The Ethan Couch Affluenza Case

In this paper I will be talking about risk assessment, supervision standards, and that while community supervision is a viable sanction for many offenders, it is not appropriate for all cases. We have the case of Ethan Couch the 16-year-old involved in the now infamous “affluenza” case. Whom as I say on April 14, 2016 was sentenced to only two years of incarceration from the crime committed in which four people were killed. In June 2013, Couch drove his pickup into a group of pedestrians and like mentioned killed four people. Couch was under the influence at the time and was reportedly fleeing the scene of a beer run with several friends in the truck. Couch was sentenced to 10 years’ probation and an intensive inpatient rehabilitation program,

I was able to corroborate this by searching in the DMS-5 and was not able to find anything that was related to Affluenza. In fact, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders has no such word under any of its recognized mental conditions (Egan, L.). That is one of the first reasons why I don’t think that Ethan Couch should have received a 10 year probation period. If such term does not exist on a recognized text why should it be valid, if it not approved by medical terminology. Yet, per the American Psychiatric Association, affluenza is not a recognized medical diagnosis (Egan, L.). I don’t understand who a psychiatrist can make such an affirmation if it is a diagnosis that is not recognized. In an article by Inquisitr they stated that according to the psychologist who testified in Ethan’s trial the action from his parents are what lead to him being a dysfunctional and remorseless teen. I mean in my opinion I don’t think that they can target something like to this to only wealthy juveniles, because I believe that his can also happen in other economic status. That is why I find that this is not a valid explanation in this case since affluenza is not a recognized

Manslaughter is a 2nd degree felony which in Texas an offender can spend 2 – 20 years in prison. Regardless of the laws in Texas Ethan pleaded guilty to four counts of intoxicated manslaughter and only received 10 years’ probation and inpatient treatment. I think that the judge in this case should have at least given the teen the maximum which is 20 years. Not only because that is what he deserved but because nothing will bring back the lives he took away and the pain and suffering from all those families including the injured individuals. I think that instead the offender could have received some type of restorative justice from inside the prison, for example been given the victim-offender mediation, along with monetary compensation to the victims. With the victim-offender mediation I think that it might have brought some relief for the families and would of in way understand what happened that day they lost their loved ones. In couch’s 2013 sentence Judge Boyd told the victims that there was nothing she could do to lessen their pain and told Couch he was responsible for his actions. So my question is why she would just give him a slap in the wrist for that? I think the judge should have taken into consideration what the families were asking for and I think their voices were not