Category: Adolescence

The Ways To Combat Juvenile Delinquency

Abstract

To combat juvenile delinquency, we must look at the people who are deeply affected by it the worst. The reasons why juvenile delinquency occurs in high-income areas are different from the reasons why juvenile delinquency occurs in low-income areas. The ways family, police and school handle those situations vary as well. So, if the reasons why re different and the way they are being handled are different, why would the solutions for combatting juvenile delinquency be the same? And why should we treat it the same?

Combatting Juvenile Delinquency

There are endless reasons as to why kids act out, each circumstance is different, but the central theme of home, school, and policing are factors in each circumstance. I believe in order to fully understand why kids act out and how to reduce delinquency we must look at low-income communities. Kids in those communities are more likely to act out and be put into the criminal justice system than kids in high-income communities.

Family

As a parent your main job is to make sure your children have clothes on their backs, a roof over their heads, food on the table. What happens when you cannot provide those things? What happens when you are in a community where crime is already high and there is constant exposure to violence? What happens when your children turn to a life of crime to get ahead? “Poverty is a reoccurring factor in juvenile delinquency that is progressively getting worse in the United States. Youth living in poverty are pressured to survive in low socioeconomic communities that lack resources such as job opportunities, financial support, mental health services, medical services, education etc. The lack of resources in these communities impedes these youth from becoming successful in a society that favors those with money. Those without money are more likely lead down a path of crime” (Cuentas, ‘Poverty: Key Factors Contributing to High Juvenile Delinquency Rates’, 2018).

As kids our lives revolve around what’s trending, what’s going to get people to like me, what will make me look cool. Kids do not want to be told that they cannot afford the “nicer” things, and some can accept that, but others will do whatever they can to get what they want. The need to have nice things and impress others leads to robbery, theft, gang activity, murder, etc.

School

The ‘school-to-jail pipeline,’ an upsetting national pattern wherein kids are channeled out of government funded schools and into the adolescent and criminal equity frameworks. A large number of these kids have learning incapacities or accounts of destitution, misuse, or disregard, and would profit by extra instructive and advising administrations. Rather, they are detached, rebuffed, and pushed out. “Zero-tolerance” approaches condemn minor infractions of school rules, while cops in schools lead to understudies being condemned for conduct that ought to be dealt with inside the school. Understudies of shading are particularly defenseless against push-out patterns and the prejudicial use of control.

For most understudies, the pipeline starts with insufficient assets in state funded schools. Packed study halls, an absence of qualified instructors, and lacking financing for ‘additional items, for example, guides, specialized curriculum benefits, and even reading material, lock understudies into below average instructive conditions. This inability to address instructive issues builds withdrawal and dropouts, expanding the danger of later court inclusion. Even more awful, schools may really urge dropouts in light of weights from test-based responsibility systems, for example, the No Child Left Behind Act, which make motivating forces to push out low-performing understudies to help magnify test scores.

In certain purviews, understudies who have been suspended or removed reserve no option to training by any means. In others, they are sent to disciplinary elective schools.

Developing in number the nation over, these shadow frameworks—here and there run by private, revenue driven organizations—are insusceptible from instructive responsibility principles, (for example, least study hall hours and educational program necessities) and may neglect to give significant instructive administrations to the understudies who need them the most.

Accordingly, battling understudies come back to their normal schools ill-equipped, are for all time secured in second rate instructive settings, or are piped through elective schools into the adolescent equity framework.

Policing

Numerous under-resourced schools become pipeline portals by putting expanded dependence on police instead of instructors and staff to look after order. Developing quantities of locale utilize school asset officials to watch school lobbies, regularly with next to zero preparing in working with youth. Thus, youngsters are undeniably bound to be liable to class-based captures—most of which are for peaceful offenses, for example, problematic conduct—than they were an age prior. The ascent in school-based captures, the quickest course from the study hall to the prison, most straightforwardly embodies the criminalization of younger students.

Youth who become associated with the adolescent equity framework are regularly denied procedural insurances in the courts; in one state, up to 80% of court-included youngsters don’t have legal counselors. Students who submit minor offenses may wind up in verified confinement in the event that they damage standard probation conditions denying them from exercises like missing school or defying educators.

Understudies pushed along the pipeline wind up in adolescent confinement offices, a significant number of which give scarcely any, instructive administrations. Understudies of shading — who are definitely more probable than their white companions to be suspended, removed, or captured for a similar sort of lead at school— and those with incapacities are especially prone to go down this pipeline.

In spite of the fact that numerous understudies are moved down the pipeline from school to prison, it is hard for them to make the voyage backward. Understudies who enter the adolescent equity framework face numerous obstructions to their reemergence into customary schools. By far most of these understudies never move on from secondary school.

Ways to Combat Juvenile Delinquency

The best method to avoid adolescent misconduct has unquestionably been to help kids and their families from the get-go. Various state programs endeavor early mediation, and government subsidizing for network activities has enabled autonomous gatherings to handle the issue in new manners. The best projects for adolescent misconduct counteractive action share the accompanying key segments:

Education:

Model projects have helped families and kids by furnishing them with data. A few projects advise guardians on the best way to bring up sound kids; some show youngsters the impacts of medications, groups, sex, and weapons; and others plan to express to youth the inborn worth they and all others have. These projects furnish young people with the mindfulness that their activities have outcomes. This is especially significant in a time where youth are blasted with sexual and brutal pictures. Instructive projects have the basic aim of empowering expectation and opening up open doors for youngsters.

Recreation:

One of the prompt advantages of recreational exercises is that they fill solo after-school hours. The Department of Education has detailed that young people are well on the way to carry out wrongdoings between 2 p.m.-8 p.m., with wrongdoing rates topping at 3 p.m. Entertainment programs enable adolescents to associate with different grown-ups and kids in the network. Such positive companionships may help kids in later years. Youth programs are intended to fit the characters and abilities of various kids and may incorporate games, moving, music, rock climbing, dramatization, karate, bowling, craftsmanship, and different exercises.

Community Involvement:

Young lady scouts, cub scouts, church youth gatherings, and volunteer gatherings all include youth inside a network. Contribution in local gatherings furnish youth with a chance to interface in a protected social condition.

Parent Training Program:

The ‘Parent-Child Integration Training Program’ takes parents and their kids around 12 weeks to finish. It is intended to instruct child rearing abilities to guardians of youngsters ages two to seven who display major conduct issues. The program places guardians and kids in intelligent circumstances. A specialist controls the guardians, teaching them on how best to react to their youngster’s conduct, regardless of whether positive or negative. The program has been appeared to diminish hyperactivity, consideration deficiency, hostility, and on edge conduct in kids.

Bullying Prevention:

The Bullying Prevention Program is instituted in rudimentary and middle school settings. An unknown understudy survey fills educators and heads in regarding who is doing the tormenting, which children are most every now and again misled, and where harassing happens on grounds. When educators and chairmen have found out about how and where tormenting happens at their school, they set up class decides and encourage exchanges that address the issue. Singular harassers and unfortunate casualties get free directing. The program prevails with regards to making a more secure, less antagonistic condition for understudies at negligible expense.

There are also preventive techniques that take place after kids have been put through the system to further prevent them from committing delinquent acts once they are released, such as The Nebraska Correctional Youth Facility’s Project Heart Program. The Project Heart Program is a program where prisoners who have met certain behavioral and educational requirements train a pet dog. The dogs that they train are considered incapable of being adopted due to behavioral problems. After a qualification the inmates are given a dog for a short period of time and must care the dog. They can bring them to class and activities. After training the dog there is an Award ceremony called the, “Good Canine Citizen Awards”, then they are set up for adoption through Nebraska’s Human Society. After adoption inmates can talk to the families that adopted their dog to get updates and inform them on the dogs training.

References

1. Cuentas, A. (2018, May 3). Poverty: Key Factors Contributing to High Juvenile Delinquency Rates. Retrieved December 11, 2019, from https://medium.com/soci100wsp18/poverty-key-factors-contributing-to-high-juvenile-delinquency-rates-31f9aebc44e8.
2. School-to-Prison Pipeline. (n.d.). Retrieved December 11, 2019, from https://www.aclu.org/issues/juvenile-justice/school-prison-pipeline.
3. Juvenile Delinquency Prevention. (n.d.). Retrieved December 11, 2019, from https://www.impactlaw.com/criminal-law/juvenile/prevention.

The Effects Of Parenting Styles On Juvenile Delinquency

Juvenile Delinquency is a major problem in the United States. Many of our youth are participating in illicit activities to gain something, whether it is money, popularity, etc. Parenting styles have a major effect on a child’s decision to participate in delinquent behaviors. A sense of family is most important for the development of socialization for children, teenagers, and young adults. Parents play an important role in that process of socialization for their children. The way in which a parent behaves to their child, emotionally or physically, is expressed to the child, which in turn allows for the child to interpret those behaviors and act out in a certain way. This goes to show that parents are a major influence over their children and are responsible for shaping them into an adult; therefore, the discipline style that parents choose to use ends up having a substantial impact on their child’s actions.

The purpose of this research design proposal is to determine if the influence of parents and their perceived parenting styles have any effect on children’s behavior leading up to juvenile delinquency. There are four types of parenting styles: Authoritarian, Authoritative, Permissive, and Uninvolved. The way parents raise and teach their children has an effect on whether that child will succeed and do good in life or if they will become another statistic in the juvenile system. For years, parenting styles have provided research experts with what parenting styles have been shown as most effective or least effective styles for raising their children, teenagers, and young adults to develop considerably better attitudes and behaviors. It has become more common for people to blame parents for the way their child is engaging in violent behavior. Throughout this research study, I will analyze the different parenting styles to see which one is most closely related to children becoming involved in delinquent activities.

Before I talk about the measures I would take to operationalize my independent variable (parenting styles) and dependent variable (juvenile delinquency), I would like to give some background information on the four different types of parenting styles. The first type of parenting style is Authoritative parenting. This type of parenting allows parents to demonstrate “a responsiveness to the child’s needs, demandingness…monitoring of the child’s behavior, providing clear standards of conduct, and discipline based on reasoning…” (Johnson par. 5). Authoritative parents provide a home environment with emotional support, encouragement, behavioral supervision, etc. Children are encouraged to behave respectfully and morally. They are also taught to respect their elders and to think independently for themselves. Authoritative parents promote individuality and confidence by being supportive and attentive to their child’s needs and demands. This parenting style “allows a child to develop into a healthy individual, both socially and psychologically” (Mowen p. 4). Research has also found that with this parenting style, “high levels of parental monitoring are associated with lower instances of some delinquent behavior…and illicit drug use” (Mowen p. 4). Therefore, authoritative parenting is known as the best type of parenting style because it is stable, warm, and sensible.

The second type of parenting style is Authoritarian parenting. This type of parenting is very strict, controlling and low nurturance. Communication skills are extremely low with this style. Children who are parented by this style usually turn out with low self-esteem, out of control, aggressive, and at times depressed. Authoritarian parents demonstrate “demandingness…are less responsive to the child’s needs, are more likely to use power assertive discipline, and may utilize love withdrawal to gain compliance” (Johnson par. 6). When a child does something wrong, that love and nurturance from their parent may be withheld in order to teach the child a lesson. These types of parents operate with a “do as you are told style of discipline” (Johnson par. 6). The parent does not allow for any type of discussion with the child about what they did wrong. Conformity and obedience are greatly emphasized with this type of style and discourages open communication, which allows for an increase in the probability that a child will engage in deviant activities.

The third type of parenting style is Permissive parenting. This type of parenting allows for the parent to demonstrate “high degrees of responsiveness, a lack of demandingness, uninvolved parenting, and negative emotionality” (Johnson par. 7). Children are less supervised by parents who conform to this type of parenting. The parents have a lack of control over their child. Basically, a child is raising themselves and engaging in certain behaviors without their parents’ concern for the outcome of that child’s actions. These types of parents are less of a figure of authority and more of a friend and/or counselor. Their children grow up with little to none expectations and/or disciplines. The child is allowed to make their own decisions and rules without the guidance from their parent. Parents who parent with this type of parenting style are more worried about being liked by their child rather than disciplining them. Multiple studies have found that when child grow up without parental supervision, that child “may contribute to adolescent involvement in deviant peer groups and delinquency…” (Mowen p. 5). This goes to show that this parenting style effects a child’s decision to participate in deviant activities.

The last type of parenting style is Uninvolved parenting. This type of parenting style allows for a parent to demonstrate a minimum amount of warmth for the child and control over the child. These parents are “rejecting of the child and gives the child minimal if any attention or nurturance” (Johnson par. 8). This parent does not participate in any of their parenting responsibilities, which means that they have no concern for their children. The parent is wrapped up in their own life and has no regards for their children’s lives. This parent may provide a home and other necessities, but there is no relationship between them and their child. Basically, the child is left having to take care of oneself and provide for oneself without the help of their parent. The parent is not involved emotionally with their child and establishes no connection with them. Uninvolved parenting is highly correlated with signs of “negative psychological emotions in adolescents and children” (Mowen p. 6). Many studies have found that children who see their parents as permissive and uninvolved “are more likely to engage in illicit drug use and alcohol abuse” (Mowen p. 5). This parenting style, along with permissive, increases the chances of a child engaging in deviant behavior.

With all of that being said, those are the four types of parenting styles that can either increase or decrease the chances of a child becoming involved in illicit activities. For this research design, I will be conducting a factorial design instead of a classic experimental design because I have four types of parenting styles, which results in my study having more than one experimental group. The independent variable of the study will be the parenting styles. Experimental group 1 would be parents taking on the Authoritative style. Experimental group 2 would be parents taking on the Authoritarian style. Experimental group 3 would be parents taking on the Permissive style. Lastly, experimental group 4 would be parents taking on the Uninvolved style. The control group would be those not associated with any type of parenting style. Instead they decide to parent their children in their own type of way. The dependent variable will be the increase or decrease in a child’s chance to participate in juvenile delinquency. Here, I would look at school records and/or self-reports of deviant behavior as indicated by surveys distributed to students at school.

There are multiple steps for me to take in order to collect the data on my dependent variable. In my experimental research design, the population of interest are all parents and adolescents in the United States. In order to choose the subjects of my study, I decided to use the sampling technique of stratified random sampling. The reason for this is because I want to focus on the demographic variable of race, which is a particular interest to the study. There will be four races looked at in this study. Those races would be White, African-American or Black, Hispanic, and Asian. A sample total of 1,000 students from a high school and 500 students from middle school will be involved in this research design. Those 1,500 students will have their parents randomly assigned to a parenting style and would have to act out that style for at least a month or two depending on how the experiment goes. Every week, data would be collected through self-reports given to those 1,500 students at school and data would also be collected through school records (“see Appendix A”).

When it comes to designing experimental research proposals, it is important to pay attention to the reliability and validity of measurement in minimize errors in an experiment. I do believe there would be a few potential reliability problems in this experiment. The instruments themselves used for the experiment would not change unless the access to school records is denied, then the self-report surveys would be the only survey instrument. A problem may occur when it comes to measuring deviant behavior in children is if the same result would be given each time. It would be helpful to get the same result each time, but it is not guaranteed that that adolescent or young adult would continue to engage in those deviant behaviors. The consistency of the research study would remain consistent when it comes to the measurement of the instrument. The instruments used are intended to measure the same concept, which is to determine if there is an increase or decrease in deviant behavior based on what type of parenting styles these children are receiving at home. The self-reports and school records relate to one another because if we compare a student’s answers to the survey with their school records, there would be a relation between the two. For example, let’s say a student takes the survey and it shows that they do engage in deviant behavior if we look at their school records and see that it matches up, that would show that those two items relate to one another.

The measurement instruments of this research design would be valid in determining if children are more likely to engage in deviant behaviors based on the parenting style they are receiving. Self-reports and school records are a valid way to measure juvenile delinquency. When it comes to the face validity of the experiment, the frequency of inappropriate behavior shown on school records or in the self-reports would seem to be a valid measure of a child’s participation in juvenile delinquency. When it comes to the content validity of the experiment, there could be an issue with the instruments encompassing the entire meaning of juvenile delinquency. For example, let’s say that those individuals with strong social bonds are less likely to engage in deviant behavior. In order to ensure that the measure of social bonds has content validity, all of the dimensions of social bonds would have to be included.

When it comes to the internal validity of a research design, there are possible rival causal factors that could threaten the internal validity. One potential threat is history. If a parent became involved in an allegation, that would affect one participant of the study. With it just being one person, that would not necessarily affect the results of the study, so the research study would still continue on. The second threat is maturation. There is not a strong possibility that maturation would be a threat in this study because it would have to do with the psychological or emotional changes in a subject that is not due to the independent variable. The third threat is testing effects. There could be a possibility of that in the study when it comes to the self-reports. If students see the same question on the self-reports, there could be an error introduced in the accuracy of the study. This could be addressed by switching up the questions on each self-report survey given to the students, so none of them can become familiarized with the questions. The fourth threat is instrumentation. This would not be a threat to the study because the measurement instruments used during the course of the study would not change. The fifth threat is selection bias. This would not be threat to the study because all of the participants involved would be randomly selected to participate in the study and the parents would be randomly selected a parenting style. The last type of threat is attrition. There is a possibility that participants may drop out of the study while it is still in progress. This could be addressed by adding new participants to the study within the two-month period and just have those new participants do the experiment a bit longer than those who are already involved.

When it comes to the external validity of a research design, there are also possible factors that could threaten the external validity. The first potential threat is reactivity. The parents would be aware of the fact that they are being studied, but the children would not be aware. As long as the children are not aware then the research environment would still be representative of the actual world. The last potential threat is selection bias. As said in internal validity, selection bias would not be a threat because all of the participants would be randomly selected using a computerized random generator.

There could be a few potential ethical concerns regarding my proposed study. There would be no physical risk of the study involved. Parents would not be allowed to physically cause harm to their children nor cause physical discomfort. There is a psychological/emotional risk involved. Children could become depressed or have emotional trauma depending on the parenting style they would be exposed to. This would try to be minimized as little as possible; however, it is not guaranteed that this risk will not happen. There could also be social/economic risk involved. It would be more focused on social risk being involved. A parent’s status in the community could be threatened by their involvement in the research study; however, it is not highly likely that their children would expose that to someone else, but it is a possibility. There could be a legal risk depending on what sort of deviant activity the child behaved in; however, that legal risk would be minimized as little as possible to ensure that these children do not face criminal charges during/or after the course of the study. There would be no concerns regarding the loss of confidentiality. Participants names of the study would be kept confidential, so there would be no complications later on in their life.

While carrying out the study, there are some special issues might of concern to me. The population of interest from which I am sampling could have some issues of concern because the study is relying on young adolescents to tell the truth. Most young people are not always known for telling the truth. With the possibility of them not being completely honest, then the results of the study would not be accurate. Therefore, it would be hard to justify the reliance of the study to see if it is an accurate representation of the real world. The sampling techniques I am using could also be a concern in the study. With using the stratified random sample technique, there could be an issue if the participants fall into more than one subgroup when it comes to the race variable. The result could become a misrepresentation of the entire population. The content of my survey instruments can also be an issue of concern. I would look at school records and/or self-reports of deviant behavior as indicated by surveys distributed to students at school. It might be difficult to collect/or look at student’s school records when it comes to the sense of confidentiality established at schools. Surveys can also be a bit difficult because students could lie on the surveys and not tell the whole truth, so that would end up in wrong information being collected. Even though there could be some concerns in the study, the type of parenting style parents use is an accurate variable source to determine the possibility of their child participating in deviant behavior.

Juvenile Delinquency In India: Reasons, Justice And Solutions

ABSTRACT

“All kids need is a little help, a little hope and somebody who believes in them.”

Juvenile delinquency is a serious problem and it is detrimental for the social order of nation. This problem is viewed as a socio-legal category invented in conjunction with the juvenile court; as a label applied to youth at the end of a chain of decisions involving the police, public and juvenile court officials and as form of behavior that violates legal codes, regardless of its detection or processing. The analysis of statistical data available at official sites shows increasing interest and involvement of juveniles in heinous crimes. Juvenile crimes have become such a common problem and they raise serious concern day by day. Those children who are involved in such crimes all over the world develop different rate of crime and world-view. With the time they increased their ability to think, develop their own views about the problems arising in their life. There is also a tendency of making comparison and there is complex in their mind. The problems arise when juveniles develop delinquent tendencies and having conflict with laws.

INTRODUCTION

Our children being an important asset, every effort should be made to provide them equal opportunities for development so that they become robust citizens physically fit, mentally alert and morally healthy endowed with the skills and motivations needed by society.

JUVENILE DELINQUENCY – What it means?

Etimologically, the term ‘delinquency’ has been derived from the Latin word delinquer which means ‘to omit’. The Romans used the term to refer to the failure of a person to perform the assigned task or duty. It was William Coxson who in 1484 used the term ‘delinquent’ to describe a person found guilty of customary offence. The word also found place in Shakespearean famous play ‘Macbeth’ in 1605. In simpler words it may be said that delinquency is a form of behaviour or rather misbehaviour or deviation from the generally accepted norms of conduct in the society.

The early penology did not recognize any discrimination between adult and juvenile offenders so far punishment was concerned. The problem of juvenile delinquency is therefore, essentially of a recent origin. The youngsters between a certain age-group are easily attracted to the temptations of life and lend into criminality. As is often said, the child of today is the citizen of tomorrow. The criminal tendency in youngsters must therefore, be timely curbed so that they do not turn into habitual criminals in their future life. It is with this end in view that most countries are presently tackling the problem of juvenile delinquency on priority basis. Many of them established separate juvenile courts to deal with young offenders and the procedure adopted in these courts radically differs from that of regular trial courts. In India, special provisions providing for the care, protection, treatment, development and rehabilitation of neglected or delinquent juveniles and their trial and disposition are enacted under the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (Section 6 of 2000) which are uniformly applicable throughout the country excepting the State of Jammu & Kashmir and rules under the Act enacted to be known as the Juvenile Justice Rules, 2007 which came into force w.e.f. October 26, 2007.

Causes of Juvenile Delinquency :

Violence in the home :- One of the largest contributing factors to delinquency is violence in the home. Every Tulsa juvenile criminal defense attorney will tell you that when a child is subjected to violence, they are in turn violent people.

Lashing out at others for the violence they experience at home is very common. Children subjected to violent actions, or those who witness it to others, are more likely to act ut their fears and frustrations. They often have a “don’t care” attitude and this allows them to get into trouble more easily.

Violence in their Social Circles

If the neighborhood is in which a child lives is violent, the children will have a tendency to be more prone to delinquency.

Many people describe this as street survival methods because the child gets into trouble as a way to stay out of trouble from area gang members or violent people. In many cases, when you remove the child from this type of situation, their tendency for delinquent actions is removed.

Peer Pressure

Similar to neighborhood pressures, peer pressure from direct acquaintances can have an effect on how a child reacts to bad situations. If all of their friends are committing delinquent acts, the child may feel pressured to do the same to be accepted.

The best way to avoid this type of situation is to be actively involved with who your child is hanging out with on a regular basis. Know their friends. Know their friends parents. This not only instills confidence in your child to do the right thing, it can help parents keep their children away from bad influences.

Socioeconomic Factors

Juvenile delinquency is more common in poorer neighborhoods. While all neighborhoods are not exempt from delinquent activities, it is believed they happen more in areas where children feel they must commit crimes to prosper.

Theft and similar crimes may actually be a result of necessity and not that of just a petty crime. The only true help for this situation is to make sure that children in these areas have access to what they need and understand that they do not have to commit a crime to get ahead in life.

Substance Abuse

Substance abuse in a home or by the child is a very common cause for delinquency. Children who are exposed to substance abuse often do not have the necessities they need to thrive and are forced to find these necessities in other ways. Others, who become dependent on a substance may also need to commit crimes to sustain their habit.

Counseling and treatment for this type of situation is the only real remedy to help these children. This type of situation can cause their self-worth to deteriorate and allow them to commit acts that they would not otherwise have considered.

Lack Of Moral Guidance

Parental or adult influence is the most important factor in deterring delinquency. When a parent or other adult interacts with the child and shows them what is acceptable behavior and what is considered wrong, the child is more likely to act in a way that is not delinquent.

It is very important for a child to have a bond with a good adult who will influence their actions and show them the difference between what is right and what is wrong.

Even if your child has committed an act of delinquency, their lives are not over. You, as their care giver have the chance to turn around their lives and show them how to change their ways.

It starts with hiring a quality Tulsa juvenile criminal defense attorney so that they can receive a fair trial. Once they have gone through this process, as a care giver, you can begin to change the influences in the child’s life so that they can start fresh and go into adulthood with a clean slate.

Justifications which the Juvenile may advance against their delinquent Act-David Matza (UK). in his theory of delinquency has attributed the following justifications or excuses which the juveniles very often advance to explain or neutralize their criminal activity.

They usually deny responsibility by claiming that the act was a result of uncontrollable passion, accident, poverty or parental neglect etc.

The delinquent may take the plea that no one is actually harmed, either physically or financially by his criminal act. Those indulging in alcoholism, drug-trafficking, vagrancy etc. It may justify their act on this ground. They may even perceive it as an act being done for their victim’s good.

He may claim that the victim was also criminal and therefore, he should not complain or that the victim was the first to start trouble, hence, he has no moral justification to attribute criminality to the delinquent. For example, in the case of sex-offence, the delinquent may allege that it was the victim who initiated the cause or in case of domestic violence, that the victim deserved the violence because he or she had misbehaved.

The juvenile offender might claim that since everyone has at sometime or other committed a criminal act, hence no one has a moral justification to blame or condemn him.

The approval of the gang or group or criminal organization may be more important to the delinquent than that of his family or society and he may justify his criminal act on that ground. This is generally true with juveniles associated with criminal gangs whose loyalty they consider more important than that of their own family members.

Juvenile delinquency in other countries

The problem of juvenile delinquency still remains a paradox despite unbridled efforts on the part of penologist to curb this menace. Several causes such as slum-dwelling, poverty, neglect or partiality by parents towards their children. Lack of parental care and social security may be attributed to the unprecedented increase in juvenile delinquency. The situation in European countries in this regard is, however, not so alarming as in United States where the problem has touched its climax in recent years. Ms. Sophia M. Robinson in her learned article entitled “Why Juvenile Delinquency Programmes are Ineffective” has aptly pinpointed the cause of the failure of preventive efforts in suppressing juvenile delinquency in United States.

Norway – In Norway, the criminal cases of young offenders between the age group of 14-18 are referred to the Municipal Juvenile Welfare Committee consisting of 5 members. This committee functions to suggest adequate measures with regard to juvenile delinquents. The enactment of Child Welfare Act,1953. However, provides the delinquent child should be allowed to stay at home and the Juvenile Welfare Committee should take preventive steps by visiting the delinquent’s home at frequent intervals and suggest effective measures to keep the offenders away from criminality. There is greater emphasis on medico-psychological method of treatment of young delinquents in recent years.

Turkey- Turkey has shown keen interest in juvenile justice. Even though rate of juvenile delinquency is not high, slightest rise in child delinquency excites concern in that country because of the stronghold of the family institutions.

The eminent Turkish scholar Nephan Saran dealt with socio-cultural pecularities of the children under 18 years of age who were involved with the police of Istanbul during 1956-1968. He observed that theft, sexual offences, violence, smuggling and pick pocketing were the most prevalent crimes and delinquency was concentrated in the age group of 16-18 years. The main causes of the delinquency were crowded families, unemployment, poor housing and culture conflict.

International Concern for Juvenile Justice

The immensity of the problem of juvenile delinquency has been engaging the attention of penologists at international level also. The International Penal and Penitentiary Commission worked successfully on the prevention of crime and treatment of offenders until October 1951 and repeatedly stressed on the necessity of rationale and humane treatment methods which could be avoid the need of keeping juvenile offenders in prison in order to disassociate them from the criminal world.

The pressing problems of juvenile delinquency in developed and the developing countries drew attention of the United Nations to work out some guiding principles for Juvenile Justice System. The United Nations Asia and Far East Institution made significant contribution in this behalf as a result of which the 7th U.N. Congress on Prevention of Crime & Treatment of offenders adopted, in September 1985.

India being a U.N. member has responded favourably to this call of the international body and enacted a comprehensive law on the subject called the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986.13.5

Juvenile Justice in India

Available statistics on juvenile delinquency in India reveal that the problem is not as tense in the western world. This may be due to variations in living conditions such as greater family affiliations and parental control, stronghold of religious convictions and due regard for moral precepts in Indian society. This is not to suggest that the proportion of juvenile delinquency in India is negligible. The impact of western civilization and temptation for luxuries and pompous life has greatly disturbed the modern Indian youth. Consequently, there has been a considerable growth in crimes committed by juveniles. India like other country, also seeks to tackle the problem of juvenile delinquency on the basis of three fundamental assumptions:

• Young offenders should not be tried, they should rather be corrected;
• They should not be punished but reformed;
• Exclusion of delinquents i.e. children in conflict with law from the ambit of Court and stress on their non-penal treatment through community based social control agencies such a Juvenile Justice Board, Observation Homes, Special Homes etc.

The Indian law contains a more precise and clear-cut definition of juvenile delinquency. It provides that any violation of existing penal law of the country committed by a child under 18 years, shall be an act in conflict with law for the jurisdiction of the Juvenile Justice Board.

Juvenile Delinquency: Who’s To Blame

Before we go full speed into this topic, we might need to take a quick look at what juvenile delinquency is.

A juvenile is someone who’s considered to be young and not fully developed, and delinquency simply means misconduct, when you add these two words together, it should make sense.

Juvenile delinquency is when a young person, who’s not yet mature (mostly around the teen ages) commits a crime or misconduct that’s punishable by the law or sometimes seen in the negative light by the society.

So who do we blame when a teenager commits a crime, could it be the Parents, the Society or the child. I’ll give my views and I will be open to your thoughts.

The Parents

Train up a child in the way he will go, when he’s old, he won’t depart from it, thus says the wise book. Parents are the caretakers of their children, a school of thought says the lifestyle of a parent influences the life of a child. The parents are with the responsibility of providing their children with their physical, spiritual, emotional, educational and financial needs, and if a Parent should default in one if these, chances are the child tends to look elsewhere for them.

Parents have contributed directly and sometimes indirectly to the way of life or delinquency in the life of their wards, a lot of the children that are abused are due to the negligence of their parents. When a Parent is permissive, negligent in their duties as guardians, indulgent, affirmative enablement of misbehavior, or too authoritative in their parenting style, then the chances are that the child will seek refuge elsewhere. A lot of underage children are on the street hawking, many have restored to prostitution as a means of survival, many gets introduced into drugs, and they turn addict, many gets into robbery and all kinds of crimes. Worst of it all, many females give birth out of wedlock, on the streets with no means of survival for themselves, let alone the new born, thereby, restarting the cycle all over.

There’s need for Parents to jealously take care of their children, bring them up with love, let them see us Parents as their friends, someone they could talk to, on just any subject matter, when a child can talk to his/her parents about just anything, there’s no way that child is going astray. Especially if the Parents are attentive and caring enough to guide them rightly. Many children’s lives has been thwarted and misled due to the lackadaisical attitude of their parents.

We stand a better chance at reducing juvenile delinquency, if the parents can provide, take care and nature their children in the right way, either physically, emotionally, educationally, spiritually and otherwise.

The Society

There’s a popular saying that, you need a whole community to raise a child. This simply goes to show that the society also plays a major role in raising the children. Once the parents of a child is negligent on their duties the next place a child looks to is his/her immediately environment. Sometimes it doesn’t have to be the environment, it could be from TVs and other media devices, it can be argued that children and youths are increasingly the target for the production of video games and computer games, most of which tend to promote violence in some way. Then we have the movies and shows that are shown on our TVs. Without proper guidance from Parents, this might also play a major role in the life of a child, take for instance, a child whose parents are always absent, but with so much access to the TV, and if such child is glued to movies on scenes that tends to promote sex, and other vices, then he or she tends to see it as norms.

So the society plays a major role, in shaping a child, but it definitely can be cut down to its barest minimum if the Parents are not negligent in their duties.

The Children

A wise man once said, it doesn’t matter where you were born, what matters is who you choose to become. Been born into a dysfunctional society, or raised by Parents who are negligent should only spur us to do better as kids. For we’ve seen enough examples of what we shouldn’t become, then we can firmly make for ourselves the things we really want to be. Life gives us options, that’s why they say, if life gives you lemon, you should make lemonade.

A child can choose for him or herself to become what the society isn’t and what the Parents isn’t. If it’s possible for a good parents to raise a bad child, then it’s also possible for a bad parent to have a good child. All the child needs to do is make up his or her mind to be better. We’ve had a lit of examples of great men and women who were either born into a dysfunctional society or raised by parents who were negligent, but they still turned out great.

So in a way, it’s all up to the child to decide, if he or she wants to be great, or if he or she will rather become the bad example that the parents or the society have been or truly make greatness for him or herself.

So that’s basically my thoughts, I feel all three factors shares the blame, but if it were to be given in percentages, then the parents gets the highest, followed by the child, then the society.

What do you think? Who would you blame for a juvenile delinquent?

The Key Factors Of Juvenile Delinquency Recidivism

Abstract

In this research, Juvenile and recidivism are analyzed to show how social bonds play a key factor in the recidivism of juveniles. We will cross-tabulate Juvenile delinquency and recidivism, in hopes of it revealing delinquency, community, family and a host of other underlying elements as being reasons why juveniles are more prone to recommitting crimes after detention and from being or lack of being rehabilitated. Juveniles and recidivism should closely resemble a high rate of recidivism regarding race, class, gender, and locations dependent upon where the juveniles live. Juveniles reoffending can be based on education and schooling, by preparing youth for prison. The likelihood of juveniles reoffending will depend on prior offenses and other surrounding factors that lead juveniles to make a decision of criminality.

Introduction

According to the Department of Justice, juvenile delinquency is a repeated action of criminal offenses, that is committed by a young person under the age of 18, the crime was not committed by an adult. Along with Juvenile delinquency, Recidivism is the inclination of a convicted criminal to reoffend (2018). The likelihood of a juvenile to re-offend could be based on poverty, mental health, education and whether or not detentions rehabilitate juveniles. This research paper will show a cross-tabulation between juvenile delinquency and recidivism and how the two variables correlate with other common elements that lead to offenses by young people. The purpose of this research is to reveal, how elements can lead to juvenile delinquency, and how juvenile delinquency alone is not the only delineating factor in repetitive crimes. Being that Juveniles commit crimes when they are young, the likelihood of them reoffending is determined by our research.

Literature Review

The article “Adolescent Neglect, Juvenile Delinquency, and the Risk of Recidivism” hypothesizes the effects of adolescent neglect and its correlation between juvenile delinquency. The author poses this question: Does the neglect of adolescents lead to repeat offending in juvenile delinquency? To find the answer, the author conducted a study. The study performed contained a broad number of demographics including females, Hispanics, African Americans, and Native Americans. The data sources that were used in this study included the records of neglect from child protection services as well as the number of high-risk offenders that were screened during this specific time (Ryan, Williams, & Courtney, 2013). These data sources were used to analyze the author’s hypothesis and the individuals chosen to be a part of the study were tasked with determining the validity of the hypothesis. The measures used in this study were family, education, peers, alcohol and drugs, individual attitudes and beliefs, neglect, and recidivism. These measures were used to assess the risk factors that may or may not be associated with them. The result of this study showed that juvenile delinquents with cases of neglect that are active or pending are more susceptible to recidivism which is the result of their lack of familial support (Ryan et al, 2013). This article concludes that neglect and juvenile delinquency have a direct correlation which leads to recidivism.

The article “The Effect of Neighborhood Characteristics and Spatial Spillover on Urban Juvenile Delinquency and Recidivism” provides a theory for juvenile delinquency and recidivism by exploring the effects of neighborhood characteristics as a cause of delinquency. The author conducted a study using data that explain the neighborhoods’ socioeconomic status, collective efficacy, reports of crime in each neighborhood and data that examines spatial spillover in these neighborhoods (Mennis, Harris, Obradovic, Izenman, Grunwald & Lockwood, 2011). The measures used in this study include; crime, recidivism, juvenile delinquency, and neighborhoods. These accounts for the variables that make up the study conducted by the author. To understand the relationship between neighborhoods, delinquency, and recidivism, the authors used a method that allows the variables to work as indicators when estimating the rates of delinquency and recidivism. First, these variables were measured separately to understand the individual effects which later help gain a broad understanding of how these variables work violence and poverty tend to produce a high concentration of recidivism among juveniles. together (Mennis et al, 2011). This article concluded that neighborhoods with high rates of

The article, “Decriminalizing Delinquency: The Effect of Raising the Age of Majority on Juvenile Recidivism”, is an empirical study performed to analyze the effects that raising the juvenile age has on recidivism. Arguments for the age rise agree that the expansion results in the decrease of crime, however, opponents of this legislative change challenges this belief by arguing that it ultimately reduces deterrence. To examine these effects, the author used data that depicts recidivism in 17 year old arrestees who were affected by the law change and compares their findings to data that reflects 16 to 18 year old arrestees who were not affected by the law change. Other data consisted of 22,779 misdemeanor arrests of juveniles ranging in age from 16-18. (Loeffler & Grunwald, 2015). This study’s research design is based on prior research and studies, in which this study is an expansion. Also, this study relies on information received from prior control groups collected from other states to analyze its currently individual-level data. The measured used in this study are minors, juvenile court, recidivism, criminal arrest, and violence crimes (Loefflet et al, 2015 ). The overall conclusion from this study shows that there is no precise statistical effect that they change in legislative has on recidivism.

The article, “Community Disadvantage, Prosocial Bonds, and Juvenile Reoffending: A Multilevel Mediation Analysis”, uses the social control theory to analyze the theoretical disadvantages on juvenile behavior. This theory, among other theoretical methods, show whether prosocial bonds work as a mechanism for juvenile delinquency and its relationship to recidivism. This data for this study was comprised of 131,261 community placements from the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice (FDJJ) as well as information from the Positive Achievement Change Tool (PACT) that shows 87% of those who were placed in community placement were also using the risk and need assessment provided by PACT (Link, Ward, Stansfield, 2019). The measures used in this study are prosocial bonds, recidivism, community-based placement, and juvenile delinquency. The author designed its research and findings using a logistic method with multiple levels to understand the similarities between youth living within the same community. Also, this method shows the differences in individual recidivism based on certain characteristics (Link et al, 2019). The sample for this study included 20,000 juvenile offenders and the author found that prosocial relationships and activities directly affect the disadvantages perpetuated by juvenile recidivism (Link et al, 2019)

The article, “Predicting Recidivism for Released State Prison Offenders: Examining the Influence of Individual and Neighborhood Characteristics and Spatial Contagion on the Likelihood of Reincarceration” examines the correlation between offenders’ neighborhood characteristics and recidivism. The sample size included 5,354 state prisoners released from a Pennsylvania prison. The measures used in this study are neighborhood characteristics, reincarceration, drug involvement, and offense type. The author concluded that drugs, violence, and certain neighborhood characteristics are some of the direct risk factors of recidivism (Stahler, Mennis, Belenko, Welsh, Hiller & Zajac, 2013). It is important to understand how one’s environment and community influence their chances of initial incarceration and reincarceration.

Theoretical Framework

Hypothesis

Question: Does the Environment/Community participate in the recidivism of juvenile delinquency? If we know why juveniles are recommitting crimes then why don’t we take the appropriate steps to prevent it, by looking at all contributing factors?

Theory

While understanding that recidivism is a problem within the community and in society, prior components inclines to why a juvenile commits a crime or not, social bond theory is an individual’s viewpoint on society, these social bonds are weakened or broken resulting in attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief, it is the reason why juveniles are more prone to engage in criminal activity and what components contribute to the criminal activity. Finding factors are; family, school and education, social class, Communities in which the juvenile lives, workplace, society and mental health (competency). According to Intravia and Hirschi In his seminal work ‘‘Causes of Delinquency,’’ Hirschi argued that delinquency is more likely to occur when an individual’s bond to society is weak or broken. Specifically, the more strongly adolescents are bonded to the prosocial elements of society—which include attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief—the more inhibited they will be from engaging in delinquent acts (Intravia, 2019).

Independent/Dependent Variables

While researching Juvenile Delinquency and Recidivism, it is important to understand the different variables that are measured throughout the study. Many independent variables that affect the outcome of juvenile delinquency and repeat offending, including socioeconomic status, education background, familial relationships, and substance abuse. These variables will be used to analyze the role that an individual’s environment and community play in juvenile recidivism. This coincides with the aforementioned social bond theory and will work as the basis for the research conducted throughout this paper.

The Null Hypothesis would be that Juvenile delinquency and recidivism do not correlate with one another. Ensuring that elements such as social class, poverty, financial barriers, gender, juveniles prior are null factors in determining why juveniles are reoffending, even though this is the null hypothesis and will be ruled out, this factor shows a possible measurable effect of both variables that do not show a measurable correlation. It will be measured based upon the hypothesis relating that community and environment playing a key role in the recidivism of juveniles. An Alternative hypothesis is the impact or non-impact of corrective response on juvenile delinquency that will contribute to their recidivism.

Our alternative hypothesis is the impact or non-impact of corrective response on Juvenile delinquency that will contribute to their recidivism. According to J.P Bouveland the Impact of Corrective Response on Juvenile Recidivism, the study within this research separated males and females from 2 different decades and years. This study was a sociological study of young persons. The research measured males and females from 1985 and males and females from 1996. In both decades it indicated that both men and women are disproportionately represented, regarding age. It also stated that recidivism between men and women in 1985 is 63.5% more likely to reoffend and the numbers were almost the same between both genders, although women’s recidivism rate is lower. In 1996 women remained the same but men were significantly higher than women with by 62.2 %. Although its lower than 10 years prior, it remains higher than women.

Data Analysis

Research Strategy

This research requires us to implement the research question “Does the environment or community participate in the recidivism of juvenile delinquency?” into a strategy. In this research, we used secondary data to compare, confirm or deny our findings. Data was collected from a standardized data collection of 38,624 cases within 3 years from 15 prison states in 1994 (1994-1997) including North Carolina. This study was conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics. It is the first study of recidivism amongst released prisoners. Prisoners were released in 1994. This research also implemented; race, class, sex, age, crime, and the time of the crime, to figure out why offenders re-offend.

The chart above gives an approximate percentage of prisoners that reoffend in the month or year(s) span of the study from 1994 to 1997. Based on the information referenced from the Bureau of Justice Statistics, race, age, sex, class, and numerous others are elements that affect offender. Formerly incarcerated offenders are subjected to elements or factors that contribute to the recidivism of prisoners. Although this research was based upon adults that were between the ages of 20 and 35, this study is compared to juveniles, because the adults could be the parents to the young offenders. The reoffenses of a young individual are based on their environment in which they live, age sex, education are all contributing factors to the recidivism of a young person. Just as easily as an adult is to re-offend based on their environment, their children can easily be subjected to the criminality of that environment as well. The social bonds are weakened due to the environment in which the juvenile or adult may live.

Sampling Strategy

The data chosen for this research paper was a study done by Lin Jeffrey about the impact of recidivism of juvenile delinquency. The sample used within this data set was collected by the Family Court systems in each of the five boroughs of New York State. The units were observed on an individual basis and the examination of this data occurred during April, Mary, and June of 2000. According to the Data Completeness Report provided by the study “Impact of Institutional Placement on the Recidivism of Delinquent Youth in New York City”, there was a total of 837 juvenile cases that had been identified during this data collection, however, only 736 of these cases had files that were located (Lin, 2009). Out of these 736 located cases, there were 38 cases with incarceration rates that did not correspond with the information observed from the other examined cases. Therefore, these cases were excluded and the final dataset had a total of 638 cases (Lin, 2009).

Data Collection Strategy

The primary data used to analyze Juvenile Delinquency and Recidivism in this research paper comes from a study done by Jeffrey Lin of New York University called “Impact of Institutional Placement on the Recidivism of Delinquent Youth in New York City”. The main sources of information used for this dataset include Probation Investigation and Recommendation reports, Probation Intake reports, Mental Health reports, school records, court records, and New York Police Department arrest records.

The data collection instrument used in this case study was a questionnaire survey. This questionnaire included initial intake information, current offense information, legal history, current/most recent family environment, past family environment, school, community and peer relationships, health concerns, level of responsibility, and post-arrest change in attitude/behavior (Lin, 2009). Each section of this questionnaire represents the variables of the study and when analyzed they will further explain the relationship between juvenile delinquency and recidivism. The table below shows the Data Completeness Report collected from the data set. This table includes information about the missing variable reported in the data set.

Findings

The conclusion of this dataset analysis shows that the most vital variables surrounding the relationship between juvenile delinquency and recidivism are family/peer interaction and conflict, participation in school, work and activities as well as their aspirational values (Lin, 2009). Whether juveniles repeatedly offend depends on how positive or negative these variables influence them. The main finding of this data is that placement does not seem to have a significant impact on recidivism. By placement, the author means that the child is taken away from their parents or legal guardian and sent to a “placement home”. This dataset showed that variables such as socio-economic environment and familial and peer influences have a greater effect on the relationship between juvenile delinquency and recidivism.

Conclusion

After analyzing our data set, we found that several variables impact juvenile delinquency. How each of these variables affects the individual child results in whether or not they will re-enter the criminal justice system. To prevent juvenile recidivism, we have to understand how one’s social bonds can affect their criminal behavior and criminal minds. Throughout the research process, we found that we were able to support our hypothesis which says that the environment and community participate in the recidivism of juvenile delinquency. Future researchers can use this present research to help support and answer our secondary question which asked, “if we know why juveniles are recommitting crimes then why don’t we take the appropriate steps to prevent it, by looking at all contributing factors”? We conclude that juvenile delinquency is significantly affected by recidivism and our social bonds are factors that strengthen this relationship.

Family Dynamics Affecting Juvenile Delinquency

Abstract

This criminal justice research paper is an analysis of the family dynamics affecting juvenile delinquency. This paper will analyze the most pressing problems facing teenagers today. It will show the correlation of traditional opposite sex parents and non-traditional same-sex parents and what role or influence it has on or in the lives of adolescents. The difference between child abuse and child discipline will be examined and how it affects juvenile delinquency. A Biblical worldview will be encompassed into and contained into the examination of the family dynamics affecting juvenile delinquency. References will be given in this paper to fully support the assertions made concerning the family dynamics affecting juvenile delinquency.

Introduction

This research paper will establish that there is overwhelming evidence that family dynamics affect and or contribute to juvenile delinquency. It will inform society that the most pressing problems facing teenagers today is separation, divorce and or blended families. This research paper will analyze the effects of traditional and non-traditional parents associated with the development of juveniles. It will educate on the differences between child abuse and child discipline and how they positively and negatively affect the development of youth. Many sources conclude that family dynamics affect juvenile delinquency and there is overwhelming evidence that it contributes to juvenile delinquency.

Separation, Divorce and Blended Families

The most pressing problems facing teenagers today is parental separation and divorce. “Family dissolution has become a common occurrence in the United States” (Siegel & Welsh, 2017). This is the most significant problem because the structure and dynamics of the family have changed over time. “The divorce rates in America are at an all-time high, and “about 40 to 50 percent of married couples in the United States divorce” (American Psychological Association, 2005). There has been an increase in mothers and fathers who are raising children by themselves with no help and are co-parenting children in separate homes. The increase in blended families is becoming a common practice as well.

According to the American Psychological Association (2005), subsequent marriage divorce rates are even higher than those of first-time marriages. Studies suggest an increase of men in women having children out of wedlock and many families who are now living in cohabitation together. Fox (2014), contends that over the last 50 years that cohabitation has increased by nearly 900 percent. It is imperative for children to be raised in homes consisting of men and women who are married to each other. The American Psychological Association (2005) says that healthy marriages are good for the mental and physical health of couples as well as for children who grow up in a happy home, because it helps to protect them from mental, physical, educational and social problems.

Parents today are often raising a society of entitled children that have no respect for their parents, themselves, and or society due to the erosion of the traditional family and marriage values. Due to the changes of traditional families and marriages, often parents are not raising their children anymore, the children are raising their parents as we see younger and younger teenagers are having children out of wedlock. There is a correlation with juveniles having no family structure, guidance and or support at home from their parents and the development of juvenile delinquency. “All too often children in the United States spend their early lives in homes racked by tension and conflict, absentee parents, separation, and divorce” (Siegel & Welsh, 2017

Parental separation and divorce are contributors to juvenile delinquency due to no stability in the home and the lack of discipline due to single parents raising children on their own and are often absent in the home due to having to work to provide for their children. This often consists of teenagers being left alone at home while their parents or parent goes to work, which often contributes to a lack of discipline and leaves the teenager vulnerable to outside influences, and to experimentation that may ultimately lead to juvenile delinquency. This is not to say; however, that a juvenile that has parents that have separated and or divorced or those living in blended families will turn out to be a juvenile delinquent; however, these are factors that play a role and or contribute to such.

Traditional vs. Non-Traditional Parents. The family, marriage and traditions of the Biblical requirements of the family has transitioned and or evolved overtime into different dynamics altogether. Marriage was once thought of in society as a holy covenant ordained by God to create what is known as family; however, over time this has shifted and or changed significantly. A traditional marriage monogamous relationship consisting of one man and one woman is the most widely accepted type of marriage and or family today. Many suggest that stern discipline and guidance of a father along with the loving and nourishing nature of a mother is needed in the lives of children to incorporate a balanced parenting style. Overtime there has been a shift in traditional marriages and people have often leaned on their own understanding and or reasoning of what they thought made up or consisted of a family and marriage, without adhering to or considering the Biblical values, beliefs and or traditions of a traditional marriage within the family dynamic. A major shift in the traditional family structure consisting of one man and one woman married to each other changed drastically in the landmark civil rights case of Obergefell V. Hodges.

Obergefell V. Hodges, the United States Supreme Court Case that ruled that same-sex couples have a right to be married to each other just as opposite-sex couples do. It established the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples also. The cited and or references given for this ruling were the due process clause and the equal protection clause to the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. This decision defiled the very word of God in every sense and the basic sanctity of marriage. With the increase in Lesbian, Gay, Bi-Sexual, and Transgender (LGBT) movements in America there is starting to be an increase in same-sex couples getting married to each other. Same-sex married couples is becoming the new norm with them co-parenting children.

These movements seem to be gaining popularity; however, it remains a sin and is not right in God’s eye and or according to his word. There has become a shift to same-sex parents parenting children either through adoption or through other methods, which eventually leaves children confused, because they may not understand why they have two mothers or two fathers that are married or in a relationship being their parents as this was once unheard of. According to Coontz (2007), these changes enabled same-sex couple to come out of the closet. It is not uncommon to see two men or two women in a married homosexual relationship parenting children now, which changed the entire dynamics of the family when they could be married as opposite-sex couples were and adopt children and or have children. This essentially desecrates the sacrament by going against the word of God as it relates to traditional marriage. We must ensure the purity of family and marriage is upheld in the tradition sense as designed by our God and make sure that we are not promoting and or advocating for sin when trying to be inclusive of all in civil rights.

The Differences between Child Abuse and Discipline. Often individuals, entity’s, and or movements seem to be unable to fathom and or comprehend the difference between what constitutes child abuse and what encompasses child discipline. Mynyo (2015), contend that of the social challenges worldwide that juvenile delinquency is at the forefront. It is critical that parents of children use acceptable forms of discipline as a way of modifying unacceptable behavior to correct juvenile behavior. “It includes both discipline and supervision from childhood to adulthood with the purpose of promoting and preventing certain behaviors in the children” (Ibabe & Bentler, 2015). The differences between child abuse and child discipline are definite and clear. Child abuse is inflicting harm onto a child using intentional physical means.

Child abuse may often start out as an acceptable form of discipline that cross the line into unacceptable physical harm. “The delicate intersection between childhood and criminality creates a complex dilemma to solve” (Mynyo, 2015). The effects of child abuse can range from physical, emotional and or psychological to name a few. Throughout the nation enacted legislation varying among different sates, counties and towns, which frowns upon parents disciplining their children, and not being inclusive of acceptable forms of biblical discipline. Child discipline is also referred to as corporal punishment. “Corporal punishment remains a common child rearing practice in the United States” (Gershoff and Bitensky, 2007).

It is defined “as the use of physical force, no matter how light, with the intention of causing the child to experience bodily pain so as to correct or punish the child’s behavior” (Gershoff and Bitensky, 2007). Discipline of children is considered a sign of love from parents toward children, that they care enough about them and love them to punish them when they do wrong to steer them in the right direction. This helps create a balance of acceptable healthy corporal punishment within the home. “Spanking represents the most common form of corporal punishment that can range in severity (e.g., beating, whipping, shaking, shoving, scolding, etc.) by parent” (King et al., 2018). “Parents use corporal punishment primarily to reduce undesirable child behavior in the present and to increase desirable child behavior in the future” (Gershoff and Bitensky, 2007). “Despite the various efforts against the use of child CP, it remains a common disciplinary strategy in North American homes” (Fréchette, Zoratti, & Romano, 2015). “At its most basic, the association of a negative stimulus with a behavior should make the behavior less likely in the future” (Gershoff and Bitensky, 2007).

A Biblical Worldview. The Bible gives guidance, instruction and defines what constitutes a traditional holy marriage. The Bible describes and defines marriage as a Holy Covenant before God. “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh” (Genesis 2:24, KJV). A man is to leave his father and mother and shall become one flesh with his wife when they are joined in marriage. Traditional marriage consists of one man and one woman being married to each other. The Bible instructs that homosexuality is a sin. “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination” (Leviticus 18:22, KJV). The Bible gives insight into adulty and divorce.

“And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery” (Matthew 19:9, KJV). The Bible offers instruction and guidance to parents on how they should raise their children. “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it” (Proverbs 22:6, KJV). How parents are to dsicpline their children are found in the scriptures. “He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes” (Proverbs 13:24, KJV). God gives specific instruction on how parents are to raise, love and provide for their children in accordance with the Word of God through the scriptures. “And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord” (Ephesians 6:4, KJV).

Conclusion. There is overwhelming evidence that family dynamics affect juvenile delinquency. That the most pressing problems facing teenagers today is separation, divorce and or blended families, traditional vs. non-traditional families, the differences between child abuse and child discipline with a Biblical Worldview incorporated herein

References

1. All About Parenting. (2005). Child Abuse vs. Discipline. Retrieved from https://www.allaboutparenting.org/child-abuse-vs-discipline-faq.htm
2. American Psychological Association. (2005). Marriage and Divorce. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/topics/divorce/
3. Bible Gateway. (2005). Bible Gateway passage: Proverbs 13:24 – King James Version. Retrieved from https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs+13%3A24&version=KJV
4. Bible Gateway. (2009). Bible Gateway passage: Ephesians 6:4 – King James Version. Retrieved from https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Esphesians+6%3A4&version=KJ
5. Bible Gateway. (2009). Bible Gateway passage: Leviticus 18:22 – King James Version. Retrieved from https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus+18%3A22&version=KJ
6. Bible Gateway. (2010). Bible Gateway passage: Proverbs 22:6 – King James Version. Retrieved from https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs+22%3A6&version=KJV
7. Bible Gateway. (n.d.). Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 2:24 – King James Version. Retrieved from https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+2%3A24&version=KJV
8. Bible Gateway. (n.d.). Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 19:9 – King James Version. Retrieved from https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+19%3A9&version=KJV
9. Coontz, S. (2007). The Family Revolution. Greater Good Magazine. Berkeley, CA: The Greater Good Science Center at the University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved from https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/the_family_revolution
10. Fox, L. (2014). The Science of Cohabitation: A Step Toward Marriage, Not a Rebellion. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/03/the-science-of-cohabitation-a-step-toward-marriage-not-a-rebellion/284512/
11. Fréchette, S., Zoratti, M., & Romano, E. (2015). What Is the Link Between Corporal Punishment and Child Physical Abuse? Journal of Family Violence, 30(2), 135-148. doi:10.1007/s10896-014-9663-9
12. Gershoff, E. T., & Bitensky, S. H. (2007). The case against corporal punishment of children: Converging evidence from social science research and international human rights law and implications for U.S. public policy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 13(4), 231-272. doi:10.1037/1076-8971.13.4.231
13. Ibabe, I., & Bentler, P. M. (2015). The Contribution of Family Relationships to Child-to-Parent Violence. Journal of Family Violence, 31(2), 259-269. doi:10.1007/s10896-015-9764-0
14. King, A. R., Ratzak, A., Ballantyne, S., Knutson, S., Russell, T. D., Pogalz, C. R., & Breen, C. M. (2018). Differentiating corporal punishment from physical abuse in the prediction of lifetime aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 44(3), 306-315. doi:10.1002/ab.21753
15. Munyo, I. (2015). The juvenile crime dilemma. Review of Economic Dynamics, 18(2), 201-211. doi:10.1016/j.red.2014.03.004
16. Siegel, L. J., & Welsh, B. C. (2017). Juvenile Delinquency: The Core (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning. Retrieved from https://ng.cengage.com/static/nb/ui/evo/index.html?deploymentId=50355617219707025676882605&eISBN=9781305640368&id=440877057&nbId=1086754&snapshotId=1086754

Juvenile Delinquency in United States: Ways To Reduce

Abstract

What can we do reduce juvenile delinquency in the United States?

Juvenile delinquency can be reduced in the United States. By 2015 in the United States there were about 3,000 minors sentenced to life imprisonment without any possibility of obtaining probation. Approximately 2,500 inmates served the same type of sentence, but were convicted when they were still minors. In addition, it was estimated that 10,000 children were confined in adult prisons, as 13-year-old children were tried as adults and sentenced to die in jail without regard to their ages or the circumstances of the crime they committed. Due to the interventions of pro-young entities and many people who opposed such a radical and excessive treatment, both the institutions and the government were taking action to reduce juvenile delinquency less severely. The United States is the only country in the world that has not ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Generally speaking, American children’s rights are adequately protected, but considerable problems still exist regarding health care, child abuse, juvenile law, etc. The law on the rights of minors exists to save children from their well-being and their individual rights. The law was created to defend and rehabilitate both physical and emotional abuse they have received while they were on a toxic environment, but there is also the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) that protects working children. This problem can be reduced with several solutions, such as psychological or other treatments, there are also different methods of effectiveness for early education programs and the way in which abused youth can get out of the issue of abuse.

The first juvenile system was established in 1899 in Illinois and which led to the creation of the first child and adolescent psychotherapy in 1909 in Chicago. Within the psychotherapy clinics multiple studies and treatments are done so that the offender can go out to society as a better person. According to a study of nearly 2,000 juvenile offenders were interviewed and they evaluated about 3 years after being detained at the Cook County Temporary Juvenile Detention Center. These are the categories in which they were interviewed: home, work, school, community, behavior, mood, self-injurious behavior, drug use and thinking to know in which category they are most affected and can work on that. The result given by the participants after the interview they conducted indicated that almost 30% of juvenile offenders have severe or severe disability in all domains. Almost all participants had severe impairments in at least one domain.

When they are less than 14 years old and enter the restorative justice, they tend to be more successful in the treatment and will make them better human beings. On the contrary, when criminals are more aggressive and more negative, they will not have much success in the future. Bergseth Bouffard says: “restorative justice is better than detention”.

Stop Now, Act Later (SNAP)

A study of children between the ages of 6 and 11 in Ontario, Canada conducted a program that lasted 12 weeks and had two components.

1. Transformer Club – Help participants through the group therapy process, identifying their bad behavior to help and control anger.
2. SNAP – Group therapy for parents.

At the end of the program, the evaluative interviews conducted with each family revealed an improvement in anger management and social skills among the participants themselves. It is important to keep in mind that this study had a very high dropout rate, only 37% were until the end.

Scared Straight (Assisted Law)

Unlike the other programs, they strive to prevent the recurrence of crime through therapy and parental support. Scared Straight tries to change the mind of young people from the initial delinquent behavior by exposing them to the harsh realities of life as a prisoner. In a methodology of youth literature, he concluded that nature’s programs do not successfully prevent future crime.

The evidence shows that over the past three decades there has been extensive research to show that establishing MTS (Multisystemic Therapy) for juvenile offenders, keeping them in the community with intensive intervention, significantly reduces recidivism. According to a study to Borduin 4 years after juvenile offenders were treated with MST or with an individual therapy plan, participants had a 22% recidivism rate. In individual therapy group it was 71.4%. MTS had a reduced recidivism rate of 46% compared to the control crime group. MST is an intensive therapy program which focuses on numerous aspects of the delinquent’s life, family, school, social and any other unique factors which may relate to the individual delinquent’s behaviors. MST focuses on prosocial activity and less association with deviant peers. It has been implemented and researched in dozens of research trials and case studies, and repeatedly received significant ratings in both effectiveness and efficacy.

Tights suggests in his study that one of the main goals of MST is to decrease the juvenile delinquent’s association with other delinquent youths, while facilitating familial support through communication and guided problem solving. Both family members and delinquents reported a decrease in delinquent behavior, improved familial relationships, and an increased interest and understanding of the delinquent’s role in creating their own future, and taking responsibility for their actions. Despite these positive results from MST research, it has proven difficult to implement it as a treatment plan into standard practice and policy today due to comparative ease of other methods, potential higher initial cost, increase of commitment on state and individual levels and failure to see future community gains.

A meta-analysis update on the effectiveness

Whether termed self-control, impulse, or temperament persons who lack impulse control are at risk for a wile range of problem behaviors and outcomes thought out the life course, including poor educational outcomes, relationship quality, employment prospects, health, and especially involvement in deviant, antisocial, and criminal activity (Moffitt 2011)

Also, these programs aim to prove the decision-making styles of person such that places less emphasis on immediate gratification and more emphasis on the long-term consequences of their behavior

Methods

Studies that investigated the effects of self-control improvement programs on child behavior problems such as conduct problems, antisocial behavior, and delinquency were included. Piquero (2009-2010) studies were only includes if they had a randomized controlled trial design with post-test measures of self-control and/or child behavior problem for the experimental and control participants. The preliminary eligibility criteria were as follows:

1. Types of studies: randomized controlled experimental designs
2. Types of participants: child aged 10 years and under or the mean age of the sample was no greater than age 10 years at the beginning of the intervention studies with mentally and lord physically handicapped subjects were excluded
3. Types of intervention: self-control improvement was a major component of the intervention
4. Types of outcomes: inclusion of at least one child-based outcomes measure of general problem behaviors, including antisocial behavior and delinquency
5. Sufficient data: availability of adequate post-test data for calculating an effect size if one was not provided (means and standard deviations, t-test, F-tests, p-value, etc)
6. No times frame restrictions
7. No geographic restrictions
8. Published and unpublished report were included
9. Qualitative studies were not included
10. Studies need to be available in English

Adopting their exact same meta-analytic methods, the intention of the current study was:

1. To build upon these earlier results by updating the search of relevant studies through September 2015
2. To incorporate these newly identified studies into Piquero

As such, the current study offers the most up-to-rate meta-analysis that exist evaluating the effectiveness of self-control improvement programs initiated before the age of 10 years on improving self-control and/or reducing delinquency. Is a summary of the due process rights that do and do not apply to juveniles in delinquency proceedings. Some of these rights derive from U.S. Supreme Court cases and therefore apply to all states, while other rights vary by state. Probable cause needed to search a minor. Right to a phone call. No right to bail. The right to counsel. The right to notice of the charges. The right to confront and cross-examine witnesses. The privilege against self-incrimination. No (or limited) right to a jury trial.

The right to have charges proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

References

1. Haugaard, J. J., & Feerick , M. (2002). Intervenetions for MAltreated Children to Reduce Their Likelihood of Engaging in Juvenile Delinquency . Children’s Service: Social Policy,vResearch & Practice, 5(4), 285-297. doi:http//doi-org.lihrarylogin.suagm.edu/10.1207/S15326918CS0504_5
2. Legal Resources. (1996). Retrieved October 11, 2019, from HG.ORG: https://www.hg.org/children-rights.html
3. Legal Resources. (1996). Retrieved October 11, 2019, from HG.:ORG : https://www.hg.org/juvenile-crime-law.html
4. May, J., Osmond, K., & Billick, S. (2014). Juvenile delinquency treatment and prevention: A literature review. Psychiatic Quarterly, 85(3), 295-301. doi:http://doi.org.librarylogin.suagm.edu:84/10.1007/s11126-014-9296
5. Michon, K. (2019). Constitutional Rights in Juvenile Cases. Retrieved November 5, 2019, from Nolo: https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/constitutional-rights-juvenile-proceedings-32224.html
6. Piquero, A. R., Jennings, ,. W., Farrington, D. P., Diamond, B., & Reingle Gonzalez, J. M. (2016). A meta-analysis update on the effectiveness of early self-controlimprovement programs to improve self-control and reduce delinquency. Journal of Expermental Criminology, 12(2), 249-264. doi:http://doi.org.librarylogin.suagm.edu:84/10.1007/s111292-016-9257-z

Factors Affecting Juvenile Delinquency

Abstract

Juvenile Delinquency has been an ongoing phenomenon for years and will unfortunately continue in future years to come. Biosocial theory, social structure theory, and Hirschi’s social bond theory are just a few of many theories that help to explain how and why juveniles engage in delinquent behavior. These theories go in depth on factors that can and cannot be changed once it affects a child’s life and body. Juveniles are still so young and have the chance to change and grow from their mistakes, it’s just a matter of if they’re willing to put in the effort. Unfortunately for most juvenile, they will have lived through at least one the factors and elements listed if not all.

Factors Affecting Juvenile Delinquency

The biosocial theory holds that instead of viewing criminal behavior as controlled by conditions at birth, biochemists believe other factors such as environmental, physical, and social conditions work together to produce human behavior. Some trait theorists believe that biochemicals acquired through diet and environment, and those that are genetically predetermined influence antisocial behaviors. Exposure to harmful chemicals and poor diet while in utero and beyond can cause long lasting effects on offspring over their whole life course. Biochemical factors related to criminality include exposure to smoking and drinking, exposure to chemicals and minerals, diet, sugar intake, glucose metabolism/hypoglycemia, and hormones.

Maternal alcohol abuse and/or smoking consumption during pregnancy have been linked to prenatal damage and antisocial behaviors in adolescents for many years. “Exposure to smoke has been associated with increased psychopathology in offspring, and that exposure to secondhand cigarette smoke during pregnancy predicts later conduct disorder” (Siegel, 2018, p. 144). Smoking parents have a greater effect on behavior compared to other influences. These factors include low birth rate, prematurity, and poor parenting practices. Research has shown people who start drinking by the age of fourteen are more likely to become alcoholics than those who hold off until the age of twenty-one. There is a good possibility that early brain exposure to alcohol may short-circuit brain cells causing destruction towards learning and memory processes that protect from addiction. Adolescent drinking has a major harmful influence on behavior.

Research shows than an over or under supply of certain chemicals can lead to depression, mania, memory loss, cognitive problems, and abnormal sexual activity. These chemicals include sodium, mercury, potassium, calcium, amino acids, peptides, and monoamines. Commonly used medications such as Viagra have detrimental side effects such as aggression and violent behavior. Excessive intake of certain chemicals such as mercury, iron, and manganese may have a link to neurological dysfunctional problems such as intellectual impairment and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). These neurological conditions are believed to be an influence on delinquent and criminal behaviors.

Biocriminologists believe there is a link between poor nutrition and aggressive, violent, and amoral people. They have a belief that violence would be reduced if diets would be improved. Research shows that excessive amount of harmful substances such as caffeine, food dyes, and artificial flavors increase chances of hostile and antisocial behaviors. “…the basic problem in the offender is more than likely to be a malfunctioning brain, which is aggravated by influences such as lack of nutrients, elements in their diet, toxins in the environment or studying difficulties” (Williamson & Meyer).

An experiment had been conducted where children’s diets were altered so sweet drinks and table sugar were replaced with fruit juices, honey, and molasses. The resulted indicated that sugar intake is associated with aggression. However, a recent study by Nathan DeWall and his associates found that some sugar intake may help to reduce aggression. “They found that people who drank a glass of lemonade sweetened with sugar acted less aggressively a few minutes later than did people who consumed lemonade with a sugar substitute” (Siegel, 2018, p. 145). The sugary drink provided short-term energy rather than the energy to lash out at people. People who have trouble metabolizing and/or using glucose in their body show more evidence of aggression.

“Hypoglycemia is a condition caused by a very low level of blood sugar (glucose), your body’s main energy source” (Mayo Clinic, 2019). The brain is the only organ that obtains energy from carbohydrates. When the brain is deprived of blood sugar, it has no other food supply to rely on. This then causes the brain metabolism to slow down and the brain starts to malfunction. Symptoms of hypoglycemia include irritability, anxiety, depression, headaches, and confusion. Research studies have linked hypoglycemia to outburst of antisocial and violent behaviors.

Criminologist James Q. Wilson claims that hormones, enzymes, and neurotransmitters may be the key to human behavior and the differences between genders and crime rates. He stated that males are biologically and naturally more aggressive than females who are more nurturing due to the fact that they are the ones who bear children and raise them. Levels of testosterone decline the life cycle and may help to explain why violence rates decrease over time. This helps to explain the aging-out process. Theorists are now finding that abnormal levels of the male sex hormones (androgens) produce aggressive behavior. Females who have high levels of testosterone or are exposed to it in utero may become aggressive during adolescence.

The social structure theory is separated into three parts: social disorganization theory, strain theory, and cultural deviance theory. These theories suggest that social and economic forces operating in lower-class disorganized areas are the key to delinquent and criminal behavior patterns. For adolescents, social factors can have a huge effect on how they behave and view social norms. These factors will influence their behavior and have a long-lasting effect on their beliefs and behaviors.

Social disorganization theory focuses in on urban environmental conditions that affect crime rates. Certain areas are considered disorganized if social control elements such as family, commercial establishments, health care, and schools are broken down and can no longer function expectedly. Indicators of social disorganization include high unemployment rates, school dropout rates, deteriorated housing, large numbers of single-parent households, and low-income levels. Residents living in these areas are more likely to experience conflict. Once these residents become aware of how much their environment is becoming unstable, they want to escape when they get the chance. This leads to everyone no longer caring for their community which can then cause street problems such as littering, crime, and house deterioration. Normal levels of self control such as family, neighbors, school, businesses, church, law enforcement, and social service agencies become weak, disorganized, and ineffective. Resident turnover becomes an issue and weakens economic expectations. Once social institutions and structures become deteriorated, law-violating youth groups and gangs take over the streets and neighborhoods. Boys and girls become detached from good social expectations making them become very vulnerable. This can lead to them joining gangs and becoming members. Crime and violence eventually take over and spread in surrounding areas.

“According to Agnew (1992) “Strain theory is distinguished from social control and social learning theory in its specification of (1) the type of social relationship that leads to delinquency and (2) the motivation for delinquency” (Friel, 2019). Individuals who live in lower-class settings are more likely to experience strain through feeling anger, frustration, and resentment because they are unable to achieve success. This type of behavior can cause individuals to go two ways. They either find the motive to move out of the environment they live in and into a better one and strive to become successful, or they stay in their toxic environment and find their way of achievement through criminal acts such as robbery, violence, and trafficking. Criminals who choose this pathway may find crime to be their escape route making them feel proud and as if committing crimes is successful to them.

Cultural deviance theory combines the elements of both social disorganization and strain. It suggests that cultural norms of lower-class societies are likely to cause crime and cause an interference with social norms. Criminal actions are generally the norm for these lower-class individuals and it continues to be passed down from each generation. In the early 1900s, researchers Clifford Shaw and Henry Mckay studied crime patterns in Chicago. During this time, they found that crime rates were at their worst in the middle of the city. Crime rates gradually decreased from the city as one moved further out into the suburbs where wealthier individuals were located. They were able to connect the fact that new and poor immigrants were the main cause of crime in the city. They concluded that race and ethnicity correlates to socioeconomic status and results to a higher crime rate.

Hirschi connects criminality to the weaknesses of individual ties that bind people to society. He believes that every single individual can be a law-violator, it is just the matter of how much they are kept under control and their beliefs. “Hirschi argues that the social bond a person maintains with society is divided into four main elements: attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief” (Siegel, 2018, p. 250).

Attachment is an individual’s way to become interested in one another and form sensitivity. Psychologists believe that without a sense of attachment, individuals are ore likely to become psychopaths and lose the ability to connect physically and emotionally with other individuals. The development of social bonding and social norms depend on attachment and the caring of other human beings. When attached to another human being, individuals learn to be inconsiderate, loving, and receive the same behavior in return. This helps individuals understand social behaviors that prevent self-focus and self-interest. Once attached to other people, individuals specialize certain values and learn not to jeopardize any relationship. Hirschi claims parents, peers, and schools are the most important social institutions in one’s life, especially parents. “Age of the participants moderated the link between attachment and delinquency: larger effect sizes were found in younger than in older participants” (Hoeve, Stams, van der Put, Dubas, van der Laan & Gerris, 2012).

Commitment means putting in the time in effort into a certain action. This includes going to work and/or school every day, saving money, and maintaining a good flow to a certain schedule. If individuals are able to build a strong commitment to society, they will be less likely to engage in criminal behavior and/or anything that has a chance of jeopardizing their hard-earned accomplishments. For example, kids who drink and engage in any deviant behavior are more likely to drop out of school and not be as committed.

Involvement in any activity or event leaves for no time to commit crimes and be involved in any deviant behaviors. “When people become involved in school, recreation, and family, Hirschi believes, it insulates them from the potential lure of criminal behavior, whereas idleness enhances it” (Siegel, 2018, p. 251).

People living in the same social settings are more likely to have the same moral beliefs. Sharing beliefs means valuing each other, finding trust, and admiring one another. If these beliefs are absent at all, individuals are more likely to disconnect from everyone and become antisocial from the rest of society.

When reading about biosocial theory, social structure theory, and Hirschi’s social bond theory, the theory that stuck out to me the most relating to juvenile delinquency was Hirschi’s social bond theory. I agree with him that any human has the potential to become a criminal if the four elements of the theory; attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief are not met properly. Going along with juvenile delinquency, it is very important for children to understand and meet the standards for these four elements. If not, they are most likely going to become antisocial and take action in delinquent behaviors. However, children should not be the only ones responsible for meeting these goals. Parents play a huge role in making sure their children are behaving properly and they should be making sure both them and their children are meeting each of the four elements in a strong way. I think the social bond theory helps support juvenile delinquency because of how the four elements have a life time lasting effect from an early age.

With biosocial theory, although a few of these factors are unchangeable, medication can help to reduce some of these factors. Social structure theory gives a strong point on how children can be very vulnerable in lower-class settings but they always have the potential and chance of moving away and living in a better environment with a new start, it’s just a matter of if they’re able to reach that goal. With social bond theory however, these factors can not be changed much once they set in at an early age. Every human being is able to change the way they are and act but certain factors can never be changed. Once children become deprived of these important factors, there is no going back. They will be affected for the rest of their life.

References

1. Siegel, L. J. (2018). Criminology: theories, patterns and typologies. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
2. Williamson, Meyer, G. D. J. (n.d.). The Link Between Diet and Crime. Retrieved December 7, 2019, from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/35b1/b03ae97f462d67b2305ef91523fe72d658b4.pdf.
3. Hypoglycemia. (2018, September 7). Retrieved December 7, 2019, from https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/hypoglycemia/symptoms-causes/syc 20373685.
4. Friel, J. D. (2019). An Examination of Robert Agnew’s General Strain Theory. Retrieved December 7, 2019, from https://faculty.wcu.edu/studentanthology/writing-across western/criminology-and-criminal-justice/47-2/.
5. Libretexts. (2019, July 2). 7.3: Theoretical Perspectives on Deviance. Retrieved from https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Sociology/Book:_Introductory_Sociology_( penStax)/07:_Deviance,_Crime,_and_Social_Control/7.03:_Theoretical_Perspectives_o _Deviance.
6. Hoeve, M., Stams, G. J. J. M., van der Put, C. E., Dubas, J. S., van der Laan, P. H., & Gerris, J. R. M. (2012, July). A meta-analysis of attachment to parents and delinquency. Retrieved December 7, 2019, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3375078/.
7. Ministry of Children and Youth Services, Communications and Marketing Branch. (2016, January 5). Ministry of Children and Youth Services. Retrieved December 7, 2019, from http://www.children.gov.on.ca/htdocs/English/professionals/oyap/roots/volume5/chapter 1_biosocial_theory.aspx.

Juvenile Delinquency: Programs and Impacts

Juvenile delinquency has always been considered as a psychological problem rather than a legal challenge which it particularly is. The question though remains, how can it be solved? Juvenile delinquency also known as “juvenile offending” is the situation where the minors engage in illegal activities. Juveniles are the young people who are below the age of the majority as the laws dictate (Loeber & Farrington, 2012). For most of the legal frameworks, they prescribe some procedures for dealing with the minors since they cannot be treated in the same way as the senior citizens. That is minding their maturity levels are different. Their treatments include being taken to facilities like juvenile detention center and juvenile courts. For juvenile systems, they are treated as civil cases instead of being taken as criminal cases (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). It helps the juveniles not to be exposed to some of the conditions that the senior citizens are involved. In the United States, a juvenile is someone who is below the age of 18 years, and they commit a crime that would have been taken as criminal if they were adults. Considering the intensity of the crime that a minor has committed, it is possible that the young person under the age of 18 be treated and even charged as an adult (Tittle, 2018).

In the recent past, a significant number of the youths have ended up arrested under the age of 20. That is different from how things have been in the past. This though is a reflection the zero tolerance by the authorities and the strict criminal justice system that has been put in place in the United States not the change in behavior to the negative. The juveniles’ crimes can be classified as status offenses, and these include drinking and smoking as underage, other classifications are violent crimes and property offenses. The rates of juvenile violent crimes though have continuously been reducing in the United States according to statistics provided by the government. It shows that the offenses by the minors are mainly not violent. The delinquency of juveniles can sometimes be considered to be adolescent behavior. It is the reason why the teens at this stage will not use means that will provoke violence. For them, they are only reacting to what the age would call for. For those who are violent at this stage, it is expected that they will grow with violent behaviors, which is why they are treated like adults in crime. They are at this stage said to have portrayed some antisocial behaviors.

Thesis

In this research paper, I will be endeavoring to explore the impacts of delinquency programs. That is whether they are helpful to the life of a minor or some of them are not goal oriented in making them better adults. The aim of every program should be to make sure that when they are adults they are better people, do the programs follow this system? This is where the research paper will revolve around.

Literature Review

Trends in Juvenile Delinquency

Puzzanchera et al., (2010), draws data from the national juvenile court data archive and reports almost 1.7 million cases of juvenile delinquency that are processed every year by the courts with the jurisdiction of the juveniles. There are also trends of juvenile delinquency that are included in the report and the status offense cases that were handled within different timeframes. Two of the chapters present approximates of the rates of delinquency cases that were processed by the courts of the minors around the year 2007. One of the cases that have been presented shows the volume and the rates of the issues of delinquency, characteristics of the juveniles that were involved and then the charges that were put on them. There is another chapter marks the flow taken by delinquency cases from the referral to the courts through the evaluation and processing of each point of decision making and the presentation of the data by demographic characteristics and the crimes that had been committed. There is the fourth chapter which is making a representation of the nation’s approximates of the crimes that were processed by the juveniles court.

From the data, it is imminent that the cases of juvenile delinquency have been increasing despite all the efforts that have been made by the authorities to establish the programs to cater for the minors and their progress in undertakings (Burfeind & Bartusch, 2015). It is imminent that there is a gap that needs to be filled, but then it is taking very long to locate the gap and link the problem with a solution. If there are no strict actions taken past the laws, it means that there will be continuous developments in the reduction of the juveniles’ crime rates. The program is not only intended to capture people who are in the wrong, take them to courts and then juvenile facilities as they wait for their term to end (Hirschi, 2017). If this is all that the programs were all about, there would be challenges in trying to curb the rates of criminal activities in the country. There requires being a method that is both punishing to those who are engaging in these crimes and controlling to those who have not yet got to the stage of adolescence (Brake, 2013). Such methods will be more apt than the ones which are only aimed at punishing and care less about those who have not yet been engaged in only results. What can be expected from such a situation is that there will be more people landing into the juvenile facilities and being put on the changing course, while in the outside world, the youths will continue being on the side of the wrong.

Gaps in Juvenile Delinquency

There is a gap that will require to be filled, and that is the long term goals gap. There always will be people who are focused on the short term goals while there are the people who will tend to have objectives of the long run. In such a department where it is the criminal justice that is in concern, there always be should be some long-run objectives (Ford & Blaustein et al., 2013). That should mean that all the efforts should be made towards solving or the problems that are running in the nations, and that should not be in the near future only, but something that should last. Most of the challenges that come up with most of the legal systems are that they want a quick solution for long-lasting problems. Such type of resolution will seem fashionable and the best when they are brought in place at the beginning. People will embrace them and term them to be the best, but the hailing will only last for a short while. It will take only time for the errors to be exposed and it will be time to go back to the beginning and try to architect some new decision. Such is a waste of both time and resources and loosing of the heritage and positive image of the department of criminal justice.

Criminal Justice System and Juvenile Delinquency

According to Sickmund & Puzzanchera (2014), the nature of the criminal justice system has been a significant issue of concern mostly when it comes to juvenile delinquency. There are a lot of things that are without the knowledge of the people in the programs that are supposed to mentor the youths towards being the best of citizens when they are done with their terms in the prison cells. It will take the efforts of the authorities to install a mindset that is positive and very different from the one that they steeped in the facilities with. It will be of no use when a minor is arrested for the first time, and then they are re-arrested. There are those who will view the government to be strict and with zero tolerance, but from a skeptic point of view, the government has failed its people and offers inadequate services. The government always should make sure that they focus their finances, ideologies and their time resources into the best direction because that is what the public expects from their authorities (Shaw & McKay, 2016).

A disbelief in the system will come in place after a very short while that the government shows that they have some loose ends in the ways that they make their decision and how firm they are to them. At no point should an administrator not be able to demonstrate their know-how when it comes to a decision that they have architected in place. Such would be to mean that it was not supposed to be in place for the first time. It is something that can be proven in this issue, despite the government introducing some new rules, it will be very hard to convince the public why there are still high rates of juvenile delinquency (de Vries et al., 2015). People are still succumbing to the minors while the authorities are saying to have brought in the best of services for the people. It will lead to the people questioning about what their government can do. The people who are in charge should be able to tell why a program is not working since to place it in; they must have had a good strategy that had a timeframe.

Every goal should have a time limit that is placed on it before it is achieved, without the factor of time, it will be hard to evaluate whether the objective as set was achieved or it failed. Lack of a time frame is just a consolation of the fact that things will happen. The latter also means that a person has failed in the early stages of their goals. It will take a lot of efforts by the governments to come up with the best of programs, but if the course is worthwhile, it will be worth waiting for and even utilizing the available resources. For a plan that is aimed to be successful and to solve things in the long run, it does not matter the amounts of resources that will be used, nor does it matter the time that it will take, what is more important is the impact that will come with the decision (Sykes & Matza, 2017). And it is imminent the more the time and the funds that a program uses, the same rate it is expected to be successful. The hopes to get the best out of the program by the people will always be high, and the results will always be compared with the resources that were used.

Juvenile Delinquency and School Relations

Fabelo et al. (2010), juvenile delinquency is something that is school-based. Most of the juvenile activities that the adolescent youths are engaged in are related to their school background. At the age that most of the children start participating in Juvenile activities, they are in their school life. It is either they are rebellious at this stage or for some they even might have quit their schooling, but for all of them, it is the ages that they are supposed to be under the instruction of their teachers. Hence for the authorities of the country who are in place, the first place that they should channel their resources and efforts is in school. If the children are well catered for in school, then there are some of the behaviors that they will not engage in (Bartlett & Easterbrooks, 2012). It becomes tough to have a point where the school would love to make the children some better citizens, but they lack the support of the government. Some of the policies that the government should bring in for the people will not always necessarily be direct policies that they have to shower on the life of people directly. Some of them will have to come through other stakeholders who are still a part of the government. In this case, the school fraternities are the best solution that would be brought into use by the government for the people.

At the youth age where most of the minors are introduced into crime, they are at a point of their lives where they should be having most of their time should be spent by the teachers. At adolescent, the time that a student spends with teachers is even more than that spent with their parents. Hence it should be realized that the teachers at this point are the most significant factor that can be used (Petrosino et al., 2013). The students are with the teacher on the whole day’s timeframe and can be able to change or moderate the way the student thinks and how they do things. For most of the Juveniles, they have a chance to change, but they have no person to facilitate their change. The only people whom they have around are their peers who are only capable of getting things worse even if they are of the same class of offenders (Caldwell, 2016). Thus it would be more apt if the teachers were given programs and schemes by the government to help in making the children not only educated in class but also reasonable past the door of the class. That way the rates of juvenile delinquency will have been dealt with adequately without having to use the most critical methods and a lot of finances (Hoeve et al., 2012).

Intervention Programs and Strategies

In the past decades, researchers have been engaging in different projects to try and come up with the best intervention strategies and programs approaches that can promote pro-social development while reducing the delinquency rates. In their research, they have been able to yield some fruits to the issue.

Peter Greenwood, a researcher, says that preventing delinquency do not only save the lives of the young people from being wasted by the criminal activities but also it prevents the onset of the criminal careers when they get to adulthood. Hence on then overall it is a benefit to the society where safer and disciplined generations are given the opportunities to grow and blossom. It is also an advantage to the nation in the financial and peace aspects. The due cost of arresting, prosecuting, incarcerating and treating the juvenile offenders ends up draining the nation billions of monies. They are amounts that could have been channeled in the society to do other constructive works (Bartol&Bartol, 2014). Hence when there is juvenile delinquency, the federal government can save on their finances while us maximizing them on other duties which might be of more vital importance. It would be a better plan for the government to invest in delinquency from a younger age all through to the middle age generation rather than spend heavily on deploying a military workforce. In this essay are the most effective delinquency intervention and prevention programs.

As per the argument raised by Greenwood, the researchers have identified some delinquency prevention programs, and there are more which are up to now being tested. There are methods though that will tend to be better than the others and he explains which the best programs are and how one can be able to determine that. Greenwood has also offered a guideline on how their working jurisdiction can be shifted from one practice to the other (Thompson & Bynum, 2016).

Home-Based Programs

According to Hawkins & Wei (2017), the most successful programs are those that are structured to prevent the youths in delinquent behaviors even before going to the intervention stage. One good example is where there are home visiting programs whereby they focus on the pregnant teens and their infants who at the peril of missing their education and even cannot even afford their primary need. This programs will act as a guideline to the other teens and also will serve as a motivation factor to those who have already fallen in the trap. They do not have to give up.

School Based Programs

Secondly, there are school-based programs. They are meant to deal with the students who are getting into while others are yet to have tasted the criminal life. For example, there are peer counseling and motivational programs that are common in schools. There are very man students who end making a turnaround in their lives after hearing of what the consequences might be. There are also those who will cut their quench from substance abuse (Siegel & Welsh, 2014). With the programs, the rates of school dropouts and antisocial behaviors have also decreased substantially. That means that the school programs also have an immense effect on the society behavioral climate.

Community Based Programs

The community-based programs are a third classification which is also a useful program in making sure that the society has changed for the better. They prevent the offenders who are in their first time from to make it a regular encounter with the justice system (Bartol&Bartol, 2014). The most community programs which are successful have enhanced growth from the family level. That is where one might talk to their younger one about the dangers of a particular engagement or the other.

Every delinquency prevention and intervention program is aimed at having a better society. All the programs as discussed are worth using to develop a crime-free environment. It is more significant though to use programs that are more prevention-oriented before even getting to interventions. That is why youth delinquency interventions programs tend to be more substantial.

3.0 The Existing Gap

• -justification of the problem
• -are there existing solutions
• -if there are, are they ample or scarce

References

1. Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). Rehabilitating criminal justice policy and practice. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 16(1), 39.
2. Bartol, A. M., &Bartol, C. R. (2014). Criminal behavior: A psychological approach. Boston: Pearson, c2014. xxiii, 644 pages: illustrations; 24 cm.
3. Brake, M. (2013). Comparative youth culture: The sociology of youth cultures and youth subcultures in America, Britain and Canada. Routledge.
4. Burfeind, J., & Bartusch, D. J. (2015). Juvenile delinquency: An integrated approach. Routledge.
5. Caldwell, M. F. (2016). Quantifying the decline in juvenile sexual recidivism rates. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 22(4), 414.
6. de Vries, S. L., Hoeve, M., Assink, M., Stams, G. J. J., & Asscher, J. J. (2015). Practitioner review: effective ingredients of prevention programs for youth at risk of persistent juvenile delinquency–recommendations for clinical practice. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 56(2), 108-121.
7. Fabelo, T., Thompson, M. D., Plotkin, M., Carmichael, D., Marchbanks, M. P., & Booth, E. A. (2011). Breaking schools’ rules: A statewide study of how school discipline relates to students’ success and juvenile justice involvement. New York: Council of State Governments Justice Center.
8. Ford, J. D., & Blaustein, M. E. (2013). Systemic self-regulation: A framework for trauma-informed services in residential juvenile justice programs. Journal of family violence, 28(7), 665-677.
9. Hawkins, J. D., & Weis, J. G. (2017). The social development model: An integrated approach to delinquency prevention. In Developmental and Life-course Criminological Theories (pp. 3-27). Routledge.
10. Hirschi, T. (2017). Causes of delinquency. Routledge.
11. Hoeve, M., Stams, G. J. J., van der Put, C. E., Dubas, J. S., van der Laan, P. H., & Gerris, J. R. (2012). A meta-analysis of attachment to parents and delinquency. Journal of abnormal child psychology, 40(5), 771-785.
12. Loeber, R., & Farrington, D. P. (Eds.). (2012). From juvenile delinquency to adult crime: Criminal careers, justice policy and prevention. Oxford University Press.
13. Petrosino, A., Turpin‐Petrosino, C., Hollis‐Peel, M. E., & Lavenberg, J. G. (2013). ‘Scared Straight’and other juvenile awareness programs for preventing juvenile delinquency. Cochrane database of systematic reviews, (4).
14. Puzzanchera, C., Adams, B., & Sickmund, M. (2010). Juvenile court statistics 2006–2007. Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice.
15. Shaw, C. R., & McKay, H. D. (2016). Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas: A Study of Rates of Delinquency in Relation to Differential Characteristics of Local Communities in American Cities (1969). In Classics in Environmental Criminology (pp. 103-140). CRC Press
16. Sickmund, M., & Puzzanchera, C. (2014). Juvenile offenders and victims: 2014 national report.
17. Siegel, L. J., & Welsh, B. C. (2014). Juvenile delinquency: Theory, practice, and law. Cengage Learning.
18. Sykes, G. M., & Matza, D. (2017). Juvenile delinquency and subterranean values. In Cultural Criminology (pp. 3-10). Routledge.
19. Thompson, W. E., & Bynum, J. E. (2016). Juvenile delinquency: A sociological approach. Rowman & Littlefield
20. Tittle, C. R. (2018). Control balance: Toward a general theory of deviance. Routledge.

Psychological And Sociological Reasons Juvenile Delinquency

Juvenile delinquency is defined as “failure to follow the law by a young person or group, the act which labels young people as deviant or delinquent” (Open University, 2020). Since Juvenile Delinquency is multifaceted, this essay will look at two social science approaches, sociological and psychological, to understand juvenile delinquency whilst reviewing the similarities and differences between these approaches. On the psychological approach, it will explore Eysenck’s Theory of personality, the Cambridge study of delinquent development, and the Integrated Cognitive Antisocial Potential theory (ICAP), and the sociological approach will analyze the theories of Howard Becker, Stanley Cohen, and Stuart Hall.

Psychological approaches look at what makes some individuals behave in a deviant manner and not others. Psychologist, Hans Eysenck’s developed a theory which links personality to deviant or criminal behavior (Harverd and Clarke, 2014), this theory helped in explaining why and how we are different from others and link criminal behavior to a certain personality, he put forth three traits to explain our individuality, these traits are Extraversion, Neuroticism, and Psychoticism. Each of these traits has dualistic outcomes, High and Low, the structure simply allows an individual to answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to set of questions to determine which personality they are categorized to. Through this research, Eysenck was able to determine which personality type was more likely to behave in a deviant way and therefore commit crimes compares to others. To summarize Eyneck’s theory, the majority of those who scored higher on the psychoticism scale were more likely to be criminals, he also believes that there was a biological basis for personality and that extraversion and neuroticism related to arousal from the nervous system. (Harverd and Clarke, 2014, p 252). Furthermore Eysenck proposed that there is a link between personality and antisocial behavior, and this is due to the experience we have as a child and our upbringing, this theory was also supported by the studies conducted by Center and Kemp (2002) using children and adolescents, their findings from this study shows that those who were classed as antisocial did in fact scored high on the EPQ questionnaire.

The Cambridge study of delinquent development was a longitudinal study led by David Farrington, this study looked at 411 males from the age of 8, up to the age of 48. This study was done to examine the cause of antisocial behaviour in a group of children over a long period of time. The outcome of the study showed that of those 411 participants, 1/3 of them had been convicted of a criminal offence by the age of 32 and rose to 41% when the men were surveyed at 48 years. (Harverd and Clarke, 2014). Prof. John Muncie summerized that this research help in identifying future criminality using different risk factors such as low intelligent, poor, and antisocial parents, and also environmental factors such as like-minded peers, delinquent school and unemployment moreover, this research showed that 6% of the chronic offenders shared common childhood characteristics. Prof. John Muncie also believed that the traits of deviant or antisocial behaviour can be identified as early as age 10 and this research can be used on a global scale to understand juvenile delinquency (Open Unievrsity,2020). Farrington further went into developing The integrated Cognitive Antisocial Potential Theory (ICAP), this is used to explain the behaviour of a deviant individual and more importantly the Antisocial potential (AP). This theory suggests that there are short- and long-term factors for AP. Just as the Cambridge study, ICAP looks at risk factors which may influence someone to go from low AP to High AP, furthermore Farrington (2003) suggested that those who are at most risk from offending can benefit and be prevented by some intervention and cognitive-behavioural skill training. (Open University, 2020)

Much like Farrington, Howard Becker looked at sociological approach to studying deviant, criminal and delinquent behaviour, he categorized his observation into four categories. He said that the main difference between deviant and normal is the label that has been bestowed upon them, thus an individual from the normal group might have conducted the same behaviour as the labelled member but since the normal group are not labelled they are not seen as delinquent, this works both ways, someone in the deviant group might have been mislabel however he is judged because of the label. He further discusses that labels such as ‘yobs’. ‘neds’,’chavs’ are mainly used on younger people to perpetrate undesirable view of them. Becker suggested that there should be more attention paid to the process of what identify them as deviant and normal, his third category suggested that society have different opinion about what behaviour is deviant, as an example, killing someone is a criminal act however in wartimes this is not a deviant act further more Becker argues that the label we are given shapes the way we live our lives therefore those who are labelled as deviant in fact become their label. (Haverd and Clarke, 2014).

Both Psychological and Sociological approaches share similarities and differences, they are similar as they are drawn from social science perspectives therefore have a common objective of looking at disorders within our society, these methods are designed and conducted in way that the result can be analysed and explained using data. Furthermore, both of these approaches tend to focus more on delinquency and antisocial behaviour of men rather than women moreover the approached tend to be based on working class individuals and groups.

The similarities help in understanding how these two approaches???,that being said they do have their differences; psychological approach tend to focus on development of individuals through behaviour and cognitive analysis by either using Eyenck’s theory of personality or the ICAP whereas social approach looks at the process and the actions of control. Relatedly, psychologist research observed white working-class male and had developed their theory however the social approach showed us that higher class children are just as likely to commit crimes but are not labelled as delinquent nonetheless the working class and ethnic minority are more likely to be stopped and search or arrested, furthermore, psychologist looks at risk factors such as income, peers, deviant parents and also personality whereas the social theorist work on the processes which label someone as deviant, and they look at whether these people live up to the label.

In conclusion, this essay has identified few of the theories explored by psychologists as well as sociologists. We’ve looked at Eyneck’s theory of personality, The Cambridge study, and ICAP which helped in identifying the psychological approach, additionally it looked at the sociological theories of H. Becker, S.Hall, and S.Cohan. As explained, these two approaches share few similarities as they both have concerns with social orders and disorders, equally, they looked at primarily male participants to further their approach and outcome as well as telling us that they do change over time, both approaches are governed by quantitative and qualitative findings. Additionally, we’ve looked at what makes them different, the psychological approach is always about the individual within the society as opposed to a group or the process, whereas the Sociological approach is about the process and agencies of control such as being label normal and deviant, how the law within policing works, and more importantly the affect media have in our society.