Should Dul's Father be Blamed for the Actions of his Son?

Abdul Qodir Jaelani, also known as Dul, is a 13 year old boy who found himself with the death of 7 people in his hands. He, undoubtedly, should be blamed for the unhappiness that he has caused because of his irresponsible actions. However, it seems that some people think that the father should have been blamed for Dul’s actions. We, as a group, disagree that his father should be blamed for Dul’s irresponsibility.

Firstly, Dul’s father had admitted that he did not know about Dul using a car alone. People might argue that his father should have been more responsible about the situation, but to have a job that pays so highly, and hire a person specifically with the task of making sure Dul reaches his destination (driver), the father has legitimate reason to believe that his son was in safe hands. However, Dul had told his driver that he wouldn’t need his services for a period of time, without sharing this news to his father too. Dul had planned to go to Bogor as the driver and ended up crashing into 2 cars and killing 7 people. The father had little chance to know that Dul had gone off by himself.

Secondly, people may argue that Dul is still too young to have made proper decisions. There is some truth to this; during puberty the human minds’ ability to make rational decisions slightly lags behind development. This may be one of the causes for Dul making a very irresponsible choice. However, it does not mean he can go and kill 7 people while using his father as a scapegoat. Being young should not void you from punishment, especially when somebody lost their life. To charge the father for an act he did not do, was not entirely involved in, or even knew about during the action, would be irresponsible as well.

This problem could be fixed, somewhat. Nothing can bring back those 7 people, but to stop something like this from happening again would be the most important. To teach people what it means to be responsible, to care for the people around you and what your actions could do to them, would be the most effective. Any person who cares enough to think before he drives at a 100 KPH, without proper training, wouldn’t do so. They shouldn’t take the chance to kill people, on the hope that they don’t. To add to this, we need to properly punish the people who commit these acts. Maybe sending them to 20 years in prison, while they’re only 13, is overkill, but time in Juvenile Hall, for more than just several months, without bail is necessary.

In conclusion, his father should not be blamed. There are many people who might disagree, but I feel that his father had no intention to hurt these people, and no capability to do so, unlike his son. Dul, himself, should be punished heavily for his actions, not his father.

Off topic: Overkill is actually a word in the dictionary!