Just got through reading “Columbine” by David Cullen and it is a must-read if you work with adolescents/boys. The two biggest take home points from the book in my opinion are:
1) the media completely glossed over the fact that the original plan was to detonate propane tank bombs that would have wiped out almost half the school. The boys then planned to shoot survivors as they fled the school. The original plan was not to go into the school and target individual students to shoot.
2) Eric Harris was a textbook psychopath. He was NOT a member of the trenchcoat mafia, did not like Marilyn Manson and was not a “goth.” His case does NOT prove that any disaffected teen who is bullied for being different can decide to go on a killing rampage. His past actions, personal diaries, website and personality profile are all indicative of a dangerous psychopath.
Overall, the book is very well-written and gripping. My one complaint is that the author switches from providing an analysis of the killers to telling the stories of the survivors, which can impact the continuity. There is much to learn from this book and Mr. Cullen should be congratulated for a job well done.
The recent suspension of a 6 year old in Delaware for brining a camping toll that included a pocketknife to school has brought zero tolerance policies to the fore. Zero tolerance for weapons in school is meant to be a deterrent to school violence, however common sense is needed. There is certainly a difference between a 6 year old who brings a camping tool to school to show his friends and a pre-teen or teen who brings a switchblade to school. As a psychologist who conducts safety assessments for schools I believe there we can evaluate risk on a case by case basis to determine if the “weapon” in safety violates the schools zero tolerance policy for weapons. That being said, parents please be as diligent as possible around monitoring what your children are bringing to school. I have seen key chain pocket knives, fishing knives and boy scout utility knives all lead to suspensions at the high school level when the students had no intention of harming anyone and were unaware possession of these items violated school rules.
Very interesting read here on an innovative youth violence prevention effort in Chicago:
http://bit.ly/1Q5myq
The idea of using statistics and research to target the most at-risk can be controversial; after all, not all youth receive services in this model. However, the approach reminds of the Operation Ceasefire initiative in Boston that was successful in reducing youth gang violence in the early 90′s. Bottom line is that it is always encouraging to see systemic approaches to youth violence prevention that combine research and outside-the-box thinking. Whether it succeeds or fails either way we can learn from it, which is more than I can say about one-shot interventions like “youth violence prevention week.”
I wanted to highlight an effort that Cambridge Health Alliance has been a part of: the Somerville Cares About Prevention. This is a coordinated effort that brings together professionals from health, mental health, human services and government who partner with families and students to address drug use, violence and risk behaviors. As the article below indicates the program has evidenced some success. These improvements, while modest, highlight the importance of a coordinated and systemic approach to prevention; one-shot interventions just will not work. Congrats to my friends in Somerville and keep up the hard work! Link to article here:
http://bit.ly/2hKcYv
