclude that the research would be helpful in therapeutic sessions with the children who have abnormal brain scans in order to equip them with the tools necessary to live productive lives. Both articles were an insightful look into the brain and

Watching the video of: “The Child Cases” reminded me of the Netflix series of Making a Murder. In this series he gets convicted of a crime that he did not do, just like in the video “The Child Cases”. I learned a lot about this and how crimes can be convicted on someone when they didn’t do it. I also, learned about child abuse cases and how they handle them. Shaken baby syndrome was talked a lot in the video. I feel this is something that people should be aware of because it can affect the baby’s future. Now with this being a new generation and later in life, I feel they have the technology and better equipment to handle these cases.

Although public safety is both a legitimate and justifiable concern, the proposed changes to the purposes clause would go against the primary purpose of the juvenile justice system, rehabilitation and treatment as opposed to punishment. During the 19th century, the American legal system tended to treat juveniles who violated the criminal law much as it did adult offenders. Consequently, if courts found children criminally responsible, they would then impose the same sentences, e.g. capital punishment, and committed these youths to the same penal facilities as they did adult criminals. Despite institutional innovation, states continued to try and punish juveniles as they would adults, practices of which appalled Progressive reformers. Accordingly, the progressives created the juvenile court as an informal welfare system and diversionary alternative to the criminal process. Rather than punish youth offenders for their crimes, juvenile court judges made dispositions in the child’s “best interests” as the state functioned as a parent of the child, under the legal doctrine of parens patriae.