Nov. 18: Creative Sentencing - How far is too far?

An AP story in yesterday's paper talked about a mother in Oklahoma who was concerned about her 14-year-old daughter's chronic lateness to class and talking-back-to-teachers attitude. So, she decided to take matters into her own hand.

She made the child stand at a busy Oklahoma City intersection with a big sign: "I don't do my homework and I act up in school, so my parents are preparing me for my future. Will work for food."

The mother claims she was desperate and needed to do anything she could to straighten up her daughter.

Her mother never left the child's side. She stood with her and though they were only there a couple of hours, they attracted plenty of attention -- letters were written and calls to talk radio shows either praised her or condemned her for publicly humiliating the child. Protective Child Services also showed up.

But apparently it worked. The child's grades, attitude and attendance improved.

Would I ever do such a thing? Probably not.

Fortunately I don't have to. I've been blessed with some amazing kids. My first daughter was born with Down syndrome. She is developmentally disabled and one of the sweetest and kindest children to ever walk the face of the earth. My middle girl has been a 4.0 kid since 4th grade and is currently first in her class of 204 sophomores and my baby has been a gifted child since preschool. She read second-grade level before entering kindergarten. They are active in band, sports, CSF, Key Club, volunteer at the SPCA and have never given me any trouble. I am blessed.

But back to the Oklahoma child...

How far would you go to protect or encourage a child?
What about adults?

We have a California Superior Court Judge (Howard Broadman) in our town that is known for "creative" sentencing.

Judge Broadman has made defendants quit smoking, attend Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, see psychiatrists, wear T shirts indicating they are on probation and has told an abusive spouse to leave town but to first donate his car to a shelter for battered women.
He made a big splash when he made it a part of the sentencing order for a woman to use a Norplant – birth control implanted in the arm – after she pleaded guilty to beating her children brutally. (He has been written about in Time, Wall Street Journal and People, and has appeared on reality-television show “Law Firm.”

In his defense, the Norplant was not just a sentence. The gal was pregnant and she had said she did not want any more children. The Judge explained that if he made it part of the sentence, the State would pay for the birth control and she could avoid four years of prison. She and her lawyer agreed but later she changed her mind, saying that her reproductive-rights have been violated; they waived the ‘no jail’ carrot in front of her and “forced” her to take the Norplant. It is no surprise that she is appealing the case.

My thoughts?

Perhaps if we had more judges like Broadman, we’d have less crime.