Über die Autorin bzw. den Autor

Stanton E. Samenow, Ph.D., graduated from Yale University and earned a doctoral degree in clinical psychology from the University of Michigan. He is the author of Inside the Criminal Mind and collaborator with Dr. Samuel Yochelson on the landmark three-volume work The Criminal Personality. He has served on three presidential task forces on crime and drug issues. Married and the father of two sons, Dr. Samenow is in private practice in Alexandria, Virginia.

Von der hinteren Coverseite

dy of work which gives concerned parents and professionals instructive insight into the personality of "problem children" and gives practical suggestions for taking corrective and remedial steps before it's too late.

Aus dem Klappentext

dy of work which gives concerned parents and professionals instructive insight into the personality of "problem children" and gives practical suggestions for taking corrective and remedial steps before it's too late.

Auszug. © Genehmigter Nachdruck. Alle Rechte vorbehalten.

Before It's Too Late

Crown Publishers

Chapter One

The Child as Shaper
of His Own Destiny

    It seems that as far back as I can remember there have beenalarm and despair over escalating juvenile crime. As a childin the 1950s, I heard radio reports about the mushroomingproblems with youthful gangs in the big cities. When I was inhigh school, many of us read Evan Hunter's Blackboard Jungleor saw the 1955 movie based on his book, which graphicallydepicted teenage delinquency occurring right in the classroom,no longer confined to the streets. In the 1960s, we began tohear about a surge of juvenile crime in areas that had been regardedas virtually crime free. In suburbs as well as in the innercities, youngsters were dropping out of school, using drugs,and committing crimes. In the 1970s and 1980s, juvenile courtdockets became increasingly jammed with criminal cases. Accordingto the Department of Justice, the percentage increasesin arrests from 1985 to 1994 have been greater for juvenilesthan for adults. During 1994 alone, 2.7 million juveniles werearrested.

    The first juvenile court, established in Illinois's CookCounty in 1899, was designed "in a spirit of benevolent paternalism"and was devoid of the idea that "children were capableof criminal intent." During the latter part of this century, juvenilecourts that customarily provided social services in order torehabilitate rather than punish lawbreakers were faced with anonslaught of children who were not simply wayward youths,but hardened repeat offenders. Providing them with social services--requiringa brief stay in the detention center or lengthierincarceration in a juvenile correctional facility--had little,if any, impact on these youngsters. The persistent juveniledelinquent exhausted the resources of the juvenile justice systemand continued to prey upon society. The 1980s witnessedan increasingly desperate outcry for courts to take more extrememeasures to contain juvenile crime, which is assumingever more serious forms. A 1984 federal report asserted that tenyears' experience with minimizing punishment and relying onprevention demonstrated that "this medicine has not produceda cure." The emphasis on rehabilitation of repeat offenders hasgiven way to "get tough" policies. Citizens want these youngstersoff the streets. More detention facilities have been constructed.Violent juvenile offenders who have been imperviousto penalties imposed by the juvenile justice system are increasinglybeing handed over to courts where they must stand trialas adults. (All fifty states have provisions for trying certaintypes of juvenile offenders in adult courts.) From 1985 to 1994,the number of juvenile cases transferred to adult courts increasedfrom 7,200 to 12,300. In 1989, the Supreme Court decidedthat the death penalty can be applied to sixteen- andseventeen-year-olds.

    In my clinical practice, I see youngsters who are referred byjuvenile courts, sent by school counselors, and in nearly allcases dragged unwillingly to me by their parents. For the mostpart, these boys and girls are already knee-deep in crime. As Ievaluate them psychologically, I find that their defiance andexcitement-seeking began as early as the preschool years and thattheir criminality is far more extensive than anyone suspects.Their parents are overwhelmed by fear, anger, and guilt. Guiltcan be the most devastating emotion, for it often paralyzes parentsso that they are unable to take effective action. As theystruggle to make sense of it all, the mothers and fathers of theseyoungsters are positive they must have done something horriblywrong that caused their children to become so irresponsible.But rarely is this the case.

    It is tragic that for decades, psychiatrists, psychologists, socialworkers, and educators have convinced parents that theyare chiefly responsible for shaping their children's destiny. Erroneously,the experts have asserted that the child comes intothis world much like a totally unformed lump of clay and thenis haplessly molded by parents. Millions of mothers and fathershave internalized this message and, understandably, feelblameworthy for everything that goes wrong.

    Most of us assume the awesome responsibility for raising achild with a mixture of eagerness and apprehension. It is, afterall, potentially the most exciting and fulfilling undertaking ofour lives. How crushing the disappointment when we sensethat we are losing control, that things are turning out far differentlyfrom what we had hoped. Certain that we are the oneswho are failing, our confidence in our instincts and skills asparents falters. Convinced that we are to blame, we become angrierwith ourselves than with our sons or daughters. But issuch severe and unrelenting self-castigation justified? Are wein fact so totally responsible for our children's behavior?

    The conventional wisdom claims that if a youngster has seriousproblems, the parents must be their source. This point ofview has been consistent for decades. In 1942, Dr. David Levystated, "Excessive mother love, indulgence, and overprotectionof the child produce personality traits which lead to delinquentbehavior." In 1979, Dr. David Elkind said, "I have argued thatmiddle-class delinquency is essentially a reaction to parentalexploitation. Such a position clearly places the burden of blamefor middle-class delinquency upon the parents." And finally, in1986, Ludwig L. Geismar and Katherine M. Wood pointed out,"Juvenile delinquency appears to occur disproportionatelyamong children in `unhappy homes' where there is poor communication;marital disharmony; [and] unaccepting, unaffectionateparents."

    Yet the daily experiences of millions of parents, as well as arelatively recent body of psychological research, indicate thatthe child is not a passive receptacle. Rather than haplessly beingshaped by his surroundings, he himself shapes the behavior ofothers. Two researchers in the field of child development havepointed out that any credible model of child development musttake into account "the child as an active agent in social transactions."Any parent of more than one child knows that childrendiffer in temperament from birth. One infant may be fussy, irritable,and restless; another may be placid and contented. Isn't itnatural for a parent to respond differently to a cranky, colickybaby than to a cooing, quiet one? Whereas most parents try toraise all children with love and to provide them equally with opportunities,they invariably treat each one differently. It couldnot be otherwise for, from birth, children have different temperaments,personalities, and needs.

    Differences in temperament and other possible genetic factorshave been largely overlooked as possible contributors tothe development of an antisocial personality. One reason forthis continuing trend is the belief that if a condition has a geneticcomponent, nothing can be done. This is not necessarilyso. Regardless of temperament, people still make choices.

    But what does this have to do with crime? A lot, so far asidentifying the source of the problem goes. If one were a fly onthe wall of my office, one would hear juvenile offenders blametheir parents and parents blame themselves for their youngsters'misconduct. As these boys and girls realize just how vulnerabletheir parents are to feelings of guilt, they...