Affluenza a Legal Justification for Misconduct?

“Affluenza a legal justification for misconduct?”

Individuals throughout society face some form of social, emotional, and/or behavioral issues. However, the severity of these issues varies immensely form one individual to another. These issues are present and can be found in all social classes ranging from rich and poor. With this being acknowledged does this give an individual the right to behave unacceptably and avoid consequences for their actions?

 Affluenza, is a diagnosis being applied toward wealthy individuals in the means of justifying their behavior. This diagnosis is being and has been administered in court systems in efforts to explain an individuals debauched and unscrupulous behavior. Individuals of higher social class and wealth are applying affluenza as the reasoning for behaviors such as but not limited to; substance abuse (drugs/alcohol), failing academically, theft, eating disorders, scandals, to criminal action(s)/conduct. Defense attorneys are exploiting a client’s upbringing, circumstances, and experiences to evade significant penalties for the clients’ engagements and misconduct/criminality. Which brings forth the argument is this an acceptable legal defense?

All members in society can suffer and encounter some form psychological hindrance. Youth ranging from the privileged to white-collar societies to poverty are acceptable to damaging destructive or undesirable behaviors. However, as a functioning individual they are and should be held accountable for their actions. Wealthy privileged youth plea/claim the means for his/her conduct was established by diagnosis of affluenza.  What about the conduct of those youth in white-collar or poverty societies’? The youth from these societies also endure stress and psychological difficulties and/or struggles.

Affluenza is exploited in court systems for law-breaking offenses amongst the wealthy. Defense attorneys are stating their client have been diagnosis or demonstrates symptoms associated with affluenza.  Stating and attempting to persuade and influence the system that the misconduct was attributed to the parents’ parental management/support. The logic behind this is the parent has constructed and generated the child’s behavior. Therefore, implying the youth should not be held accountable to the full extent of his/her actions.