An interesting article in the JoongAng, mentions recent data from the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office says that there is a trend in crimes committed by middle-class youth in Korea (think most average kids that you see walking around). This, in turn, has lead to a government initiative to protect young Koreans from violence by creating counselors to handle reports of violence and would allow parents to locate their kids by cell phones (When students pass by a device, upon entering their school, it would automatically send a message to their parents’ mobile phones).
Considering the causes of rising violent crime amongst kids, will closed-circut TV in schools really and electronic gate-keepers help? Will “the Education Ministry’s plans to offer lectures and training sessions on school violence” help?
Returning to the original article, consider the opinions that were offered about the trend in violent youth crime. First, Professor Kim Mi-ra (Sungkyunkwan University) says:
If someone (kids) habitually starts to break small rules, it can lead to a bigger crime later on . . .
While, reflecting the more popular opinion that media, such as TV, celebrities, games or the internet is the cause of such trends, Oh Hye-yeong of the National Youth Policy Institute says:
When children look at celebrities who commit crimes, including taking drugs or being violent, only to return to work after a short while, they might think that it is okay to break the law . . .
and lastly Kim Seong-gon of the Ministry of Justice is quoted as placing emphasis upon the role of parents and their interaction with their kids:
Spoiling them (kids) is a problem but being too strict and harsh on them will only lead to children who are obedient to the strong and violent to the weak . . . Parents must try to communicate with their children from an early age and open their hearts.
Which brings me to a recent story told told to me by a woman that teaches English privately in Seoul. One student she has is a young boy who looks nice and comes from a well-to-do background, with educated parents, yet something is profoundly wrong with this student. When my friend talked with the student, his language was filled with violence and the sort of things that would raise many eyebrows and prompt a call to a school counselor back in the US, where memories of Columbine High School haunt most school administrators. When the teacher asked the young man about if his mom kissed or hugged him, he said she never did, that his mother thought such was repulsive.
I wonder how different this kid would be if his parents actually hugged him and spent time with him and if this trend in violence is not wholly fueled by legions of parents who have lost touch with their children. The lack of personal involvement is something that no amount of policy or technology can cure, IMHO.
{ 32 comments… read them below or add one }
“When children look at celebrities who commit crimes, including taking drugs or being violent, only to return to work after a short while, they might think that it is okay to break the law . . .
So the solution is prison terms for drug possession?
Yes, it works so well in the U.S.
It was sad, the way I was mobbed by Korean boys at our local playground — so hungry for adult male attention, so desperate for a father figure to throw or kick a ball around with.
Contrast that with their own fathers, absent from Monday through Saturday, and so tired on Sunday they can only veg out on a couch. Korea is an admirable country in some ways, yet a very sick society.
The irony is that single-motherhood is forbidden because “having a father” (in name only) is considered so important in Confucianism.
No one in my generation in Korea was kissed or hugged by parents, and we all turned out fine. Showing affection does not have to be about physical contact.
“and we all turned out fine.”
All !! Have you ever met a korean, theKorean !!
I really agree with both of your comments “Weiku”. I think there is much truth in this, however having a single parent has its own burdens and problems and single mothers in Korea really face an awful social stigma.
“thekorean”, I got the same observation from a 42-year-old Korean woman as well. She grew up in a big family (seven) and they looked after each other. Perhaps, due to the much smaller family nowadays (1-2 children thus fewer siblings) and the push to do scholastic activities at a young age in place of socializing and lacking an opportunity just to be a kid are both factors in this anti-social tendency. Perhaps merely showing attention or interest in one’s children and listening to them makes a difference.
I suspect a well-socialized person is the result of many factors and not just one. I have met many very nice kids here during my stay too but I also see more problems with anti-social kids that form their own kind of gang here in Nakseongdae-dong. Many of my neighbors are scared of them too.
R. Elgin, you are way too intelligent to be offering us this post without a set of relevant statistics. The set of stats given by the JoongAng is hardly enough to tell us whether the trend is a good thing, bad thing, or not even a real issue.
After all, you conclude with this thought:
“I wonder how different this kid would be if his parents actually hugged him and spent time with him and if this trend in violence is not wholly fueled by legions of parents who have lost touch with their children.”
But the JoongAng actually says that crimes committed by orphans as a percentage of all youth crimes declined during the same period!
I was never hugged and kissed by my parents and by the time i was 12 i was a total shithead, my son is 9 and he gets a very strict education (by me) when it comes to school and at the same time tons of hugging and kissing by both me and girlfriend and he doesn’t show any sign of rebellion or difficulty.
What i think it really makes the difference is the availability of shitty, cheap, designer drugs in the streets. Chemical fueled violence is a completely different thing, soon kids slash each other throats for a wrong look or just for fun…
Korea from this point of view will be fine for another while, that’s why i want my child to live there after 5th grade.
“I think there is much truth in this, however having a single parent has its own burdens and problems and single mothers in Korea really face an awful social stigma.”
The youth crime rate for youths raised in single parent households also declined during this period, says the JoongAng.
Maybe the problem is that there are too many two-parent households in Korea?
;p
“The youth crime rate for youths raised in single parent households AS A PERCENTAGE OF ALL YOUTH CRIMES also declined during this period, says the JoongAng.”
Fixed.
Yes, “lolla”, I have been sloppy. My comment on the “burdens and problems” of single mothers was made based upon what I have been told in conversation and what I have read here for one. I would have to get a look at the JoongAng’s data (Supreme Prosecutor’s Office) to see just what it was based on. There is no information about the nature of the single-parent household either, for example, if the grand-parents were taking care of the child or if it was really one parent, as per the article linked above:
My understanding of the article is that, though we might not expect such, kids, from two-parent households that have adequate income, are seeing an increase in violent youth crime and this in turn brings into question the quality of childcare and where is it deficient.
@R. Elgin
“My understanding of the article is that, though we might not expect such, kids, from two-parent households that have adequate income, are seeing an increase in violent youth crime…”
I think one of us is misreading the article then. It seems to me that the journalist for the JA Ilbo is insinuating that stats from the SPO are showing that there is an increase in total youth crimes committed by children of middle class households run by two parents. But the only stat he uses to make this implication is that the percentage of total youth crimes committed by this particular group has risen. But this particular stat does not actually allow you to infer anything about the nature or trends of juvenile crime in the ROK.
For instance, the stat does not deny the possible explanation that crime incidents involving all other categories of youths drastically decreased during the period. This stat also does not deny the possible explanation that total two-parent middle-class households in the ROK saw a drastic increase relative to orphaned or single-parent households or two-parent households of other income brackets. The relevance of this is that the mere demographic change in the nature of households in the ROK may be sufficient to explain the change. After all, the Koreans reached $10,000 per capita income level in 1995. But that number reached $20,000 in 2007. Koreans are way more wealthier than they were even before the Asian Financial Crisis, when their per capita income fell to $7335 in 1998.
Another important factor the journalist ignores is the change in public attitude during this period, in which Koreans may have become more accustomed to bringing charges against children of more affluent homes.
My reason for expressing skepticism is that I think total juvenile crime incidents remain pretty stable during stable periods of a society. And we should generally be skeptical of such incomprehensible trend articles, such as this one offered in the JA Ilbo.
“I think total juvenile crime incidents remain pretty stable during stable periods of a society.”
As a person who worked in the industry, I can assure you that juvenile crime in the U.S. increased along with the huge transfer of wealth to the rich during the Reagan-Bush Sr. era and the sense of hopelessness that resulted, but then — just when gangs and youth violence were getting out of control circa 1993 — suddenly receded, as hope, followed not long after by prosperity, returned just in time under Clinton-Gore. Denizens of The Hole might disagree with my politics, but I’ve seen it up close and personal.
@WeikuBoy
No, I remember that recent history, even though I was just a kid then. And you are right. I take back that comment.
Guys, I see and hear more of this middle school gang problem nowadays too. I have had more than a few adjumas tell me that they no longer upbraided kids that acted badly in public because they were afraid of being attacked.
I also have observed that what kids learn starts in the home and those kids, with parents that pay attention to them, listen to them and treat them with acceptance and respect, do pretty well.
The lady that teaches English reminded me of this article because her student looks fine and comes from a good background but the things coming out of his mouth are alarming.
Actually, something that one of my readers sent me was very insightful:
So one can say that the tough rule is getting phased out, and right now anarchy rules.
I thought the peak of violent crime in America was reached in 1980-81, at the end of the “leftist” 70′s that’s what i remember from statistics i’ve read somewhere…i remain of my idea that widespread drug use is what make crime spiral out of control, as long as Korea will stay mostly drug-free i believe she will not experience a significant increase in serious crime.
I would not mistake an exponential rise in the number of badly mannered, stupid, rude teens with a crime wave. As long as knives and iron bars or let alone guns become common phenomena everything should be ok.
DON’T become
@both WeikuBoy and gangpehmoderniste
What both early Reagan and late HW Bush years had in common was economic turmoil. I’m pretty sure that the fall in economic performance had more to do with rising crime rate than whoever was in power.
The late 70s, of course, saw the energy shock damage the world’s economy. Plus, we were dealing with stagflation, with high job losses and runaway inflation peaking at 13.5% in 1981. It took the policy of extremely tight monetary policy by the Fed chairman, Paul Volker, to get us out of that mess. Furthermore, the 70s saw the maturation and end of the most violent arms of the civil conflict in the USA.
HW Bush came into office at the tail end of the savings&loan crisis triggered by Black Monday of 1987. Plus, for complex reasons, Reagan had to triple the deficit and Bush had to work on reducing the deficit. And then he had to deal with the oil spike after he came to defend the sovereignty of Kuwait. Bush dealt with a number of economic problems more or less pretty well until another recession hit at the very end of his term. Unemployment jumped and the number of Americans who entered poverty was high. Then there was the unfinished business of the civil Rights movement, which exploded in the Watts race riot of 1992, triggered by the Rodney King beating. This occured around a time when in many urban areas, people, who were sick of out-of-control gang warfare, began to demand more aggressive use of police against juvenile and minority criminals. Gangs had become a different kind of threat during this time, not because of liberals or conservatives, but because drug trafficking had matured into the era of globalization.
It seems more likely that other factors probably had more to do with high crime rates during those years than Democratic-majority Congresses or Reagan and Bush.
:p
May as well just post a link to the article with a picture of a bulldog taking a crap.
lollabrats: i substantially agree except i wouldn’t use the expression civil conflict to describe what began (and never subsided) in 70′s America, it was and still is today a RACE WAR waged by blacks against whites
That’s why i hope Asia will remain as monocultural as she can
@ gangpehmoderniste
You probably have already guessed, but I do disagree with both your points, that (1) we are today in the midst of a race war between whites and blacks; and that (2) Asia could or should be monocultural.
On point 1. The Watts Riot of 1992 probably marks the beginning of the end of the civil discord between whites and blacks in America. It does not mean that there is no more discord; I only mean that over the next few centuries, I expect racial discord in America will substantially subside to nothing. Since the 60s, Americans are becoming ever increasingly sophisticated in understanding racial discord and the strategies that may undermine and mitigate problems. Nowadays, it is difficult to imagine any American city resorting to racial pogroms or inciting another race riot. The process merely will take centuries, but the sooner a nation deals with the problem, the sooner it will leave the problem behind.
This is why it is bad for Korea to remain “monocultural.” On point 2. First of all, the two Koreas are two of the few exceptions of the curious fact that most states on earth, including most of the states in Asia, contain two or more “nations” within its borders. Even racially “pure” Japan has the conquered peoples of the Ainu and the Ryukyu islanders who live within its borders. However, over time, the Ainu and the islanders, despite their many legitimate grievances, have come to accept the reality of seeing themselves as Japanese. Meanwhile, the Tamils of Sri Lanka are only now beginning to have to face the reality of being citizens of a united island nation. However, the people of Tibet and the Uighurs of Xinjiang are still resistant to their Han rulers.
Regarding South Korea, in particular, I would like to see increased immigration, if for no other reason than to diversify the gene pool, increase cultural innovation, and to have a healthy economy a couple of decades from now. Plus, being forced to deal with other people is actually a benefit in this globalized world.
deleted (off-topic)
deleted (off-topic)
deleted (off-topic)
Guys, you are way off-topic. Stay on topic or it gets deleted.
Maybe we can reconcile (i) TheKorean’s experience of a lack of parental affection not leading to violence and (ii) more recent experiences that seem to show a link by identifying another causal factor that is different in those two time periods: discipline (or the lack of it).
When TheKorean was growing up, corporal punishment was much more common, whereas today it is almost non-existent. When he was a youth, if Korean parents failed to discipline their children and thus cultivated spoiled brats, teachers spanked out most of that spoiled nature when the little darlings got old enough to go to school. Today, however, it is very uncommon for parents to discipline their children with any kind of consistency, and schools no longer pick up the parental slack.
The result is that children are angry when they encounter the real world and its limitations on their demands. They are angry that most adults, unlike their parents, don’t jump to satisfy their every whim. They feel tricked and unloved (albeit perhaps not at a conscious level) because their parents didn’t prepare them for the real world, and many of them act out such anger.
And the truth is that undisciplined children are unloved children — parents who truly love their children discipline them. As the old American saying goes: “Spare the rod and spoil the child.” Or as the Bible says even more strongly: “He who spares the rod hates his child”.
(Disclaimer: I fully understand that discipline can be taken too far and became abuse (too much of any good thing is bad), but the exceptions are not, and should not determine, the rule.)
Sounds like Attorney and The Korean are vying for the title of Father of the Most-Beaten Children…
Mr. Attorney — so the solution is more child-beating! I like that
I think that in discussing this subject we should distinguish between “spanking” — which is controlled, loving physical discipline — and “beating,” which crosses the line into abuse. Otherwise, we will lose the rhetorical high ground and play into the hands of the anti-discipline activists.
First of all Mr. Elgin, let me apologise you’re right, I got carried away.
Back to the topic: I’m all for physical coercion of kids but i’m at discomfort with the notion of beating a child for no other reason i try to teach my kid he should never ever fight somebody smaller than him, while i don’t mind him getting aggro on bigger kids (as long as it’s not gratuitous). What kind of message a 6′ ft. guy bullying a 9 years old child would send ? There are other ways to inflict punishment: take away videogames and tv (for a long time not for a week), take away the allowance, give extra homework, extra physical exercise etc.
And for good controlled and productive physical pain, i recommend a decent Muay Thai gym
ObL, KSM, and the pantybomber all came from wealthy families…
It ain’t the poor who become terrorists… It’s bored rich kids…
I’ve given some loving spankings before, but only to grown women.
You must log in to post a comment.