The Adrian Peterson
Controversy:
The reactions and opinions about the Adrian Peterson
situation have been extreme in both number and emotion. Unfortunately, I have yet to hear a
commentary that I particularly agree with.
After a significant amount of thought and reflection, I have decided to
describe my own thoughts in writing.
First and foremost, this is far from the simple issue that
most people make it out to be. Living in
Minnesota, the loudest voices are proclaiming that Adrian Peterson’s actions
were wrong, not effective, and akin to “child abuse.” From the Minnesota media, the consensus seems
to be pretty much the same. From the
people who know Adrian, mainly his teammates, the general theme is of support for
their teammate and friend, and even some more vocal justifications, such as
from Captain Munnerlyn and Jerome Felton.
Others have decided to keep their personal feelings private, while expressing
general support for the rights of parents to make decisions about discipline as
they see fit.
Out of Texas, where Adrian Peterson was raised, there has
been an outpouring of support for their local hero. This includes a public defense from his
mother, and a carefully worded, “stay out of our business,” from the child’s
mother. Throughout all of this, most of
our “facts” come from Twitter and various “news” organizations, neither of whom
obtained the information and pictures legally, and all of whom stand to profit
from the outrage. To pour fuel on the
fire, news of a second allegation, which sounds like it was really a “first
allegation” that didn’t result in any charges, has made it clear to many people
that AP is a child abuser.
All of this makes for a fairly muddled situation, far from
the clear cut case that so many people want this to be. There are a lot of other “facts” in the case
that make “getting it right” even more complicated. My intention is to separate “actual facts”
from “perceived facts” and also try to look at the case from different
perspectives than are being widely represented.
Discipline:
Children need discipline, and discipline is
complicated. As a white child from the
Midwest suburbs, I was raised with a certain understanding of discipline. That understanding included the idea that if
I was really, really bad, I might get spanked.
The fear of that possibility depended on my belief that it could ever
actually happen. Fortunately for me, I
did believe it, and I can count on one hand how many times it became necessary.
In other families, other cultures, other regions of the
country, and other parts of the world, that understanding is most certainly
different. Which makes this an
especially sensitive subject is that the differentiation seems to consistently mirror
racial and regional differences. African
American kids from the South will generally have a very different understanding
of what constitutes discipline. The fact
that this distinction has a very strong racial and geographic (and potentially
religious) causality should make all of us pause before rushing to judge the
beliefs of others. Just as “it was how I
was raised” should not automatically excuse Adrian Peterson’s actions, neither
should “it’s not how I was raised” automatically condemn him.
Being a parent is hard work, and deciding how or when to discipline
your child is an immense responsibility.
While there may be many very credible studies that suggest that physical
punishment is less effective than other forms of discipline, we don’t live in a
perfect world. For a child raised in a
stable home, by two parents who delivered a fair and consistent message about
what is right and wrong, it may seem barbaric to think that this type of
discipline would be employed. In less
ideal circumstances, where not following the rules could be a life or death
decision, it is fair to think that more severe measures may need to be employed
to gain a child’s attention.
Ask yourself three questions, and try to answer them
honestly:
1.
Were you EVER spanked as a child (in any form)?
2.
Do you think your parents did a good job of
raising you?
3.
Can you say (with 100% confidence) that you
would NEVER consider spanking your child?
For me, the answers are YES, YES, and NO. This makes sense, because it is “how I was
raised,” and “I turned out fine” so why would I believe that it was wrong?
Think about your own answers, and then consider replacing “spanked” with “whooped”,
and see if this is still an open and shut case.
The Law:
Aside from the moral and practical opinions on what
constitutes appropriate discipline, we need to take account of what the law
actually says. I am not a lawyer; I have
never studied law; and I don’t claim to be an expert in the area. If someone can point me to a written law that
prohibits a parent from spanking their child, hitting them with a belt, or
whipping them with a “switch,” then I think the legal aspects of this case are
pretty clear. If not, then the case
comes down to the judgment of the parent, and that of the jury (as an advocate
for the child), as to whether Peterson “went too far” in his discipline of his
son. At this point, that has not been determined
and likely won’t be for quite some time, which makes the rush to judgment of
both the media and the public a bit troubling.
The NFL:
The NFL is, quite simply, in a terrible place right now,
plagued by decades of concern for profit over the welfare of its players and
the communities that support its growing influence. The handling of the Ray Rice incident, and
the subsequent handling of other recent issues, simply expose how secretive and
protective the league has been over its image and its enormous profits.
Let’s be clear, the troubling reality of Ray Rice is this:
The NFL, in handing down an initial 2 game suspension,
handed out a punishment that was far more severe than in most previous cases of
domestic abuse by its players. If it
seems like there has been a spike in domestic abuse issues since the Ray Rice
situation blew up in their face, you are almost certainly wrong. The difference is that the NFL is actually
starting to tell us about these incidents, for fear we’ll find out about them
from TMZ. The other thing to recognize
is that, by most accounts, Roger Goodell’s initial defense of the seemingly
light suspension was correct, in that it was in line with other punishments
that the league had handed down in recent years for similar incidents.
Precedent:
When we talk about precedent, in a legal sense or otherwise,
we mean that punishments for certain behaviors should be determined (in part)
by how similar situations have been handled previously. Let there be no mistake, this is a GOOD
THING. Without precedent, we create an
environment where decisions and discipline are guided by personal opinion,
rather than facts. This makes
discrimination much more likely when deciding appropriate discipline, as
similar situations can be handled differently based on personal feelings or
beliefs. It is almost always understood
that discipline for “alleged” crimes or behavior be withheld until the legal
process has completed, and a verdict rendered.
In the Ray Rice case, the punishment handed down by the legal system was
nearly non-existent, in large part because his fiancé refused to press charges
and admitted to fault in the altercation.
In this case, the league’s hands were mostly tied, as the legal system
let Rice off with a slap on the wrist.
Personal Conduct
Policy:
As private enterprises, the NFL, the Ravens, and the Vikings
have a great deal of leeway when it comes to disciplining their employees. This generally comes down to situations where
the actions of the employees “damage” the brand. In these cases, the employer has the right to
discipline the employee in order to encourage more appropriate behavior. Conversely, the interests of the players are
protected by the players’ union, to make sure the NFL doesn’t “go too far” in
its discipline. In the Ray Rice case,
the 2 game suspension was warranted, considering both the legal judgment and
historical precedent.
The wild card is the personal conduct policy, and more
importantly, the “NFL brand,” which was damaged due to public perception that
the punishment was too lenient. The
reason for that perception is the TMZ videos that were leaked for all to
see. The punishment, in the opinion of
the public, was too lenient even after the first video was seen. After the second video, however, the “brand”
was immeasurably damaged, and action had to be taken. The fact remains, however, that the
punishment that was eventually handed down to Rice was unprecedented due to the
lack of any formal policy dictating punishment for domestic abuse cases, and
due to the fact that the new policy was not enacted until after he was
originally suspended.
Assumptions (these
are mine):
1.
If Ray Rice had not been caught on camera
dragging his fiancé out of the elevator, he would not have received ANY
suspension. This assumption is based on
the fact that he was essentially cleared of any “criminal” wrong-doing AND that
he was theoretically a first time offender.
The 2 game suspension was almost entirely due to the release of the
first video. In fact, the league’s (and
Rice’s) knowledge of what was on the second video probably played a big part in
Rice not appealing the initial suspension.
2.
The uproar at the seemingly light suspension
forced the league to re-evaluate its decades old policy of covering up anything
and everything possible when it comes to the actions of its players, as long as
they can keep it out of the media. This
is all about “protecting the brand” and therefore the money.
3.
The indefinite suspension of Ray Rice has
already been challenged by the players union, and will almost certainly lead to
him being reinstated by the league. If I
were a betting man, I would say that he gets a MAXIMUM of a 6 game suspension,
and more likely less than that since the policy did not exist when he was
disciplined. Whether he ever gets picked
up by another team is unlikely, but he will almost certainly collect on the
remainder the money guaranteed in his contract with the Ravens, with the
exception of the games he is officially suspended.
Back to AP:
Why am I talking about Ray Rice when this commentary is
about Adrian Peterson? The rush to
judgment of Peterson is a direct result of the uproar caused by the Ray Rice
incident. Add to it the extra emotion due to the involvement of a young child,
and you have a perfect storm for a premature, and potentially unfair reaction.
To be clear, Adrian Peterson has not been convicted of
ANYTHING at this point. He has been
charged with negligent injury to a child.
This is very different from being charged with intentional injury to a
child, assault, or child abuse. The
charges, which he could eventually be found guilty of, suggest that he MAY have
inflicted inappropriate injury to his child while exercising his parental
rights to discipline him.
The PRECEDENT would suggest that no action be taken until
the legal system had time to review the facts, and come to a judgment. If, at some point in the future, the legal
system determines that he did break the law, the league and the team would be
compelled to act in accordance with its own policies and best interests.
The Vikings:
Most people believe that the Vikings screwed up this situation badly. I tend to agree with that
assessment, though not for the reasons that you might think. Under normal circumstances, a 7 year veteran
and seemingly upstanding citizen, would not be suspended by his employer on suspicion
that he did something wrong. The initial
decision to deactivate Peterson was generally applauded as the Vikings “doing
the right thing,” even though there is very little legal or historical
precedent for such action (Chris Cook aside). The
subsequent decision to reinstate him was no doubt due to an honest evaluation
trying to balance Peterson’s rights to due process with the interests of the
team and organization. Peterson’s
eventual dismissal was nothing more than an organization caving to external
pressure, the almighty dollar, and
making a decision without regard for facts, fairness or due process.
Bringing it all
together:
After reading this commentary, it may be a bit unclear what
my personal opinions are in this matter.
I’ll do my best to clear that up right now. I personally don’t believe that spanking a
child is a particularly effective form of punishment, and certainly don’t feel
that it would be necessary to use a belt or a stick to more severely inflict
physical pain as a form of punishment. I
also believe that any man that intentionally strikes a woman when not
protecting himself is a coward. I by no
means support either behavior. The fact
is, however, that one of these examples is clearly illegal, and the other may
be illegal. There is also a difference
in severity between the two, even if we assume both are crimes. It is not up to me, or you, or the media to determine
what is and is not an appropriate form of punishment for someone else's child. If it were, I’m sure we’d all be guilty in
someone’s eyes at one time or another.
If a court decides that a crime was committed, then the punishment
should fit the crime. And when Ray Rice
is reinstated by the league after only losing 4-6 paychecks, the precedent will
be set in regards to Peterson.
I decided to write this out because I was having difficulty
explaining why I disagreed with the “popular opinions” being expressed so
openly and passionately. In doing so, I
tried to think about what it would be like to be raised in a family where this
type of thing was the norm. How would
you feel to find out that the way you were raised, and the way you currently
raise your children, is so “obviously” wrong and horrible?
Hopefully this situation creates an environment where we can
look at all sides of the issues at hand, and have an intelligent, fair, and
open conversation that is inclusive of all people, not just those trying to
sell jerseys, or newspapers, or online advertising.
