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.