"CHILDREN WHO STEAL" ESSAY

Bronwyn Donaghy of Parents magazine, in her article "Children who steal", attempts to give the impression that she is mostly exploring the issue of childhood stealing objectively. There even is some evidence to suggest that Donaghy views shop stealing in particular, as a " chronic crime" requiring address. However, a close reading of the article reveals a well presented and written piece of work which focuses on encouraging in parents a sense of responsibility and perhaps even guilt, for their children's stealing. In fact, Donaghy's argument about children who steal is simple; children who steal are motivated by loneliness, " the need to impress" others, a sense of 'loss' or, more explicitly, parents' failure to fulfill their nurturing role. It would seem that the real topic in discussion is not, as the eye-catching bold

type headline implies, about children who steal, but the parents of children who steal and the 'fact' that they appear to be the cause of their children's 'unease'. Stealing is only a symptom of this unease.

It is important to recognise that Donaghy quickly dispels any notion that only poor parents are concerned. The modern allusion to the famous verse' Rich man ...thief" indicates clearly that social class is not a barrier to children feeling unease during their growth through childhood. The anecdotes, which will be discussed further, clearly support this assertion for they include references to children stealing " diamond ring(s)" from parents. One could even assert that Donaghy, despite her inclusive approach, focuses on rich parents, who " would be wise to keep money and jewellery out of (their child's) sight" and who have the funds to initiate their children into a life of glamour and create " little girl(s) who {have} everything" (Danielle's story), or who can afford to give their child a " bank account" to encourage

children to have a sense of responsibility with their own money.

Donaghy's use of headings throughout the article appeal to a parents' emotional conflict when faced with a child who steals. Highly connotative words such as " What can a parent do?" and stealing and loss" and "stealing and guilt" are visible. Other subheadings such as "Seven- the age of discontent"(a bastardisation of a common phrase,) followed by the alliterative reference to the 'transitional' stage occurrence of " surreptitious stealing" only serves to emphasise Donaghy's rhetorical skill and her ability to justify child theft. Children are made out to be the victims. Despite Poppy Harris' reassurance that " Parents have [not] failed when " their children steal, the impression given is that parents have been negligent. The shift in Donaghy's tone also indicates that this is a fair interpretation.

Donaghy attempts to create a caring tone throughout the piece. At the start of the article, her tone is "inclusive". Parents immediately get the impression that Donaghy is one of them, for as she states, " stealing is one of those crimes of childhood...we hope...our children will never commit" (My italics.) .It is interesting to note that this inclusivity is shortlived. Donaghy begins to speak as an expert rather than a parent, and distances herself, speaking of " parents " who need to be careful and " your child". Perhaps she considers herself the perfect parent for she scolds others at the end of the article when she states " ...if your children witness you taking things....don't be surprised if they adopt the same standards as yours". The supplementary material "Stop! Thief?" advice section at the end of the article only serves to confirm Donaghy's hidden agenda - to emphatically encourage parents to "be tolerant' and 'patient' and 'present' to their children. (Use of the imperative tense also supports this understanding and illustrates Donaghy's confidence in her role as advisor.)

Structurally, an important technique utilised, which reinforces the notion that the author is encouraging parents to not act impulsively when disciplining a child who steals, is the use of narrative at various points in the article. A close look reveals a progression. Each anecdote labours the point that theft is a symptom, therefore, each anecdote considers causes such as car accidents, a desire for acceptance, premature parental expectations and lack of communication, (as Ms. Harris indicates by stating that stealing is "almost always connected with family relationships.) Cleverly, the (fictitious) children's ages appear to increase as the anecdotes progress, indicating that parents can be responsible for many years; their action or inaction can have consequences for many years. The concerned parent will, by this stage, acknowledge that Donaghy's view are urgent and need to be heeded lest their children fall, or continue to fall, on the wayside.

The narrative style and selection of detail employed throughout these narratives creates pathos in the reader. The reader is positioned to empathise with; Danielle who "just wanted her mum [to] talk to her; the little boy who "couldn't [write stories] since the car accident"; Josh, who steals to impress his peers and " Vikki", who despite her own wealth, stole money because " her mother no longer talked to her while they did the washing up". Parents (particularly mothers) are clearly questioned. In order to add authenticity to these constructed messages furthermore, the author follows each anecdote with reference to authoritative authors, published and otherwise such as Dr. John Pearce and " Allen and Unwin".

As is very evident, Donaghy's argument about children who steal, is more an argument about the parents of children who steal. Perhaps she means all parents are at fault, for their lack of concern proper conduct, since she doesn't seem to make a distinction. Through the structure of the piece, different sources of information and the shift in tone, Donaghy most clearly illustrates her argument and betrays her own persuasive rhetoric; children who steal, will continue seeking to "reach" their parents in "an oblique way " by stealing, regardless of age, until these parents are "there for them."