Hot on HuffPost Parents:
C-Sections Not Always Best For Preemies
Alison Craiglow Hockenberry: Disrupting College: A Mother of Five's…
Drinking, Voting, Driving, Having Sex Shouldn't Be Based on Age, Author Says
Filed under: Books for Kids, Teen Culture
Dr. Robert Epstein says we don't give teenagers enough opportunity to prove their competence. Photo courtesy of Dr. Robert Epstein. Photo courtesy of Dr. Robert Epstein.
Dr. Robert Epstein says kids as young as 12 ought to be able to smoke, drink, vote, drive, have sex and fight in combat.
It just depends on the kid, he says. Look at David Farragut. The American naval hero commanded his first ship when he was 12, Epstein points out. And long before Andrew Jackson was president, he was a 14-year-old soldier fighting in the American Revolution.
In his book "Teen 2.0: Saving Our Children and Families from the Torment of Adolescence," Epstein, the former editor-in-chief of Psychology Today, argues we should do away with the very concept of adolescence and base what we let people do on ability and competence rather than age.
"I am not slightly right," he tells ParentDish. "I am completely right."
Epstein was not always so confident. He says he started out with the usual American view of teenagers: that they have underdeveloped, immature brains and are inherently more brutish and less intelligent and responsible than adults.
Accordingly, when he was raising his older children, he treated them like, well, children. His younger children have a much different father, he says. He says he realized teenagers don't need keepers. They need mentors.
Teens are basically apprentice adults, Epstein says. When they complete the apprenticeship – at whatever age – they deserve to reap the benefits.
That could be the right to vote, drink or fight. And if a 14-year-old girl wants to marry a 54-year-old man, Epstein says, that should depend on her emotional and intellectual maturity rather than her chronological age.
"You have to look at people one-by-one by competence," he says.
Epstein says he didn't come to these conclusions easily.
"This has been a very difficult journey," he says. It has taken the better part of 20 years, he adds, to unlearn all he had learned. "It's completely changed me."
The founder of the Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies in Massachusetts, Epstein says we inherited our modern notions of adolescence from psychologist G. Stanley Hall and his 1904 book, "Adolescence." Hall claimed that the individual goes through the same evolution as the species itself.
"Hall mistakenly concluded that the turmoil he saw among teens was inevitable," Epstein says, "but he was completely wrong. That turmoil is entirely absent in most cultures, and that was true when he wrote his book. He just didn't have access to the information."
Thus, adolescents are more brutish than adults and less intelligent. They also are irresponsible, incompetent and hormonal. However, Hall made his observations of the "stress and storm" of adolescent life based on kids living on the streets during the height of the industrial revolution.
Yet, the image of the angst-ridden and hormonal teen is so ingrained in our society that teens tend to live down to the stereotype, he says – just as women once acted meek and submissive to reflect society's expectations.
"Most of them are not mature," Epstein says of adolescents. "We've raised them to be big babies. Most of them are not living up to their true potential. The way we look at teens is totally wrong."
Teens really are in turmoil in this country, Epstein says. But blame the doctor, he says, not the patient.
Americans now spend more money on prescription drugs that control teenagers' emotions and behavior than we do on all other prescription drugs for teens combined, "including acne medication and antibiotics," Epstein claims in his book.
"The mental health profession is dead wrong when it comes to teenagers," he adds.
To understand our misconceptions about adolescence, Epstein suggests looking at history. For hundreds of years before Hall and his theories came around, there was a seamless web between adolescence and adulthood.
"This stage of life we feel is cast in concrete is absent in Shakespeare," he says.
Epstein says we too often quarantine teenagers with other teenagers, and they have very little interaction with the adult world. The average teenager spends 70 hours a week with other teenagers and only a half hour each week with their fathers, he claims in his book – and 15 minutes of that is spent in front of the television.
Parents should be there not to dominate their children, Epstein says, but to gently guide them into adulthood. And kids should take their teen years more seriously too, he says.
"This is a time to learn to be an adult, not master hip-hop lyrics," he adds.
Epstein wants to see society dole out rights by competence rather than age. That would mean potential voters -- whether 11 years old or 80 – would have to prove a minimal amount of intellectual competence.
"As a society, we need more competence," he argues.
Some Americans toward the older age of that spectrum might remember when literacy tests were given to African American voters in the South as a way to keep them out of the political process. Those were bad tests given for the wrong reason, Epstein says, and there are other ways to test people, he insists.
The idea of people in authority sitting in judgment of other people's competence or incompetence might be a can of worms many – if not most – of us would rather leave unopened. Yet, Epstein argues our current system of judging people by age is inherently unfair.
"That's why it takes a massive book to change it," he says, "not that my book will change anything."
Related: When Big Authors Write for Little People












ReaderComments (Page 1 of 1)
4-09-2010 @ 4:50PM
helena said...LOLOLOLOLOOOOOOOLLLLL!!!!
This is the funniest thing I've heard all year!!
Kids 100 years back are not kids of today! Most of this generation is a whiny, irresponsible,spoiled generation- most of whom are totally INCAPABLE of taking responsibility for the result of their actions and finding a way to blame everything and everyone for their problems (the most popular scapegoats being parents and society).
I am 29 years old and I have taught 10 -12 year olds and let me tell you that NONE of them is capable of even making a proper decision on which universit to attend much less smoke, drink, have sex, combat, etc. Take a look at the road accident statistics and you will see that even the legal driving age of 16 is proving to be a problem.
Can you imagine a 12 year old with a gun in this day and age? In combat? In Iraq?This is not the time of the pioneers where young men and women were properly taught and basically had no choice but to be responsible young adults.
We are so busy pumping them with video games, shopping sprees, and material things they do not work for or value that all we are teaching them is how to take, take and take and as a result they grow up with a sense of entitlement and appalin selfishness. And you want them to take on adult responsibilities? LOL!! 12 year olds-smoke, drink and have sex indeed...LOL
Reply
4-13-2010 @ 7:42PM
mconnelly42 said...Wait a second before you jump the gun... What he had said was that CERTAIN kids could do it... Im not arguing against that, but not ALL kids of my generation are spoiled, whiny, and so on. You cannot just generalize all kids and teens these days as what only a fraction of them are, spoiled or whiny.
4-09-2010 @ 10:10PM
tabby said...It doesn't matter anyways whether we treat them like adults or not. Teens still go out and do these things anyways. That's why you hear a lot about teen moms and they struggle daily to juggle a child and trying to go back to school. That's the problem is these kids aren't ready AT ALL to be adults, yet they make adult decisions all the time to have sex and such and it never ends well.
Reply
4-09-2010 @ 11:20PM
Mindy said...I love the way this guy thinks, but I have serious doubts that it will ever happen. Our country is far too large to not have age parameters for these various rights and privileges. The logistics of implementing a "competence-based" process to license kids based on ability rather than chronological age would be vastly complicated, not to mention ripe for exploitation.
I have 12- and 15-yr.-old daughters, and I would trust both of them in many adult situations because they are very mature, capable girls. But I also know how hormonal swings and their young brains can also cause momentary lapses in judgment and periodic problems with impulse control - and those things don't lead to good driving, shooting or responsible decisions about drinking or sex.
I understand his point, and I do think we, as parents and teachers, don't give our kids enought credit or expect enough maturity out of them sometimes - but I also think we can expect too much out of them in terms of consistency, and I don't believe it is a slippery slope we need to head down.
Reply
4-10-2010 @ 4:48AM
2BFree31 said...This man makes some valid points, but please remember, survival is one of the basic instincts built into man/woman. In the times he is referring to children being able to fight, drink, and have sex at young ages, life expectancy wasn't very long, many kids were orphaned and "had" to survive, and thus forced into adulthood early on. Also, back in those times, many based their actions on what the genteel folks thought was appropriate within their society. There were "real" gentleman who respected women and family, children respected education and their elders, and there was a thing called honor and the giving of, "my word", went a long way those days, but today is nonchalantly given just to pacify people.
Younger people "do" need continued guidance, because everything they experience is their "first", and mistakes will be made, and emotions "will" run rampant with confusion, disappointment, spontaneity, grief, ect, due to that, and having someone positive there to help them through it is a must, but I agree, Kids today are handed too much, and when they are young and eager to learn things such as work, or volunteering, they are labeled too young, so when their interests turn to what society and corporate America has rammed down their throats, as well as ours, we have nobody but ourselves and them, to blame.
But, if this guy is just a pervy old man trying to legalize and have society think it's ok to have sex at younger ages, and with older men, per his quote, " And if a 14-year-old girl wants to marry a 54-year-old man, Epstein says, that should depend on her emotional and intellectual maturity rather than her chronological age." That is just something I will always be against, and never agree with because people that age ARE TOO YOUNG, to make such a commitment, and there is no justification in the world to make it any less wrong or sick.
Reply
4-11-2010 @ 3:21AM
Kelley said...I completely agree. I'm nineteen now and my mother and I have been following a fairly similar model.
I've been drinking (with the approval of my family) since I was around 15. As a result, now that I'm in college, I'm one of the few that far prefers a glass of wine at dinner every now and then to chugging down an entire keg every Saturday night.
For the last election, I was too young by a month to vote. I have been staying far more current on politics than many people twice my age. My mother followed my guidance on who to vote for, rather than the other way around.
I've never had a curfew, I've never been grounded, never gotten a speeding ticket, never gotten a grade below a B. You know why? Because I knew my mother respected me, and I didn't want to lose that respect.
Am I the aberration? Maybe. But I bet if more parents treated their teens like the functioning human beings they are, perhaps they would feel less compelled to rebel against their parents.
Reply
4-11-2010 @ 10:48PM
Lenore Skenazy said...I very much agree: Give teens a meaningful way to start being grown up -- a job, a paper route, a family responsibility. Thinking of them as mopey consumers means we try to appease them with stuff, when what they're really longing for is a way to take their place in the world. Great interview and great book. -- Lenore Skenazy, "Free-Range Lenore."
Reply
4-11-2010 @ 8:50PM
Silver Fang said...I'm with Epstein 100%. If teenagers were functioning adults 100+ years ago, there's no reason they can't be today. Let's not forget that Alexander the Great was ruling Macedonia as his father's regent at age 16 and was conquering all the Middle East when he was 20.
Reply
4-12-2010 @ 10:44AM
j edward ladenburger said...interesting -- read Do Hard Things by Alex and Brett Harris
www.therebelution.com/books/
This article is a twisted version of their thesis. Alex and Brett challenge teens to use their teen years as a launching pad to adulthood rather than as a video game playing party time prior to having to "get serious and work = adulthood". They lament the trend toward extended adolescence and recognize that teens are capable of doing hard/great things. I don't think their vision includes drinking and having sex out of wedlock as great things.
Reply
4-12-2010 @ 11:14AM
Steve said...The young people mentioned in the letters, i.e. Alexander the Great, and Andrew Jackson, as well as a plethora of young people from David, son of Jesse who killed Goliath at about age 17 or 18; these youths were raised from infancy to take care of themselves in their environment. Their minds were not cluttered with "Tom and Jerry" cartoons, violent movies and games, and little personal discipline. The young woman who said how she was raised is certainly an exceptional person, but note her words: "I knew my mother respected me, and I didn't want to lose that respect." Her training started very early. It worked for her.
Most youths of today could not handle the type of responsibility Henderson speaks of. They haven't got the inner core of personal discipline needed to follow through on the types of ventures he is talking about. Could they be taught? Perhaps some of them. But for the majority this training would have to start at infancy by parents who were willing to sacrifice a life style that has become so ingrained in our society today.
Reply
4-12-2010 @ 11:34AM
pentamom said...I agree that kids are capable of things at various ages, and capable of more than we give them credit for (especially if we prepared them better.) However, removing age-based legal restrictions for certain things is totally unworkable. It's just asking for unfairness, corruption, and poor implementation. Better to give your kids all the non-legally based responsibilities appropriate to their abilities, and let the legal things remain privileges of age. It may not be ideal, but it's a lot better than the alternative would be in actual practice.
Reply
4-12-2010 @ 12:15PM
SKL said...I'd have to read the book before judging it. I don't trust the blogger's summary.
I absolutely believe we should be giving kids more responsibility at an earlier age, gradually preparing them to take on what are now considered "adult" responsibilities at the age when they are actually capable of them, which the libs would have you believe is now 26 (except that with respect to sex, it's more like 5).
For example, a teen can take care of children full-time, provided she's been eased into the responsibility over time.
When it comes to areas governed by law, I would hesitate to lower the legal age on things that can be dangerous, because the fact is, most parents are not preparing their kids to be responsible. I know so many parents who let their kids take the driver's test without ever giving them a lesson, then let them drive as soon as they passed the test. Those kids are going to be learning to drive on their own, on public streets where my kids are walking. Do I want that to start even younger? No. As for statutory rape and child molestation statutes, those are to protect youngsters from predators, and I don't think they need to be changed - especially since I don't think unmarried teens need to be having sex at all. Voting? No way, considering that the kids' main source of "knowledge" is the government-run schools / teacher's unions. That would be enough to skew the elections.
On the other hand, I do think age-based curfews and truancy laws are unnecessary, as are laws that penalize parents for letting their kids take responsibility for their own choices. As an early graduate, I can attest to the fact that a teen is able to make choices and learn from her mistakes. When even a poor choice isn't harmful to society at large, I say, let teens think for themselves a little. Why waste millions of dollars "educating" teens who don't want to be in school?
Reply
6-11-2010 @ 4:19AM
Sean said...If the child is physically, intellectually, and emotionally competent to do something, he/she should be aloud to do it. It's as simple as that really
Reply
8-04-2010 @ 10:44AM
Hanna said...I agree with this article completely. We have seen teenagers being whiny, hormonal, moody, and uncontrollable for quite awhile now. But that's not always the case. My 16 year old brother isn't moody or whiny. The only big problem he has is being shy. Never whined about getting a car, or a phone, or an Xbox. When my parents told him no, he knew that they meant no and accepted it, no throwing fits or complaining. There are 20 year olds who shouldn't be driving. There are 30 year olds who aren't mature enough to have and take care of children. So really, it's all based on maturity, not age.
Reply