A person that, in an irresponsible way, drives a vehicle at high speed in a high-traffic area. The impact and the immediate death of innocent pedestrians who become victims. Dreams and lives ruined in a second.
At times when the problem of direct responsibility in fatal traffic accidents moves the political agenda in our country, the result of a tragic automobile accident caused by a wealthy teenager in the United States could set a dangerous precedent, and deserves analysis, discussion and partial interpretation of such a noteworthy and relevant subject.
The event in question took place in Texas, in June of 2013. Ethan Couch, a 16-year-old teenager and a member of one of the most well-off and influential families from that state, ran over and killed four people and injured another nine (one of which was left paralyzed).
Ethan was driving at a speed of 110 kilometers per hour [about 68 miles per hour] on a street with a speed limit of 65 kilometers per hour [40 miles per hour], with a blood alcohol level that was three times the legal limit in Texas. There were also traces of Valium in his system, which when mixed with alcohol, causes a drunk feeling, decreases one’s reflexes, and causes drowsiness.
Up to this point, it is just a sad case that resulted in preventable deaths. But the truly peculiar thing in all this was that the defendant was sentenced to 10 years of house arrest and parole thanks to the arguments presented by his lawyer, which involved "social class" and could set a dangerous precedent: According to the lawyer, Ethan Couch carried out the mentioned act because he suffered from affluenza, a new social disease that affects rich people, and which deserves a detailed analysis that will be carried out later.
What Is Affluenza and How Does It End Up in a Lawsuit?
The word affluenza was introduced for the first time by the psychologist Jessie O´Neill, granddaughter of a president of the General Motors car company, who published a book in 1998 called "The Golden Ghetto: The Psychology of Affluence." The term affluenza is a neologism that combines the words "influenza" (which means flu in English and Italian) with "affluent" (well-off or rich).
In that way, the meaning of affluenza would be something like "rich people sickness" or "the disease of the rich."
This disease is characterized by acting without values, the absence of feelings of guilt, and a total lack of empathy for some people thanks to excessive ambition and a social status that is generally very high.
To better understand its characteristics, you should keep in mind that the opposite of dissatisfaction is satisfaction. For example, earning a salary that would be considered low is a cause of dissatisfaction, but the solution for this (for example, getting a raise or switching jobs) does not increase your satisfaction; instead, with luck, it decreases your perceived dissatisfaction. In this way, the opposite of satisfaction is dissatisfaction. For example, if you create strong expectations for something which are soon unfulfilled, the sensation that stays is not less satisfaction; instead, it is dissatisfaction.
According to this, affluenza could be considered being permanently dissatisfied, which temporarily improves when goods are bought or when enjoying other privileges that come from status, but that soon begins to get worse until the previous levels of dissatisfaction return.
This "disease," according to Texas lawyer Scott Brown (who defended Ethan), is passed from parents to children and prevents the children from having a clear notion of the gravity of their actions.
In order to defend its argument, the defense called a number of witnesses that are close to the family, who testified that the careless driver had a comfortable lifestyle where there are no consequences for his bad behavior, and that he enjoyed freedoms that no young person should have.
Judge Jean Boyd, of the juvenile court of Fort Worth, Texas, bought all these arguments and practically let Ethan Couch go free, taking that step of staying on the side of the defendant who mysteriously and suddenly becomes a victim.
Conclusion
In a column published a few weeks back called "Egoistic Behaviors of Wealthy People," we have debated diverse issues that show how insensitivity toward your neighbor increases as you climb the social pyramid; but from there to this situation of justifying abhorrent deeds seems like another world.
Following the line of reasoning from this case, you could say that there are a lot of people that commit crimes and find themselves conditioned by the family environment in which they grew up, like those that have marginalized families, the seriously disturbed, or those with alcoholic or abusive parents that end up stealing.
Don't try to become a civil rights advocate, but rather demand that justice is carried out in an impartial way, without favoring outlandish arguments from those who have greater material resources to contract more creative lawyers at the time of presenting arguments for their client.
My experience with this subject tells me that our relationship with money (or our family's, in the case of being a minor) can be used to explain an important part of our behavior. But when the same involuntary aspects endanger the lives of others, the focus shouldn't be the same.
The risk here is that affluenza may be used as an argument to excuse people from punishment that their actions deserve instead of the pain and suffering that they cause in the lives of other people.
Let's hope that for once, common sense and a greater social conscience prevents it.
Una persona que de manera irresponsable conduce un vehículo a una velocidad extrema en un área transitada. El impacto y el deceso inmediato de peatones inocentes que se transforman en víctimas. Sueños y vidas frustradas en un segundo.
En momentos en los cuales la polémica sobre la responsabilidad directa en accidentes de tránsito mortales sacude la agenda de los medios en nuestro país, la resolución de una tragedia automovilística causada por un adolescente adinerado en los EE.UU. podría sentar un peligroso precedente y merece ser analizada y discutida por su naturaleza social e interpretación parcial de un tema tan sensible y actual.
El acontecimiento al que hacemos mención ocurrió en Texas, EE.UU., en junio de 2013. Ethan Couch, un adolescente de 16 años miembro de una de las familias más acaudaladas e influyentes de ese estado, atropelló y mató a cuatro personas y lesionó a otras nueve (uno de los cuales quedó caudripléjico).
Ethan manejaba a 110 kilómetros por hora en una calle cuya velocidad máxima permitida es de 65, y sus pruebas de sangre dieron un porcentaje de alcohol tres veces superior a lo que en Texas se considera índice de embriaguez. Había, también, indicios de Valium que, al mezclarse con alcohol, potencia la sensación de embriaguez y disminuye aún más los reflejos al causar somnolencia.
Hasta aquí, un triste caso más que deriva en muertes evitables. Pero lo verdaderamente curioso de todo esto fue que el acusado fue sentenciado a 10 años de arresto domiciliario y libertad bajo palabra gracias a los argumentos presentados por su abogado, que involucran temas "de clase" que podrían sentar una peligrosa jurisprudencia: según el letrado, Ethan Couch llevó a cabo el citado acto bajo los efectos de la affluenza, una nueva enfermedad social que afectaría a la gente pudiente y que merece un análisis detallado que llevaremos a cabo a continuación.
¿QUE ES LA AFFLUENZA Y COMO APARECE EN UN CASO JUDICIAL?
La palabra affluenza fue introducida por primera vez por la psicóloga Jessie O´Neill, nieta de un presidente de la automotriz General Motors, que publicó un libro en 1998 llamado "El Ghetto dorado: la psicología de la afluencia".
El término affluenza es un neologismo que sale de combinar las palabras "influenza" (que significa "gripe" en inglés e italiano) con "affluent" (que significa acaudalado o rico).
De tal manera, el significado de affluenza vendría a ser algo así como "la gripe de los ricos" o directamente "la enfermedad de los ricos".
Esta patología se caracteriza por un accionar sin valores, ausencia de sentimiento de culpa y una falta total de empatía manifestada por algunas personas gracias a su ambición desmedida, generalmente de estatus social muy alto.
Para entender mejor sus características se debe tener en cuenta que lo contrario a la insatisfacción es la no-insatisfacción. Por ejemplo, ganar un sueldo que consideramos bajo es una causa de insatisfacción, pero la solución de ese tema (por ejemplo vía un aumento o cambio de trabajo) no incrementa los niveles de satisfacción sino que, con suerte, disminuye la insatisfacción percibida. De la misma manera, lo contrario a la satisfacción es la no-satisfacción. Por ejemplo, si se crean fuertes expectativas de algo o de alguien que luego no se cumplen, la sensación que queda no es de menor satisfacción sino directamente de no satisfacción.
Dicho esto, la affluenza podría ser considerada como una insatisfacción permanente, que mejora temporalmente cuando se compran bienes o se disfrutan otros privilegios derivados de status pero que luego vuelve a empeorar hasta los niveles de insatisfacción previos.
Esta "enfermedad", según el abogado texano Scott Brown (quien defendió a Ethan), se contagia de padres a hijos e impide a estos últimos tener una noción clara de la gravedad de sus actos.
Para sustentar sus argumentos, la defensa citó en el juzgado a diversos testigos cercanos a la familia que testimoniaron que el conductor imprudente tenía un estilo de vida acomodado en donde no había consecuencias por su mala conducta y que gozaba de libertades que ninguna persona joven debería tener.
El juez Jean Boyd, de la corte juvenil de Forth Worth, Texas, "compró" todos estos argumentos y dejó prácticamente en libertad a Ethan Couch, que paso de estar en el banquillo de los acusados a convertirse en una víctima de manera rápida y misteriosa.
CONCLUSIÓN
En una columna publicada semanas atrás llamada "Comportamientos egoístas de gente adinerada" hemos debatido sobre diversos estudios que muestran como la insensibilidad hacia el prójimo puede crecer a medida que se escala la pirámide social; pero de ahí a que esta situación justifique hechos aberrantes como el descripto parece haber un mundo de diferencia.
Siguiendo el hilo argumental del caso citado, se podría decir que existen muchas más personas que comenten delitos y se encuentran condicionadas por el entorno familiar en el cual deben crecer, como ser aquellos que nacen en familias marginadas y gravemente perturbadas, con padres alcohólicos o abusadores y que terminan robando.
No se trata aquí de convertirse en "garantista" sino más bien de exigir que la justicia se lleve a cabo de manera imparcial sin favorecer con argumentos extravagantes a aquellos que poseen mayores recursos materiales para contratar abogados más "creativos" a la hora de presentar los argumentos del acusado.
Mi experiencia en el tema me dice que nuestra relación con el dinero (o la de las nuestras familias, en caso de ser menores de edad) puede ser usada para explicar una parte importante de nuestros comportamientos. Pero cuando los mismos involucran aspectos que ponen en riesgo la vida de terceros, el enfoque no debe ser el mismo.
El riesgo aquí es que la affluenza sea usado luego como argumento para eximir a personas acaudaladas de cumplir el castigo que su accionar merece en función del sufrimiento y dolor que causan en la vida de otras personas.
Esperemos que, por una vez, el sentido común y una mayor conciencia social lo impidan..
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link
.
If the Green Party or No Labels candidates steal enough votes from Biden, they will go down in history as the idiot narcissists who helped Trump return to power and possibly finish off U.S. democracy.
” Affluenza ” ? as an excuse for vehicular homicide ? What a mockery of justice. It is the capitalist system, a class divided society, that diminishes ” social conscience ” even in modest living, respectable middle class. It is no accident that many American judges can be moved by this morally insane defense. They are imbued with upper class values from the first day of law school. It is a rare judge that has read a word of Marx, Darwin, or Freud. Often their hostility to lower class people in their courtroom is blatant and shameless. THEY- the UNDERCLASS- are seen as ” scumbags ” in contrast to the ” Nice People ” of wealth . A most interesting essay titled ” Nice People ” was written by that old radical socialist, British philosopher Bertrand Russell. It seems that most of the nice people Lord Russell knew were quit nasty. He was briefly jailed for opposing the Great War-to make the world safe for nice rich people. Here “affluenza ” damned him !
[ http://radicalrons.blogspot.com ]
” Affluenza ” ? as an excuse for vehicular homicide ? What a mockery of justice. It is the capitalist system, a class divided society, that diminishes ” social conscience ” even in modest living, respectable middle class. It is no accident that many American judges can be moved by this morally insane defense. They are imbued with upper class values from the first day of law school. It is a rare judge that has read a word of Marx, Darwin, or Freud. Often their hostility to lower class people in their courtroom is blatant and shameless. THEY- the UNDERCLASS- are seen as ” scumbags ” in contrast to the ” Nice People ” of wealth . A most interesting essay titled ” Nice People ” was written by that old radical socialist, British philosopher Bertrand Russell. It seems that most of the nice people Lord Russell knew were quit nasty. He was briefly jailed for opposing the Great War-to make the world safe for nice rich people. Here “affluenza ” damned him !
[ http://radicalrons.blogspot.com ]