I heard a discussion on homelessness, and how the problem was much larger and more intractable then first thought. It's police who first encounter those who are obviously indigent, and it's the police who generally intercede whenever trouble ensures.

Years ago, there was little evidence of youth homelessness, though adult vagrancy has always existed and has generally been tolerated. Why then has there been such an escalation of youths living rough ?

Many former colleagues have suggested, in the last twenty five, thirty years, there's been a move by many of our social designers to petition educators to tutor, or at least acquaint young people of their 'rights' both socially, the law and even education. Ergo many teachers took it upon themselves to thoroughly educate their pupils as to what legal limitations where placed upon their parents, society, and the police.

Corporal punishment has all but vanished. Therefore many parents are bemused as to how and by what means, they should correct, regulate and place limitations on their children's behaviour, both in the home and in society.

In days one by, youth found domiciled on the street, or out very late at night, without a legitimate reason, the copper would have him/her in the back of the truck and home to the parents. My understanding today, coppers dare not even enquire of the kid, as to their bona fides, whenever they're found loitering or skulking around, or dwelling in or near a public street or place, unless a crime has occurred nearby ?

So inadequate things are today, coppers have a ( sad)little mnemonic, 'FIDO' which amounts to...unless the kids are involved in 'murder rape or mayhem', simply go the other way ? Certainly NOT what the public expects from their police in terms of law and order is it ?

Youth ALL Youths 'unequivocally' know and understand their legal RIGHTS in terms of what police can do or not do - personally I reckon we've regressed too far in terms of our children's 'rights' ? Their rights, do come with some accompanying responsibilities too !

Hi o sung wu, yes I think you are right there. When I was a kid, if you were out too late, or mucked up around town you got a cops No9 up the tail, & got dragged home by the ear for a real walloping. It appears today most parents would want the cops blood, not discipline the kid.

I have a nephew, about 28 now who absorbed all this stuff like a sponge. He used to taunt his father that he couldn't do anything to discipline him, or he'd get child welfare onto him. I think it was the strife this caused that broke the mirage.

He at least was smart enough to get jobs in resorts & in the snow fields where accommodation was supplied. Funnily enough, he is now working up the mines, & his wife, from Canada, & daughter stay with his mother when he's away, as his wife can't handle being alone.

Yes when ever our dogooders get involved with anything, the consequences they did not see coming are usually disastrous. Usually others warn them, but they refuse to see, & then refuse to admit the result when it happens.

This lack of youth discipline, boat people, & the disaster of the poor bush aboriginals are just the most obvious.

If your in Sydney, and want to take an interest in homeless kids, her is a link that might help you.

http://www.youthoffthestreets.com.au/

I know, on OLO I bang on about the Church, but in the case of Fr Chris Riley I certainly make an exception.

Any given night there are 47,000 kids on the streets. So the coppers would certainly kept busy taking them "home" where ever that is.

o sung wu wrote:

"Corporal punishment has all but vanished. Therefore many parents are bemused as to how and by what means, they should correct, regulate and place limitations on their children's behaviour, both in the home and in society."

The above sounds odd. Do you mean to say that corporal punishment is the only means by which parents can think of to correct, regulate and place limitations on their children's behaviour?

Deprivation of privileges, talking, making a child understand why its behaviour is unacceptable are some of the many ways parents can discipline without using corporal punishment.

John Betjeman had a humorous bit:

The Velvet Hand

I call that parent rash and wild
Who’d reason with a six-year child,
Believing little twigs are bent
By calm, considered argument.

In bandying words with progeny
There’s no percentage I can see,
And people who, imprudent, do so,
Will wonder how their troubles grew so.

Now underneath this tranquil roof
Where sounder theories have their proof,
Our life is sweet, our infants happy.
In quietude dwell Mammy and Pappy.

We’ve sworn a stern parental vow
That argument we won’t allow.
Brooking no juvenile excess here,
We say a simple No or Yes, here.

And then, when childish wails begin
We don’t debate.
We just give in.

<<Deprivation of privileges, talking, making a child understand why its behaviour is unacceptable are some of the many ways parents can discipline without using corporal punishment.>>

David I would agree with that in a "functional family" environment, where there is love and understanding, where parents show kindness and do take an interest in their children, I would agree with you. Many of these kids come from a "dysfunctional family" and for some I use the word family rather loosely. I'm not one for corporal punishment at the best of times. Many of the parents we are talking about don't give a rats about their kids.

They make homelessness sound like it is the fault of society ? Come to think of it, it is but only the fault of one sector of our society, the Left ! They have pushed & pushed & are still pushing for more & more leniency towards misbehaving youth.
let those do-gooders sort it out & pay for it. leave us out of it !