Sunday, January 5, 2014

TOW #14: 'Affluenza' isn't as crazy as it sounds

'Affluenza' isn't as crazy as it sounds


Russia Times reporting on the controversial case of Ethan Couch.
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/16153654/image/102276016-ethan-couch-avoids-jail-time-thanks-to-affluenza-defense


"Affluenza" is a term coined in the 1970s to encapsulate an odd, "affluent-influenza" that supposedly affects young, wealthy kids and their lack of motivation due to a poor upbringing. A benign idea, until some desperate attorney pulls it out of nowhere to defend a minor accused of four counts of intoxicated manslaughter. In his article, Danny Cevallos attempts to explain the court system and why a bout of affluenza might actually be a legitimate mitigation of punishment. Danny Cevallos is a legal analyst that currently works for CNN. He is a criminal defense attorney, which qualifies him to talk about a recent court case involving 16-year-old Ethan Couch, charged with hitting and killing four innocent people while driving under the influence of alcohol. Couch walked away with 10 years of probation rather than 20 years of prison, primarily because of his claim of affluenza. Cevallos uses this incident to comment on several broader ideas regarding both affluent children and juvenile courts. His purpose is to explain the reasoning behind affluenza and – more importantly – to comment on the current state of the juvenile court system. Cevallos wrote his opinion editorial for a broad audience: anyone who is or knows a child, wealthy or not; anyone in the legal system as a whole; even anyone who has heard about the controversial case of Ethan Couch. To portray his view on the juvenile court system, Cevallos uses anecdote-like medical studies and his own personal knowledge on the defensive side on court cases with a focus on juvenile cases. Although Cevallos's article kept me interested, that wasn't his purpose. Considering the fact that Cevallos has experience in law and writing, this article should have been spot-on. However, I feel as though Cevallos set out with one purpose (to explain his view on affluenza) and ended up somewhat off topic (describing and revamping the entire juvenile court system). Regardless, I do think his use of medical studies as factual anecdotes was very effective at forwarding his purpose. 


http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/18/opinion/cevallos-case-for-affluenza/index.html?hpt=op_bn5


No comments:

Post a Comment