@@mrhumpty this is not in the control of the kids, the question is, what do you do when your caregiver, good or bad, is removed. How can the damage be repaired.
A huge byproduct of the current American criminal justice system is that those people with money can afford to fight seemingly small crimes and get their sentences reduced to community service or house arrest. Those people who do not have the means to plead their case are stuck taking plea deals which offer reduced prison time, but rarely offer non-prison options. This, of course, continues the circle of poverty by giving well-off people a way to prevent separation from children and their jobs, whereas poorer people are thrown in prison away from their children and job opportunities to make the kids' lives better.
Im confused on what you have an issue with here? People who can afford better legal representation, higher more qualified lawyers who are more experienced and better at representing there clients shouldn't be able to do that? The legal systems already provides every person who commits a crime a legal appointy, In a system that didn't care, those people would have to be there own legal representative. If you can afford a better attorney than you will pay for one but don't sit there and act like America just locks up poor people for the fun of it, you either are not looking at reality or are grossly misrepresenting the facts.
I suggest you watch John Oliver's segment on public defenders (ruclips.net/video/USkEzLuzmZ4/видео.html). The public defender system is so over logged that they can barely learn the details of the case, much less figure out the best defense. It is a system where the most needy and vulnerable people are forced to make plea deals rather than having the opportunity to make their case. They get access to lawyers because they are constitutionally entitled to, but they are not given adequate support.
Sorry, I'm not an US citizen so my comment might sound out of place, but I find your statement abhorrent. The legal system is supposed to impart justice, and money should never be a factor in the sentences, period. Justice that you can buy is simply a travesty and the facts around the allegations should decide the outcome of the trial, not who has the best lawyer.
Firstly, Do not think for one second that where you from, who you are, or what you have experienced will ever dictate the "validity" of your contribution. You have opinions, thoughts, and ideas all of which you do not need to justify with, you don't need to be a U.S. citizen to criticize or have opinions about the U.S. So actually addressing your arguement, is that I agree with you, but that kind of system just does not exist and cannot exist. Essentially lawyers have to represent people within both civil and legal court cases and not every lawyer is the same, there are good lawyers and bad lawyers. So the only way to make it fair is to tell every practicing lawyer that they are not allowed to choose their clients, but instead will be assigned randomly to cases. There are three major problems and many more small problems. First major is this eliminates freedom of choice for the lawyers, with the state dictating who they must represent. Here in America we will under a capitalist society and therefore the government cannot tell you how to labor and does not own you're labor. So we maintain the right to work how we want to work and I believe this is a better system. Big problem number two, each lawyer has specialtize which they fill comfartable practicing thier skills in, if your start assigning legal representation willy nilly to a wide swaths of cases you are going to end up with lawyers not well versed in areas of laws having to prosecute or defend with very little expertise. Third glaring problem is what prevents a lawyer from gaining experience in the system, than retiring to become a "consultant" who advises the client an exterior manner. And than from there you get back to the current system, but with extra steps. Im not sure maybe you could propose to me a system that would work and maybe I could find a hole in it.
I highly recommend that you do not get your news/information from a comedian. Check out this publication from the Journal Criminal Justice: www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/criminal_justice_magazine/sp12_ethics.authcheckdam.pdf. Also you're wording is loaded and full of superavoulsness, rich criminals is just as much "in need" of legal representation as a poor one, neither one has more or less need than the other. I am sure you are not looking at this objectively but through some emotional lens that you are also trying to apply to the argument.
I was 14 when my father went to prison and, what do you know, that was 20 years ago. He's still there, too. Because of my age at the time, I had no trouble understanding the situation, of course, and had more ability to cope with things, even supportive friends, and I continued to do well academically (although probably not as well as I might have). There are still lingering emotional and psychological issues for me despite all that (my mother had passed just a few years before as well), and moving between family members for a couple of years probably didn't help. People talk about "justice" being done, but forget that I wound up a victim of the system. (And before anyone accuses me of some victim mentality, I'll restate that I did well with my academics. In fact, well enough in high school to go to and complete college, and then begin a career as an educator. It's a matter of having had a lot of struggles that nobody sees because I keep putting one foot in front of the other.)
Thank you loaded base, this is what I want to know. My partner died from a heartattack, as I was imprisoned for a year, reduced to 6months. My son aged 5/6 was the one who suffered, and I want to address this. At 14, he does great at school but there is little to no information. I want to know what I can do now. I became the ice queen and had to thaw out, (which was no help to him). I am only just finacially recovering but he lost everything and it hurt to much to deal with then.
@@Elixer296 I'm not sure how to make things better, but hopefully as more people learn the real human effects, things will change. My dad and I have stayed close, and I know he wishes he could've been there for things in my life, good and bad, and I know that he loves me. And I am sure your son knows that you love him and care for him, and always have. Even when it's hard for a boy to express it in those teen years, it's appreciated, and it matters. You're doing right by him. (And what a coincidence--while I was typing this I got a call from my dad!)
A HUGE change that would help would be to push for bail reform(I'm looking at you, California, good on you), but also to push for house-arrest in cases wherein dependents may be affected unjustly. Not only would this keep the parent WITH the child, but it would also allow the parent to be assigned a counselor, working with the justice system, to perform regular well-checks and counseling for the parent, the children involved, and everything else. It would provide the justice system with a first-hand on-the-ground contact that can help best guide the parent towards proper reform, but also help the justice system better understand what struggles are being faced on a case by case basis, and adjust accordingly.
Going to share a story of a very dear friend of mine. She grew up in a lower class family, borderline poverty. She got involved with the wrong crowd at a young age and was doing drugs and skipping school. When I met her she turned her life around a bit, she got off a lot of the harder stuff she was doing, and went to school... She was in all honors within a year. She was a bright girl. Home life was horrible for her. She had a mother who was very schizophrenic and a father who was an angry drunk... well... as it so happened one night her father really beat her mom up quite badly, the police were called by the neighbors... he got arrested and sentenced to prison for ten years... and her mother was found too incompetent to care for herself so she was sent to a care facility. My friend, who was seventeen, was too old for the foster care system, so basically... she became homeless... No matter what you think about the situation I just mentioned... so much more could of been done... addressing the drug abuse sooner, a more proactive education system (which could of identified how gifted the girl was in the first place), addressing the poverty, in-community mental health care (including drug abuse/addiction, like alcoholism and anger management). lighter sentences, and quite simply more help for teenagers and young adults (moreover those without a means of adequate support). But no... the criminal justice system, ordained by law, destroyed what little of a family and home that she had, and put her on the streets for years (because it is not easy to exit homelessness even when you are really trying). And the criminal justice system in my opinion took her father, her father who she tried to be a dutiful and loving daughter to, visited her father often in prison... but still with anger issues (because they don't give treatment in prison, and in prison it can get a whole lot worse)... he kinda started ranting at her... and she got upset telling him she hoped he died in prison and ran off... he died of a heart attack just a few days later. She blames herself. I blame the so-called justice system.
A child can still call or skype or otherwise contact at any time a parent who is divorced or traveling. And a parent who is divorced or traveling can still help financially support their child. Oh yeah, and at 4:41, it's mentioned that a good preschool can help alleviate these problems. Guess who's more likely to go to a good preschool? Wow, I keep thinking of things to add to this comment! You must realize that having your parent forcibly taken away by scary men with guns who are screaming and cursing at you is a far more traumatic experience than having your parent leave of their own free will?
@@mac533 I don't think they were arguing that it is more or less traumatic... I think they were genuinely wondering if there is research comparing these types of parentlessness.
This is good to see, as a single mother who was imprisoned, my five year old suffered themost. When I was paroled, I looked for information and found none. His stepfather died of a heart attack eight weeks prior and my sons life would change forever, what went on in his head, who knows, he is super smart, in an excellent music programme. His relationships and personality must have been affected but how?
I’m still suffering. I’m a 33 year old man. Seeing my mom go back to prison really broke my heart. I was blessed to have my grandparents growing up but it’s just not the same ya know?
“Low quality experiences have negative effects on children and high quality experiences have positive effects on children” This seems like a bit of a non-statement without qualifying what a “high/low quality experience” is, since you could (and I would) define a high quality experience as one which has a positive effect.
I think the interesting part of that statement is "low quality experiences have *negative* *effects* ", as opposed to *no* *effect* . So it is worse than if they had not gone to preschool. PS: I didn't read the study, I'm just interpreting what Dr. Aaron said.
You'd be surprised at the number of people who don't agree with the idea that low quality experience has negative effects. In order to justify inequality, people in the US will make just the opposite argument. "I had a hard childhood and look at me..." I bet someone in these comments is making the argument now.
The quality of the preschool depends on a few factors: child:childcare worker ratio, educational time, amount and variety of toys to play with, testing and working on the 3Rs/motor skills/socioemotional skills, structure, and nutrition. I babysit 2 of my MIL's 3 fosters, all under 6, all drug babies. They have serious behavioral issues, and I can't handle the youngest, 3, in addition to the 4 and 5yos AND my 1 and 3yos, because her behavior is so bad. The 5yo has literally been suspended from school for hitting adults and jumping the fence, and all but one preschool in the area have refused to take them BECAUSE of their behavioral issues. That one being the public elementary school, which is woefully understaffed and does not help these kids in the least. Worse still, the social worker has denied every attempt at therapy because "they're too young." These kids NEEDED to be taken from their parents, but they also NEED more resources.
What I love most about this age in history is that we have more ways than ever to express the obviouse and yet, still find ourselves beating a dead horse. Maybe a loss in critical thinking? Who knows...
@@Elixer296 Yes they have. Choosing to go to prison is literally choosing to abandon your child. "I didn't CHOOSE to get fat. I just chose to eat chocolate cake twice a day for a decade." No, you chose to get fat. Same thing.
@@fixed-point Think of all the grey areas, no one eats chocolate is choosing to choke. Is being black choosing to go to prison? because it definitely increases your chances. Is making a comment on you tube choosing abusive replies? Thats not a dig at you. I saw a lawyer to see if my import was legal, paid alot for a report, police at the door a week later, jail for me.
This is interesting and makes a lot of sense in terms of psychology. Actually, I also read a thing talking about the higher likelihood of youth ending up in gangs and one of the early indicators is having problems in preschool/elementary school. It's crazy how far back these things can go. What I do always wonder about when these sort of topics come up, though, is what was the deal with the parents in the first place? For example, there's this huge statistic of kids with one or more parents in prison. But was that parent even around in the first place? Or were they doing anything positive if they were? I worry about generalizing based on statistics which don't take into account the full context. It may seem like a stereotype but the sad reality is, there's a huge issue in some socioeconomic ranges especially (I'm not talking race, I'm talking socioeconomics), where there's either a lot of kids with a lot of different variations of parents and one half of the parents are basically non-existent, or there's a lot of kids to one set of parents but they aren't around much due to trying to support the family or because they just aren't responsible, or they are around but do not create a healthy living environment for the children. When I even think of extended family, my cousins who are a lot less stable and have a lot more behavioral issues are the ones who are more likely to have been affected by that. One family set in particular is interesting because the oldest son is a problem child, but the younger two kids are very stable, and the difference was the oldest kid lived with his abusive dad and his mom until the dad was sent to prison, and mom was single for a bit, until she moved in with her parents who are very stable. He's slowly gotten better over the years but honestly he's only started to stabilize a little bit in his mid/late 20's, now that it's been years and years since his dad wasn't in the picture. For him, his father being sent to prison was probably the best thing that happened to him. Same with the women in the area, because he went to prison for violently raping strangers, including a woman who was a vulnerable adult just trying to walk down the street. Meanwhile, the younger kids have the same dad, so they have the same DNA roll of the dice - they simply were younger, so they don't remember him as much, and the majority of their lives was spent living with stable grandparents and their single mother in a steady household. Particularly with the focus on incarceration lately, sometimes it seems like people get it in their head that people who go to prison are purely victims of a system that doesn't care about them, and nothing but bad things happen because of their removal from society, and so on. Don't get me wrong - the system definitely needs to be fixed. I don't think it works now, and I do think for some people it makes them worse after coming out. I don't like that there isn't enough rehabilitation. And if someone does go through the system and makes an actual effort to take responsibility for their actions, I don't think they should be punished for the rest of their lives for past mistakes because that doesn't help anyone, including society. But at the same time, there are people who refuse to take responsibility for their actions, and when confronted with consequences, they say it's everyone and everything else's fault, and then these groups come in championing that cause, trying to make it seem like this person had zero agency in the entirety of their life which I do not believe or agree with at all. Psychology would support that typically a person has SOME ability to make choices, even if they feel they have fewer choices, unless they are so completely ridiculously, dramatically fucked up that they're basically a sociopathic psychopath with the worst family in existence raised in the absolute worst environment with zero contact with society and etc etc etc. Basically, a character out of a storybook, not someone you're going to see every day on the street. Fact is often stranger than fiction, so I'm not discounting that these people exist - I'm just saying, it's not going to be the majority by any means. So if you're looking at parents, I would be curious to know what the majority of the crimes are that people go to prison for who are being listed in these studies or referenced in the statistics. Was the parent refusing to think about the consequences of their actions, and that's what led to this? That is the sign of someone who is not the best parent in the first place. And in that case, is the child completely missing out, or like my cousins, are they actually a little bit better off in the long run? Or was the parent even around in the first place? Was part of the reason the child already went into life at a disadvantage because that had some instability at home, resulting in one parent having to take on more work in order to support the lack of the other parent, even without prison involved? But of course, we also know that the system is extremely far from perfect, so there are people who end up incarcerated who really shouldn't have been arrested and charged in the first place, or who should have been given a much lower sentence, or who should have been allowed to work off their debt to society in some other form than going to jail or prison for an extended time. Part of the reason I'm curious about this is I wonder if there are resources that would be good to create or provide to teach the children of incarcerated parents why consequences happen, if their parents are not teaching them that as evidenced by their actions. (This is not including what I personally believe to be completely ridiculous incarceration and separation of families, such as what is happening with people crossing the border lately; in my personal opinion, those are not the actions of reckless parents, but of parents who are so desperate to save their children and family that they will take dangerous and extreme action because it's STILL safer than the alternative. For me, personally, I don't think those parents should be interrupted or judged, because we already have enough kids who have shitty parents as-is; we don't need to interfere in cases where the kid might actually have a chance at growing up to be a decent human being who improves the world rather than makes it more turbulent) At any rate, in the cases of children with one or more parent taken away, preschool (or schooling) sounds like the best solution to help bridge that gap. I seriously wish our damn education system was better... Like this video says, childcare programs are extremely helpful, and I really feel like in the situations where there's a lack of stability for a child at home or in their neighborhood, having SOMEONE who cares can make such a dramatic difference. If you look at the way a child's life can end up down paths which are much more difficult or harrowing for them in the long run (and which I would argue would continue to support, create, or encourage a vicious cycle that might extend down generations if not caught and mitigated), there are multiple stepping stones along the way which can make a significant difference for them, but we don't have the best resources along the way for them. Regardless of what people think about the criminal justice system, I would hope that we could all agree that education is good for everyone, and the more we can encourage it from childhood, the better off we will all be. Thank you for the interesting and informative video as always, healthcare triage!
I don't think there was ever a doubt that children being separated from their parents is harmful, and that this harm can be mitigated with certain resources. But this doesn't mean the state should stop incarcerating criminals or start pumping a disproportionate amount of money into the families of those with an incarcerated family member. There must always be a balance, in my country, you can literally get away with repeated murder and not go to jail, you can literally never work and let the state give you money for the amount of children you have, a measure to protect said children from poverty. No extreme is right, but I think the correct balance is closer to making criminals responsible for their own actions and the well being of their children. I mean, I can't understand how people can be so hard on the USA government separating illegal immigrants from their children. What kind of absolute fucking lunatic takes their children illegaly from Mexico to the US? The harm that almost assuredly befell them on that trip will be HUGELY more traumatizing than getting separated from their negligent parent.
I wonder if theres any studies on the outcomes of children of convicts where the convicts had different punishment, like house arrest or community service
Was thinking the same. Yeah there should be programs to help those that are already affected but consequence of committing a crime is affecting your children’s lives not just theirs. Feels a bit like diverting attention from the actual problem… criminals and consequences of their action so it should start with them
@Johnathan Dawn Fiske just like it's cruel to require the male half of the creators of an unplanned pregnancy to be required to accept responsibility for it if he doesn't want to? It's cause and effect. There's no reason to avoid making mistakes if there are no repercussions. And you can bet if motherhood reduces jail time fertility will skyrocket.
@Johnathan Dawn Fiske my point is that saying no to someone who is only begging for money because of their own bad decisions is not being cruel. The cruelty was done themselves by putting themselves in that situation. Or if it's the kids it was done to them by their parents. The blame needs to be put where it belongs. Humans have known where babies come from for around 10000 years, they don't just appear out of thin air. Maybe if we could publicly call stupid people stupid instead of victims, maybe there would be fewer kids to pay for.
It's important to not imply or state aloud that women being incarcerated is a bigger problem than men being incarcerated. That is already a pervasive, yet unspoken prejudice.
What you have to realize is that people like my parents, and other Trump supporters, DO NOT SEE SUFFERING OF CHILDREN OF IMMIGRANTS AND CRIMINALS AS A PROBLEM. Telling them that it happens affects them not at all. I have given up talking to them, there is no changing their mind.
So, they don't realise that these suffering children become the next generation of criminals they are so keen to consider a threat? If they want fewer criminals on the street, they should support things which eradicate the environment that creates criminals.
They don't want less criminals. If they truly did they would not advocate for the current criminal justice system. They want people to vilify, to blame for their problems, to see people in cages to make themselves feel better about their own lives.
>CHILDREN OF IMMIGRANTS AND CRIMINALS this is a little nitpicky but its incorrectly addressing the problem. which is illegal immigrants, those who are not supposed to reside in the united states to begin with. from homeland security. www.dhs.gov/news/2018/06/18/myth-vs-fact-dhs-zero-tolerance-policy "DHS does not have a blanket policy of separating families at the border. However, DHS does have a responsibility to protect all minors in our custody. This means DHS will separate adults and minors under certain circumstances. These circumstances include: 1) when DHS is unable to determine the familial relationship, 2) when DHS determines that a child may be at risk with the parent or legal guardian, or 3) when the parent or legal guardian is referred for criminal prosecution. In recent months, DHS has seen a staggering increase in the number of illegal aliens using children to pose as family units to gain entry into the United States. From October 2017 to February 2018, there was a 315 percent increase in the number of cases of adults with minors fraudulently posing as “family units” to gain entry." if you didn't get it by now, minors are seperated from their "parents" during these criterias which you can read early on in the link. the adults are brought in for questioning and naturally one cannot bring the minors with them as the adults will reside in jail while these questioning goes on. justified or not the adults in questioning often seek asylum which takes several years to allow or deny while the minors in shelters can only be held for a maximum of 20 days. you are left with two options, releasing only the minors into the united states, or releasing both regardless of suspicion and hope naively that they will meet up for a courtcase several years into the future. this encourages illegal immigrants to cross the borders in groups with minors.
A parent's child is their responsibility. Perhaps people who commit disproportional amounts of crime should not be having as many children as responsible individuals. Your child is your responsibility. Until people start taking ownership of their actions, these conditions will continue. I wish the video were less politically one-sided and addressed fatherless homes more. Perhaps a topic for a future video? Thank you HT.
Pssssst...! Any Nerdfighters over here that like Secret Projects? Because there’s one happening right now! If you would like to participate and do something nice for Hank and John Green, just google ‘Secret Project - no peeking, Hank and John’ and you’ll find it!
Thanks a lot DOCTOR for everything. But if possible, would you please add the English and Arabic subtitles to make it easy for us to figure out the the meaning for the words that we don't know.
I'm not sure what the proposed remedy was here. You pointed out that children without either parent present is harmful for development, which is true, but is the suggestion that preschool of high quality should mitigate the problem? Also, when you suggest "prison reform" I'd be interested to see how your reformation proposal would address this issue. It isn't clear to me that it can be done without making the societal sacrifice of releasing criminals back into the general population.
An excellent solution. Life is full of so many opportunities for everyone. It's astounding that we are not all living the lives we've always dreamed of.
You do understand that marriage is a commitment between two people and no one person can just say "guess I should get married then"? If it were so easy no one would be criminals. Also, that isn't really a solution, since people have been saying that forever and surprise, it's not some new insight people just haven't thought of before, and you're not fixing anything by regurgitating it.
Kevin, I'll quote what you wrote on another comment: "It doesn't matter if it's the parents' fault; it isn't the kids' fault but they are still punished."
a lot of those incarcerated parents are those runaway dads and incarceration isn't keeping them from being with their children. many of them have no intention or desire to be parents
Shouldn't your script have the parent(S?) and not just a parent? There are always going to be two, even if they are not around. Are you just trying to be Politically correct? I just find your wording a little off putting & a tad confusing.
Simple solution: just send the kids to jail with the parent! Those kids will probably just end up being criminals anyway, so it's a pre-emptive measure /s
Good plan. So when my father went to prison when I was 14, I could've been locked up instead of graduating high school with honors, going to college, and becoming a teacher. Would be much better to have society spend more on prison than for me to be the law-abiding, tax-paying citizen I am (well, aside from occasionally exceeding the speed limit, but I live in New Jersey, that's expected).
If only we had a list somewhere telling us what is against the law so people could avoid those behaviors, this problem would disappear overnight. Unless people are intentionally doing things that are against the law, then it's their own fault and not anyone else's problem.
It is our problem when their kids grow up without a stable family. It doesn't matter if it's the parents' fault; it isn't the kids' fault but they are still punished.
This is why I'm all for avoiding paying people to have kids by paying them to not have kids. A Universal Basic Income with the only requirement being that you are fixed like a stray brought into the Humane Society.
Wow, was this ever one sided. No mention of welfare or other benefits to the mothers/family was given. While it varies state to state the remaining family is NOT left left to starve or go homeless. Disruptive to the home life as it is incarceration can actually improve the economic standing of single parents depending on the circumstances. (state specific but mothers tend to do well if they know how to play the system) The amount of benefits available to the families is actually pretty extensive as well as abused. Not to mention the other resources available to the families (for instance there are churches that bus families to see incarcerated family members) The fact this was left out of this episode leaves me to question its integrity. If you take into account all of this the situation looks different then what you painted here. I really think you guys are better then this.
As you would know if you had experienced true poverty or the trauma of an incarcerated parent, children affected by this are not "better off." Additional income, especially of the type provided by bureaucracy, is difficult to obtain and full of hoops to jump through. All of which require time and usually a degree of education not always possessed by the remaining caregiver... if there is one.
This is garbage. You're arguing that it's good to put a parent in prison or jail because they might be able to get financial benefits for the kid. A prisoner costs tens of thousands a year. When you put someone in prison, it costs money. It costs money when they leave. Additionally, 75% of people in the US return to prison within five years- often for silly things like missing a meeting with a parole officer. The rest of the developed world has universal healthcare. That alone makes a huge difference for a poor family. Having regular doctor visits makes a difference in a kid's life. This increases the chances of success for those kids. The rest of the developed capitalist world has guaranteed paid vacation, sick leave, and family leave. Those things matter a lot to a poor family. They increase the chances of success for a poor kid. The rest of the developed capitalist world has something called "family support payments" or "child allowance payments". These are direct payments to families with kids. In Germany, for instance, a family receives a couple hundred Euros a month until the kid is out of college. There is NO MEANS TESTING in Germany. That means the money is paid out w/out any type of income tests. Poor or rich, the same check arrives. The rest of the developed capitalist world has much less expensive (or free) college/preschool/technical school. These things improve the chances of success for a poor kid. The rest of the developed capitalist world DOESN'T have the insanely high prison population that we have in the US. Rather than spending our money on supporting workers and people who live in the US, we spend our money incarcerating poor people. Incarcerating parents makes it LESS likely that a kid will succeed in life. When you are a poor parent, you can't afford representation. So, don't spend the money after you've put someone in prison. That ends up costing 35K a year per inmate. Spend a portion of that to catch up with the rest of our peers in the world. It improves the chances of success for those children's lives.
I want this video to be a public service announcement.
To, 1. Be in a two-parent household and 2. Don't do crimes. Because, surprise, it's best for your kids.
@@mrhumpty this is not in the control of the kids, the question is, what do you do when your caregiver, good or bad, is removed. How can the damage be repaired.
Fatherlessness.
Makes a (horrible) difference.
A huge byproduct of the current American criminal justice system is that those people with money can afford to fight seemingly small crimes and get their sentences reduced to community service or house arrest. Those people who do not have the means to plead their case are stuck taking plea deals which offer reduced prison time, but rarely offer non-prison options. This, of course, continues the circle of poverty by giving well-off people a way to prevent separation from children and their jobs, whereas poorer people are thrown in prison away from their children and job opportunities to make the kids' lives better.
Im confused on what you have an issue with here? People who can afford better legal representation, higher more qualified lawyers who are more experienced and better at representing there clients shouldn't be able to do that? The legal systems already provides every person who commits a crime a legal appointy, In a system that didn't care, those people would have to be there own legal representative. If you can afford a better attorney than you will pay for one but don't sit there and act like America just locks up poor people for the fun of it, you either are not looking at reality or are grossly misrepresenting the facts.
I suggest you watch John Oliver's segment on public defenders (ruclips.net/video/USkEzLuzmZ4/видео.html). The public defender system is so over logged that they can barely learn the details of the case, much less figure out the best defense. It is a system where the most needy and vulnerable people are forced to make plea deals rather than having the opportunity to make their case. They get access to lawyers because they are constitutionally entitled to, but they are not given adequate support.
Sorry, I'm not an US citizen so my comment might sound out of place, but I find your statement abhorrent. The legal system is supposed to impart justice, and money should never be a factor in the sentences, period. Justice that you can buy is simply a travesty and the facts around the allegations should decide the outcome of the trial, not who has the best lawyer.
Firstly, Do not think for one second that where you from, who you are, or what you have experienced will ever dictate the "validity" of your contribution. You have opinions, thoughts, and ideas all of which you do not need to justify with, you don't need to be a U.S. citizen to criticize or have opinions about the U.S.
So actually addressing your arguement, is that I agree with you, but that kind of system just does not exist and cannot exist. Essentially lawyers have to represent people within both civil and legal court cases and not every lawyer is the same, there are good lawyers and bad lawyers. So the only way to make it fair is to tell every practicing lawyer that they are not allowed to choose their clients, but instead will be assigned randomly to cases. There are three major problems and many more small problems. First major is this eliminates freedom of choice for the lawyers, with the state dictating who they must represent. Here in America we will under a capitalist society and therefore the government cannot tell you how to labor and does not own you're labor. So we maintain the right to work how we want to work and I believe this is a better system. Big problem number two, each lawyer has specialtize which they fill comfartable practicing thier skills in, if your start assigning legal representation willy nilly to a wide swaths of cases you are going to end up with lawyers not well versed in areas of laws having to prosecute or defend with very little expertise. Third glaring problem is what prevents a lawyer from gaining experience in the system, than retiring to become a "consultant" who advises the client an exterior manner. And than from there you get back to the current system, but with extra steps.
Im not sure maybe you could propose to me a system that would work and maybe I could find a hole in it.
I highly recommend that you do not get your news/information from a comedian. Check out this publication from the Journal Criminal Justice: www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/criminal_justice_magazine/sp12_ethics.authcheckdam.pdf.
Also you're wording is loaded and full of superavoulsness, rich criminals is just as much "in need" of legal representation as a poor one, neither one has more or less need than the other. I am sure you are not looking at this objectively but through some emotional lens that you are also trying to apply to the argument.
Cashless bail programs are being instituted in California, which should help to level the playing field. Great video!!
I was 14 when my father went to prison and, what do you know, that was 20 years ago. He's still there, too. Because of my age at the time, I had no trouble understanding the situation, of course, and had more ability to cope with things, even supportive friends, and I continued to do well academically (although probably not as well as I might have). There are still lingering emotional and psychological issues for me despite all that (my mother had passed just a few years before as well), and moving between family members for a couple of years probably didn't help.
People talk about "justice" being done, but forget that I wound up a victim of the system. (And before anyone accuses me of some victim mentality, I'll restate that I did well with my academics. In fact, well enough in high school to go to and complete college, and then begin a career as an educator. It's a matter of having had a lot of struggles that nobody sees because I keep putting one foot in front of the other.)
Thank you loaded base, this is what I want to know. My partner died from a heartattack, as I was imprisoned for a year, reduced to 6months. My son aged 5/6 was the one who suffered, and I want to address this. At 14, he does great at school but there is little to no information. I want to know what I can do now. I became the ice queen and had to thaw out, (which was no help to him). I am only just finacially recovering but he lost everything and it hurt to much to deal with then.
@@Elixer296 I'm not sure how to make things better, but hopefully as more people learn the real human effects, things will change.
My dad and I have stayed close, and I know he wishes he could've been there for things in my life, good and bad, and I know that he loves me. And I am sure your son knows that you love him and care for him, and always have. Even when it's hard for a boy to express it in those teen years, it's appreciated, and it matters. You're doing right by him.
(And what a coincidence--while I was typing this I got a call from my dad!)
A HUGE change that would help would be to push for bail reform(I'm looking at you, California, good on you), but also to push for house-arrest in cases wherein dependents may be affected unjustly. Not only would this keep the parent WITH the child, but it would also allow the parent to be assigned a counselor, working with the justice system, to perform regular well-checks and counseling for the parent, the children involved, and everything else. It would provide the justice system with a first-hand on-the-ground contact that can help best guide the parent towards proper reform, but also help the justice system better understand what struggles are being faced on a case by case basis, and adjust accordingly.
God, yes!
Going to share a story of a very dear friend of mine. She grew up in a lower class family, borderline poverty. She got involved with the wrong crowd at a young age and was doing drugs and skipping school. When I met her she turned her life around a bit, she got off a lot of the harder stuff she was doing, and went to school... She was in all honors within a year. She was a bright girl. Home life was horrible for her. She had a mother who was very schizophrenic and a father who was an angry drunk... well... as it so happened one night her father really beat her mom up quite badly, the police were called by the neighbors... he got arrested and sentenced to prison for ten years... and her mother was found too incompetent to care for herself so she was sent to a care facility. My friend, who was seventeen, was too old for the foster care system, so basically... she became homeless...
No matter what you think about the situation I just mentioned... so much more could of been done... addressing the drug abuse sooner, a more proactive education system (which could of identified how gifted the girl was in the first place), addressing the poverty, in-community mental health care (including drug abuse/addiction, like alcoholism and anger management). lighter sentences, and quite simply more help for teenagers and young adults (moreover those without a means of adequate support).
But no... the criminal justice system, ordained by law, destroyed what little of a family and home that she had, and put her on the streets for years (because it is not easy to exit homelessness even when you are really trying). And the criminal justice system in my opinion took her father, her father who she tried to be a dutiful and loving daughter to, visited her father often in prison... but still with anger issues (because they don't give treatment in prison, and in prison it can get a whole lot worse)... he kinda started ranting at her... and she got upset telling him she hoped he died in prison and ran off... he died of a heart attack just a few days later. She blames herself. I blame the so-called justice system.
+
How do the children of incarcerated adults compare to those of parents who primarily travel for work or are divorced?
A child can still call or skype or otherwise contact at any time a parent who is divorced or traveling. And a parent who is divorced or traveling can still help financially support their child. Oh yeah, and at 4:41, it's mentioned that a good preschool can help alleviate these problems. Guess who's more likely to go to a good preschool?
Wow, I keep thinking of things to add to this comment! You must realize that having your parent forcibly taken away by scary men with guns who are screaming and cursing at you is a far more traumatic experience than having your parent leave of their own free will?
@@mac533 I don't think they were arguing that it is more or less traumatic... I think they were genuinely wondering if there is research comparing these types of parentlessness.
Imagine having all 3
This is good to see, as a single mother who was imprisoned, my five year old suffered themost. When I was paroled, I looked for information and found none. His stepfather died of a heart attack eight weeks prior and my sons life would change forever, what went on in his head, who knows, he is super smart, in an excellent music programme. His relationships and personality must have been affected but how?
I’m still suffering. I’m a 33 year old man. Seeing my mom go back to prison really broke my heart. I was blessed to have my grandparents growing up but it’s just not the same ya know?
My dad has been doing life in prison since I was 3 im 15 now just around 3 years ago I am barely now visiting him and recognizing him
“Low quality experiences have negative effects on children and high quality experiences have positive effects on children”
This seems like a bit of a non-statement without qualifying what a “high/low quality experience” is, since you could (and I would) define a high quality experience as one which has a positive effect.
I think the interesting part of that statement is "low quality experiences have *negative* *effects* ", as opposed to *no* *effect* . So it is worse than if they had not gone to preschool.
PS: I didn't read the study, I'm just interpreting what Dr. Aaron said.
You'd be surprised at the number of people who don't agree with the idea that low quality experience has negative effects.
In order to justify inequality, people in the US will make just the opposite argument.
"I had a hard childhood and look at me..."
I bet someone in these comments is making the argument now.
At least now there is proof that bad really is bad.
The quality of the preschool depends on a few factors: child:childcare worker ratio, educational time, amount and variety of toys to play with, testing and working on the 3Rs/motor skills/socioemotional skills, structure, and nutrition.
I babysit 2 of my MIL's 3 fosters, all under 6, all drug babies. They have serious behavioral issues, and I can't handle the youngest, 3, in addition to the 4 and 5yos AND my 1 and 3yos, because her behavior is so bad. The 5yo has literally been suspended from school for hitting adults and jumping the fence, and all but one preschool in the area have refused to take them BECAUSE of their behavioral issues. That one being the public elementary school, which is woefully understaffed and does not help these kids in the least. Worse still, the social worker has denied every attempt at therapy because "they're too young."
These kids NEEDED to be taken from their parents, but they also NEED more resources.
What I love most about this age in history is that we have more ways than ever to express the obviouse and yet, still find ourselves beating a dead horse.
Maybe a loss in critical thinking? Who knows...
How is parental incarceration different than children with a parent that abandoned them?
I guess they have a date to look forward to and the parent hasnt abandoned them.
@@Elixer296 Yes they have. Choosing to go to prison is literally choosing to abandon your child. "I didn't CHOOSE to get fat. I just chose to eat chocolate cake twice a day for a decade." No, you chose to get fat. Same thing.
@@fixed-point Think of all the grey areas, no one eats chocolate is choosing to choke. Is being black choosing to go to prison? because it definitely increases your chances. Is making a comment on you tube choosing abusive replies? Thats not a dig at you. I saw a lawyer to see if my import was legal, paid alot for a report, police at the door a week later, jail for me.
This is interesting and makes a lot of sense in terms of psychology. Actually, I also read a thing talking about the higher likelihood of youth ending up in gangs and one of the early indicators is having problems in preschool/elementary school. It's crazy how far back these things can go. What I do always wonder about when these sort of topics come up, though, is what was the deal with the parents in the first place? For example, there's this huge statistic of kids with one or more parents in prison. But was that parent even around in the first place? Or were they doing anything positive if they were? I worry about generalizing based on statistics which don't take into account the full context.
It may seem like a stereotype but the sad reality is, there's a huge issue in some socioeconomic ranges especially (I'm not talking race, I'm talking socioeconomics), where there's either a lot of kids with a lot of different variations of parents and one half of the parents are basically non-existent, or there's a lot of kids to one set of parents but they aren't around much due to trying to support the family or because they just aren't responsible, or they are around but do not create a healthy living environment for the children.
When I even think of extended family, my cousins who are a lot less stable and have a lot more behavioral issues are the ones who are more likely to have been affected by that. One family set in particular is interesting because the oldest son is a problem child, but the younger two kids are very stable, and the difference was the oldest kid lived with his abusive dad and his mom until the dad was sent to prison, and mom was single for a bit, until she moved in with her parents who are very stable. He's slowly gotten better over the years but honestly he's only started to stabilize a little bit in his mid/late 20's, now that it's been years and years since his dad wasn't in the picture. For him, his father being sent to prison was probably the best thing that happened to him. Same with the women in the area, because he went to prison for violently raping strangers, including a woman who was a vulnerable adult just trying to walk down the street. Meanwhile, the younger kids have the same dad, so they have the same DNA roll of the dice - they simply were younger, so they don't remember him as much, and the majority of their lives was spent living with stable grandparents and their single mother in a steady household.
Particularly with the focus on incarceration lately, sometimes it seems like people get it in their head that people who go to prison are purely victims of a system that doesn't care about them, and nothing but bad things happen because of their removal from society, and so on. Don't get me wrong - the system definitely needs to be fixed. I don't think it works now, and I do think for some people it makes them worse after coming out. I don't like that there isn't enough rehabilitation. And if someone does go through the system and makes an actual effort to take responsibility for their actions, I don't think they should be punished for the rest of their lives for past mistakes because that doesn't help anyone, including society.
But at the same time, there are people who refuse to take responsibility for their actions, and when confronted with consequences, they say it's everyone and everything else's fault, and then these groups come in championing that cause, trying to make it seem like this person had zero agency in the entirety of their life which I do not believe or agree with at all. Psychology would support that typically a person has SOME ability to make choices, even if they feel they have fewer choices, unless they are so completely ridiculously, dramatically fucked up that they're basically a sociopathic psychopath with the worst family in existence raised in the absolute worst environment with zero contact with society and etc etc etc. Basically, a character out of a storybook, not someone you're going to see every day on the street. Fact is often stranger than fiction, so I'm not discounting that these people exist - I'm just saying, it's not going to be the majority by any means.
So if you're looking at parents, I would be curious to know what the majority of the crimes are that people go to prison for who are being listed in these studies or referenced in the statistics. Was the parent refusing to think about the consequences of their actions, and that's what led to this? That is the sign of someone who is not the best parent in the first place. And in that case, is the child completely missing out, or like my cousins, are they actually a little bit better off in the long run? Or was the parent even around in the first place? Was part of the reason the child already went into life at a disadvantage because that had some instability at home, resulting in one parent having to take on more work in order to support the lack of the other parent, even without prison involved? But of course, we also know that the system is extremely far from perfect, so there are people who end up incarcerated who really shouldn't have been arrested and charged in the first place, or who should have been given a much lower sentence, or who should have been allowed to work off their debt to society in some other form than going to jail or prison for an extended time.
Part of the reason I'm curious about this is I wonder if there are resources that would be good to create or provide to teach the children of incarcerated parents why consequences happen, if their parents are not teaching them that as evidenced by their actions. (This is not including what I personally believe to be completely ridiculous incarceration and separation of families, such as what is happening with people crossing the border lately; in my personal opinion, those are not the actions of reckless parents, but of parents who are so desperate to save their children and family that they will take dangerous and extreme action because it's STILL safer than the alternative. For me, personally, I don't think those parents should be interrupted or judged, because we already have enough kids who have shitty parents as-is; we don't need to interfere in cases where the kid might actually have a chance at growing up to be a decent human being who improves the world rather than makes it more turbulent)
At any rate, in the cases of children with one or more parent taken away, preschool (or schooling) sounds like the best solution to help bridge that gap. I seriously wish our damn education system was better... Like this video says, childcare programs are extremely helpful, and I really feel like in the situations where there's a lack of stability for a child at home or in their neighborhood, having SOMEONE who cares can make such a dramatic difference. If you look at the way a child's life can end up down paths which are much more difficult or harrowing for them in the long run (and which I would argue would continue to support, create, or encourage a vicious cycle that might extend down generations if not caught and mitigated), there are multiple stepping stones along the way which can make a significant difference for them, but we don't have the best resources along the way for them.
Regardless of what people think about the criminal justice system, I would hope that we could all agree that education is good for everyone, and the more we can encourage it from childhood, the better off we will all be.
Thank you for the interesting and informative video as always, healthcare triage!
Destroy the Prison Industrial Complex and provide universal preK.
I don't think there was ever a doubt that children being separated from their parents is harmful, and that this harm can be mitigated with certain resources. But this doesn't mean the state should stop incarcerating criminals or start pumping a disproportionate amount of money into the families of those with an incarcerated family member.
There must always be a balance, in my country, you can literally get away with repeated murder and not go to jail, you can literally never work and let the state give you money for the amount of children you have, a measure to protect said children from poverty.
No extreme is right, but I think the correct balance is closer to making criminals responsible for their own actions and the well being of their children. I mean, I can't understand how people can be so hard on the USA government separating illegal immigrants from their children. What kind of absolute fucking lunatic takes their children illegaly from Mexico to the US? The harm that almost assuredly befell them on that trip will be HUGELY more traumatizing than getting separated from their negligent parent.
I wonder if theres any studies on the outcomes of children of convicts where the convicts had different punishment, like house arrest or community service
Parents shouldn't break the law then, and get sent to prison, their own stupid f*cking fault...!!!!.
Was thinking the same. Yeah there should be programs to help those that are already affected but consequence of committing a crime is affecting your children’s lives not just theirs. Feels a bit like diverting attention from the actual problem… criminals and consequences of their action so it should start with them
Time where the judge is the criminal
New intro or am I late to notice it?
Two things that are completely preventable, having kids and committing crimes.
@Johnathan Dawn Fiske just like it's cruel to require the male half of the creators of an unplanned pregnancy to be required to accept responsibility for it if he doesn't want to? It's cause and effect. There's no reason to avoid making mistakes if there are no repercussions. And you can bet if motherhood reduces jail time fertility will skyrocket.
@Johnathan Dawn Fiske my point is that saying no to someone who is only begging for money because of their own bad decisions is not being cruel. The cruelty was done themselves by putting themselves in that situation. Or if it's the kids it was done to them by their parents. The blame needs to be put where it belongs. Humans have known where babies come from for around 10000 years, they don't just appear out of thin air. Maybe if we could publicly call stupid people stupid instead of victims, maybe there would be fewer kids to pay for.
It's important to not imply or state aloud that women being incarcerated is a bigger problem than men being incarcerated. That is already a pervasive, yet unspoken prejudice.
What you have to realize is that people like my parents, and other Trump supporters, DO NOT SEE SUFFERING OF CHILDREN OF IMMIGRANTS AND CRIMINALS AS A PROBLEM. Telling them that it happens affects them not at all. I have given up talking to them, there is no changing their mind.
So, they don't realise that these suffering children become the next generation of criminals they are so keen to consider a threat?
If they want fewer criminals on the street, they should support things which eradicate the environment that creates criminals.
They don't want less criminals. If they truly did they would not advocate for the current criminal justice system. They want people to vilify, to blame for their problems, to see people in cages to make themselves feel better about their own lives.
That's somewhat of a caricature. Even though there could be elements of truth to this idea, I doubt it is how these people see themselves.
+Nolan Thiessen
You're not wrong, but you've forgotten the biggest benefit: money, dear boy.
>CHILDREN OF IMMIGRANTS AND CRIMINALS
this is a little nitpicky but its incorrectly addressing the problem. which is illegal immigrants, those who are not supposed to reside in the united states to begin with. from homeland security. www.dhs.gov/news/2018/06/18/myth-vs-fact-dhs-zero-tolerance-policy
"DHS does not have a blanket policy of separating families at the border. However, DHS does have a responsibility to protect all minors in our custody. This means DHS will separate adults and minors under certain circumstances. These circumstances include: 1) when DHS is unable to determine the familial relationship, 2) when DHS determines that a child may be at risk with the parent or legal guardian, or 3) when the parent or legal guardian is referred for criminal prosecution.
In recent months, DHS has seen a staggering increase in the number of illegal aliens using children to pose as family units to gain entry into the United States. From October 2017 to February 2018, there was a 315 percent increase in the number of cases of adults with minors fraudulently posing as “family units” to gain entry."
if you didn't get it by now, minors are seperated from their "parents" during these criterias which you can read early on in the link. the adults are brought in for questioning and naturally one cannot bring the minors with them as the adults will reside in jail while these questioning goes on. justified or not the adults in questioning often seek asylum which takes several years to allow or deny while the minors in shelters can only be held for a maximum of 20 days. you are left with two options, releasing only the minors into the united states, or releasing both regardless of suspicion and hope naively that they will meet up for a courtcase several years into the future. this encourages illegal immigrants to cross the borders in groups with minors.
please tell me the presentation program name
A parent's child is their responsibility. Perhaps people who commit disproportional amounts of crime should not be having as many children as responsible individuals. Your child is your responsibility. Until people start taking ownership of their actions, these conditions will continue. I wish the video were less politically one-sided and addressed fatherless homes more. Perhaps a topic for a future video? Thank you HT.
Pssssst...! Any Nerdfighters over here that like Secret Projects? Because there’s one happening right now! If you would like to participate and do something nice for Hank and John Green, just google ‘Secret Project - no peeking, Hank and John’ and you’ll find it!
Thanks a lot DOCTOR for everything. But if possible, would you please add the English and Arabic subtitles to make it easy for us to figure out the the meaning for the words that we don't know.
I'm not sure what the proposed remedy was here. You pointed out that children without either parent present is harmful for development, which is true, but is the suggestion that preschool of high quality should mitigate the problem? Also, when you suggest "prison reform" I'd be interested to see how your reformation proposal would address this issue. It isn't clear to me that it can be done without making the societal sacrifice of releasing criminals back into the general population.
Be married so you're a two-parent household. Don't do crimes. Studies show that you can fix a lot just doing that.
An excellent solution. Life is full of so many opportunities for everyone. It's astounding that we are not all living the lives we've always dreamed of.
You do understand that marriage is a commitment between two people and no one person can just say "guess I should get married then"? If it were so easy no one would be criminals.
Also, that isn't really a solution, since people have been saying that forever and surprise, it's not some new insight people just haven't thought of before, and you're not fixing anything by regurgitating it.
Kevin, I'll quote what you wrote on another comment: "It doesn't matter if it's the parents' fault; it isn't the kids' fault but they are still punished."
Party pooper
a lot of those incarcerated parents are those runaway dads and incarceration isn't keeping them from being with their children. many of them have no intention or desire to be parents
Blame the system not the criminal. Guess healthcare triage believes in determinism.
When someone grows up without their parents, they become more likely to break the law themselves. Can't deny that determinism.
Shouldn't your script have the parent(S?) and not just a parent? There are always going to be two, even if they are not around. Are you just trying to be Politically correct? I just find your wording a little off putting & a tad confusing.
Simple solution: just send the kids to jail with the parent! Those kids will probably just end up being criminals anyway, so it's a pre-emptive measure /s
Good plan. So when my father went to prison when I was 14, I could've been locked up instead of graduating high school with honors, going to college, and becoming a teacher. Would be much better to have society spend more on prison than for me to be the law-abiding, tax-paying citizen I am (well, aside from occasionally exceeding the speed limit, but I live in New Jersey, that's expected).
If only we had a list somewhere telling us what is against the law so people could avoid those behaviors, this problem would disappear overnight. Unless people are intentionally doing things that are against the law, then it's their own fault and not anyone else's problem.
It is our problem when their kids grow up without a stable family.
It doesn't matter if it's the parents' fault; it isn't the kids' fault but they are still punished.
This is why I'm all for avoiding paying people to have kids by paying them to not have kids. A Universal Basic Income with the only requirement being that you are fixed like a stray brought into the Humane Society.
First!
Wow, was this ever one sided. No mention of welfare or other benefits to the mothers/family was given. While it varies state to state the remaining family is NOT left left to starve or go homeless. Disruptive to the home life as it is incarceration can actually improve the economic standing of single parents depending on the circumstances. (state specific but mothers tend to do well if they know how to play the system) The amount of benefits available to the families is actually pretty extensive as well as abused. Not to mention the other resources available to the families (for instance there are churches that bus families to see incarcerated family members) The fact this was left out of this episode leaves me to question its integrity. If you take into account all of this the situation looks different then what you painted here. I really think you guys are better then this.
As you would know if you had experienced true poverty or the trauma of an incarcerated parent, children affected by this are not "better off." Additional income, especially of the type provided by bureaucracy, is difficult to obtain and full of hoops to jump through. All of which require time and usually a degree of education not always possessed by the remaining caregiver... if there is one.
This is garbage.
You're arguing that it's good to put a parent in prison or jail because they might be able to get financial benefits for the kid.
A prisoner costs tens of thousands a year.
When you put someone in prison, it costs money. It costs money when they leave. Additionally, 75% of people in the US return to prison within five years- often for silly things like missing a meeting with a parole officer.
The rest of the developed world has universal healthcare. That alone makes a huge difference for a poor family. Having regular doctor visits makes a difference in a kid's life. This increases the chances of success for those kids.
The rest of the developed capitalist world has guaranteed paid vacation, sick leave, and family leave. Those things matter a lot to a poor family. They increase the chances of success for a poor kid.
The rest of the developed capitalist world has something called "family support payments" or "child allowance payments". These are direct payments to families with kids. In Germany, for instance, a family receives a couple hundred Euros a month until the kid is out of college. There is NO MEANS TESTING in Germany. That means the money is paid out w/out any type of income tests. Poor or rich, the same check arrives.
The rest of the developed capitalist world has much less expensive (or free) college/preschool/technical school. These things improve the chances of success for a poor kid.
The rest of the developed capitalist world DOESN'T have the insanely high prison population that we have in the US.
Rather than spending our money on supporting workers and people who live in the US, we spend our money incarcerating poor people.
Incarcerating parents makes it LESS likely that a kid will succeed in life. When you are a poor parent, you can't afford representation.
So, don't spend the money after you've put someone in prison. That ends up costing 35K a year per inmate. Spend a portion of that to catch up with the rest of our peers in the world. It improves the chances of success for those children's lives.
Tell me again how having my father locked up was good for me.