With the
onset of the Progressive Era and as new disciplines in the social sciences
emerged in the early 1900s, the American society perceived its youth as
“dependents” (of their parents and the state) and as new objects of study. Stanley
Hall’s study of youth also reflects this time period in which he classified “adolescence”
as a social category in between childhood and adulthood. Hall’s study of
adolescents contributed significantly to the understanding of youth undergoing
puberty. Throughout his research, Hall explained how youth is different from
adults, how male youth differs from the female counterpart, and common “symptoms”
of being an adolescent. Stanley Hall’s study of adolescents also led to various
disciplines studying youth, such as neuroscience in its recent research that
discovered how adolescent brain is less developed than an adult’s. However,
with growing understanding and distinct categorization of the youth comes also
the move away from youth as the same rights holders as adults to youth as
forever dependent, not quite adults, and therefore not deserving the full
rights as adults.
Throughout
his research, Hall emphasizes how distinct youth is from adults through the
coining of the term “adolescence,” as well as specific characteristics that
compose who youth is. In his book, “The Psychology of Adolescence,” Hall
describes youth as a distinct age group in which they lack self-control and are
almost animal-like because they are prone to follow their instincts more so
than logical reasoning (339). Among female adolescents, such lack of
self-control manifests in their underhanded methods of expressing envy, jealousy,
rivalry, and hatred (355). The male adolescents are at greater risk to fight
with their peers at puberty, as well as engage in activities like teasing and
bullying (356). Overall, these young offenders see themselves as “an enemy of
society” (340) and self-fulfill this identity through their actions. More than
anyone in his time period (as well as ours), Hall studied the youth and
understood their state of mind as they underwent biological and psychological
development. Through his study, the society became more aware of who youth is,
what it is that they go through as youth, and how the society can be a positive
influence in this difficult period for the adolescents.
This view of youth even pervades
our society today. According to Science Today at the University of California, adolescents’ brain, especially the
decision-making frontal cortex, is not yet fully developed. Such study reveals
that youth does have diminished
mental capacity and thus calls for a special treatment. For example, according
to the Miller case, the Supreme Court
ruled that mandatory life without parole for a teenager convicted of murder is
still a cruel punishment that violates the 8th amendment. Although this
may seem like protection of youth from harsh society, this reasoning also implies that youth is different from adults and therefore
do not deserve the same set of rights
as adults do.
Hall’s scientific study of youth to
better understand this uncertain stage of life contributed perhaps to resolving
a few misconceptions about youth in our society today. However, Hall’s study also
backfired as we witness how this distinction of the youth may unintentionally
lead to deprivation of youth of their rights.
------------------------------
Hall, G. Stanley. Adolescence: Its Psychology and Its Relations to Physiology, Anthropology,
Sociology, Sex, Crime, Religion and Education. New York: D. Appleton, 1904. Print.
Science Today at the University of California. "The Adolescent Brain."
Hall definitely had a strong belief that adolescents were inferior to adults, and therefore should be corrected. He suggests that children are not psychologically mature enough to become true criminals, but if not reformed, their wayward tendencies could lead to the beginning of a criminal career (332). Hall suggests that this reformation should be "the effort of society," a phrase which reminds us of the House of Refuge and concept of parens patriae.
ReplyDeleteTherefore, I agree with Yunee that Hall's studies may have contributed to the depravation of youth rights, as he presented adolescents as a separate class that requires careful regulation if society is to remain safe from criminals. I would not be surprised if Hall's writing stirred fear in adults and caused them to react strongly, taking away youth rights for the sake of their (both children's and adults') own salvation.
- Yu Yat (Vincent) Yang
Very well presentation Yunee. I have to agree the great point that Yunee makes about Stanley Hall’s study of “adolescence” as a social category in between childhood and adulthood. During lecture Professor Morrill states about stage of “storm and stress” conditioned by brain development, social environment, and early experiences. A stage of adolescent where stress, storm, prone to social problems likely to: threat and urban and industrial life. The example that Yunee examines of “youth as a distinct age group in which they lack self-control.” Is a great example of adolescents less morally developed and female adolescents to “underhanded” tactics. Hall also points out adolescent is perceived as “dependents” seen as character is not “well formed” as an adult his traits “less fixed.” Therefore, Hall described adolescence as a new birth for the higher and more completely human traits are now born. Adolescent characteristics contained both the remnants. Hall believes that adolescent characteristics contained both the remnants of uninhibited childish selfishness and increasing idealist altruism. Yunee point of misconception about youth stage in our society leads to a view of “youth-not-quite-adults” with denial of youth rights. Overall, great analysis and reference to Science Today a the University of California.
ReplyDelete-Marisol Lopez
As we covered in lecture, we must take in to consideration that Hall was active during a period in which youth were ‘objects of saving and study’. He classified youth as less morally developed and rebellious, yet necessary to achieve adulthood. Yunee makes an interesting point as biologically youth’s brains are not fully developed; this is analogous to how during Hall’s era social science methods were applied to argue that youths had inferior capacity to make certain rational decisions. We must also consider how all these discoveries and claims regarding youth behavior consequently led to the argument that youth thus do not deserve equal rights; even though youth behavior were somewhat more understood, this automatically deprived them of their rights at the time. Even today we still debate about to which extent should youths be guaranteed certain rights, but reflecting back Stanley Hall’s study made important steps in classifying youth behavior.
ReplyDeleteI think Yunee makes an apt observation that the physiological and cognitive difference between youth and adults can become justification for the deprivation of certain rights to youth. This is worrisome to me because it seems this reasoning could be used to deny rights not only to youth, but also to populations of the mentally ill or mentally retarded; it seems to set a certain requirement of cognition in order to hold certain rights. In fact, if anyone could be reasonably shown to be of “diminished mental capacity,” then by this logic any person could also be deprived of rights.
ReplyDeleteHowever, to play devil’s advocate, one could also ask if youth (or other similar populations) do indeed deserve the same rights as adults, given that they are in fact physiologically, emotionally, mentally, and socially less mature. Youth have historically been viewed as dependent, not-quite-adults because that’s what many youth truly are—not-quite-adults who are somewhat independent but also still somewhat dependent on a caregiver to guide them and teach them as they learn to navigate life. By the same principle that inspired Parens Patriae, if the goal is truly to protect the youth, then is it not acceptable that youth be subject to certain restrictions? Is the loss of rights such as the right to trial by jury as upheld in McKeiver greater than the benefit of special consideration and protection against punishments like life without parole?
I really liked the way in which this essay was presented. Not only did Yunee give a clear overview of Hall’s research and arguments, but she also identified the good and the bad consequences of the argument.
ReplyDeleteI want to agree with Yunnee that Hall reflects the time period in which youth was considered dependents and a new subject of study and I also want to agree with the idea that Hall’s research did in a sense take away some rights from youth. The reason why this is may be is because when one assumes that there is a different category of people then, there is also the assumption that rights and obligations might or should differ as well.
During lecture, Professor Morrill talked about the stage of “storm and stress” that according to Hall, is conditioned by brain development, social environment, and early experiences. On that note, I want to say that although there might be some sort of storm and stress in youths, it seems that most of this storm and stress stage is created by certain social norms and ideas we have. Children grow up with a certain idea of youth and conform to it and try to represent that idea when they are considered youth.
-Karen Ruiz Pina
I really enjoyed reading your blog essay. I would agree with what you said about Hall’s study of adolescence as a social category that lies between childhood and adulthood. Stanley Hall and the idea of “storm and stress” is extremely interesting due to our prior learning of cases where the court claimed that youth had diminished capacity. I feel like the cases that viewed juveniles as having diminished capacity prove Hall’s belief that cognition, social environment, experiences, stress, and storm are all real parts of adolescent development. The way you talk about adolescence as being less morally conscious whether it is a male or female, I believe further proves Hall’s and your arguments. Do you really think that all adolescence are misbehaving and are not morally rights or conscious? One point you brought up that answers my question is how girls use underhanded tactics and boys get angry and are more violent when stressed. Another important point is the Hall believed that without a child going through the stage of adolescence, they would never become a well functioning adult. Do you agree with that point Hall made? I really think you did a good job of going through and breaking down Hall’s studies on adolescence to be very easy to read and informative.
ReplyDeleteI really liked the structure of Yunee Choi’s essay. It was easy to follow, and especially her conclusion was concise and made it clear for readers to understand her main argument. In Hall’s reading, he used all the data and research results to prove that youth was in fact inferior to adults, and therefore needs to be guided in a right way. His quote in the preface, “we think we are young will make the faith in our future curative, and we shall one day not only attract the youth of the world by our unequaled liberty and opportunity, but develop a mental, moral, and emotional nature that…” shows how the concept of adolescence is perceived as a developmental stage that all the people had to go through universally and at the same time they are not yet equal to adults, and a subject of study. Also note that he used the word ‘curative,’ because in my opinion this shows that Hall had a hope in adolescence that they will be better, after going through all the ‘storm and stress’ phase. I thought it was very interesting and could not agree more to Yunee’s conclusion that Hall’s categorizing ended up depriving youth of their rights. Socially, Hall’s research encouraged people to better understand youth, but ultimately deprived their rights because they were seen as inferior and incapable of handling their own criminological instincts.
ReplyDeleteI think you mention an interesting point brought up by Hall. You mention that Hall describes youth as a group that “lacks self-control and are almost animal-like.” I feel like this correlates to youth-as-a-dangerous-class because it hints that youth have these diminished capacities that promotes the idea that they lack self-control and are more likely to engage in crime and become criminals. It also relates to the term “super-predator” in which youth were seen as an uncontrollable dangerous class. Also, you mention that the decision-making frontal cortex is not fully developed in youth. I believe that this supports Hall’s claim that because youth do not have a fully developed decision-making cortex, they are also not fully developed criminals. He portrays that youth were still “objects-of-saving-and-studying” and even though they engaged in certain criminal activities, they could be reformed into good citizens of society.
ReplyDeleteAs we journey through this class I find myself struggling with the inherent blurred lines of liminality. For on one side, I am totally for youth receiving the same rights as adults, but on the other side I am against such "rights" as life without parole or the death penalty for youth. As Yunee cleverly paraphrases, "Hall describes youth as a distinct age group in which they lack self-control and are almost animal-like because they are prone to follow their instincts more so than logical reasoning," I am reminded of colonialism and how "explorers" justified genocide of indigenous populations by saying much of the same things Stanley Hall says about youth — that they are less civilized because they are more instinctual than logical.
ReplyDeleteBecause of the persistence of this belief to attempt to understand (or really to control) certain groups, I am forced to call into question, not the targets, but the creators and maintainers of such a belief. Who decides what's logical? And furthermore, who decides what to do with people who don't seem to fit that definition. Even though we understand more about differences between populations now than we did then, these ideals still subtly persist. It is always dangerous ground when we look outward to label out-groups without examining the motivations behind the creation of such labels.
Yunee does a very good job of showing how Hall's study has both positive and negative effects for youth justice. She clearly shows that studies like this help to prove that adolescents can not necessarily be held completely accountable for their actions because many times they have not yet reached a mental maturity level that would warrant the same punishment as it would for an adult that committed the same crime. At the same time she shows how this can be detrimental to youths being given all the same rights as adults instead of being treated like someone who are completely dependent on either their parents or the state. Neither of these situations alone is ideal for they stand on opposite extremes of the spectrum. The ideal situation would incorporate both of these findings, and would perhaps have to deal with each juvenile on a case by case basis depending on the severity of the crime and the maturity level of each individual that is involved.
ReplyDeleteYunee does a great job identifying and summarizing the core concepts behind Hall’s study of adolescents. Hall is described as one of the pioneers of childhood development studies; therefore his work and theories require careful consideration. It is crucial to look at Hall’s study in its historical context. Hall’s study of adolescents took place during an era where child labor was a prevalent practice among industrialists and “children’s rights” was a foreign concept. Therefore, we can conclude that children had virtually no rights of any kind. Hall’s study was an attempt to separate adolescents from adults into two distinct groups in order to secure adolescents particular rights and amnesty. I also believe that entitlement to certain rights would call for certain responsibilities corresponding to those rights. For instance, if one has the right to drive a vehicle in society, he or she also carries the responsibility of not exceeding the speed limit. Similarly, adolescents may not benefit from all of the rights that are held for adults, especially because according to Hall, “they are prone to follow their instincts more so than logical reasoning”.
ReplyDeleteYunee makes a great argument that through Hall's research of adolescents, youth are seen in particular light now. They are seen as less morally developed, more impulsive, more prone to criminal behavior. However, it can be argued that although youth are underdeveloped in terms of ability to properly think things through, they may have a larger capacity for moral compassion. I'm thinking back to the Heinz dilemma in which, boys were asked the same scenario over the course of a few years, but the answer changed with age to a more legal/logistical standpoint. Despite this observation proving in the researcher's mind the development of maturity with age, I feel as though this may be an incorrect deduction. Other research has shown that with age, children are more prone to discriminate based on skin color past the age of 1 and others that can suggest this moral right/wrong thinking can be a strength only available in children. I think that instead of taking Hall's research as suggesting youth have diminished capacity, it is possible to think of youth as possessing great strengths (moral reasoning) that isn't present in adults due to societal corruption.
ReplyDelete