Ethan Couch Case

“In our daily lives, law affects how we behave or do not behave and possibly some of what we think, and it also governs many aspects of our lives.” (Barkan, 2009) Our legal system is what keeps our country cohesive and running. To evaluate the legal system and how it deals with the numerous things that go through it, one of the four major assumptions of law, its functions and dysfunctions and finally, how the law is defined. One could say that the legal system is corrupt and favors the elites. To better explain, the Ethan Couch case, or the “Affluenza” case will be used as an example. “Law reflects the type of society in which it is found.”(Barkan, 2009) This is one of the four major assumptions of law. This case involves a wealthy and privileged

The term used to describe this behavior is “affluenza” which means Couch was a product of his wealthy environment and his parents never established boundaries for their son. In Layman’s terms, Ethan Couch did not know any better and therefore should not receive a punishment as severe as the one that he deserved. The presiding judge agreed with the defense team and rendered a 10 year probation sentence which caused outrage within the community as well as the

There is one function of law that serves as a function, but could also be a dysfunction and that is that the law expresses a society’s moral values. Influential social groups can sway the law in their favor as seen with the Affluenza case. Another dysfunction is that the law may create and perpetuate inequality. This inequality can be seen in the Affluenza case. Firstly, there is inequality in the fact that several years prior to the Affluenza case, the judge sentenced a “16 year old who came from a poor background and had paltry court-appointed legal defense, got 20-years in prison while Couch, who came from a multimillionaire family, got off with 10 years of probation and a stint at a costly rehabilitation center in California after his private attorneys argued that he was too rich to know right from wrong.”(Bult, 2015) This is an example of the blatant inequality caused by the dysfunctions of the law. Secondly, this case set a precedence that because you are wealthy, privileged, and in some cases white, you may be able to avoid the consequences of your actions. You will just get a mere slap on the