Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 255 posts

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#241

Post by wolverine876 »

unityByFreedom wrote: post #236
wolverine876 wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Thoughtful parents and older siblings will not abuse their strength/wisdom against youth because they know they are raising a new generation that may one day make decisions for them. I'm not sure what you mean? Plenty of parents and older siblings abuse their power, and plenty don't.

I wouldn't say you can "depend on" power corrupting parents. I'd say it's more the exception, and that parental behavior is better described by how they themselves were raised. By the time a misbehaving kid is in their teens, parents are grasping at straws trying to figure out what to do. They need training, not condemnation.

> I wouldn't say you can "depend on" power corrupting parents.

I see what you mean now. I did not mean to say that we could depend on power corrupting parents ... but now I wonder: how much does it, and to what degree do we normalize it and not see it?

> They need training, not condemnation.

Yes, they are humans too. It's true of most people doing bad things (if we define 'training' very broadly).

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#242

Post by noduerme »

DiggyJohnson wrote: post #130
noduerme wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This goes along with my own observation that when someone you just met says "I'm a really fucked up person," you should believe them no matter how attractive they are.

This inspired me to stop saying this as a joke lol

Heh. Yeah, avoid it. One girl who said that to me killed herself by hanging a couple years later with an electrical cord in the backyard of a rehab facility. And the girl after her who said something similar is in rehab now. Ain't no joke. I think when people say that jokingly, they know something I don't. I appreciated the honesty I thought they were giving me, but I was too young to realize how seriously they meant it. I don't even know if they thought they were being serious. But they knew.

I'm a dude who thinks about intentionally walking into propellers or windmills to take my face off, and turn into a fine red mist. So it's not totally weird I'd date women with suicidal tendencies. But yeah, if you say that kind of shit out loud, it's usually coming from somewhere true. I'm a pretty fucked up person. I'm trying with all my strength not to be one, to the people who matter to me and the people who count on me. But recognizing the dark ones so they don't fuck with you is essential to survival.

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#243

Post by moffkalast »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #158
moffkalast wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think it's a surprise that we now see an epidemic of kids with mental health problems To be fair, it's likely those mental health problems were there with most generations but went undiagnosed. We don't have a pandemic of cancer today, people just used to die from other shit before it got to them.

“To be fair, it's likely those mental health problems were there with most generations but went undiagnosed.” Unless you don’t believe self surveys of the children themselves, it is unequivocally worse now.

> don’t believe self surveys of the children themselves

Sounds like that would be very subjective and hard to compare?

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#244

Post by mxkopy »

Clubber wrote: post #217
denton-scratch wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Don’t our genes dictate how we respond to our environment? "Dictate" is much too strong. Genetics and environment interact in complex ways, that aren't well understood. I detest the idea that some people are just bad, and were always going to be bad. It seems to be an idea that attracts religious fundamentalists. I struggle with the idea that literally all psychological problems are the result of trauma; but I do t…

>I detest the idea that some people are just bad, and were always going to be bad. I think some people (children really) have a propensity to be bad, but it can be corrected. When and how it's corrected has a lot to do with success. It has to be worked on early and properly, or it could make the problem worse. Like you I'm not comfortable with the idea that any child is irredeemable. >I struggle with the idea that li…

>I think some people (children really) have a propensity to be bad

That's... incredibly simplistic. When you're describing actions as good or bad you've already lost the truth.

A child can have poorly informed priorities. They can be sociopathic. But if your local government is experiencing an armed revolution, you're going to envy that lack of care for society.

Blanket characterizations like 'bad' and 'good' might have been useful in the third grade, but accurate and specific diagnoses that bring accurate and specific treatments are the only way to solve this problem.

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#245

Post by mxkopy »

rajin444 wrote: post #173
denton-scratch wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How the heck do you try to prevent something like that when all the warning signs are there? Surely not by preemptive incarceration. GP said: > Do kids lose TV privileges for a day if they refuse to go? Then I'd say it's not abusive. I don't agree. Coercing kids into physical sports is abusive. In general, using coercion (including denial of "privileges" that non-inmates consider a right) is both abusive and probab…

> My guess is that his behaviour was a rational response to being brought up in a home where he was denied love and affection. I wish this were always the case but statistically this would be a miracle. There is a non zero number of humans born that no matter what we do they will not work with the society that works for the rest of us. That’s the root of this issue. How do you help the ones that can be helped, and wh…

Do you have a source for your statistics?

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#246

Post by mxkopy »

Clubber wrote: post #216
hef19898 wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For risking a pointless dispute on forum, I'll comment one more time. No, I didn't make a Hitler comparison. Owning up to it? Sure, look up the history eugenics, its use through history and you'll find that the Nazi's use of it was the worst but by no means the only or first occasion where this approach (it doesn't matter that we can analyze genomes now) utterly failed. And no, future compatibility with society canno…

>No, I didn't make a Hitler comparison. Why did you even bring it up then? Nobody from my comment down was talking about eugenics that I can see, until you introduced it to the discussion. It's like you are arguing against an imaginary person in your head. This is the comment you replied to with your eugenics/not-Hitler argument: >I wish this were always the case but statistically this would be a miracle. There is a…

You are either trolling, or not mentally present. Either way, please refrain from commenting further.

In case of the latter:

>What does eugenics have to do with that comment?

rajin444 is stating that an understanding of genetics would allow us to rehabilitate people that "will not work with the society that works for the rest of us." This implies that socially desirable behavior can be genetically coded, which has been debunked by the failure of eugenics.

>>future compatibility with society cannot be judged on genetics

>Nobody said this but you.

You had said in a previous comment:

>>Just because it hits home, genetic prevalence of cancer is something completely different from behavior and how people work in a society.

>>You know who else tried to predict future compatibility of certain people based on genetics?

>Both can be predicted genetically.

Which implies that you think future compatability can be judged by genetics.

>>Using proven things like cancer to justify BS theories like "eugenics" is, IMHO, unacceptable.

>Nobody said this either. Who are you even arguing with?

You commented this earlier:

>Your parents have cancer? Well predictively you might have a higher chance of getting it too. Your parents are smart? We should test you for the gifted program.

In this comment, you explicitly compare the use of genetics in a.) cancer and b.) screening for intelligence.

I am inclined to think that you are trolling, especially considering that you are repeatedly using an appeal to emotion in the form of a hypothetical traumatic event. Please stop.

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#247

Post by mxkopy »

treis wrote: post #226
legacynl wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I disagree with this. As an example, a video came out the other day of a Chicago Transit Authority employee getting into an altercation with some guy. "Some guy" pushed him to the ground and walked away. The employee very slowly (he was quite obese) rose to his feet, pulled a gun, walked after the guy, and then shot 14 times hitting him 3 times. In short, he murdered the guy on video in the middle of a crowded stat…

>"If someone seems irrational, it's because you don't understand the person" "Thats not true, because I didn't understand why somebody did something, so he must be irrational." Who said I didn't understand why the guy shot him? I certainly didn't. >To answer hard questions quickly like that, your brain has a trick: it doesn't actually answer THAT question, but secretly gives the answer to a different question, that m…

>Uh, no that's not what I did.

...I'm not sure you can shake off Nobel prize-winning research like that and retain any credibility.

>In this case there isn't.

I think you didn't count some of those infinite possibilities.

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#248

Post by mxkopy »

treis wrote: post #229
hef19898 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe there is a true self in all of us. Whatever that is, and it might change. We have no way to tell what that is, so. Discovering this is what personal development is about. This development should be as unhindered as possible. One, rather obvious, example is trans-gender people. That's the "who / what you are" part. The become what you want part is ranging from career choices to the kind of person, besides id…

What do you suggest when the true self is something like "serial killer" or "violent abuser" or "drug addict"?

If you truly want a life that involves running from the police, constantly wondering if your death is around the corner, having no sense of community/family etc. then there are places in society where you can do that productively (e.g. a soldier, special operative, foreign agent). But most children don't know that they don't want that, and that's the fault of the parents.

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#249

Post by mxkopy »

dahfizz wrote: post #180
denton-scratch wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a tendency to explain away behaviour as being the result of a person being "bad". It's a lazy way out. > healthy teeth So "cannot be reasoned with" seems to mean "refuses to accept that I'm right". If you have charge of an unruly kid, I hope you aren't focusing mainly on their dental hygiene. > These kids are labeled troubled because they are. Gosh, that sounds rather black-and-white - they're "bad" because t…

> So "cannot be reasoned with" seems to mean "refuses to accept that I'm right". That's unnecessarily combative. Are you arguing that refusing to brush your teeth is a reasonable position? > I hope you aren't focusing mainly on their dental hygiene. Dental hygiene was OP's example. > a lot/all of the time, what's being referred to as "troubled" is really "traumatised". I agree that most of the "troubled" kids I've kn…

>That's unnecessarily combative. Are you arguing that refusing to brush your teeth is a reasonable position?

If all you did was explain to them the importance of healthy teeth, then denton-scratch is justified, all you're saying is that the kid cannot be reasoned with because they didn't listen to your explanation. Show them a root canal. Let them talk to the local crackhead. If your kid doesn't already have trauma and they aren't listening, most likely you aren't trying hard enough or aren't creative enough in your approach.

Re: When I was labeled a ‘troubled’ teen, I obliged

#250

Post by mxkopy »

Gareth321 wrote: post #114
unityByFreedom wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author writes, > I was reckless, taking my mom’s car out for joy rides without permission, skipping class That may be after 16 years of doing outrageous things to get attention at home. Some psychologists in the 1950s [1] suggested kids will do whatever gets them attention while striving for a way to participate in the family. That can include bad behavior. If they don't receive attention for good behavior, then…

>"Today, many psychologists suggest using positive discipline" From Wikipedia: >"It is based on the idea that there are no bad children, just good and bad behaviors." Given the fact that we've known for decades now that behaviour is roughly 50% nature (and 50% nurture), this foundational (implied) premise is unequivocally and demonstrably incorrect. Some children are "bad" and need to be taught not to hurt others. Th…

>This parenting style is growing in popularity and I don't think it's a surprise that we now see an epidemic of kids with mental health problems.

Mmm, let's ignore the profound changes in society, as well as the life-altering technologies... Yeah, being nicer to your kids is making them fucked up.

Post reply on HN