Tuesday, March 18, 2014

Affluenza isn't actually a thing. Sorry.

In December 2013, a Texas teenager was put on probation with no jail time after killing four people while driving under the influence. How could this be? The judge cited "affluenza," meaning the teen could not have taken responsibility for his actions because he grew up wealthy. I know what you're probably thinking- really?!

Yes. A psychologist testified on behalf of the teen, claiming he suffered from affluenza, a condition in which wealthy young people have a sense of entitlement, are irresponsible, and make excuses for poor behavior because their parents have not set proper boundaries. The kid may have gotten off easy, but many critique the psychology behind the affluenza diagnosis.

Clinical psychologist Robin Rosenberg believes that the affluenza diagnosis is a a distortion of psychology. The psychology of affluenza does not hold up for two reasons. Firstly, even if the teenager was not disciplined or given boundaries at home, he certainly would have been able to learn lessons in other areas of his life. People are sensitive to context and accurately distinguish between consequences that will occur in one situation but not in another. We see this in preschoolers. They are sensitive to context. They know when to push the boundaries and how much they can get away with. Even rats are known to understand and make discriminations based on context. In a study, rats learned that if a light is on when they press a lever, they’ll receive a food pellet, but when the light is off they won’t. It's that simple.

Secondly, the teenager seemed to feel a sense of responsibility in other areas of his life. He remained in school instead of dropping out because he understood the consequences such actions might bring. If he understood this, he certainly would have understood the consequences of driving under the influence.

So, it seems that affluenza is NOT a valid psychological diagnosis. Everyone has at least some sense of responsibility and knows that certain actions lead to unpleasant consequences, no matter how much money their parents may have.

3 comments:

  1. TRUE. I do not understand how people can blame their parents bad upbringing for how they are acting. The only thing that that can say is that they have genetic problem that they inherited from their parents.
    Parents do have a strong influence on how a child thinks and acts. But something that you yourself need to use your own brain and think, can not be blamed on your parents when you think poorly.
    Maybe little children can pull the aspect that its their parents fault because they imitate everyone they see, but a teenager or adult do their own thing.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I couldn't agree more with what you said!! I hate when people blame their problems on how their parents raised them. I agree with you & Hudis in that parents do have a pretty big influence on their children, but I think that this influence is possible to break away from. As we grow older we learn to think on our own and can potentially break away from what our parents have done.

    ReplyDelete
  3. When I first read this story in the news, I thought it was completely ludicrous. I completely agree with you, Hudis, and Jamie. Although parents do have an influence on their children's upbringing, it's not the only factor. And it certainly is not an excuse to justify killing four people. This teen disobeyed the law and did not even have the morals to take responsibility for his actions. "Affluenza" is not a valid defense for that. At his age, in any other aspect of his life, he would be thinking on his own, but in this situation, it was his parent's upbringing of him? I don't understand, and quite frankly, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.