I don't know (as my friend Rawl would say it) but I am not too bright. I am no expert in psychology, sociology and the other "ogys," but I am of the opinion that a country so crime-ridden as ours needs to mobilise forces to protect future generations from becoming criminals. I have great admiration for the Police Service and I respect the legal system; their combined efforts are to be applauded. Nevertheless, we must realise that there is a persisting trend. We must also realise that trends can be changed.
Seeing as I am not too bright, I went on the Internet to do some research and realised that maybe I do have something worthwhile to say. Let me give you some quotes from the paper entitled "Family life, delinquency and crime: A policymaker's guide" by the National Criminal Justice Reference Service and from the Web site www.tycstate.txus/prevention/family_life.html: "A healthy home environment, one in which parents and children share affection, cohesion and involvement, reduces the risk of delinquency." "While many juvenile delinquents do not become adult offenders, behavioural problems during childhood often predict subsequent delinquency and criminality." "Research suggests that some of these behaviour problems initiate within the family."
"A healthy home environment is the single most important factor necessary to keep children from becoming delinquent." With that last point, many readers may be tempted to say that all these single-parent families contribute to the high rate of delinquency. I myself have been brought up in a single-parent home and I consider myself no delinquent. Furthermore, I know of many single parents who are doing and have done great jobs with their children.
Please don't assume that I am blaming two-parent homes because this is not true. What I am trying to say is that family structure is not the cause of delinquency. Well I am not too bright (as I said) so I did some research and it has shown that family relations, not the structure, influence delinquency.
So my opinion is that good parenting for all types of children–from the most meek and docile to the boisterous and most trying–will reduce and perhaps even eliminate delinquency. I am a parent of one child and I always thought that I wasn't too bright so I bought loads of parenting books so that I could make the best choices for my son. I just simply realised that no one ever told me before how to be a parent and I was like a fish out of water even though my mother, father, aunts and uncles were still alive. I can't keep calling them every minute to ask them what to do next. I tell you, I am that stupid! Parenting is a big task.
I consider the crime situation in T&T and I keep hearing that criminals come from dysfunctional homes. So I thought why not teach parenting skills? But to whom should we teach this. I say to everybody because it takes a village to raise a child. Parenting can be learnt. Why not teach parenting from Form 4? Make it a compulsory course but not too loaded. (Note that it must include parenting adolescents.) Make it an examinable course under the local NCSC board. (I think its NCSC. I am a teacher myself in a secondary school and I am not even sure about the name of our local examination board. Indeed, I am a little scatter-brained.)
Finally, for those people who have been labelled "bad parents"–poor souls were never taught parenting and probably are doing the best they can–make it a law, punishable by a small fine, that when a child is delinquent, these parents must attend a special parenting skills course. The same should be done with parents of children with serious psychological problems. I don't know–what do you think? I am not too bright (according to Rawl).
I Superville
Via e-mail