Classifying Delinquency

When discussing the issue of juvenile delinquency most people generalize this topic by categorizing all persons under the age of 18 into one broad group. This way of oversimplifying and categorizing a group of offenders does not help when trying to prevent and rehabilitate them. Instead of one grand explanation for delinquency, it may be more accurate to think of one explanation for those who begin their criminal careers at a later age and one for those who begin their criminal careers earlier (Patterson & Yoerger, 1993). Simply labeling a person due to their age and putting them into a large group based on their age is narrow minded thinking and does not help solve the problem. This way of categorizing juveniles assumes they are all psychologically similar. “Assuming that all teenagers who commit crimes are psychologically similar is wrong.” (Moffitt, 1993) To obtain more accurate research and to properly prevent and reduce juvenile delinquency we must classifying youth offenders into two narrower groups “early occurring and late blooming” offenders. Early occurring delinquents are youth who commit their first offense prior to the age of 15.  Late blooming delinquents are classified as youth who commit their first offense at the age of 15 or later.

It’s always difficult when trying to classify youth into groups because each offender has a unique situation. Some kids straighten out their lives after a few, petty delinquent acts, while others “spiral downward into serious crime” (Moffitt & Harrington, in press). However, research has shown that late bloomers are less likely to become career criminals than early occurring delinquents. Adolescents who start delinquent activities at ages 15-17 are more inclined to stop delinquent behavior as they mature. In fact, almost 85 percent of late bloomers by the age 28 have stopped committing crimes (Moffitt, 1993). These adolescents account for the majority of delinquent offenders. The majority of these offenders commit few delinquent acts and few serious crimes, most stop offending by the time they reach maturity. Psychologically these offenders are deemed as normal. Most offenders are socially skilled, popular amongst their peers, and have no prior problems. Late-blooming adolescents can be found in most communities, their families appear to be less disadvantaged than those of early occurring delinquents, and the parents appear more skillful in family management practices (Steinberg, 1987).

There are a number of influencing factors that cause late blooming delinquents. The most commonly accepted factors are: antisocial peer pressure, poor parental supervision, and the desire to participate in adult activities. Teenagers constantly want to be treated as adults and make their own decisions. Delinquency may be one of the only tastes of adulthood available to young people (Steinberg, 1991). According to Moffitt and Harrington (in press), “every curfew broken and car stolen is a statement of independence and maturity”. It is common that these offenders merely lack maturity and responsibility. These offenders are more likely to stop offending with time. As they become older and more mature, the majority acquire jobs and families thus ending their brief criminal careers.

Early occurring offenders are far more problematic than late blooming offenders. When youth begin committing crimes at an earlier age than 15, most develop antisocial behaviors and continue committing criminal activity as adults.  The causes of these offenders are very different than late blooming offenders and require a different response.

Most early occurring offenders show signs as early as preschool. Early predictors are: aggression, impulsiveness, lack of social skills, and lack of self-control. Factors such as hyperactivity or genetic influences may predispose these youngsters to delinquency, but they don’t tell the whole story (Steinberg, 1989). Early delinquents are often a result of poor parenting. According to some studies, about 30 to 40 percent of child antisocial behavior can be accounted for by family interaction patterns (Patterson, 1986; Yoshikawa, 1994). This is caused by negative interactions such as violence and yelling between family members and poor parenting. In normal families children use both aggressive and socially acceptable ways of resolving problems. Antisocial children try to resolve conflict by using only aggressive ways, such as whining, temper tantrums, or physical violence. If parents allow this aggressive problem solving behavior to continue, this teaches the child that aggression works. Patterson, Bank, and their colleagues have determined that parenting practices produce antisocial behavior in children; antisocial behavior, in turn, leads to delinquency in early adolescence. Overtime this behavior has a “snowball effect” and progressively becomes worse as the child develops.

After classifying the adolescents we can then begin assisting them with their problems. Late blooming juveniles are often easier to treat. These juveniles are psychologically stable and are able to interact socially amongst their peers. To prevent them from committing delinquency they need to be taught how to not succumb to negative peer pressure. Getting them involved in time consuming programs with constant monitoring by positive mentors will also prevent them from committing delinquency. Early occurring delinquents are more difficult due to their antisocial nature. These adolescents have developed antisocial tendencies which needs to be addressed and then retaught how to interact socially amongst their peers in a socially acceptable manner. To affectively rehabilitate early occurring juveniles we need to be involved with their family and parents. The parents play a big role in the development of antisocial behavior and therefore need to learn how to properly act and discipline their child. Once the child establishes what is and isn’t socially acceptable behavior can they begin to properly interact amongst their peers.

When we classify delinquents into two groups we can then determine how to properly treat the delinquents. Late blooming delinquents are typically psychologically stable and are able to interact with society positively. Early occurring delinquents develop antisocial behavior and do not know how to positively interact with society due to their upbringing. The treatment for each group may be different but early prevention is best for both groups of delinquents. So if we want to be able to properly diagnose and treat juvenile delinquents we need to be able to determine which of these categories they fall under and from there we can begin to properly rehabilitate them.

Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior:

A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review 100, 674-701.

Moffitt, T. E., & Harrington, H. L. (In press). Delinquency across development: The

natural history of antisocial behavior in the Dunedin multidisciplinary health

and development study. In W. Stanton & P. A. Silva (Eds.), The Dunedin study:

From birth to adulthood. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

 Patterson, G. R. (1986). Performance models for antisocial boys. American Psychologist

44, 432-444.

 Patterson, G. R., & Yoerger, K. (1993). Differentiating outcomes and histories for early

and late onset arrests. Paper presented at the American Society of Criminology,

Phoenix, AZ.

 Steinberg, L. (1987). Familial factors in delinquency: A developmental perspective.

Journal of Adolescent Research, 2, 255-268.

 Steinberg, L. (1991). Adolescent transitions and alcohol and other drag use prevention.

Preventing adolescent drug use: From theory to practice. Office of Substance

Abuse Prevention Monograph 8, (pp. 13-51). Washington, DC: U.S. Department

of Health and Human Services.

 Steinberg, L. (1989). Adolescence (2nd ed.). New York: Knopf.

Steinberg, L.

 Yoshikawa, H. (1994). Prevention as cumulative protection: Effects of early family support

and education on chronic delinquency and its risks. Psychological Bulletin,

115, 28-54.

Antisocial Youth and Violence

Youth violence happens more often than you would imagine. In the state of California, the Governor’s Office of Gang and Youth Violence Policy recorded the arrests of violent juvenile offenses which included: murder, forcible rape, robbery, assault and kidnapping. In 2009 the state of California recorded a total of 15,387 violent juvenile offenses from the ages 10-17. What causes a juvenile to become violent? Is there any way of detecting potentially violent behavior?

Violent behavior has been defined as behavior including physical injurious attacks, life-threatening use of drugs, murder, and suicide (Dwyer, Osher, & Hoffman, 2000). Violent behavior is directly linked with antisocial behavior.  Antisocial behavior does not exclusively mean a person is quiet and isolated; a popular individual can exhibit antisocial behavior. Antisocial behavior is defined as "hostile or harmful acts to organized society" or "behavior that deviates sharply from the social norm" (Merriam-Webster, 2011). This definition can apply to both the isolated and popular juvenile.

These two different types of behaviors have been classified into two broad groups, internalizing and externalizing. Internalizing disorders are directed inward and involve behavioral deficits, such as withdrawal, isolation, and depression. Externalizing disorders are directed outward and involve behavioral excesses, such as disturbing others, verbal and physical aggression, and acts of violence (Nelson, Rutherford, & Wolford, 1996).

Antisocial youth who display externalizing behaviors are the main focus of research and of school and community intervention programs. Their actions gain public attention because they act out and display egregious behaviors. If these juveniles commit crimes they will most likely get arrested; then they typically become involved with the juvenile justice system.

Juveniles who display internalizing behavior disorders are very troubled, but often go unnoticed by school personnel and parents because they hardly ever act out. For this reason they are in danger of not receiving services for their developmental problems (Heward, 2000). However, eventually these juveniles might show externalizing behaviors in the form of violence or suicide. Suicide is the third leading cause of death among youth, according to a report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Thornton, Craft, Dahlberg, Lynch, & Baer, 2000).

There a several ways to hypothesize who will eventually become a violent offender. The most commonly accepted predictor is the age that a juvenile commits their first crime. Early age offenders are more prone to eventually being violent and career criminals. Boys arrested between the ages of 6 and 14 are at greater risk of becoming frequent and violent offenders than boys arrested after the age of 14 (Patterson & Yoerger, 1993). This is a widely accepted theory for juveniles becoming violent and repeat offenders. “Those who begin their criminal careers early get started on the wrong foot and are more likely to become frequent offenders, commit violent crimes, and continue criminal activity as adults.” (Moffitt & Harrington, in press, p. 8)

In order to stop youth from becoming violent offenders we need to get involved before there is ever crime. This has been stated by well-known psychologists for a period of time, “to do the most good, policies and programs must begin before the youth become involved in the formal criminal justice system” (Hawkins & Weis, 1985). Due to the classification of externalizing and internalizing behaviors we can determine which juveniles are considered to be antisocial. With this information we then know who may potentially become a violent offender. If we can identify these juveniles at an early age and get them involved in school or community programs we can lower the violence rate of California.

Dwyer, K. P., Osher, D., & Hoffman, C. C. (2000). Creating responsive schools: Contextualizing early warning, timely response. Exceptional Children, 66 (3), 347-365.

Hawkins, J. D., & Weis, J. G. (1985). The social development model: An integrated approach to delinquency prevention. Journal of Primary Prevention, 6, 73-97.

Heward, W.L. (2000). Exceptional Children: An Introduction to Special Education. Upper Saddle River, N J: Prentice-Hall.

Merriam-Webster OnLine: The Language Center: Retrieved on November 6, 2011 from: http://www.m-w.com

Moffitt, T. E., & Harrington, H. L. (In press). Delinquency across development: The natural history of antisocial behavior in the Dunedin multidisciplinary health and development study. In W. Stanton & P. A. Silva (Eds.), The Dunedin study: From birth to adulthood. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nelson, C. M., Rutherford, R. B., & Wolford, B. I. (Eds.). (1996). Comprehensive and Collaborative Systems That Work for Troubled Youth: A National Agenda. Richmond, KY: National Coalition for Juvenile justice Services.

Patterson, G. R., & Yoerger, K. (1993). Differentiating outcomes and histories for early and late onset arrests. Paper presented at the American Society of Criminology, Phoenix, AZ.

Thornton, T. N., Craft, C. A., Dahlberg, L. L., Lynch, B. S., & Baer, K. (2000). Best practices of youth violence prevention: A sourcebook for community action. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.

Social Status or Parents?

A child’s family greatly affects a child’s fundamental development. How much of an influence does economic status and parenting have on a child? Can you blame the parents or social status for juvenile delinquent behavior?

Many child psychologists say  there is a common thread between juvenile delinquent children, low self- esteem due to absent parents, and parental negligence; mainly caused by parents with their own chemical dependency issues or incarceration . Psychologists Ziggler and Taussig state that “precursors to later frequent offending include poor child-rearing practices, poor parental supervision, criminal parents and siblings, low family income, large family size, poor housing, low intelligence, and low educational attainment” (Zigler and Taussig 998). Whatever the case may be according to well-known psychologist Leo Buscaglia, there is severe lack of structure and lack of healthy nurturing in most homes. This may be  due to socioeconomics, in which both parents must work to meet financial burdens or single parents who are working several jobs to make ends meet and having someone else care for their children.  Whatever the case may be, Buscaglia argues that the most essential need of the child is  quality parent time at home. According to Buscaglia  quality time reinforces connection, giving the child a sense of belonging, of acceptance, and of being loved and nurtured. This parenting relationship helps to grow a child’s self-esteem. Furthermore, a juvenile is more likely to portray his or her parental role in their daily problem solving . Meaning, if violence and profanity are commonly used in the home to deal with problems, the juvenile learns that hostility and intimidation is key in getting what they want.  Regardless of what the juvenile’s moral compass of right or wrong, the child will react to the problem how he is taught. 

Many believe that the majority of crimes among teens reflect stereotypes or lower socio-economic communities’ where ethnic minorities are more prevalent.  On the contrary, there is an incredible number of cases where juveniles from wealthy families commit crimes. An example of this would be the Columbine High School shootings in 1993. It was later revealed that the two white male juvenile shooters were both children of doctors, who lived in upper class, gated communities. Another similar scenario is of three wealthy teenage girls who robbed stores and banks wearing Barbie masks in Beverly Hills, all of which came from affluent families. Their reasoning was simply to seek thrills due to their boredom. In some studies economic status is directly associated with delinquent behavior, other studies have found that regardless of socioeconomic status, that children who were raised by distressed and unsupportive caregivers in unstable families had a greater chance of developing problem behaviors than children who had nurturing caregivers and grew up in supportive homes (Zigler and Taussig 999). This shows that a families’ social status alone does not determine if a juvenile will become a delinquent.

There are masses of examples of teens with problems today; ranging from those who come from affluent backgrounds to those who have more economical challenges. The economic status of a child does not determine whether or not that child will be delinquent.  Although economic status can be a contributing factor to a parent’s ability to effectively raise their children. Positive parenting,  involvement in a child’s daily life, and creating a loving environment all contribute to preventing a child from a life of crime. This positive parenting creates confidence and love within the child; influencing the child’s life by positively affecting their social and mental development as well as their morals. Social status alone is not a precursor to a juvenile becoming a delinquent. However the absence of quality parenting is a contributing factor to juvenile delinquency. Through involvement and support parenting can greatly reduce juvenile delinquent behavior.

Zigler, Edward, and Cara Taussig. "Early Childhood Intervention." American Psychologist 47.8 (1992): 997-1007. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 9 Nov. 2009.

Buscaglia, Leo. Loving Each Other The Challenge of Human Relationships. New York: SLACK Incorporated Distributed, Random House publishing group, 1984.

Recreation: Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency

Growing up my grandma would always say to me, “Idle hands are the devils workshop.” I heard this from her for as long as I can remember.  Even though I heard this saying hundreds of times, I never really grasped what she was trying to teach me until I became older.  Looking back, I now realize that my grandma was teaching me an important life lesson.  She was teaching me to keep busy and stay out of trouble, and how not to become a juvenile delinquent. At an early age I was exposed to sports, church, music, and after school programs. I was so busy that I didn’t have time to get into any trouble.   I’ve never had any problems in school or with the law, so basically my grandma’s “family saying” proved successful for me. So my question is: Could this technique of early prevention the best way to deter juvenile delinquency?

According to many child psychologists, a child’s personality is formed by the age of five. How they view the world and how they have been raised, before the age of five will greatly impact who they become later in life. There are numerous theories on how the youth should be raised in order to prevent juvenile delinquency. By getting involved in children’s lives early, later crime can be effectively reduced (Zagar, Busch, and Hughes 282). The best of the early intervention programs build on the strengths of families as well as children (Zigler 5). Arguably, the most effective way to prevent juvenile delinquency is to start at an early age. I believe a combination of these two theories is the best prevention. Intervention along with healthy role models, parental involvement, and recreational activities all contribute to raising a healthy, happy, successful child that will stay out of trouble. 

Growing up I did not enjoy school for the academic aspect of it, but I loved going to school. I was never enticed by mathematics, history, science, or literature.  My school experience was great due to my role models, the programs I participated in, and the friends I made. I have literally taken thousands of tests throughout my entire education and only remember a couple of them. I do remember my teachers, coaches, friends, athletic games and after school programs I participated in. Along with my family, these people and events contributed to making me the person I am today. I would argue that most youth in America have had a similar school experiences.  

One of the key contributing factors of youth getting involved in crime is unsupervised spare time. The Department of Education has reported that youths are most likely to commit crimes between 2 p.m. and 8 p.m., with crime rates peaking at 3 p.m. (A. Chung) Recreational activities work great because of the amounts of spare time they take up. The recreational activities themselves don’t necessarily matter. What does matter is that the kids stay captivated and involved. These activities should be designed to fit the different physical abilities, and personalities of the kids. The most common activities are: sports, music, dancing, art, drama, karate, etc. During these activities the children are interacting with other children and adults. These positive interactions can greatly affect a child’s social development. Recreational activities can fill up this time frame when there is no supervision and drastically prevent juvenile crimes from occurring.

In order to prevent juveniles from getting into trouble and or involved in crime, we must get involved in juvenile’s lives in a lasting, influential, positive way. This must be done in a nurturing environment with stability, consistency, and can be accomplished by using mentors such as “big brothers /big sisters” through recreational programs after school. 

An-Me Chung. (June 2000) After School Programs: Keeping Children Safe and Smart. The U.S.  Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/pubs/afterschool/afterschool.pdf

Zagar, Robert John, Kenneth G. Busch, and John Russell Hughes. "Empirical Risk Factors for Delinquency and Best Treatments: Where Do We Go from Here?" Psychological Reports 104.1 (2009): 279-308. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 8 Nov. 2009.

Zigler, Edward. "Early Intervention to Prevent Juvenile Delinquency." Harvard Mental Health Letter 11.3 (1994): 5-8. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 9 Nov. 2009.

---

Crime Prevention

I believe the most crucial topic in criminal justice, is crime prevention. Crime prevention is a very broad topic so my emphasis and main focus will be on crime prevention pertaining to youth. Juvenile Delinquency is any case involving a minor charged with an act that would be a crime if committed by an adult. Juvenile delinquency is a serious problem with today’s youth.  Statistics reveal that persons under the age of 18  accounted for approximately 15.4% of all arrests in the United States in 2007 (FBI, 1996-2007, 2008). I do not believe  people are born criminals, but that they become criminals based on life experiences and their individual upbringing. Throughout this blog, I will be looking at several issues in depth: juvenile delinquency, juvenile recidivism, risk factors, gender roles, pathways to delinquency, and prevention. To date there are no universal programs available that prevent all juveniles from committing crimes. As a person with the ability to make choices of our own, it is impossible to deter all youth from committing crime. For instance, a program that worked on a child who suffered from physical abuse might not work for a child who suffered from sexual abuse. But, with this being said, not all people who were victims of abuse end up repeating the abuse and/or getting into trouble with the law. I will be exploring the different programs, ideas, and theories used to prevent youths from committing crimes. I intend to analyze and research this topic, not just to  determine what does and does not work,  but to discover what makes a youth intervention program  successful.

This topic is important because it affects society as a whole. Crime and society go hand-in-hand, therefore, as long as we have a society there will always be crime. Although we cannot stop all crime, we can however lower the overall rate of crime depending on our prevention and response to it. Society’s current response to dealing with crime is to react to it. In today’s system, police make an arrest and take the criminals off the street. The criminals then go to court and finally to the correctional system, where we lock them up, away from society. This  is a very costly and reactive approach to solving our problem with crime. We need to be proactive in our approach and direct our efforts towards the prevention of crime thereby lowering the rate of crime and criminals. Various cost-benefit analyses show that early prevention programs provide value for money and can be a worthwhile investment of government resources compared with prison and other criminal justice responses (Welsh and Farrington 871). Putting a quick patch on a leak may temporarily fix the problem but eventually you are going to have to fix the actual problem. It’s time for us to stop reacting to crime and think of how to prevent it from occurring. Due to our current crime solution our  jails and prisons throughout the nation are experiencing overcrowding. We currently have more criminals than we have cells. Crime prevention will not change our present day problems with crime, but in ten to twenty years from now society will ultimately be a better place due to crime prevention. Stepping back and looking at the bigger picture by helping today’s youth and preventing them from committing crimes is not only benefiting them, but also benefiting our society.

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (1996-2007) Crime in the United States, 1995-2006. Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm

Welsh, Brandon C., and David P. Farrington. “Save Children From a Life of Crime.” Criminology & Public Policy 6.4 (2007): 871-79. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 9 Nov. 2009.

---