Thinking Like a Lawyer

By Pavan Rane

Questions

1. Basic facts about the incident: who, what, when, where, why?
2. How did the teenagers obtain the illegal substance?
3. Were any figures of authority involved?
4. Was the situation monitored?

When it comes to the topic of underage substance abuse, I believe that the blame lies with the individuals who commit the offence. Although the argument exists that an underage consumer would likely be influenced or enabled by others (for instance, faced with peer pressure supplied or with the substance by a figure of authority), the fact remains that a person must make a conscious decision to act illegally. Motivation from others can only go so far; no one can force a person to make a decision. Furthermore, the reason why I believe that teenagers should be held responsible for their own actions, even if they are minors, is because they are at an age where they are intelligent enough to make proper decisions. Education about alcohol and drugs through schooling, parental teachings, and other sources of media is sufficient to provide teenagers with enough information about drugs and alcohol in order to make informed decisions. There exists little to no distinction between the cognitive process of a person in their teenage years and their early twenties, a fact validated by the inconsistencies in legal drinking ages in different countries (16 in Italy, 21 in the US). The reason why drinking is permitted in Canada for those aged 18/19 and older is because of biological development – studies done in Canada show that the brain often finishes developing when a person is in their late teens, and the use of alcohol and drugs can impede proper development. The argument also exists that teens have a rebellious nature, though this argument is not concrete and furthermore still puts the teenager at fault over any other party.

URL to the first news article:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2012/02/17/toronto-hamilton-teen-drinking-inquest.html

The story is about a 17-year old boy named Chris Skinner who died due to alcohol poisoning. Chris, already intoxicated, attended a friend’s house party where he smoked marijuana and engaged in heavy drinking eventually leading up to his death that night. It is revealed that he had consumed 5 times the legal amount of alcohol. His friend’s parents were at home and fully aware of the situation. In their defense, they stated that the teenagers would drink and smoke regardless of where the party was held, so it would be better if they did it in the safety of their home. The article states that even after the incident, his friend, Kyle, continues to party and drink with friends in a similar fashion today, even to the point of passing out.

In this article, it is clear that Chris made all the wrong decisions. While his consumption of alcohol was illegal in Canada, it would have been permitted had he been living in a country like Italy. He was less than 2 years away from the legal drinking age in Hamilton, Ontario, (his home city) and less than 1 year away from the legal drinking age in other parts of the country, so one cannot make the argument that he was too young to make proper decisions. While he could have interpreted the acceptance of drinking/smoking from Kyle’s parents as an approval, it does not justify him acting in such a way. In the end, he made the decision to drink and smoke, and the fact that Kyle and his friends continue to act similarly today is proof that the acceptance by Kyle’s parents in this one instance was not a determining factor.

URL for the second news article:

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Port+Moody+youth+hospital+after+night+party/8007765/story.html

The article states that a teenager from Port Moody who had been drinking on a party bus was hospitalized due to a dangerously high level of intoxication, and no word has been released yet on his condition. This event happened one week after the death of Ernest Azoadam, who died from over-drinking on a party bus as well. The death of the 17-year-old Azoadam stirred much controversy as to who was responsible and how the alcohol got on the party bus in the first place. The driver of the party bus stated that he had no knowledge of the alcohol and that it was possible for the teenagers to sneak it onto the vehicle.

One can argue that in both scenarios involving the party buses, the circumstances were in favour of the teenagers if they wanted to drink; they were isolated and it would have been easy to sneak the alcohol onto the party bus. However, the fact remains that they still made the conscious decision to violate the rules of boarding and consuming alcohol, and for that reason they are at fault.  While others are to blame for not doing their job properly and allowing alcohol to reach the children, they are not the ones who made the children drink.

Thinking Like A Lawyer / Rights & Freedoms

Thinking Like a Lawyer

        Looking at the issue objectively, there were many questions circulating my thoughts such as:

• To what extent do society plan on letting underaged drinking continue without enforcing stricter rules?
• What influences teenagers to drink alcoholic beverages?
• Who should be moderating the actions of teenagers, society as a whole, family rules, or personal judgement?

Example #1
“14 Year Old Dies of Possible Alcohol Poisoning at Her Own Sleepover”

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/14-year-dies-alcohol-poisoning-slumber-party/story?id=14065038

This story captures the tragic results of young teenagers exposed to alcohol. In this case, a 14 year old girl died at her own sleepover after drinking soda mixed with vodka. The police officer stated that the parents were tenants of the house, and the alcohol belonged to the owner’s cabinet. The parents did not want to dispose the alcohol and just left it there. This investigation was brought to scientific research where a side note was added that early exposure to alcohol will interfere with normal brain development, heighten the risk of addiction, as well as makes it harder for the individual to control alcohol consumption later on in life. Not only this, but also the risk of alcohol poisoning is a huge risk that underaged alcohol drinker might face. Alcohol poisoning happens when these liquids hits a person’s system and their livers can’t handle it and that individual goes into toxic sickness because their liver simply cannot process it.

While I read this article and watched the news video, I felt the need to educate teenagers and to some cases, the pre-teens as well because alcohol is a serious matter. This underaged drinking issue is beginning to shift to younger ages and we must stop it. As an open minded teen myself, I understand the factor of peer pressure and the ideals behind drinking, but narrowing everything down, essentially teenagers are not educated enough about the negative results of alcohol. Children are exposed to alcoholism everywhere from an ad from a tv program, to witnessing our own parents drink right before our eyes. Eventually, kids are so used to seeing people drink that they are not considering the requirements or precautions of drinking, which sometimes, brings death upon a number of teens. Since many lives have been lost due to underaged drinking, I wonder why there aren’t any stricter rules being made. Or better yet, if this notion is known to parents, why are parents not taking measures in making sure alcohol is inaccessible in the house, or stopping their own children from drinking? It all comes down to my main question, and my question is, why do teens drink? Is it because it gives a good social image, or is it because they found another way to escape their troubles?



Example # 2
“Parents’ behaviour can influence teen drinking”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-13779834

This article outlines the necessity for public figures as well as parental figures to educate themselves as well as teens. A survey done by ipsos MORI of 5,700 children aged 13-16, one in five claimed that they have been drunk by the time they were at age 14, by age 16, half of those questioned said they had been drunk. A study done by Joseph Rowntree Foundation has shown that one factor that influences underaged drinking is poor parental supervision. This would raise the likelihood of teen drinking. Not only do parents play a role, but teens who spend more than two evenings per week will multiply the odds of excessive drinking by more than four times. Finally, these teens who do drink often find alcohol supply right within their homes.

While reading this article and watching the two news videos, I feel that parents and the government should be responsible for this issue. Regarding the government, they should put more effort in stopping the continuation of vast media promotion of cheap alcohol as well as regulating the possession of alcohol within a household. Although we are a democratic society where freedoms are existent, I feel as if the government have and should censor alcohol advertisements along with alcohol related images in the public. Since alcohol imposes a significant threat parallel to that of drugs, we hardly see drugs being advertised, why is it then that we see alcohol advertised on tv even on children channels? This is where parents come in play. Since children (including teenagers) are under the protection of adults, then shouldn’t the parents take responsibility of what their children do or get involved in? This raises another pressing issue, a question that outlines the parental influence on children; should it be illegal for adults to possess and or drink alcohol at home where there are minors?

Human/Civil Rights Issues:

1. What is the difference between human and civiil rights?
2. What kinds of human and civil rights are there?
3. Do you think some human and civil rights clash with one another? Why?

References:

1. http://www.civilrightsmovement.co.uk/civil-rights-human-rights.html
2. http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/civil_human_rights.html#.USr88aWtwrU
3. http://johnharmstrong.typepad.com/john_h_armstrong_/2011/08/an-inevitable-clash-of-human-rights.html

When Crime is not a Crime

“Corruption is nature’s way of restoring our faith in democracy.”

~ Peter Ustinov

            Almost in all societies, laws are set in place as a guideline in ensuring that justice is met. The issue to which is brought upon us is whether laws are a fundamental aspect of society or a restriction of one’s freedom. To activists who view their personal identity with great concerns, certain laws are deterred and viewed as violations of their human rights. As for the group who strive for social security and a peaceful lifestyle, laws are looked upon as a necessity to maintaining order. Similarly, I believe that these principles and regulations are what establishes and forms a democratic and freedom based community. To some extent, this universal set of custom within a country acts as a system of organization levels in which society is operated on. Only through achieving order can the rate of criminal activities can be dealt with and reduced. By abating crimes, a new sense of privileges and civil rights are being promoted to law abiding citizens. Therefore, by examining organization, crime, and civil rights, it becomes evidently clear that laws are a key point in stabilizing a society which essentially, protects people from harming one another.

            Laws are equivalent to a collection of adaptive decisions and compose accumulatively into a definition of an organized civilization. Especially in a developed nation, laws must be enforced to ensure that the nation is progressing and functioning smoothly. The constitution of Canada for instance, properly outlines the different levels of government so that conflictions between parties, and power struggles are prevented. One of the reason lies within the notion that only through a stable government can the citizens inhabit in true democracy and freedom. The forefathers of Canada had foreseen the corruption of power struggle; hence, a set of basic rules were established to maintain order. Alongside to political stability is economic support. In most countries, it is a law for citizens to pay taxes. In North America, we are required to pay taxes so that money is invested towards infrastructures as well as preventing money stagnancy. All in all, laws play a significant role in maintaining organization within a country.

            Not only does a nation operate smoothly with the existence of laws, but it also protects its citizens from crime and unjustifiable offences. In the article “When is a crime not a crime?” for example, depicts arguments for both human rights interferences, and the argument that laws protect individuals from victimizing themselves. The article is essentially broke down to sections revolving around drugs, suicide, vagrancy, and drunkenness. With drug crimes, there is the crime of trafficking, and on the other hand, possession. These drugs often would lead to an urge to suicide. According to the Canadian Criminal Code, committing suicide is an offence punishable on summary conviction. In this case, one party might say that suicide is one’s own decision because the body belongs to their own. On the other hand, suicide is viewed morally corrupted and is a bad image for society. One major factor that lead up to suicide, drug abuse, and alcoholism is the state of vagrancy. It is obvious that society consists of the rich and of the poor, so to what extent is vagrancy justified as a “crime without a victim?” According to my belief on this issue of crime, the justification of a situation being a crime or not is never justifiable. However, if the society as a whole were to accept stricter terms regarding the law despite arguments for a violation of human rights, society would in fact be able to self-develop which in return, manufacture fewer criminals and fewer crimes. Indeed, according to my perspective, crime can be reduced with a stronger grasp and specified terms regarding the law.

            Last but not least, the notion of dehumanization has been around for a long time however, laws are able to keep all people including authority figures from corruption as well. At the heart of the argument, laws not only protect citizens from crime, but also from the corruption of their own government. A written and sealed document is rarely seen unraveled and changed because it is common sense that these scripts play a significant role in facilitating the country. In other words, laws are able to promote civil rights which technically embodies an individual’s human and civil rights. By understanding this concept, the argument for more freedom regarding human rights is unjustifiable since it is included within the law system. To further expand on this explanation, not only are we protected under the law, but we also maintain our identities and individualism. Essentially, we are double benefited by law in a sense that we do have rights, we are protected from crime and corruption, and we are able to maintain our self-identity. Surely, laws are beneficial for all aspects within a society.

            Therefore, by examining levels of organizations, reduction to crime, and embodiment of rights, laws depict a large scaled value such that we must abide to it in order to achieve a democratic state. It provides a clear statement underlining our political stability, which then magnifies in justice to stopping crime, and till the end, promotes rights for the common people. Without rules or laws, our democratic system would eventually deteriorate into absolute monarchy. With the loss of freedom, our roots of anglosaxon and catholic background would be corrupt and disappear. Similar to what Peter Ustinov prophesized, through corruption we understand democracy. Let us hope that we are in no state to experience devastation because we are a developed society and should be able to prevent disasters before it hits, before it’s too late. 

human / civil rights issues in the news

Human/civil rights issues:

1. What is the difference between human and civil rights?
2. What kinds of human and civil rights are there?
3. Do you think some human and civil rights clashes with one another? Why?

References:

1. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/05/us/politics/05civil.html?ref=civilrights
2. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/14/north-dakotalgbt-discrimination_n_2689436.html?utm_hp_ref=civil-rights
3. http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/06/opinion/hair-dianis-voting-rights/index.html

Thinking like a lawyer - develop your questioning skills from the general to specific...

Some questions that I have created while looking at this topic of "accidental" deaths of alcohol poisoning or overdoses due to teens binge drinking and / or mixing with drugs were...

1. What happened? (Must hear every side of the story.)
2. Who was involved in this situation?
3. Where did this happen?

Example 1. Party Hosts Fined in Teen's Alcohol-Related Death

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/story/2011/11/29/mb-dauphin-party-death.html

In 2009, a 15-year-old girl named Tamara Aller froze had died from alcohol. She froze to death in a parking lot. She was at a birthday party where the hosts, Allan and Mary-Anne Kostur were serving alcohol. Both him and his wife were fine to a huge amount of money. The party consisted of 20 people and most of them were under the age of 18. Apparently, "the Kosturs had purchased a case of beer for the party, but guests — including Aller — brought beer, liqueurs and coolers as well." (Section 2) After the party, Kostur had not ensured that the people arrived home safely. In the end, Aller did not make it home, but froze to death outside due to her being unconscious.

When reading this article, it looked like the Kostur was at fault. Allan and Mary-Anne Kostur were serving alcohol to minors. What was not mentioned was that if they knew that most of the people were under the age of 18. Also, as a parents and the hosts of a party, they should have taken responsibility and knew better of serving alcohol anyways in the party. When driving the two people back home, it was their responsibility to see if they got home safe after heavily drinking. It is understandable, that they may be able to answer questions or walk properly, but one may never know when the person can become in danger. In my opinion, the sentencing for the couple were too light, for a young teenager girl had died due to their not responsible actions. The blame is to go to the parents that hosted the party.

Example 2. Father Demands Answers About Teen Party Bus Death

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2013/02/18/bc-party-bus-death.html

"A 16-year-old boy died on Friday in Surrey, B.C., while riding a party bus..." (Paragraph 1) The article is mainly about the father who is in shock and full of sadness that his son had died from underage drinking in a bus. His son collapsed on the bus and could not wake up.

When reading this article, it does not say who was to take the blame, but I believed that it was everybody. Ernest Azoadam probably did not tell him parents that he was going to go and party because he may have believed that his parents would not let him go. The father did not know anything what his son was doing outside late at night. Miscommunications between the parents and Ernest Azoadam may have played a big role. Azoadam's father mentioned that he did not know what a party bus was until this tragic event. I understood then that parents may not have been educated with these things. When reading the article, I thought that parents had to be educated to know and understand what these things are. The party bus came into playing a big issue as well. Did they not know that the boy was 16 years of age? Don't they have security guards. The party bus should be heavily asked questions as well as the people who were inside the bus as well. The results of this event is unknown yet, but so far I believe that the blame would be on the party bus.

Binge Drinking by Teenagers Causing Death

Binge drinking in teenagers has become a serious issue, moving into the eye of the media over the last decade more than ever before.  There have recently been many issues where not only do teenagers get very sick as a result of binge drinking, but many have actually died due to binge drinking and mixing alcohol with drugs as well.  Teenagers have many ways of obtaining alcohol, not only can they pay an adult to get it for them, some teenagers carry false identification, and some parents will actually supply the alcohol for their children.  The question here is, who should be held accountable for these deaths that have been caused due to binge drinking, the people that served the teens the alcohol, or should it be the teens themselves?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1290292/Binge-drinking-teenager-fell-100ft-death-celebrated-end-GSCEs.html

This is the story of Paddy Higgins, a popular teenager in the United Kingdom died on a night that he was out binge drinking.  Not only and he and his friends enjoyed approximately 6 cans each of a strong lager at a campsite before they went into town, but the 16 and 17 year old children were served alcohol in a restaurant, they were served shots of Sambuca to be exact.  Paddy decided to take a shortcut across a beach later that night, when he attempted to climb a cliff, he became distracted by his cell phone and fell to his death.  Many could try to state that a boy could become distracted by his cell phone while climbing a cliff, even while not being under the influence of alcohol.  The fact that Paddy Higgins had over three times the legal driving limit of alcohol in his system when he fell would assist in a loss of coordination, causing him to fall.  The alcohol played its part in this story.  Who is to be blamed though?  Should it be the waitress at the restaurant that served the underage minors alcohol?  Should it be the bus driver that took the underage students to a campsite and left them without adult supervision?  Should it be whoever got them the lager in the first place?  That is the question.

http://alcoholism.about.com/od/binge/a/teen_death.htm

Now this is the story of Julia Gonzalez, a teenager in California that died a death associated with acute alcohol poisoning.  Her problem was not just that she had been drinking too much, her problem was that nobody was there to help her in her time of need.  Julia had over 6 times the legal adult intoxication limit in her system, and she was only 16 years old weighing only 100 pounds.  To reach the alcohol limit she was at, she would have had to drink the equivalent of 16 drinks in under 1 hour.  She was then abandoned by her friends and died a death associated with alcohol poisoning.  She died because nobody helped her when the symptoms began to show, she was left all alone, to battle whatever came at her on her own.  Who should be blamed here?  The host of the party?  The friends that abandoned her?  Or her parents for allowing her to go to the party in the first place?

Teenagers binge drinking is a serious problem in the eye of the media today.  No matter who is to blame for any incident involving teenage binge drinking, the issue here is that people are dying, and something must be done to stop this.

hi

Hi :)

New Blog... Hi