“Affluenza is symptomatic of a culture that holds up financial success as one of the highest achievements. People said to be affected by affluenza typically find that the very economic success they have been so vigorously chasing ends up leaving them feeling unfulfilled, and wishing for yet more wealth” (1).
One of the main reasons for working extremely hard in high paying jobs is the desire for wealth. So why do people sacrifice time with their families to gain significant amounts of wealth? Everyone has heard the saying, ‘money can’t buy happiness’, yet deep down many people believe that the wealthier you are the happier you become. Or that money buys happiness. One must note that there is a large difference between people who must work tough hours in order to provide essentials for their family, and those who make more than enough money yet desire more and more in order to gain a sense of fulfillment. The problem arises when people start believing that money makes you superior to others, and that money can solve all your problems.
You don’t have to look further than the Vanderbilt campus to find evidence of the negative results of affluenza. Affluenza “has…been used to describe a condition in which children — generally from richer families — have a sense of entitlement, are irresponsible, make excuses for poor behavior, and sometimes dabble in drugs and alcohol.” This sounds a lot like Vanderbilt to me. Often, the reason many students are able to get into a great academic school like Vanderbilt is due to their parent’s wealth. Their money can place kids in elite private schools and also pay for many prep classes for standardized tests that other students may not have access to. However, having many students living together that are extremely wealthy can lead to problems. For example, many students spend great amounts of money on alcohol and other drugs every weekend (and during the week) because of the large disposable incomes they receive from their parents. Not only are students able to experiment with many drugs and alcohol, they also gain a feeling that they are invincible and can do anything they wish. For a particular case, I will look to a recent example from Texas.
16-year-old Ethan Couch was driving drunk in North Texas when he hit and killed four pedestrians. Not only was he driving with a blood alcohol content 3 times the legal limit; he had also been seen on surveillance cameras stealing beer, and was driving with 7 passengers in his Ford F-350, which only has 5 seatbelts (2). Given the circumstances, one would expect a very harsh sentence including jail time. However, the court ruled that Ethan Couch’s behavior resulted from affluenza, and he would be on probation for the next 10 years, but serve no jail time. First, it is incredible— no, unbelievable that an appointed judge would make a ruling based off of how wealthy someone’s family is. Second, this ruling brings many questions to the table. If the kid had been a lower class kid it would be hard to imagine the judge not giving a sentencing. However, since the parents are able to spend $450,000 per year on rehabilitation, this kid gets a simple slap on the wrist for killing 4 people drunk driving (2). Therefore, this ruling is a perfect example and contributor to why many upper class people believe that they are above the law.
Therefore, there results a double standard in today’s society. Rich, upper class boys are often engaging in similar activities as lower class boys. After all, as a teenage boy you just want to have fun, which unfortunately often means doing illegal activities with friends. However, due to a society that values wealth, rich upper class kids are able to walk away free from a DUI offense and killing 4 people, where a lower class citizen might serve jail time for something comparably harmless like stealing food.
I believe that this ‘condition’ of affluenza can be solved if children are not taught to believe that a person’s character can be judged by their wealth. This does not just go for wealthy people. After all, the Texas judge was the person who made the final ruling that Ethan Couch would walk away free. Furthermore, people must realize that money does not buy happiness or make you a better person. While society as a whole can place less emphasis on money, it is also partially wealthy parents fault for instilling wrong values in their children. Kids should not grow up thinking they will have everything given to them, rather they should believe that they have to work hard to achieve success.
- http://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/affluenza.asp
- http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/12/12/affluenza-dwi-dui-texas/3999487/
I agree with Sarah. This is a good idea for an essay, but your introduction could be stronger if you opened with your own words and incorporated the affluenza definition either in your introduction or later in the essay. I do like the connection you make to Vanderbilt, as I think it shows that this is a phenomenon which hits pretty close to home for a lot of people. I also think your conclusion is very effective and straightforward which ends your essay on a very strong point.
I think this essay has great potential. However, I would work in the introduction. The opening quote and your first sentences were a little bit confusing (I thought that the essay was going to address how money cannot buy happiness, but instead the rest of the essay was about how wealth does not make you more privileged). In terms of sentence structure and tone, I think that your essay would benefit from using the words “however” and “furthermore” a little bit less. If you took out some of the formality, I think you would sound much more approachable as a writer. Your example did strengthen your argument, but you really only had that one case. With that being said, the purpose of your essay, aside from the beginning, was crystal clear and your logic was really easy to follow.
I liked the topic choice for this essay. It was great that you provided a real world example of what affluenza does to people and how it is unacceptable. However, I think a potential problem with this essay is with direction. The thesis states one thing, but you go in a different direction. I think it would be good to change your thesis to better reflect the rest of your essay. Overall, I liked how you presented your points and the choice of topic.
Michael, you make a lot of good points in this essay about the potential issues of affluenza. I feel you could strengthen the paper by providing more evidence/examples and by giving more credit to the other side. Not all those who attend nice private schools and hold high-paying jobs got there because of mom and dad’s money. Similarly, I thought the Ethan Couch example was a nice touch and very relevant; however, it could have been beneficial to expand on why the judge gave the ruling he did (including his official statement as well as your own sentiments–that he favored the wealthy). Overall a well written and fluid essay.