Blog Assignment 2
In the article "A Wealthy Teen's Defense For a Deadly Drunken-Driving Crash: "Affluenza" it is discussed how 14 year old Ethan Couch could not possilb y be held responsible for the deaths of 4 that he hit while driving intoxicated because he was suffering from 'Affluenza'. Affluenza is defined by Wikipedia as a term used by critics of consumerism. The book Affluenza: The All-Consuming Epidemic defines it as "a painful, contagious, socially transmitted condition of overload, debt, anxiety and waste resulting from the dogged pursuit of more. Within this article it is taking shape as a kid who was given no guidelines or rules from his highly affluent family and therefore cannot possibly be held responsible for his actions
This case has been heavily covered in the news as well as online. While couch received a 10 year probation sentence this is an extremely light sentence compared to the 20 year prison sentence that was asked for as a result of killing 4 people. The judge never referenced the 'Affluenza" defense when reading the verdict, but it is clear that there are some serious holes in the judicial system at work. This has sparked a heavy dialogue online about how avoiding serious prison time is exactly curing affluenza. It seems that the only way to cure a kid who has no sense of right or wrong or crime and punishment out be to show him how wrong his actions were with punishment.
This is an almost unbelievable case that has truly rocked the nation's social media, seeing a predominance of adolescents showing an outpouring of rage against the decisions of the court on this trial for this 14 year old white Texas boy.