AFTER an encounter with a wayward child at the shops Dan McSweeney (GP letters, April 11) felt compelled to write to the Post and asked the question; when is a child considered old enough to know right from wrong?
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
After he observed a big difference in the behaviour of a Sikh child and an average Australian kid, the child from the Sikh family appeared to have a better concept of right and wrong.
Now let me just clarify before we get too far, just because I have children I am in not in any way shape or form, an expert on raising them.
However, Mr McSweeney’s letter posed some interesting questions, which prompted me to look into it and find out what other countries consider a responsible age.
I found myself looking at this from the point of view of the law, because as parenting advice goes none is absolute, but the law comes close.
Well that sometimes depends on what magistrate you get, but at least laws give us some written guidance so to speak.
Now I’m not suggesting that Mr McSweeney’s example of a child’s behaviour should be dealt with so harshly, but stay with me on this.
UNICEF has helpfully gathered data on international ages of criminal responsibility, and the first thing I noticed is that there is no clear standard age at which a child can be held criminally responsible for their actions.
In Mexico a child is considered criminally responsible at the age of six, in Australia the age is set at ten and right up to eighteen in Uruguay, and then there is Doli Incapax to consider as well.
Doli incapax is the presumption that a child is "incapable of crime" under legislation or common law.
When a child commits a crime it has to be proven that they were capable of knowing what they were doing was wrong, children in Australia come under Doli incapax from the age of 10 to 14.
Prior to the age of ten they cannot be criminally charged.
However in Mauritius the age is from zero to 14, and in Pakistan it gets even more scary.
There you are considered criminally responsible from seven, but you can be charged with a serious crime from birth.
An example of this occurred only two weeks ago in Pakistan, when a nine-month-old baby was charged along with its family with attempted murder, but thankfully the charge was thrown out.
Getting around to my original point; is it possible that the widely varying ages a child can be held criminally responsible in other countries, is a reflection of the behaviour that the children in these countries exhibit?
It is a big assumption but if this is the case, how did the parents in those countries that have set such a young age for criminal responsibility, manage to give them the skills to know right from wrong? In other words, what are we doing wrong?
Can we learn from this? As parents, are we teaching our children to be responsible in the most effective way possible?
Do we need to say no to our children more?
Are we being too soft on our kids? I don’t know, I don’t have an answer to that, just a hope I’m doing things right for my children by leading by example where I can.
Like I said I’m no expert, just a parent running things without a handbook like everyone else, wanting my kids to be kids for as long as they possibly can be.