[dahfizz]

Have you ever interacted with a "troubled" teen?

This comment is not based on reality. It's laughable, really. There are kids who cannot be reasoned with. You try to explain the importance of healthy teeth to troubled teen and they will respond "I don't care".

"Natural consequences" are not sufficient. A troubled kid will drink himself into the hospital over and over. A troubled kid will have run ins with the law over and over.

These kids are labeled troubled because they are.

[hef19898]

Assuming they really are troublesome, that justifies torturing them into compliance? On which legal ground are they basically imprisoned?

If they are so troublesome that they are a continuous threat to society (e.g. murders or serial sex offenders), there are legal ways to get them into psychiatric clinics (those means are easily abused as well so). If they are not, well, in a free society you cannot prevent people from ruining their own lives.

Most "troublesome" kids, so, are nowhere even close to these categories. And if they turn out to have really troubled lives after wards (e.g. drug abuse and everything that comes with it), I'd say most of that was caused by the "treatment" they received previously.

just to take your example of a drinking teen (being German my threshold for that would be considerably higher then the US one at that), how do you think such a teen, with already existing problems of substance abuse, would behave after going through months or years of mental and physical abuse? Turning sober? Or falling deeper into that hole?

I'm puzzled that I even have to argue against a system that, as was proven time and again, results in very serious child abuse.

[dahfizz]

You're creating a false dichotomy. Obviously these abusive camps are bad. That doesn't need to be said.

Irrespective of the camps, OPs parenting advice is bad, insulting, and deserves to be called out.

[unityByFreedom]

Your solution sounds like we should try nothing,

> There are kids who cannot be reasoned with.

Are you familiar with an approach that can help?

The approach I mention has been around for over 70 years.

[dahfizz]

I have seen limited success of real mental health institutions (nothing like the camps in TFA, obviously). I have also seen rehab work pretty well when substance abuse is involved.

The most effective method, though, is time. The author of the article is one example, and there are many more in these comments. Eventually, the teenage brain becomes an adult brain and a lot of the rage, impulsiveness, and destructive behaviors go away. (Most) people mature eventually. The key is to try to limit the damage of the "troubled" phase. If you end up going to jail in your teenage years because you act out, you're going to have a much harder time building a life for yourself later on.

[unityByFreedom]

> The most effective method, though, is time.

Rather than waiting I'd suggest families try to find a therapist they can all visit for counseling together. There may be a broken relationship in a kid's past that can be mended, and that won't happen without understanding where the problem began. The kid isn't going to be able to tell you offhand where he went off the rails. It takes time to build a trusting relationship and share traumatizing stories.

> The author of the article is one example

It seems presumptuous to conclude the author never went to therapy or did not have further discussions with his parents that helped him move past the trauma. Maybe he says more in his book [1].

> there are many more in these comments

I haven't seen any suggest that waiting for time to pass is a solution for years of feeling "a blur of misanthropy".

> The key is to try to limit the damage of the "troubled" phase. If you end up going to jail in your teenage years because you act out, you're going to have a much harder time building a life for yourself later on.

It almost sounds like you would suggest parents bail their kids out of trouble so the system doesn't mark them as "bad". Maybe you're not saying that (if not, how would you "limit the damage"?). Anyway, I think parents covering up their kids' behavior, thinking it's just a phase, is exactly what gets kids into this pattern. People don't grow out of habits, they grow into them.

[1] https://bookshop.org/a/18622/9781542007887

[hef19898]

Are you a parent? And if so, did you use your approach? It would just be anecdata, but at least some real world experience.

[unityByFreedom]

Yes and yes, of course I do! I've learned a ton from this discipline and never need to raise my voice with my kid. When I do raise my voice, it is almost always unnecessary. I apologize in those cases because I want her to know we can recover from mistakes and that it is okay to be upset. Our relationship is stronger for it.

[hef19898]

Kudos, then, I try and fail at being the parent I want more often than I care to admit.

What ever makes our children human beings able to show compassion with others, and stay safe as soon as they have to live their lives on their own feet, is good parenting. Everything else is secondary. Same as the most important thing with new born toddlers is "are they healthy?".

[brimble]

With one of our three kids, everything from those nicey-nice parenting books works perfectly, and always has. It goes exactly how the books say it will. It's wonderful, and so damn easy.

Not so much with the other two.

[denton-scratch]

I'm a parent. I didn't use any approach; like every first-time parent, I had never done it before. You can read books and Wikipedia articles as much as you want, but you have to work out how to parent real kids in real life. And not all kids are the same; not all kids will respond the same way to a given discipline regime.

Both my kids sometimes exhibited "challenging" behaviour. As we all grew older together, I became increasingly sure that coercion isn't a helpful response to such behaviour.

I was brought up with coercion; I was sent to a boarding school where I was caned (yes - when I was a child, adults attacked me with sticks). My parents were of a generation where that kind of act was considered reasonable.

It took me time raising my own kids to realise that coercion isn't a solution, unless your child is literally a psychopath. Psychopathy is a pretty rare trait.

[unityByFreedom]

> These kids are labeled troubled because they are.

Well, again, the title of this post shows the results of that attitude. Years of misbehavior and a well written story from a lucky one who made it to the other side, no thanks to "tough love" bootcamps according to him.

Every kid looks up to someone, whether they see that someone in person or on a screen. Becoming that someone, or a trusted figure for a teen, is a lifestyle change. Building trust takes time, and it can be lost in a moment.

[erdos4d]

I'm certain you can find teens who have such attitudes and behaviors, but I'd argue that every one of them was made that way through years of abuse and neglect. Does it help them to look at them as fucked up, irredeemable, etc? Cause that is exactly how your comment reads.

[denton-scratch]

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 they're "bad". I think the word "troubled" here is serving as a dog-whistle; a lot/all of the time, what's being referred to as "troubled" is really "traumatised".

[dahfizz]

> 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 known have been traumatized. But traumatization does not necessarily lead to being "troubled", and being "troubled" does not require traumatization. In any case, it does not excuse illegal, damaging, and destructive behaviors.

[mxkopy]

>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.

[denton-scratch]

> Are you arguing that refusing to brush your teeth is a reasonable position?

No, I'm not. I'm arguing that poor dental hygiene isn't in the same universe as getting drunk, stealing your parent's car, and wrapping it round a tree. Or beating up small kids at school.

It seems an awfully trivial misdemeanour to bring up, in a discussion of "troubled" kids and abusive incarceration.

[dahfizz]

I don't understand why you're so hung up on that example. It was the OP's example, and all the same logic applies to the examples you bring up here.