No youths on programme on youth and crime

Dear Editor, 

On the evening of Thursday, January 30, 2014, I witnessed a TV programme purporting to report what members of the public had to say about youth and crime in Guyana.  All the persons whose opinions were sought appeared to be middle-aged, or even older.  There was not a single individual within the age group of 15-25.  Such an approach was most likely to give an inaccurate impression of the public’s opinion on the issue.  In my opinion this was unfair to the youth of Guyana.  I do not condone crime in any form, and I am deeply saddened by reports which have indicated that youths are the main perpetrators of serious crime in Guyana.  We need, however, to hear from the largest group of social and economic victims in Guyana.

I have learnt to have a great respect for the opinions of our youth.  In the early 1980s, when I was engaged in field studies for my doctoral thesis ‘The Organizational Effectiveness of the University of Guyana:  A Case Study of an Emerging University in a National Development Context,’ I surveyed samples of all the strategic constituencies of the University of Guyana.      This included students in the 5th and 6th forms of several high schools who might have been considering a future in tertiary education. The questionnaires that were used were designed to guarantee anonymity.

The responses to certain questions amazed me. At that time I was taken aback by their precociousness, in particular responses from the Linden area. However, as the years drifted by, I could not help but wonder how profoundly prophetic were many of the responses that I had been privileged to collect. I am still amazed.

I would strongly urge that when we seek information and insights on issues concerning youths in Guyana that the opinions of as wide a cross-section of youths aged 15-25 as is possible, be aggressively canvassed. The ‘pictures’ which we obtain can then be evaluated within the context of the realities confronted by youths, and as such the knowledge gained should more closely approximate to the truth.

Yours faithfully,
Clarence O Perry