There are many reasons why teens run away from their families. Most of the teens featured in the documentary have dysfunctional families. According to Thompson and Pillai (2006), poor communication, abuse and neglect, interfamily conflict, and dysfunction set the basis for runaway adolescents. Some of the teens are also forced out of their homes when they are subjected to intolerable circumstances and mistreatment. Thompson and Pillai (2006) also noted that some of the teens run away from home because of drug abuse. Rat from the documentary, for example, narrates how he ran away from home because he was caught peddling. His father had warned him against drug use and peddling and when he was caught, he had to run to the streets.
In the documentary, it is clear that some of the parents care deeply for their children. Dewayne’s father, for example, fears that his son will end up in prison like him. He tries his best to advise his son against drugs and he is against his life in the streets. Patrice has a loving mother who is always ready to welcome him home. However, some of the parents do not seem to care about the choices of their children. Tiny’s mother, for example, states that her daughter is just going through a phase, which will eventually pass. Shellie’s mother does not display any kind of empathy for her daughter because of her ways. However, most of the parents are against the lifestyle chosen by their children but lack proper mechanisms to help their children.
While some parts of the documentary were not surprising, most of the parts were. Most of the teens in the documentary lack caring families. Despite having a home and loving mother, Patrice remains in the streets. Further, Tiny’s mother maintains that her daughter is just going through a phase through prostituting. Prostitution and drug abuse cannot be classified as just a phase. The surprising issue about the article is that majority of the runaway adolescents were actually White. This was also clear in the documentary. This is surprising because most of lower-income class is mainly associated with other races rather than the White races. Most of the runaway teens are most likely to come from the lower-income class, which matches with the teen’s representation in the documentary and article.
Crisis shelters provide basic shelter and crisis intervention for the runaway youths. However, these shelters fail to meet the youth’s long-term needs and their families (Thompson and Pillai, 2006). Issues like whether to return the youths to the homes they ran away from are not catered for in these shelters. There is lack of facilities that can determine the best interests of the youth. If the crisis shelters were better equipped with the appropriate amenities to cater for the best interests of the youth instead of shelter alone, they would be more useful.
The root cause of most runaways is dysfunction within their families. The best way to reduce the numbers of runaway teenagers is by the provision of a favorable home environment. Both parents and young people should be involved in coming up with intervention strategies (Thompson and Pillai, 2006). Returning adolescents to the home they ran away from without making any changes do not solve their problems but rather increases their probability of running away again.
The documentary and the article paint a clear picture of youths in trouble. As covered in class, the family structure and person’s character shapes the life of an individual. From the documentary and the article, it is clear that the family structure is an important part of a young person’s life.
Reference
Thompson, S., " Pillai, V. (2006). Determinants of runaway episodes among adolescents using crisis shelter services. International Journal of Social Welfare, 15, 142–9.
