What's the future for 'affluenza' defenses?

Yamiche Alcindor | USA TODAY

After a Texas teen from a wealthy family avoided jail time, many are wondering whether the case has set a precedent for "affluenza," the affliction a psychologist cited in the trial.

A psychologist testified that 16-year-old Ethan Couch, charged in the deaths of four pedestrians while driving drunk, suffered from the condition in which children — generally from richer families — have a sense of entitlement, are irresponsible, and make excuses for poor behavior because parents have not set proper boundaries.

A judge gave the teen 10 years of probation for the fatal accident. Prosecutors were seeking the maximum 20-year prison sentence.

Details of the sentence have gone viral with experts offering conflicting views on whether more "affluenza" defenses will be mounted in the future.

"Unfortunately, given the fact that this was successful, it's more likely that more attorneys are going to pick it up and wave it as their banner," said Gary Buffone, a Jacksonville, Fla., psychologist who does family wealth advising.

The term "affluenza" was popularized in the late 1990s by Jessie O'Neill, the granddaughter of a past president of General Motors, when she wrote the book The Golden Ghetto: The Psychology of Affluence.

Buffone said the affliction is not a recognized diagnosis but is a popular term that should not be used to justify bad behavior. It is typically mentioned when children from rich families do things such as fail classes, skip school and abuse drugs or alcohol, he said. "Spoiled brats — that is the common term that's used."

The Texas case could mean psychologists will be getting an increasing number of calls from defense attorneys and prosecutors eager to have them testify, Buffone said.

Judges, however, most likely won't be buying "affluenza" defenses after many expressed outrage at Couch's sentence, said Areva Martin, a Los Angeles-based attorney.

"I don't think it's going to have legs legally," she said. "I just don't believe wholesale judges are going to start letting wealthy kids who murder people go off to expensive rehab facilities in lieu of jail time."

Couch's sentence could send a dangerous message that would reinforce bad behavior by allowing others to get away with crimes and avoid consequences for their actions, Martin said.

She argued that if future "affluenza" defenses did become successful, lawmakers would face public pressure to pursue legislation stopping such practices.

Daniel Filler, a law professor at Drexel University who specializes in juvenile law, agrees. He said he also doubts that any savvy lawyer would use the term to argue for their client after the Texas case gained so much attention.

But, the practice of using a client's background in arguments to make him or her less responsible or culpable for a crime is the core of good defense work, said Filler, a former criminal defense attorney.

"The real truth is that our criminal justice system is suffering from 'affluenza' because affluent people can afford better attorneys and better get better outcomes," Filler said.

Couch's attorney was "doing what a well-paid lawyer can do," he added.

Still, children spoiled by their wealthy parents can be victims, said Ben Agger, a sociology professor and director of the Center for Theory at The University of Texas at Arlington. Couch's case might make some rethink parenting decisions.

"The kid is a victim in this case — not of being wealthy but the consequences of his unboundaried behavior," Agger said. "It's hard for us to accept that because he killed people and he is getting off. Ultimately adults are responsible both as role models and parents who turn a blind eye to their children's reckless behavior."