Schedule an Appointment:

Phone: 617-968-2438
Email: jgbarret@gmail.com

Office Location

240 Concord Ave., Suite C
Cambridge, MA 02138

Map & directions >>

Justified Aggression

Dec 6, 2011 | Comments (0) | Filed under: Uncategorized

When working with boys to help them avoid violence and aggression it is difficult not to be frustrated by the pervasive messages in society that condone and even encourage violence when “justified.”  To start, there is even a TV show called “Justified” where a marshall frequently shoots bad guys but is always cleared of wrongdoing because it is, you guess it, “justified.”   Just about every action movie that scores big at the box office involves some variation of the theme of the hero getting even with the villain.  Even in comedies we see the same themes played out; Marty McFly in “Back to the Future” finally gets even with Biff the bully by punching his lights out as the audience cheers.  In the world of sports, if you watch a baseball game and a batter shows up the pitcher after hitting a home run you can be pretty certain the next time that batter is up he is going to get a hard ball thrown directly at him at about 90 mph.  Likewise, if a hockey player takes what is perceived as a cheap shot at another player, the offending player better be ready to drop his gloves and fight the “enforcer” from the other team the next time they meet on the ice.  I believe that our violence prevention efforts need to acknowledge and address “justified violence” and the very real bind that boys are in when they feel disrespected or threatened.  If they fight back they get in trouble, if they walk away they feel a deep sense of shame.  Yet, boys and young men get bombarded with images and messages in our culture that value striking back when you are wronged.  It is what “real men” do; it is the American way.  Don’t believe me?  Think that all of these examples just come from sports and pop culture?  Here is a transcript (click for link to video) of part of Joe Biden’s nomination speech at the Democratic National Convention in 2008.  Remember, this speech would have been intensely scrutinized by speech writers for any message or implication that would turn off the American public.

And when I got — when I got knocked down by guys bigger than me — and this is the God’s truth — she sent me back out and said, “Bloody their nose so you can walk down the street the next day.” And that’s what I did.”

Seems pretty clear to me.

 

 

"Columbine" David Cullen

Oct 28, 2009 | Comments (1) | Filed under: school,violence prevention

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.

Zero Tolerance

Oct 14, 2009 | Comments (0) | Filed under: school

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.

Youth Violence Prevention in Chicago

Oct 8, 2009 | Comments (0) | Filed under: violence prevention

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.”