i UNDERSTAND your reasoning and perspective. Would likely be valid in many cases.
I’m just noting that you can’t be certain about this particular case, imho,
BECAUSE
as a psychologist, that I HAVE PERSONALLY KNOWN quite a number of kids [not just teens but younger even than teens—e.g. toddlers] even who were absolutely fearless in many situations where the total absence of fear was totally irrational.
What made them that way is a whole ‘nother discussion. I just know for a FACT that such kids exist and this kid was likely one of them. His narrative is 100% congruent with my knowledge of such kids.
In my experience, such kids comes from 2 major factors:
A) Basic genetic energy, personality, temperament that is aggressive and outgoing;
B) LACK OF ANY significant ATTACHMENT DISORDER yielding an added confidence and fearlessness.
C) Sometimes there’s also a component of a kind of naivite wherein the stakes involved in a situation are not well comprehended. That probably relates, in part, to a THRILL-SEEKING GENE that has been verified a lot in research literature. The situation is seen as EXCITING insteaed of as dangerous—even when the danger is obvious to others.
You might want to be careful that your advocacy doesn’t override your empiricism.