Category: Adolescence

Juvenile Justice And Juvenile Delinquency

While other developed nations are trying to reduce the levels of imprisonment, United States of America has focused much on penal sanctions on a variety of offences touching on adults. In 1970s, when American politicians realized that rehabilitative programs could not work, they persuaded American people that there was need to use tough methods for adult offenders. So from that time up to date United States prisons population has tremendously increased. Juvenile justice system has received mixed reactions from different people. Some see it as if it has it has abandoned the best interest of the child.

The juvenile justice system and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, reiterated on imprisonment of youth offenders. The main factor that complicated incarceration of the youth was imprisonment of girls for violent offences and not boys. From the statistics given by Federal Bureau of Investigation, girls account for a third of the juvenile arrests. This is different from other decades when girls arrested were very few. Since then, the number of girls arrested for different offences have increased.

Girls are getting more violent. For example, the beating of Florida cheerleader. The video showing the girl being beaten went viral. The girls involved in the battery were tried as adults and that could finally land them into life imprisonment. The media has been in forefront on exposing offenders. For example in 1980s, the media showcased the presents of girls gangs. For the data collected in 1990s, as girls’ arrests went up, boys’ arrests was declining. The change in girls’ arrests was not because of change in their behavior.

Girls normally confront different and diverse environments and obstacles than the boys when they are imprisoned. This has continued even when over a half of the States have proved to improve the conditions of girls in the juvenile justice system. By assessing girls’ unique needs and designing better programs for them. One lasting tendency is that there will be continuous absence of programs for girls. For example, in 1988, Ohio judges stated that there were few sentencing options for girls. Two thirds of judges surveyed disagreed with the statement that “there are an adequate number of treatment programs for girls” while less than one-third of judges disagreed with this statement regarding services for boys (Holsinger,Belknap, & Sutherland, 1999). In a San Francisco study, Schaffner, Shorter, Shick, and Frappier (1996: 1) concluded that girls were “out of sight, out of mind” and that girls tended to linger in detention centers longer than boys. In fact, 60% of girls were detained for more than seven days, while only 6% of boys were detained that long.

Another evidence that girls are more vulnerable than boys to experiencing sexual abuse while being detained. In their study of 200 girls in California juvenile justice halls, Acoca and Dedel (1998: 6), found several examples of abuse, including “consistent use by staff of foul and demeaning language, inappropriate touching, pushing and hitting, isolation,deprivation of clean clothing.” In addition, girls underwent strip searches while being supervised by male staff.

Lack of female staff seems to place girls in vulnerable positions whilebeing detained. In addition to increasing the chances that female wards will be abused by male staff, the lack of female staff also limits the programs and activities available for girls. Staff shortages in the Miami-Dade CountyJuvenile Detention Center for girls, for example, resulted in decreased outdoor recreation for girls. Ledermen and Brown (2000) reported that girls sometimes went as long as two weeks without outdoor recreation and were sometimes “locked down” due to shortage of staff. O

Several recent scandals suggest that like their adult counterparts women’s prisons), juvenile prisons are often unsafe for girls in ways that are uniquely gendered. Take, for example, a recent investigation of conditions in the Hawaii Youth Correctional Facility in the summer of 2003 by the American Civil Liberties Union [ACLU]. According to the ACLU report, there were no female guards on duty at night on the girls’ ward, one reported case of rape of a girl by a male guard, and several reports of girls exchanging sex for cigarettes. The report also noted that male guards made sexual comments to female wards, talked about their breasts, and discussed raping them. While wards noted that rape comments decreased after the rape incident, White (2003: 16) wrote, “wards expressed concern that the night shift is comprised entirely of male guards and they feel vulnerable after the rape because male guards could enter their cells at any time.” The ACLU report also discovered that wards reported being watched by male guards while they changed clothes and used the toilet. Male guards were also present when girls took showers. And, like their counterparts in detention, girls had not received outdoor recreation for a week due to lack of supervising staff and girls were told that the situation could last for up to a month (White, 2003). While critics of the ACLU report commented that the wards made up stories and severely exaggerated tales of abuse, in April of 2004, the guard implicated in the rape charge pleaded guilty to three counts of sexual assault and one count of “terroristic threatening of a female ward” (Dingeman, 2004). Although comprising a plea bargain, the legal rape case uncovered details indicating that the sexual abuse was more severe and alarming than wards originally reported to the ACLU.

References

1. Blankinship, L. A. (2018). Providing Culturally Sensitive Care for Islamic Patients and Families. Journal of Christian Nursing, 35(2), 94-99.
2. Flores, A. (2017). How the US Hispanic population is changing. Pew Research Center, 18.
3. Sue, D. W., Sue, D., Neville, H. A., & Smith, L. (2019). Counseling the culturally diverse: Theory and practice. John Wiley & Sons.

Juvenile Delinquency In Global Context

The focus on Juvenile Delinquency or Youth Offending behaviour has been a recurrent issue that has dominated public and political discourses around the world (Baligar, 2014 & Farrington-Douglas & Durante, 2009), with its origins being traced back to London’s Report of the Committee for Investigating the Causes of the Alarming Increase in Juvenile Delinquency in the Metropolis in the 1800s (Committee in to Juvenile Delinquency, 1816). Since then, Juvenile Delinquency has become an increasingly complex issue globally, with many countries around the world reporting incidents about violent youth behaviour (Tan et al., 2013 & Krug et al., 2002).

Current global statistics have highlighted a downward trend in youths arrest and conviction rates in the past two decades, yet many countries worldwide still consistently report high rates of violent youth offending annually (Li et al., 2019 & Fagan & Catalano, 2012). In 2009, the USA reported that Juvenile represented 16 percent of their annual number of arrests, highlighting that approximately 86,000 of these youth were arrested for committing violent crime (Fagan & Catalano, 2012 & Mapp, 2009). Specifically, in 2015, the World Health Organization reported that approximately 200,000 youth homicides occur among individuals aged between 10-29 years old, with the main perpetrators being youths themselves (Li et al., 2019, WHO, 2015 & Krug et al., 2002). Furthermore, recent crime victimisation surveys in the USA coupled with self-report data report a high degree continuity of such behaviour among a small percentage of youth (Young et al., 2017 & Smith, 2008) These were replicated across the world in places like Australia, report a rise in the amount of violent offences committed by youth residing in densely populated urban areas despite reductions in juvenile arrest rates in 2013 (Young et al., 2017). Consequently, in the context of this global decrease in youth arrest rates, these evidences suggest that youth are increasingly committing violent crime, with a large number of these crime being disproportionately contributed by a small group of chronic offenders (Young et al., 2017, Farrington-Douglas & Durante, 2009 & Smith, 2008).

Dealing with Juvenile Delinquency

Similarly, these complexities are reflected in the attempts to reduce Juvenile Delinquency across the years. These strategies are subsumed under the wider discourse surrounding crime prevention (Hollin & Palmer, 2006), particularly exemplified through debate between “nothing works” and “what works” stances in 1970s. Consequently, this resulted in the emergence of two mutually opposing strategies towards the reduction of offending behaviour within the juvenile justice discourse, classified as being eliminative or constructional in nature (Farrington-Douglas & Durante, 2009 & Hollin & Palmer, 2006).

Eliminative strategies focused on deterring and restricting youth’s opportunity to offend through the implementation of coercive punishments like harsh penalties and prison regimes, and intensive surveillance programmes like electronic tagging and curfews (Hazel, 2008 & Watts, 2003). In contrast, constructional strategies focused on the implementation of early intervention programmes which addressed these criminogenic risk factors through the development of cognitive, behaviour and interpersonal skills of the youth. Therefore, promoting alternatives to crime (Fagan & Catalano, 2012, Farrington-Douglas & Durante, 2009 & Hollin & Palmer, 2006).

Researchers proposed that these strategies represent conceptual frameworks in understand juvenile justice systems in the world. This is based on the notion that each country’s juvenile justice discourse can be characterized along a continuum of wanting to promote conformity to the law, with eliminative strategies at one end while constructional ones located on the other (Farrington-Douglas & Durante, 2009 & Hazel, 2008). Consequently, this resulted in a myriad of juvenile delinquency programmes around the world; with countries like the USA endorsing harsh zero-tolerance policies and electronic monitoring programmes towards juvenile offending (Tan et al., 2013 & Munchie, 2008), while other countries like India adopting a more welfare-based policies which focus on training and provision of guidance to prevent reoffending (Baligar, 2014), or in the UK which has adopted a hybrid of both strategies with their establishment of “youth offending teams” and “offenders brought to justice” targets reflective rehabilitative and punitive agendas respectively (Farrington-Douglas & Durante, 2009).

Singapore context

Similar to the rest of the world, the problem of Juvenile Delinquency is a key area of social concern in Singapore. In 2010, due to the increase in the number and seriousness of juvenile offending, the Singapore Police Force listed youth’s involvement in crime as one of the main priorities it seeks to tackle (Tan et al., 2013 & Ong et al., 2000). Ever since then, studies have highlighted a decrease in juvenile arrest rates across the years. Recently, the Ministry of Social and Family Development reported that approximately 1,057 youth were arrested in 2016. Furthermore, when comparing between total juvenile arrest rates between 2017 and 2018, the Singapore Police Force reported a decrease of 231 juveniles arrested (Li et al., 2019 & Singapore Police Force, 2018). Despite this decrease, researchers still highlight that the number of youths arrested still accounts for one-fifth of the youth population in Singapore and roughly accounting for 16 percent of the total number of individuals arrested in 2018 (Singapore Police Force, 2018 & Tan et al., 2013).

Typically, youths are commonly arrested for shop theft, theft; in 2005 this accounted for roughly 31 percent, 17 percent the total number youth arrests respectively (Tan et al., 2013 & Ang & Huan, 2008). Furthermore, recent reports have included other crimes like sexual penetration and cheating offences, with cheating offences accounting for 81.7 percent of the total crime committed by youth in 2018 (Singapore Police Force, 2018). Apart from these, reports from the last decade highlight that youth are beginning to engage in increasingly serious and violent behaviours like murder, causing grievous harm, armed robbery, unlawful possession of weapons, the distribution and consumption of illegal substances (Tan et al., 2013, Chan, 2010 & Tam, et al., 2007). In 2010, reports highlighted that 4176 youths were arrested for assault, rioting and loan shark-related offences, with 78 percent of the rioters reportedly having ties with a gang (Lim et al., 2012).

Currently, the main legislation governing the administration of Juvenile Delinquency in Singapore is The Children and Young Persons Act Chapter 38 (CYPA). The CYPA aims to provide welfare to youth in need for care and protection and offer rehabilitation options for juvenile in conflict with the law (Ekman, 2015 & Kamal, 2002). As such, Singapore’s response to Juvenile Delinquency is based on an equilibrium between eliminative and constructional strategies. This is rationale is based on the beliefs surrounding the individual’s capacity for change, thus focusing on rehabilitative efforts which offer alternatives to criminal offending to youths-at-risk and reintegrative programmes which aid in the development of skills which prevent juveniles from re-offending (Zhang, 2008 & Kamal, 2002).

Problems associated with Juvenile Delinquency

The problem of Juvenile Delinquency causes issues at many different levels within society. On a personal level, studies highlighting that the youth involvement in violent offending is associated with negative life consequences during adulthood like substance abuse disorders, negative health and educational outcomes, lack of social relationships (Salvatore & Rubin, 2018 & Fagan & Catalano, 2012). Additionally, Tan et al. (2013) highlights that early engagement in juvenile delinquency is correlated to the increasingly violent forms of offending in the future. As such, this coupled with the negative life outcomes associated with criminal offending, perpetuates a cycle of criminality in the lives of youth (Fagan & Catalano, 2012).

On a community level, Juvenile Delinquency has serious negative implications on the safety and security of the society. Studies highlight that youth homicide and non-fatal assaults is one of the leading causes of premature deaths among youths globally and have detrimental impacts on the life chances of victims who survive (CDC, 2019, Farrington-Douglas & Durante, 2009 & Krug et al., 2002). These effects are also not isolated among youths and have implications on wider community; increasing public anxiety surrounding the fear of victimization, thus impacting the livelihood of individuals in the society (Tan et al., 2013 & Farrington-Douglas & Durante, 2009).

Lastly, studies highlighting the costly nature in dealing with the effects of Juvenile Delinquency. In the USA, injuries associated with Juvenile Delinquency accounted for approximately 21 billion dollars’ worth of medical costs and productivity loss (CDC, 2019 & Li et al., 2019). As such, Juvenile delinquency has greatly increased the costs incurred in the healthcare and welfare sector within society and resulted in the development of costly ineffective crime prevention programmes in society. This disrupts the provision of essential services and has the potential to undermine the economic stability within the country (Farrington-Douglas & Durante, 2009 & Krug et al., 2002).

Problems within Juvenile Justice Discourse

Firstly, despite the ubiquity of the term in the global discourse and the long-standing nature of the issue, there is still a lack of a universal conceptualisation for juvenile delinquency (Smith, 2008 & Hamzah et al, 2004). Internationally, the United Nations (UN) defines juveniles as individuals aged between 15-24 years old (UN, 2010) Despite this, the minimum age of criminal liability varies globally between 6-18 years (Young et al., 2017), with places like India and England placing it at 7 and 10 respectively, while other countries like Yugoslavia and Belgium defining it at 14 and 18 respectively (Baligar, 2014, Sijerčić-Čolić, 2009 & Goldson & Munchie,2006). Specifically, for the case of Singapore, the CYPA defines juveniles as individuals ages between 7 and 16 years old (Chan, 2010 & Ang & Huan, 2008), while other sources like the National Youth Council (NYC) defining youth as ages between 15- 35 years old (NYC, 2018). As such, for the purposes of this study, I propose a possible framework towards understanding Juvenile Delinquency in Singapore comprising several key characteristics: 1) individuals between the ages of 7 to 35 years old 2) who commit statute offences and/or 3) display violent or non-violent antisocial behaviour and/or 4) experience any form of risk factors associated with criminal offending.

Secondly, though countless efforts have been taken to reduce Juvenile Delinquency in Singapore, recent cases like the Downtown East Murder still highlight the severity of the Juvenile Delinquency issue in Singapore and the ineffectiveness in dealing with it (Tan et al., 2013) Farrington-Douglas & Durante (2009) highlights that current methods regarding the management of Juvenile Delinquency increases youth’s contact with the criminal justice system. This results in attachment of labels and subsequent stigmatization of delinquents; reducing the life chances and severing relationships between youths and supportive networks in society (Salvatore & Rubin, 2018 & Tan et al., 2013). As such, this current trend of increasing youth’s contact with the criminal justice system has two-fold implication in society; cementing youth’s persistence in criminal offending (Farrington-Douglas & Durante, 2009) and affect the stability of the country as these youth represent an integral part to the future development of society (Tan et al., 2013 & Mapp, 2009). As such, researchers have increasingly called for shifts towards the development of community-driven programmes (Ekman, 2015 & Fagan & Catalano, 2012), focusing on factors which promote positive youth development rather than addressing criminogenic risk factors; with one such factor being religion (King & Furrow, 2004 & Knudten & Knudten, 1971).

Does The Bible Speak On Juvenile Delinquency?

In answering this question, items 3, 4, 16, 1 and 2 are considered respectively. 98% of the respondents agreed that the Scripture contains biblical stories of youths who cause positive changes and live exemplary while 2% are not sure. But upon this inference were the analysis based for reliable inferences. Adewusi asserts that “the Bible is the standard for every believer and according to it, there is nothing ever new in the world today. Both the good and bad, tall and short, rich and poor and many others have once existed and some others are in existence now and with sure fact that before the coming of Our Lord Jesus Christ, many would still live.”

In view of this George also explains that “human beings lives on the basis of the information passed to the verbally, in written formats and by revelation. Therefore, good people do not just exist now, there was, there are and there will continue to be, perhaps fewer than expected.” The researcher agrees with this view because there are countless numbers of people who are evil than those who are good. But nevertheless, people like Joseph, Abel, Joshua, Caleb, Moses, Jephtha, David, and many others are recorded examples of people who during their youthful lives did well and caused positive change in one way or the other. It is sure through the eye of the 99% respondents that the Bible also contains issues relating to juvenile delinquency.

Oghoghoye explains that “theft, disobedience, assault, crime against public order, rape, gambling, killing, and lots more are all recorded in the Bible.” Example of people in these categories is Eve, the daughters of Noah, Cain, Jacob and Esau, Delilah, Jezebel, Ahab, Absalom, Ananias and Sapphira and so on. In sum, 98% of the respondents agreed that God negates juvenile delinquency attitudes. No wonder in some cases He commanded the disciplining of children as “spare the rod, spoil the child”, and also He placed some judgments on anyone who practices the act. Godwin points out that “God might even not clearly mention juvenile delinquency attitudes, but as far as the Bible quotes He is a God of peace and orderliness and love. Anything that negates this attributes of His automatically commands His wrath and anger.” The above understanding brings in item 1 and 2 which are the causes why100% and 96% of people respectively knows what juvenile delinquency and youth ministry are about.

The respondents agreed that biological factor is a major cause of juvenile delinquency. Bello points out that “gene mutation is real and any parents who smokes, or womanizes for example have a higher probability to give birth to a baby who will do the same.” Also, 93% respondents also agreed that the society is another cause of juvenile delinquency. It is viewed through oral discussions with Omosefe that “the society is an avenue that consists of disciplined and undisciplined people, and if the disciplined are not careful enough, they will be corrupted too.”

86% of the respondents concurred that ineffective and unorganized homes constitute to the rise of juvenile delinquency. Falade asserts that “God did not give a child or children just to the father or the mother, He gave it to the both of them; and if anyone fails in his or her duties, it sure will affect the child /children in one way or the other.” Aderemi also points out that “the home is the root of the society and if unruly children come from a home, such mixes with the society and corrupts many others. Also, in a home where the father always hit the mother in the presence of the children, there is tendency for the child/children to also want to hit someone too.” This means that whatever the parents does is what is registered to play in time to come in the life of the children. In item 10, 89% of the respondents also agreed that school factor also fuels the operation of juvenile delinquency while 11% are not sure. Adedeji asserts that “most times, parents come to school to complain of bad influence on their children as a result of mixing with other children. This has been a battle teachers have been confronting in recent times. This occurs in manner of speech, detesting attitudes, aggression, anger, retaliation, dirtiness, slangs and so on.” Upon these groups were the analysis based for reliable inferences.

In sum, 91% of the respondents to the questionnaire also expressed that the abuse of modern technology and modernization is another huge cause of juvenile delinquency. The 21st century is the era of rapid growth in, and application of Information Technology. Although this has great impacts, but its abuse can never be underestimated in the life of both young and old. Ajide explains that “man children views ex-rated movies, browse sites which are not proper for the eye and mid to behold and so on. These have caused a downgrade in the morals and have polluted the society more than the mind can fathom.

The Causes Of Juvenile Delinquency

Juvenile Delinquency has evolved overtime, leading to new found crimes and punishments within the system. Delinquency is primarily dominate in young adolescents transitioning into their adult life. It is the act of unlawful behavior that is specifically fulfilled by minors- mostly individuals start under the legally issued age in America. Surprisingly, “A significant proportion of U.S. national crime rate trends over time can be explained by fluctuations in the proportion of the population in the crime-prone age group of 15- to 24-year-olds.” (Steffensmeier & Harer, 1987, 1999). The causes of these delinquent tendencies strive from lack of support, education, environmental help, etc. Delinquent juveniles are dealt with low quality services such as education- old materials, did interesting topics, and declining help. However, minority children have the shorter of the stick with constant poverty, absence of opportunity, and being more influenced by street crime to elevate their living. For example, “Black and Hispanic/Latino adolescents are more likely than Whites to have had contact with the police and to be arrested.” (Cruchfield, Skinner, Haggarty, McGlynn, & Catalano, 2009). African American and Latino students have encountered the police and have been placed under arrest suppressing the numbers for whites. These students are known to live in under developing neighborhoods surrounded by the uprise of crime activity.

Delinquency is heavily constant among the teenage group, those exposed to new life experiences. For many, it begins to decline as adolescents enter their early adult lives. However, those who start offending at an earlier age tend to continue reoffending for most of their adult life. According to “The Pittsburgh Youth Study it found that 52 to 57 percent of juvenile delinquents continue to offend up to age 25. This number dropped by two-thirds — to 16 to 19 percent — in the next five years.” (National Institute of Justice, 2019). More juveniles are participating in criminal activities that surpassed the given age that these tendencies supposedly fade away. It becomes a major concern when offenders are being locked away for years on end, due to early on contact with juvenile delinquency. These crimes committed at such young ages follow them into their future crimes. Some are lucky, however, as they are placed on probation minimizing their time in a detention facility. As stated in the statistics, “Approximately 57 percent of adjudicated youth are placed on probation.” (Youth.Govt, 2010). A little over a half of juveniles are placed on probation, it is significantly low for the youth. Probation is essential for youth to commit to rules and regulations that can potentially keep them out of jail and on a new path.

Adolescents encounter crime conduct from friends, and adapt this type of behavior through the influences of those perceived to be their role models. Absence of an adult mentor or adviser can lead adolescents to act out and cause distribution within society due to a lack of guidance. Family is the main component within youth crime, because guidance starts within the home first: Adolescents can fall into the peer pressure to commit crimes without guidance. Also, the use of drugs are particularly dominant within these age groups to cope with the lack of opportunity in life. Many delinquents do not possess the mature mentality, believe the stereotypes and insults assigned to them through higher power individuals and break off from their environment.For this paper, two theories, the Labeling and Social bond theory, will be applied to explain why youth commit crime. These theories aid to define juvenile delinquency and causes of the youth crime epidemic. In order to change the face of delinquency so that it may be better dealt with, as a society acknowledgment of how we contribute to it is consequential.

Young people are vulnerable due to their under developing cerebellum, that lacks the maturity of decision making. Many youngsters are inclined to participate in crime activity because they are fed up with their current life circumstances. Young people compare heavily with their peers, as they interact with them the most on a daily basis. Adolescent peers are students of the same grade level, their fellow classmates. As they become adjusted to school, students often form groups that have similar backgrounds. “Adolescents usually become involved with delinquent peers before they become delinquent themselves” (Elliott & Simons, 1994). It’s a change reaction, adolescents start to befriend their peers and pick up on their habits and invest themselves in those same activities. They view those behaviors and start to mimic those themselves. Young individuals typically fall into the perception that their delinquent peers are quality examples of sufficient behavior if not addressed ahead.

Drugs are highly popularized among the teen age group because of their curiosity and need to experience. This is common deviant behavior among young individuals. Drugs are easily accessible to the youth, and are commonly shared among their peer groups. Drug use among teens is problematic considering the addictive risks behind it. It can lead adolescents down a path of severe addiction. “During the 6 months prior to detention, 71 percent used one type of substance regularly, and 29 percent used more than one type regularly; 63 percent used cannabis; 46 percent, alcohol; 20 percent, amphetamines; 8 percent, ecstasy; and 7 percent, inhalants.” (Payne & Prichard, 2005, pg, 1). Before these delinquent adolescents were taken into custody and placed in a detention center, more than half had taken an abusive substance. Many adolescents take drugs to suppress their issues behind closed doors. Issues within their families play a key role in their usage of abused substances and need to lash out. Drugs rid of depressive emotions and moods but can enforce the label already imposed on the delinquent.

Labels prohibit the growth and change of developing adolescents and often highlights negative characteristics with misleading information. It travels with the child throughout their life living up to the potential the label limits them to, not allowing room for them to change or grow into a different label. Others around them will continue with the label making it hard for the young adult to ever escape. The Labeling theory was created by Howard Saul Becker in the 1960s to address the concern of youth crime surrounding labels placed upon them. “The deviant is the one whom that label has successfully been applied to; deviant behavior is behavior that people so label.” (Tannenbaum 1951 & Lement 1951, Kitsuse 1962). In deviant behavior, it highlights negative characteristics and neglects the positive. Adolescents become consumed by only their dismissive behaviors. Most of the time, labels are based off accusations, and misconstrued information based off glimpses of displayed behavior. The labels are generated off small interactions or observation over the “delinquent” adolescent that presents socially unacceptable behavior. Adolescents are more susceptible to being influenced by higher authority figures that denounce their temperament, especially minority children. Authority figures such as teachers, police officers, guidance counselors and so further have the power to turn a young adult to participate in crime activity due to the labels placed upon them by these professionals. Remarks toward or spoken among delinquency lead them into a world of crime. Typically assumptions such drug dealer, gang banger, territost, and just simple up to no good weight on the developing mind of the child. They begin to believe these false accusations of their self- characteristics and take up that role that is stereotypical associated with them. This destroys the youth’s fundamentals values and turns them into a newly found criminal. If someone thats perceived to be of higher wisdom and knowledge of the world like high authority figures demies them to become their worst ideal represented in society than an immature, evolving, coming of age adolescent will certainly act in the matter presented of them.

Behavioral factors that others in society deem as “deviant behavior” can stimulate the labeling process. Many students have simple behavioral disorders such as ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder) or ODD (Oppositional Defiant Disorder). These disorders make it almost impossible for them to stay still for long periods of time, hold attention, or control their hyper-ness for extended moments. The education system mislabels these students as disruptive, trouble makers, and bad influencers on other children within the classroom. It is at a young age when children are exposed to diminishing labels that can affect how they see themselves and their future performance in their class work. Placement of these children in under developing classes limits their full potential and can lead them conforming to unintelligent labels placed upon them. According to a study of student discipline in an inner city high school Bowditch noticed “ student’s vulnerability to suspension, and identification as a ‘troublemaker,’ may . . . depend upon his or her parents’ ability to influence the actions of school personnel” (Browditch, 1993, p, 501). As parents, many feel the unnecessary need to challenge the administration of education’s actions when it comes toward placement of their child. When children become identified as troublemakers, it is widely known among the student body and the teaching personnel. The child becomes known for their abnormal behavior and begin to believe they are useless in society and will not amount to anything due to their behavioral factors. In many cases, this leads adolescents into a life of crime from stimulated isolated emotions and previous childhood labels surrounding their uncontrollable behavior.

The social bond theory branches off from social control theories, “the most prominent control theory is the one developed by sociologist Travis, Hirschi.” (Siegel & Welsh, 2017, pg, 110). Hirschi discusses in his book “Causes of Delinquency” the arguments to the theory. Many commit crime because it is easily obtainable and gives great rewards. Most people are controlled by their family and their bond to the community. When these bonds are essentially broken, adolescents seek out deviant crimes that are personally desirable. Hirschi details the 4 main components a social bond contains for an adolescent like attachment, commitment, belief, and involvement. (Siegel & Welsh, 2017, pg. 112). It is when social bonds are broken that an adolescent can turn towards a life of crime, diminishing fear of breaking the connection that once was. When developing youth have absent role models and lack attachment to virtuous individuals they are in search of that deeper connection elsewhere. As stated, “ In addition to parental and family attachment, parental control over children’s behaviors and spending time with family are also considered to generate social bonds which might keep adolescents away from delinquency. First, parental control (decisions made by parents on adolescents’ activities) was related to lower delinquency.” (Demuth & Brown, 2004, pg, 60).With positive family bonds, adolescents are taught acceptable behaviors within society. They are natured through care and develop positive attitudes with guaranteed expectations for themselves. Parents and other legal guardians determine activities suitable for their children. They instill and differ right actions from wrong, so that child is aware for future reference in their own actions. Absence of a parental bond can create an emotional isolated and uncompassionate child. Guidance from those they value strengthens their will to do the right thing and focus on their commitment to societal values.

As youngsters progress into their young adult life, their main desire is to impress their peers and not adult figures. Peer acceptance is most important to young adults because they crave that need to be accepted and part of the “in group”. Also, deprivation of ethical and upstanding companionships can lead teens to become delinquent by seeking the acceptance of other delinquent students. They have found themselves a group within society despite their anti socially suitable behaviors. Delinquents will continue to do deviant activities to secure their new found bond. In the text, “association with peers who valued education was related to lower school delinquency (e.g., being late, skipping classes, breaking school rules, and school suspension)” (Liu, 2004, pg, 278). When adolescents are influenced by their peers that take their schooling seriously, they act in less unfavorable school behavior. Delinquents encountering peers that display effective school behaviors are likely to replicate those same behaviors because they are exposed to them. They start to fall out of their delinquent ways picking up the new habits of these new found peers. Positive peers keep children on track with their school studies and represent the pleasing behavior of society.

Stigmatization is not limited to just official institutions but also those unofficial such as parents, neighbors and peers. Society sets this image of certain adolescents, especially minorities into the public, stigmatizing them and influencing the minds of others into thinking alike. As stated in the text, “Although the original cause of the misbehavior is important, it is the labeling process that transforms the adolescent’s identity. Without the label and stigma, they might be able to return to a conventional lifestyle; with it, and they are locked forever into a delinquent way of life.” (Siegel & Welsh, 2017, pg, 114). In other words, the delinquent’s behavior is a factor, but is lightweight compared to the labeling process that is placed upon them. It changes how the adolescent sees themselves and conforms to that identity of a criminal and the stereotypes that are thrown at them. Despite the initial behavior, the delinquent can grow out of the conduct, aspire to do more and live a normal lifestyle just as any other, if not exposed to the labeling process. Those with past run ins with the law and previous records are deemed to be failures in life and will continue to live in a life of crime. When high authority figures such as police officials accuse juveniles of participating in crimes when the juvenile clearly has not actively seeked out the crime caused, they succumb to the stigma.

Delinquents that abandon the social norms, social expectations, and refuse to adjust their anti- social behavior are likely to commit deviant crimes. It can start with simple deviant acts such ungerage drinking and substance abuse and can manifest into hardcore crimes like drug dealing and suppling othet illegal substances. Lack of social bonds allow adolescents to get caught up in deviant crimes such as these when no one is telling them not to participate in them. There are no reciprocations for their actions when no one is concerned with their whereabouts or adverse actions. Participation in school/ sport activities help adolescents channel that hyperactive and driven energy in a positive controlled environment. In the absence of these activities, teens turn delinquent to express their energy in other ways. They become unbothered by consequences of these behaviors because they feel like outsiders and deem them to be insignificant. Relationships children form throughout their lives have a vast impact on their criminal status. Those who have obtained a stable relationship and bond with traditional individuals like family, community and their fellow peers develop a stronger self image. These stable inner connections help encourage adolescents to perceive against temptation of deviant behaviors. Personal relationships are crucial to eliminate the attempt to participate in deviant acts. Turning their life away from crime and the need to break the law, these relations are essential to righteous actions. .

Anomie Theory And Juvenile Delinquency

Abstract

There has always been an increase in cases of crimes among children under the age of 18 years. This trend led to more discussions, which include the causes and impacts it has in society. Psychologists and other scholars were involved in the development of theories that described how children ended up breaking the law. One of them is Robert Merton; he introduced the Anomie theory in explaining that social differences make children develop behaviors that entail at breaking the law. The theory elaborates that things such as schools, inequalities, drug and substance use, and living standards bring about crimes. The best solution lies with the government, the general society and the families involved. Adequate measures are necessary for preventing consequences which include increased expenditure in both courts and hospitals, and morality in the society. In general, this theory enables us to understand measures need to take for us to deal with increasing crime rates among children and youths.

INTRODUCTION

Juvenile Delinquency is the act of children under the age of 18 participating in activities that are against the law (Hughes et al., 2018). The issue of juvenile delinquency has been of concern due to the increased cases of criminals under the age of 18. This situation has led to psychologists conducting research and developing explanations on why some students behave the way they do. Some of the cases of Juvenile Delinquency include murder.

The society has always been the point of focus when it comes to Juvenile Delinquency; this is because children grow in society and adopt behaviors from people around them. If people who are around children are thieves, then they adopt that behavior. In some cases, children have taken up different attitudes towards some people in society. Attitudes are then bound to make them act unlawfully against one another because of what they think is bad. The increase in crime rates among children has raised concerns from the government; this led to the formation of a department to address the issue.

In response to the problem of children turning into criminals, psychologists and other scholars have developed theories that help in understanding how it happens. The social disorganization theory, Anomie theory, Subcultural theory, Educational disabilities, Family influence, and Feminist theory are among the theories that scholars have introduced to help in understanding this kind of criminology (Walsh, 2017). This paper shall concentrate on the Anomie theory, the causes, and consequences in the population.

Anomie Theory

A psychologist introduced this theory by the name Robert Merton. We can also call it the Mertonian Anomie theory. The theory elaborates on the existence of crimes that come as a result of social differences between people (Messner& Rosenfeld, 2017). The society is made up of different classes of people. Economically, we have the rich and the poor; this is the most discussed cause of crimes. Many children tend to steal or rob people because they want to shift to upper classes of people in society, who, in most cases, are the rich. The decision to steal or rob has a basis on the idea that other means of looking for money are so long.

The teenagers are the groups of children who face this challenge; this is because they always want to have whatever they need, yet the parents sometimes do not have money (Messner& Rosenfeld, 2017). Teenagers are affected by the adolescent stage which makes them look for the best way of pretending to be richer and decent than others. The feeling of wanting to look beautiful or handsome always drives the decision of adolescent groups; this, therefore, makes them go out stealing or breaking the law as the best shortcut to achieving their demands.

Schools

Children in schools find it hard to cope with the requirements that need them to spend more. Requirement such as school fees is always a challenge to children who come from low-income families; this makes them drop out of school (GROßet al., 2018). As they drop out of school, it becomes even harder for them to get job opportunities. Lack of jobs among the dropouts has led to most of them choosing to force people to give them money. Some of them may end up killing people who do not give them what they want. Others have chosen to steal equipment such as home machinery and sell to raise money for their sustainability.

Living standards

Different people have different living standards; the decision on the use of money or finances depends on what you have (Eriksson &Broidy, 2017). Families that live in areas designated for the poor tend to live a simple life. They do not spend so much to have basic needs; hence, they do not welcome luxuries. On the other hand, rich families tend to spend so much on anything they need. This manner of spending on finances is due to their improved standards of living. The difference is what makes children wish they were on the other side. Those born in families with low living standards always feel like they should be in families with high standards of living.

The difference that exists between livings standards of the rich and the poor sometimes lead to jealousy. Adolescents and other children under the age of 18 may feel jealous when the rich go out during weekends and eat in honorable places. This attitude is sometimes acquired from society, and it may lead to hatred. Hatred, therefore, is what drives the poor children into attacking those from rich families. The main intention, in this case, is not to satisfy their needs but to feel better seeing them suffer.

Drug Abuse

Children who live in areas that many families are poor tend to gain access to alcohol and other drugs. The accessibility of drugs and substances makes them drop out of school because of lack of understanding of why they are in school (Bernburg, 2019). Addiction is a common contributor to cases of school dropouts. Constant use of drugs such as tobacco and Marijuana leads to addiction that may end up making children steal. Since victims of drug abuse are unable to buy drugs, they end up robbing people to get money for buying drugs. This situation comes about because many children under the age of 18 are unable to get jobs.

Drug and substance use is another example of juvenile delinquency (Bernburg, 2019). Prohibition of drugs such as tobacco and Marijuana for normal use is done by anonymous people. If caught either processing or producing any product of these drugs, one is liable to the consequences that the law permits. In many cases, users of these drugs end up undergoing the rehabilitation processes as a way to correct their addiction.

The use of drugs and other substances may lead to sexual abuse. An example of sexual abuse is rape; both women and men may become victims under different circumstances. The use of drugs may make addicts develop dominance over other sex, hence making them command them into forceful sex. The female gender is the most vulnerable when it comes to sexual abuse between teenagers.

Inequality

Among the problems that many poor people face is inequality in terms of allocation of resources (Eriksson &Broidy, 2017). People who live in shanties tend to struggle on different ends as they satisfy their needs. In some cases, there is no accomplishment of public needs such as health care. The government tends to consider the rich and middle-class individuals when it comes to public service. Many people who are poor struggle to live in the regions that are polluted. In some cases, there are no good roads, which make the places inaccessible.

When children who live in low-class families experience the kind of environment other citizens go through, they develop attitudes towards them. The attitude is later bound to become hatred, which may lead them into crimes. The feeling that public funds are only utilized by the rich makes them angry at them. Some adolescents end up moving to the regions to rob what they feel belongs to their class. This difference in terms of development is an issue that affects progress even in terms of security.

Consequences

Government

Juvenile delinquency affects many parties, which include the government, families, society and other involved parties. The government always spends so much on the development of correctional centers (Koval, 2019). The increased number of young criminals makes the government spend more funds on the handling of juvenile court cases. Increased expenditure may make the government stretch further by diverting some funds intended for some developments. Prevention of this consequence can be if children are made aware of the problems some behaviors may cause in the operations of the government.

Family

When a child turns into being a criminal, the parent and siblings are among the people affected both psychologically and physically. The absence of their family members makes them feel low and incomplete (Koval, 2019). Criminal behavior sometimes makes the family spend a lot of money on correctional measures. In some cases, the parent may end up losing parenting roles because the child is taken away from him or her by the government. The decision to take a child from the family is an intention of correcting him or her.

Victims of Crime

The victims of crime are among the people whose psychology is affected; some crimes such as rape may make them develop self-denial (Koval, 2019). Low self-esteem is a result of self-denial, and this may cause depression; this condition causes suicidal thoughts in the minds of victims. In some situations, victims are left very sick and require medical care; this makes the families struggle funding medical care. There is a delay in compensation when a person faces crime against him or her.

The Society

The society is another party that faces consequences of juvenile delinquency; the removal of children from society to rehabilitation centers or even jail leads to lesser numbers of people in the society. Societal norms also face a threat when there are more cases of juvenile delinquency (Koval, 2019). Morality is always important in ensuring harmony and the peaceful stay of people in an area. When children adopt crime-related behaviors, it affects morals; hence, things such as insecurity may arise.

Unemployment

In some cases, juvenile delinquency may result in more cases of unemployment; this is because more children who commit crimes may not get an opportunity to work with a company or organization in the future (Koval, 2019). Many people tend to believe that children who have a criminal record may become criminals at any point in life. However, some families may have a chance to solve the problem of criminal history in the juvenile courts without the issue becoming a public matter.

CONCLUSION

To sum up, we need to consider the fact that some groups of people are different from others. The difference that exists between the rich and poor should not be used to make children indulge in robbery and criminal activities. There should be an understanding between the rich and the poor. These requirements call for government involvement; they need to accomplish some roles such as universal development. Health care is among the services that every citizen should get regardless of their social status.

The theory helps us understand that the things we do in society affect what children will grow to become. Negativity and attitudes towards one another may create a difference that may result in crimes such as murder and rape. Living standards should not be an excuse for people to develop attitudes against each other. The use of drugs and other substances is a practice that requires interventions from every parent. The government should also enforce all the laws to ensure there is no use of drugs such as Marijuana in regions that the poor people live. The same case should be in the regions that the rich stay.

There is a need to understand the consequences that crimes have on the life of victims; they are forced to change their lifestyle because of one or a group of individuals. The effects that crime rates have on society should be considered in developing the best measures to handle juvenile delinquency. We should also ensure children understand the repercussions their behaviors may have on future activities such as working. All parties should always minimize the costs of handling juvenile crime cases by promoting preventive measures even if it costs us more than what we spend in solving cases in courts and treating victims.

References

1. Bernburg, J. G. (2019). Anomie Theory.In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice.
2. Eriksson, L., &Broidy, L. (2017). Strain Theory and Crime. In The Palgrave Handbook of Australian and New Zealand Criminology, Crime and Justice (pp. 543-556). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
3. GROß, E. M., Hövermann, A., &Messner, S. F. (2018).Marketized mentality, competitive/egoistic school culture, and delinquent attitudes and behavior: An application of institutional anomie theory. Criminology, 56(2), 333-369.
4. Hughes, L. A., Antonaccio, O., &Botchkovar, E. V. (2018). Neighborhoods, Individuals, and Instrumental Crime in Russia and Ukraine: A Multilevel Test of Merton’s Anomie Theory. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 34(4), 1019-1046.
5. Koval, M. M. (2019). Psychological Characteristics of Juvenile Deliquency.
6. Messner, S. F., & Rosenfeld, R. (2017).The present and future of institutional-anomie theory.In Taking Stock (pp. 127-148).Routledge.
7. Walsh, A. (2017). Behavior genetics and anomie/strain theory.In Biosocial Theories of Crime (pp. 97-129).Routledge.

The Causes Of Juvenile Delinquency In The USA

In the United States there are about 75 million juveniles and 1 out 9 of them are at risk of becoming delinquents. A juvenile is a young person that is, in the eyes of the law, someone who is under the legal adult age, which is 18 in most states but they go on to vary from state to state. When a juvenile becomes a delinquent or does delinquent activities, they have a tendency to commit crimes even though most of them are minor, they can get up to a point where the crime becomes major.

Out of the 75 million juveniles, around 2.1 million of them are arrested during a single year in the United States. In 2016, law enforcement agencies in the United States made more than 856,000 arrests of persons younger than 18. 43% of delinquency cases in 2014 involved white youth, 36% involved black youth, 18% involved Hispanic youth, 2% involved American Indian youth and 1% involved Asian youth (Charles 2018). Urban areas have the highest juvenile violence rates while rural areas have the lowest. While all neighborhoods and communities are not excluded from delinquent activities, it is believed to happen more in areas that make children feel they need to commit a crime in order to prosper.

More than a quarter of delinquency caseloads involved females. Juvenile courts handled 269,000 cases involving females and 705,100 involving males. In 2017, a study showed that female juveniles were given more lenient sentences than males depending on the complexity of the crime. Males are shown to become delinquent due to to lack of protection and guidance. The type of crime can also vary, as well as the consequences for it. The most common of crimes amongst adolescents are theft, vandalism, alcohol offenses, disorderly conduct, and assault. Latest research shows that “In 2016, there were an estimated 134,180 juvenile arrests for larceny-theft. About 4 in 10 (41%) of these arrests involved females, more than a quarter (27%) involved youth younger than 15, and 60% involved white youth” (Charles 2018). Most violent crimes committed by juveniles were most likely to occur in the hours immediately following the close of school on school days because after school youth tend to hang out with their friends, where they are most likely to get in trouble or commit crimes. Urban areas have the highest juvenile violence rates while rural areas have the lowest. Addressing many of these issues at an early age, adults could be able to put a decline in the amount of delinquent activities amongst youth.

The major causes of juvenile delinquency in the United States are peer pressure, dysfunctional families and poor school attendance. The first cause of juvenile delinquency is peer pressure. Peer pressure results in an influence from someone’s group of friends in a negative or positive way. The wrong kind of peer pressure can result in a child becoming a delinquent first hand and committing criminal acts. The pressure that most youth face can impact them in their adult lives and play a role on whether or not they will grow up and still live a life of crime. “Adolescents expand their peer relationships to occupy a central role in their lives, often replacing their parents and family as their main source of advice, socializing, and entertainment activities” (Health and Peer pressure).

Peer pressure has a greater impact on youth than adults because of the fact that youth spend more time in schools, classrooms and social settings where they are exposed to other children around the same ages as them, where they can start spending more time with friends and less time with family, where they are not constantly being told what to do and how to act. 1 out of every 5 teenagers experience some form of peer pressure, whether it’s positive or negative but the amount of peer pressure that has negative effects have risen 45% since 2011.

Youth are products of their environments and act how they were shown to act. If they grow up in areas that are known for violence and gangs, then they are more prone to feed in to peer pressure. Most of the time they often feed into peer pressure because of the fact that they want to fit in it or be liked and worry about children making fun of them or thinking they are not cool just because they do not want to feed into it but that varies from child to child. In the article, the author states, “Some kids give into peer pressure because they want to be liked, to fit in, or because they worry that other kids may make fun of them if they do not go along with the group. Others may go along because they are curious to try something new that others are doing. The idea that ‘everyone is doing it’ may influence some kids to ignore their better judgment or their common sense.”

Children often group themselves based on the interests they have in common with each other and one of them can introduce new concepts to the others because of a “everyone is doing it so lets do it too” kind of attitude. Latest research shows “surely students’ learning experiences are greatly influenced by their teachers and classmates”. Being around other peers can also impact the kind of person a teen becomes in their adult life. Peer pressure happens within students of all races, backgrounds and religions in any area of the United States. Youth can be pressured into smoking, drinking, sexual activity and theft. When peer pressure gets to a point where delinquent activities become a constant behavior. Existing research suggests that the extent of peer effect is usually stronger among students of same gender and racial background. Similarly, in schools where classroom assignment is based on students’ academic achievement, we would expect that peer effects will be stronger among students with similar academic levels. (Peer effects and juvenile delinquency).

A second cause of juvenile delinquency is having or coming from a dysfunctional family. The type of family you grow into can have many positive and negative effects on how you act and behave as you get older. Children growing up in dysfunctional families often lack the basic structures of love, communication and support they need. Having poor communication skills can lead to isolation and this stops a child from being able to communicate properly and display emotions. It is important for a child to have a reliable adult in their lives. Having a strong bond with an adult can help influence a child’s mind and actions that is going to help guide them through what is wrong and right. Displaying emotions and communication is an important part of child development because not being able to express your feelings can lead to having an aggressive temper. In the article “The Effects of Growing Up in A Dysfunctional Family,” Martin writes, “In dysfunctional families.

Adults tend to be so preoccupied with their own problems and pain that they dont give their children what they need and crave – constituency, safety, unconditional love. As a result, children feel highly stressed, anxious and unloved” (Martin and Lcsw). A dysfunctional family can be displayed in more ways than one, and most of the time it’s not realized as some parents try and convince themselves that their the best family or that they do not want to admit that their family lacks coherence. Dysfunality can consist of parents who drink or do drugs, controlling parents, parents that work a lot and don’t make enough time for their children, and abusive parents. Children of alcoholic parents are much more likely to become alcoholics than children of non-alcoholics.

The reasons behind dysfunctional families varies between a few different factors. Those beings, finances, a history of dysfunality in the family or religious belief systems. When a family begins to experience low finances, everyone begins to become anxious and disorganized, which leaves gaps for a family to begin to shift in structure and lose their coherence. Families in more urban areas where the poverty levels are higher have children that are twice as likely to show delinquent behavior as a way to subsist with the situation. Families that have a history of being dysfunctional are likely to pass that down in their way of teaching to their children. Since children and young adults pick up on behaviors and practices around them, they give back what they receive.

A child who doesn’t feel loved or appreciated in their families won’t know how to or might have a difficult time loving and caring for someone else. In a family that has strong religious beliefs can tend to be stricter on their children and leaves no room for them to question and develop an understanding for why their parents are being strict first of all, which leads to dysfunality.

Youth that come from violent homes and backgrounds are more likely to take that violence and run with it. They develop a “do not care” kind of attitude which can also lead them to get in trouble more easily. Often you can tell how aggressive a child will be around the ages they attend kindergarten and preschool. In the article “Juvenile Delinquency- family Structure it states, “Single parents often find it hard to get assistance. If they must work to support themselves and their families, they are likely to have difficulty providing supervision for their children. Poor supervision, like alcoholism and criminality, seems to generate delinquency”. Some childhoods are more difficult than others, and families tend to contribute to it. Due to juveniles lacking appropriate parental controls and attention, children will try and find it elsewhere, which could mean getting into trouble and acting out just to get a reaction out of someone.

The third cause of juvenile delinquency in the United States is poor school attendance. Going to school is an important part of childhood years. Missing a significant amount of school can impact a child’s performance and ultimately set them up to fall behind. Missing school has been linked to delinquent activity as well as having a negative impact on them in their adult lives because of their lack of structure and support. Research shows that “kids who are allowed to miss school when they’re young are more likely to skip school when they’re older. And that can lead to other consequences”. Students who struggle academically might miss school because of the pressure of not being able to grasp the criteria. Each day a child misses school in a row, it leaves room for them to fall behind and not be able to catch up, especially if they were already struggling. Students missing lots of school days have a higher chance of performing unsatisfactorily as the years progress.

Students have different reasons for missing school, whether they are excused or not. A few of those reasons being a lack of transportation, being bullied, unsafe conditions, poor health and lack of aid, having to look after younger siblings, housing, whether or not you are a English-Language Learner and whether or not a student had a disability or not. Garcia and Weiss states, “Hispanic ELLs (English language learners) and Native American students were the most likely to miss three or more days of school (24.1 and 24.0 percent, respectively, missed more than three days of school), followed by black students (23.0 percent) and Hispanic non-ELL and white students (19.1 and 18.3 percent, respectively). Only 8.8 percent of Asian non-ELL students missed more than three days of school” (Garcia & Weiss 2018).

Missing school during the day has been linked to more daytime robberies and vandalism. Children who feel like their parents don’t show enough interest in their child’s education were likely to not care too much for it either. Children who are not influenced to get up every morning and prepare themselves for school everyday can establish multiple bad habits, which is why it is a good idea to install a morning routine into your child that would help them practice good habits. The type of school a child attends also plays a role in whether or not they will commit delinquent acts. If children are in a school setting where everyone is doing what they want, a child might feel like they don’t have to listen either. Jacob and Lovett states, “For younger students, research has shown that chronic absenteeism in kindergarten is associated with lower achievement in reading and math in later grades, even when controlling for a child’s family income, race, disability status, attitudes toward school, socioemotional development, age at kindergarten entry, type of kindergarten program, and preschool experience” (Jacob and Lovett, 2017).

Schools that do not get the proper funding are more likely to lack order, guidance and discipline. Having an active adult in the lives of children during school times can motivate them into working hard as they are likely to be congratulated and feel like what they are doing is a good thing. Latest research shows, “When students are absent for fewer days, their grades and reading skills often improve—even among those students who are struggling in school. Students who attend school regularly also feel more connected to their community, develop important social skills and friendships, and are significantly more likely to graduate from high school, setting them up for a strong future” (Absences Add Up, 2019).

In conclusion, Juvenile delinquency in the United States is greatly impacted by their surroundings and the type of people they have in their lives. Peer pressure, dysfunctional families and not having the appropriate educational background can lead to people living lives of crime. Making sure a child feels loved, appreciated and supported is very important because it might not affect them today or tomorrow but soon enough it will. The rising rates as well as the reason behind juvenile delinquency is because of the lack of parental guidance and kids pick up on the actions that are being displayed by their parents, communities and peers. Juvenile delinquency is a widespread issue, while they vary from case to case because every child is different, every household is different and every child’s guidance or role model is different.

Peer pressure influences children to think about making choices for themselves and whether or not those choices are going to benefit them or destroy them. The likelihood of a juvenile giving into pressure increases with the amount of pressure that is being displayed. Families and delinquency go hand and hand and when there is a lack in structure or family connection, there’s going to be a lack in structure for a child which leaves room for them to act out and misbehave. Missing school has important impacts on a child’s way of living. It teaches them skills that will be useful later on in life as well as making sure they are prepared for a more beneficial life.

Lowering The Age Of Juvenile Delinquency From 15 To 12 Years Old

Diokno, there is one dream that we all Filipino share: that our children may have a better life than we have had. To make this country, our country, a nation for our children.

Parents are busy with their jobs, so they are having a hard time taking care of their children, because of the absence of their parents, their children find their happiness and care from the people who are surrounded. Eventually, some people whom they are together with are the people that bring them to danger, they were being used to do the things that are against the law. The generation today was way too far from what yesterday had because in this generation teenagers are more engage in pre-marital sex so they lack the knowledge of how they could raise their newborn children. So, when the children grow older, they are lacking with the knowledge also on how they could deal with society. In that part of their life, they more likely to engage and involve different kinds of bad habits, worse things when it becomes crime and hard for them to escape.

As I observed nowadays, children tend to do it because of peer pressure. So, most of them are encouraged to do several things that could put them in crime. Also, when I’ve watch television there are much news about a crime that many children are involved. Many articles also posted on the internet, that this bill should be accepted as law, even though the criminality rate was not yet surpassed unlike other crime that the Philippines was dealing with, we should take action of it because the safety of the children in our country was involved here. We should have a fast action of it before it blow-up and hard to solve because every small wound will grow big if it doesn’t be healed. There was a statistic that in the year 2018 the criminality rate of the children ages nine to eleven years old was decreased by fifty-two percent. But it wouldn’t say that we should stop proposing this bill because of the lower the crime rate of the children. We should always care for their safety because there are many people would want to abuse them. The most presenting crime that minors do was theft, it was recorded that there 6,535 of it. This can say that the problem of our country in the economic was increasing. Even children can also do this kind of crime. I can say that because of our economic status children couldn’t deal with it and think of a way that even their life could put in danger. This problem should be first to be solved because it was the most pressing issue and the start of many crimes here in the Philippines.

Juvenile delinquency was one of the problems here in the Philippines that we should deal with because it involves the minors that are needed assistance for the world full of danger. It was a root to some parents that have children and don’t take care of them. So, their children find it to the wrong people and abused them for a selfish act of some people. Having this kind of problem, the parents should take more responsibility of it because they were the ones who is helping their children to be nurtured and teaching it on what is good and right, on how they will deal with society. They were also the one who was being with the children in their everyday life before going outside. When the children are been caught from any kind of crime the parents also suffer from it because they were responsible for repairing the damage s that their children have done. A child was being said to be juvenile when their life was being seen was too dark and gloomy so they couldn’t deal with it. And because of it their attitude was changing and started to be rude.

Our government should take action for this because the generation now was different from yesterday. Children nowadays were too much engaged in finding happiness and care, but sometimes when they find those things, they don’t assess it and always grab it without knowing the possible danger when they get involved to some people that only try to abuse them and afterward lose them and put them on crime. The reason why children could do this such thing because of the absence presence of their parents in guiding them. so, they couldn’t know if the things they do were right. For some, instances children do it because of poverty, we all know that here in the Philippines it was one of many problems that people are dealing with. The children try to help their parents but for their age, it is not accepted that they can get a job. So, most of them do them do an illegal way. As a lesson for their parents, they should take care of their children, and it will not be involved in any crime. Lowering the age of juvenile delinquency to help the children not to do any crimes and for their parent they should guide their children. Also, some of the teenagers become parents. So, they have a lack of knowledge about how they would guide their children.

Approving this will lessen the crime that the children will be involve because they could build up fear from going to jail when they commit a crime. Giving also a lesson for their parents to take good care of their children and giving them much attention to preventing them from engaging in different kinds of crimes and being abuse also by the people. And according to Jose Rizal, the youth is the hope of our future. Because of it, we should be more responsible for raising them, they are carrying the hope we needed soon. The parents also are the one will nurture their children before it came out in the society to face the many struggles in life.

The Concepts Of Juvenile Delinquency

Juvenile delinquency, as we know it today, is a relatively recent concept. This does not mean, however, that young people in the past were more compliant than they are today. The American juvenile justice system has developed over the past century with a number of differences that distinguish it from the adult criminal justice process. Juvenile justice advocates supported the differences on diminished youthful offender accountability and legal understanding, and youths’ greater amenability to treatment. The first juvenile court was established in Chicago, Illinois, in 1899; yet a century later there is still considerable debate over the goals and the legal procedures for dealing with juvenile offenders. It was believed that youths could be held responsible for their unlawful behavior and society could be protected through an informal justice system that focused on treatment and “the best interests of the child.” This approach is still appropriate and effective for the majority of juvenile offenders whose crimes range from status offenses, to property offenses, to drug offenses.

The juvenile justice system has come under increasing scrutiny, however, as a growing number of juveniles are involved in violent crimes, especially school violence, gang-related violence, and assaults with weapons resulting in fatalities and serious injuries. Juvenile Delinquency refers to criminal acts committed by children or teenagers, specifically anyone below the age of eighteen (or 17 in some States). Common sentiment on this issue is that the crimes they commit hurt society and hurt the children themselves. Much research and debate revolve around the problem of juvenile delinquency in the US. The research is mainly focused on the causes of juvenile delinquency and which strategies have successfully diminished crime rates among the youth population. (Wikipedia, 2019). There are many factors that cause juvenile delinquent Children whose parents have been incarcerated are far more likely to show delinquent behavior than their peers. Sometimes children want to test their parents’ limits, or society’s limits. Some people believe that imposing strict laws such as curfews will cause a drop in juvenile delinquency rates, but sometimes imposing strict rules merely give the children more of an incentive to break them. (Wikipedia,2019)

“Behavior of youths under 18 years of age which is not acceptable to society and is generally regarded as calling for some kind of admonishment punishment or corrective actions”. (Coleman,1981)

Many children reach adulthood without involvement in serious delinquent behavior, even in the face of multiple risks. Although risk factors may help identify which children are most in need of preventive interventions, they cannot identify which particular children will become serious or chronic offenders. It has long been known that most adult criminals were involved in delinquent behavior as children and adolescents; most delinquent children and adolescents, however, do not grow up to be adult criminals (Robins, 1978).

Contemporary programs of delinquency-control can be traced to the enterprising reforms of the child-savers who, at the end of the nineteenth century, helped to create special judicial and correctional institutions for the labeling, processing, and management of ‘troublesome’ youth. Child-saving was a conservative and romantic movement, designed to impose sanctions on conduct unbecoming youth and to disqualify youth from enjoying adult privileges. The child-savers were prohibitionists, in a general sense, who believed in close supervision of adolescents’ recreation and leisure. Poor children could become a financial burden, and the child savers believed these children presented a threat to the moral fabric of society. Child-saving organizations influenced state legislatures to enact laws giving courts the power to commit children who were runaways or criminal offenders to specialized institutions. The most prominent of the care facilities developed by child savers was the House of Refuge, which opened in New York in 1825. It was founded on the concept of protecting potential criminal youths by taking them off the streets and reforming them in a family-like environment. (cjcj.org)

The Features Of Juvenile Offenders

Juvenile offenders are often cataloged as irrational thinkers and even highly dangerous criminals that threaten the safety of modern society. They are placed behind bars to serve their time in the hopes that they emerged having learned their lesson between right and wrong, so they will not reoffend in the future. Far too often, justice is not actually achieved and instead juveniles are the victims; their age makes them vulnerable to maltreatment from their legal caregivers. Often times their crimes are simply trying to escape their abuser who is often a family member. While they are incarcerated, instead of being protected from harm and being prepped for life back in normal society, juvenile delinquents continue to be released from the system with a variety of mental health issues and plenty memories of trauma to reflect on for the rest of their life. Lobbying for reform in structure of environments and reentry programs in the juvenile justice system is crucial to help the youth break their cycle of recidivism.

Rehabilitation sounds like the proper solution to juvenile delinquents in theory, but far too often they are executed poorly and do more harm than good. There is still hope though, through more and more research by forensic psychologists, building the path to the right approach to juvenile rehabilitation is a dream that is becoming more and more possible. The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice (FDJJ) has made great strides in their dedication to address the issues of safety and security of juveniles within a residential environment of youth offenders. They found that, “Although many factors are known to affect youth safety within a residential environment, none are more significant than the use of physical restraints. Physical intervention with youths breaks down relationships between staff and youths, often compromising the program’s ability to provide effective treatment” (Baglivio and Olson 2013). This is only a single example of the efforts being made to effect positive change within these types of facilities.

While the elimination of physical restraints shows a thoughtful approach to juvenile justice reform, not much can be praised until the use of solitary confinement for juveniles is far in the past. There is not much data available on the effect of solitary confinement on juveniles, but it is safe to say that that their less developed brains have a reduced capacity for dealing with what is shown to be psychological torture with serious results. A study conducted in New York jails found that inmates committed to solitary confinement were 6.9 times more likely to harm themselves. Not only that, but 53.3 percent of self-harm acts were performed while in solitary confinement (Inmates in Solitary Confinement 7 Times More Likely to Harm Themselves:

Study 2014). Despite the facts, solitary confinement is still being used. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention completed a survey where they questioned 7,073 youths who were in a juvenile detention facility in 2003. They found, “… a quarter of detainees reported having been placed in solitary confinement at some time during their incarceration… in 2014 the same office reported that nearly half of juvenile detention facilities reported locking youth in some type of isolation for more than four hours at a time” (Clark 2017). This type of punishment is unacceptable if the goal of juvenile detention facilities is actually rehabilitation.

Research shows that the length of time within residential custody is not a variable in recidivism rates. Studies actually show that the probability of the juvenile reoffending again once they are released are highly elevated. So how can this number be decreased? Reentry programs are one of the most common solutions to help properly acclimate those in custody, but there are still issues with them. During a post-discharge interview, a sixteen-year-old boy named John pointed out, “I went from this totally structured environment for eight long months back to a totally unstructured home with no real plan before I left [residential]. I am going back to the same home [life] that I left in the first place.… I did all this work getting my (expletive) together while my mom and step-dad did nothing. All this time, they could have been doing something with my counselors, anything” (Sells, Sullivan, and DeVore 2012). There is no wonder John is most likely going to return to the same facility for the same or a similar crime. After returning home, the structure and routine he worked to build fades into the past and he must live in the same toxic factors that led to his arrest in the first place.

With the residential facility often being far away from the youth’s family and community, reentry programs run into the challenges of making sure the individual will continue to be held accountable and supported after their release. While it may be difficult to accomplish, a holistic approach is necessary to make the most impact. Out of this issue, Parenting with Love and Limits was born. A group of policy makers and juvenile justice stakeholders took it upon themselves to create a curriculum that encompassed parenting groups, individual therapy, family therapy, case management. Early discharge, video conferencing, and wraparound teams were utilized to connect the different facets of the juveniles’ reentry. What really made the blueprint unique was the communities were encouraged to change the model in order to fit their strengths and weaknesses. The Justice Research center revealed that those in the PLL program had a rearrest rate of 30 percent compared with the comparison group’s rate of 44 percent (Sell et al. 2012). This goes to show that not only are effective reentry programs possible, but also that connection between the different facets of their rehabilitation is essential.

An even better solution to Parenting with Love and Learning’s approach to connecting all the different individuals handling their case, is to keep them local in the first place. Not only does this allow for more parent visits, but it can also cut their overhead cost of treatment. New York is working to provide incentives for counties to expand their local treatment programs. Incarceration, particularly for juveniles, is an expensive proposition. According to Justice Policy Institute, “Each year, capital costs to build new facilities run in the range of $100,000 per cell… In comparison, community options such as drug treatment or counseling, including wrap-around services that make sure individuals get to school or work on time, rarely exceed $15,000 and often cost less than $5,000 per year” (Cost-Effective Youth Corrections: Rationalizing the Fiscal Architecture of Juvenile Justice Systems 2017). The better and more fiscally responsibly choice is clear.

In addition to giving juveniles proper treatment during their incarceration and the reentry process, respecting their due rights is vital to maintaining the Juvenile Justice System. In 1899 in Cook County, Illinois, the first juvenile court was founded, finally demonstrating the recognition of the distinction between juveniles and adults (Youth in the Justice System: An Overview, 2018). The early stages of the juvenile court were more informal and private which, while more comfortable for a juvenile than the intimidation of a proper court room, allowed for the violation of their due process rights. This begs the question, what are the due process rights for juveniles?

With the addition of the juvenile court, the outline of what juveniles were entitled to developed over time in a series of many different trials. In 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled youths charged with crimes of delinquency within the juvenile court are guaranteed the same due process rights as an adult offender in re Gault (Facts and Case Summary- In re Gault n.d.). While this covered both the right to counsel and the right to confront witnesses against them, the Supreme Court later on added the right against double jeopardy and the right to have the charges against them proven beyond a reasonable doubt. In 1971, however, the Supreme Court held that the 14th Amendment did not guarantee juveniles going through the juvenile court process the right to trial by jury. Their reasoning stated that, “Were a jury—a major formality in the criminal process—imposed on juvenile trials, there would be little left to distinguish a juvenile delinquency hearing from a criminal trial…the plurality held that because juries are not necessary to ensure adequate fact-finding, as such, they are not vital for due process” (United States Supreme Court Juvenile Justice Jurisprudence n.d.).

While some due rights of the juvenile are guaranteed, many differ from state to state. Most states have some type of confidentiality laws, often protecting the identity of youth from being revealed for the media to publicly broadcast understanding that the information about their crime is out there forever and will not be beneficial to the juvenile when the goal is rehabilitation. These laws typically only protect juveniles who commit acts of delinquency and status offenses. If a juvenile commits a criminal offense, then, under the discretion of a judge, they can be waived to the judgement of the adult criminal courts. When sentenced under criminal court, the goal is not necessarily rehabilitation. In 2005, Roper v. Simmons decided that those under the age of 18 could not be sentenced to death on the grounds that it was cruel and unusual punishment (Flynn, 2008).

According to Juvenile Justice, “The stated purpose of the juvenile court is treatment of the child and community protection, not punishment as for adult felony offenders in criminal court” (Lawrence and Hesse 2010: 138). This must be remembered during the entire judicial process for juveniles if crime and recidivism rates are to decrease. Much like the education sector, a case by case approach is needed to properly meet the juvenile’s specific needs. While programs such as Parenting with Love and Limits hit the mark spot on, change from within the justice system is vital. Solitary confinement should be eradicated from both juvenile and adult prisons as it greatly increases the probability of the individual self-harming. While the juvenile court system has come a long way since its beginning in 1899, there is still much room for improvement.

References

1. Anon. 2017. “Cost-Effective Youth Corrections: Rationalizing the Fiscal Architecture of Juvenile Justice Systems.” Justice Policy Institute.
2. Anon. 2014. “ Inmates in Solitary Confinement 7 Times More Likely to Harm Themselves: Study.” CBS News, February. (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/inmates-in-solitary-confinement-7-times-more-likely-to-harm-themselves-study/).
3. Anon. 2019. “United States Supreme Court Juvenile Justice Jurisprudence.” NJDC. (https://njdc.info/practice-policy-resources/united-states-supreme-court-juvenile-justice-jurisprudence/).
4. Anon. 2018. “Youth in the Justice System: An Overview.” Juvenile Law Center. (https://jlc.org/youth-justice-system-overview).
5. Clark, Andrew B. 2017. “Juvenile Solitary Confinement as a Form of Child Abuse.” The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law. Retrieved (http://jaapl.org/content/45/3/350).
6. Dierkhising, C. B., Lane, A., & Natsuaki, M. N. (2014). Victims behind bars: A preliminary study of abuse during juvenile incarceration and post-release social and emotional functioning. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 20(2), 181–190. https://doi-org.argo.library.okstate.edu/10.1037/law0000002
7. Flynn, E. (2008). Dismantling the Felony-Murder Rule: Juvenile Deterrence and Retribution Post-‘Roper v. Simmons’. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 156(4), 1049-1076. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40041400
8. Olson, D., & Baglivio, M. (2013). Creating a Safe Residential Environment for Juvenile Offenders: The Florida Experience. Corrections Today, 75(1), 64. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.argo.library.okstate.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=f5h&AN=88315048&site=ehost-live
9. Sells, S., Sullivan, I., & DeVore, D. (2012). Stopping the Madness: A New Reentry System for Juvenile Corrections. Corrections Today, 74(2), 40. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.argo.library.okstate.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=f5h&AN=80131985&site=ehost-live

Environmental Effects On Juvenile Delinquents

Crimes are actions that hurt a person and/or property. They are performed by one or more persons. These actions are punishable by law and can lead to imprisonment for a period of time depending on the severity of the case. Adults, 18 and older, are viewed as criminals for their crimes. They can either be sent to jail or prison. A misdemeanor is not as severe as a felony and people spend up to one year in jail. A felony is a more serious crime that can lead to a lifetime in prison if the case is severe enough. Younger people that commit crimes are known as juvenile delinquents. They end up in a detention center for younger persons. This is their version of jail for committing a crime.

Juvenile delinquents have a history of choosing to the bad choices as opposed to doing what is morally correct in their respective society. Young people learn right and wrong from their environments, such as their parents, family members, and peers in school. They observe what actions lead to unwanted consequences and which are left unpunished.

According to the Mischel Marshmallow Experiment, young children that lack the self-control to wait for the marshmallows performed worse in school due to their impulsivity and lack of self-control (Mischel, Shoda, and Rodriguez, 1989). Also, this is a great example of the Ainslie-Rachlin Model. The Ainslie-Rachlin Model is when a person chooses a small reward sooner over a larger reward that will be received later. The person does not have enough self-control to stop themselves from choosing a smaller reward sooner over a larger reward. They are impulsive in the sense that they will disobey orders at the risk of losing a greater reward. Juvenile delinquency has existed for a long time now. Children are more at risk to behave in a delinquent manner when they have had prior exposure to criminals in their inner circle (Bellis, Lowey, Leckenby, Hughes, and Harrison, 2013).

Young children whom commit crimes are known as juvenile delinquents. This is a term used to identify those who commit crimes but are not able to be legally charged due to their age. Such crimes include, robbery, battery, and assault to name a few. These are examples of property crimes and personal crimes. Researchers have performed studies to get an introspective viewpoint as to why and what might be possible causes of these actions. A study by Novero, Booker-Loper, and Warren in 2011 found that most juvenile delinquents performed such crimes due to having a low self-esteem, poor eating habits, and prior experience with people that are or have been incarcerated.

According to Kaplan, one reason why delinquency occurs is due to low self-esteem (Kaplan, 1972). Kaplan states that they use these criminal acts to compensate and cope for how they view themselves. Rebelling temporarily raises their self-image and allows them to feel an ego boost. This leads to them following a cycle of feeling bad about themselves, coping, and receiving an ego boost. Each time they perform a crime or behave mischievously, they feel superior to the law when they are not caught.

Biological factors also play a role in misbehaving at a young age. Prenatal and birth complications as well as the rejection of their mother within the few months have shown to increase the likelihood of a child growing up to be more aggressive (Raine, Meloy, Bihrle, Stoddard, LaCasse, and Buchsbaum, 1988). Raine also noted that low levels of cortisol in young children is a possible indicator of aggression later on in life (Glenn & Raine, 2014). According to Raine and Glenn, any disruptions to the hypothalamus, pituitary, and adrenal glands will cause a hormonal imbalance which leads to antisocial behavior.

Being exposed to criminal activity teaches the children that the behavior is what they should strive to achieve. They are being taught to make the wrong decisions at a young age. Children in low social economic status areas are more at risk to becoming juvenile delinquents because they lack the appropriate resources to achieve something greater.

The combination of children’s self-image, biological factors, and environmental factors play a key role in their development. Most children are not fortunate enough to have positive mentors in their lives. Therefore they fall into a vicious cycle of committing crimes. Breaking the cycle is more difficult when their only role models are their parents that have been placed in jail or prison and are absent from their lives.

Parental incarcerations affects approximately 1 in every 25 children (Sykes & Pettit, 2014). In an average school, each class holds about 25 children, this means at least one child in each class has a parent that is or has been to jail or prison. This negatively impacts them in their school setting because they are perceived as the bad children in the class. Most mimic the behavior they are exposed to at home. This varies amongst social class and race but the outcomes is almost always the same. The family is left as a single parent household. The singular parent does what they can do maintain the structure of the family together and at times fails to provide enough attention to their child(ren).