The death of the teenager?

Towns are passing curfews to keep them off the street. Parents are shelling out for gadgets to spy on them. Teens are subject to twice as many restrictions as prison inmates.

But U.S. psychologist Robert Epstein says we are wasting a huge human resource: Let them choose when to leave school, work and vote – it's the birth of the new adult.

Globe and Mail columnist Margaret Wente recently sparked a vigorous discussion when she described a new book in which Dr. Epstein argues that not only should young people have the same rights as adults – from voting and signing contracts to smoking and drinking – but that the designation of teenager should be abolished entirely.

In Saturday's Globe, writer Tralee Pearce examined the changing roles of young people in society in her article Adolescence is obsolete

Dr. Epstein was online earlier today to take your questions and to offer his insight into these issues.

Robert Epstein is the author of The Case Against Adolescence and is Director Emeritus, Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies.

Virginia Galt, Globe and Mail: Good afternoon, Dr. Epstein, and thanks so much for joining us today to talk about the way we treat our teenagers. It promises to be a lively discussion.

You argue that extended adolescence is bad for everyone. Yet, as parents, educators and employers, we can't seem to let go.

In Canada, more than 40 per cent of adults under the age of 29 still live with their parents. As a matter of course, universities now accommodate anxious Moms and Dads at orientation sessions.

And, even when these young adults graduate and find employment, they are often relegated to "intern" status, although many are better educated than their bosses. In your view, how much harm are we doing by not letting them, from the time they are teenagers, assume more responsibility and get on with their lives?

Dr. Robert Epstein: The harm for our young people, our families, and our society at large is enormous. At one level, we're simply wasting valuable human resources: millions of talented, energetic, creative young people who are making little or no contribution to society.

There are also mental health consequences: When we restrict young people and hold them back, many get angry or depressed. In the U.S., we have 5.5 million teens in counselling now, and we're spending more money on psychoactive drugs for teens than on all other prescription drugs combined.

We also have 2 million attempted suicides each year by teens. Infantilizing teens and isolating them from adults also causes enormous family conflict: 20 conflicts per month, on average. That's a lot of pain.

Philosopher King, Ottawa: Not to be rude, but when I was a teenager I thought and did a lot of stuff that was dangerous, stupid and potentially disasterous. In the end I suspect it was only the continuous messaging from around me as what the boundaries ought to be (even if I ignored them) that kept me from doing even crazier things.

While I accept that freedom of choice and the learning of what constitutes acceptable and unacceptable behaviour in society is incredibly important, the simple fact is that teenagers don't understand repurcussions very well.

As such, giving them the right to get credit cards, loans or the like is simply allowing them to be victimized by a system whose only mantra is 'what the market will bear' which I translate as them being allowed to take advantage of inexperienced youth.

I myself took on a credit card in university and ended up very much in debt because I didn't understand the ramifications. So, how do you propose to protect the young when you seem to desire setting the world loose on them?

Dr. Epstein: My guess is that your irresponsible behavior was guided mainly by the absurd rules, values, and role models of teen culture.

If you had truly been allowed to enter the adult world - to own property, to compete against adults head-to-head, to sign contracts, etc. - you would have done a better job. Of course, many adults also behave irresponsibly, so I could be wrong!

Maggie Crow, Canada: Motivated people will take initiative and take on responsibility at any age. If teenagers want to be involved in something they will be - take politics for example.

The teenagers that want to be voting are probably involved in student government, or volunteering for political parties, or are part of advocate groups.

Laws don't need to be changed in the hopes that the mediocre will become exceptional. The way to foster growth and maturity in adolescence is to show teenagers the opportunities that exist within their reach, and to help them become the best leaders in their own world.

Dr. Epstein: The problem, Maggie, is that they have almost no meaningful opportunities within their reach.

According to survey research I've conducted in the U.S., American teens are subjected to more than 10 times as many restrictions as are mainstream adults, to twice as many restrictions as are active-duty military personnel, and even to twice as many restrictions as are incarcerated felons.

They have virtually no incentive to pay attention to the adult world because they can't vote, they have limited property and privacy rights, they can't sign contracts or start businesses, and they're forced to attend school even if they have no interest in learning the completely arbitrary material they're supposed to learn there.

Give young people some real opportunities and incentives to join the adult world, and they'll do it by the millions. And yes, you're right, the most exceptional teens will lead the way.

Ari Up, Ottawa: At 18, my great-grandparents got married and hopped on a boat from England to Canada. As far as I know, they never returned home. They established a home and business in small-town Saskatchewan, and started a family that grew to 5 kids within a decade. The whole family thrived.

At 17, my grandfather was told it was time for him and his younger brother to leave the family farm in Ireland. They headed for Canada and fended for themselves during the Depression. It was rough, but he did fine.

Are teens today inherently less capable than they were in previous generations, or have we just lowered expectations to the point where they're incapable of demonstrating this kind of competence?

Dr. Epstein: Great question. I show unequivocally in my new book - based on my own research and extensive research done by other scientists - that today's teens are every bit as capable as teens of old.

We've just lowered our expectations, treating teens as we treat young children and trapping them in the completely absurd world of teen culture.

They learn virtually everything they know from each other -- the very last people on earth from whom they should be learning.

They need to be learning from the people they will soon become: adults. And yes, they need more meaningful responsibility in their lives - not more "freedom," but more responsibility.

They have way too much freedom as it is - the freedom to spend frivolously, the freedom to be disrespectful, the freedom to waste time, and so on.

Thumb Sucker, Toronto: Dr. Epstein, this to me is all very depressing.

Why does everybody need to squeeze every last ounce of productivity out of their lives? We are moving so close to a society where you are judged purely by how much money you make and how many hours you can put in at work during a week that it seems no one is smelling the clichéd roses along the road to death.

Who cares if a teenager can work in an office just as well as an adult? They have plenty of time to do that when they are an adult; no need to go back to the ways of the industrial revolution.

Dr. Epstein: I agree completely, which is why I spend a great deal of time relaxing!

But this is a matter of options: Many young people would like the opportunity to start a business, own property, compete against adults, make their own medical decisions, live on their own, drink alcohol (responsibly) - or even to retire to a desert island!

But over the last century, society has come to restrict all young people - based simply on age, and no matter how motivated or competent they may be - so that they have virtually no meaningful options whatsoever. . .

The key is to allow young people to enter the adult world as soon as they are ready.

James Cyr, Balmertown, Ont.: Most teenagers, in their transition from childhood to adulthood, are looking for answers to fundamental questions of life.

In other words, they are seeking some philosophy to live by --a comprehensive view of life. What are they offered today?

Rap music that advocates volence and disrespect; movies that offer nothing but either immorality or ammorality; mysticism as an alternative to reason and consumerism-materialism as a be-all-end-all. Rationality and reason is discouraged; objectivity is replaced with cynicism and the false dichotomy of the practical versus the moral.

Further to his point, how possible do you think it would be to reverse the huge hold popular culture has over us? How many man-as-boy movies do we need to see anyway?

Dr. Epstein: They're offered this kind of nonsense because we have trapped them in the idiotic world of teen culture.

We treat them like children and completely isolate them from the adults.

D.V., Canada: As a 'high-achiever' teenager myself, I can relate to much of what you write, and myself find age to be an arbitrary number.

Do you think that current teens are in agreement with your ideas?

How much time do you believe it would take to fully remove the concept of 'teenager' from our society's vocabulary?

Dr. Epstein: Because teens are infantilized and so completely isolated from the adult world, many are not aware of their own potential.

They just feel frustrated, but they don't fully understand where that frustration is coming from.

Unfortunately, the forces of infantization - mainly greedy companies, but also misinformed parents and policy makers - are so strong that it's going to be long time, I fear, before we abolish adolescence.

Diane Agate, Lincoln, Canada: These ideas are wonderful. But how do we as a community begin to initiate changes, especially for teens who are living dangerously, by substance abuse and running away?

How do we reach out and begin? Perhaps we just let them fend for themselves and learn from their mistakes?

Dr. Epstein: I think the teens who are in the most trouble would be the first to enter the adult world, given real opportunities to do so.

In many cases, they're the ones who "grew up" first - but then were quickly frustrated by the prison bars that surround them.

We need to start the ball rolling to end infantilization, allow teens to enter the adult world (when they can demonstrate readiness), and rescue them from the idiotic world of teen culture.

More home schooling will help, and so will giving meaningful responsibilities. But fundamentally, we need to educate the public and to begin the process of legislative reform.

T Dot, Canada: The only truth I have come to accept after 30 years in education is that the current education system fails many students: the structural model, the curriculum components, and measurements of success conspire against young minds, inducing boredom and alienation, instead of stimulating and engaging them.

However, nothing will change without the participation of larger social forces, specifically the economic forces.

Yes, legislation would be needed and policies amended, but the real impetus should come from the business world in terms of taking responsibility for the development of a skilled labour force. Now there is a significant disconnect and a culture of blame.

In comparison to many other developed nations, Canadian budgets for R & D fall short, and in the long run we will suffer for it.

Instead of expecting highly refined and specific skills to walk in the doorway with new hires, all organizations should have training and internship programs in partnership with educational institution.

Practical application and problem solving demand on-the- spot learning; motivation determines accomplishment, which in terms drives self- esteem (yes - the real thing). Students would have to become accountable in real world terms - to themselves and to others.

Dr. Epstein: I agree completely and recently published a long article in Education Week spelling out my views.

Our current education system was modelled after the factories of the industrial revolution, with young people placed on assembly lines - as if they are all the same, like widgets - and all ready to learn and be molded in preparation for a lifetime of labour. What nonsense!

The assembly line is fine for cars but not for people. The main thing we teach young people in school is to hate learning.

Effective education - as you and all other teachers know - must be personalized and individualized, because people have different learning styles and learn at different rates.

Will Decker, Norman, Oklahoma: I've heard it said that boys with loving fathers do not join gangs. What do loving fathers do? Do they not establish boundaries within the context of love?

I wonder if Dr. Epstein has witnessed how lost teens are as they relate to each other by themselves. Maybe it is how we go about setting rules, where they come from that needs to be examined . . .

We've got a lot to do but, dear Dr. Epstein, leaving teens on their own seems wrong to me.

Dr. Epstein: Thanks, Will, for your question. First of all, past puberty, young human males are not "boys." They're young men, and many of them are extremely capable - in some cases far superior to adults.

A loving father doesn't necessarily assure that a young man won't enter a gang. Gangs themselves are paramilitary organizations, highly organized emulations of adult military organizations, complete with ranks, emblems, uniforms, codes of honor, territories, and weapons.

I've never suggested that we "leave teens on their own," but to treat all teens as young incompetent children is a serious mistake.

We need to let young people enter adult society, one by one, as soon as they can show us that they're competent do so in one or more areas.

They're very different, one from another - just as adults are - and to toss them all away based merely on their age is just plain wrong, and also quite harmful for young people, families, and society at large.

Virginia Galt, Globe and Mail: Thanks so much for joining us today and taking questions from the readers of globeandmail.com.

Your discussion has stirred up a lot of interest. Do you have any closing thoughts?

Dr. Epstein: When I started the research that is reported in my new book, The Case Against Adolescence: Rediscovering the Adult in Every Teen, I had very different views than I have now.

I thought that teens were inherently irresponsible and incompetent, and that we hold them back from the adult world for their own good.

I learned that I was wrong - that the systems we have in place that restrict teens and isolate them from adults are remnants of the industrial revolution . . . that no longer make any sense, and do great damage to our young people and our families.

I learned that teen turmoil is not necessary - that it doesn't exist in more than 100 cultures around the world and that it is entirely a creation of our society.

If you're intrigued by my ideas, I hope you'll take a careful look at the book. If you look closely at the evidence, I believe you'll become as persuaded as I have become.