argumentative essay about juvenile delinquency

Presentations made painless

• Get Premium

111 Juvenile Delinquency Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

Inside This Article

Juvenile delinquency is a pressing issue that affects communities and families worldwide. It refers to the act of committing crimes by young individuals below the age of 18. Understanding the causes, consequences, and solutions to juvenile delinquency is crucial in addressing this problem effectively.

If you are tasked with writing an essay on juvenile delinquency, choosing a compelling topic is essential. To help you get started, here are 111 juvenile delinquency essay topic ideas and examples:

• The impact of family structure on juvenile delinquency
• The role of peer pressure in juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and mental health disorders
• The relationship between poverty and juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and substance abuse
• The influence of media on juvenile delinquency
• The effectiveness of rehabilitation programs for juvenile delinquents
• Juvenile delinquency and school dropout rates
• The link between child abuse and juvenile delinquency
• The role of genetics in juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and social media
• The impact of neighborhood characteristics on juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and gang involvement
• The relationship between juvenile delinquency and race/ethnicity
• Juvenile delinquency and the juvenile justice system
• The role of trauma in juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and recidivism rates
• The influence of parental monitoring on juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and educational attainment
• The impact of peer relationships on juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and juvenile detention centers
• The relationship between juvenile delinquency and technology
• Juvenile delinquency and juvenile curfew laws
• The effectiveness of early intervention programs for at-risk youth
• Juvenile delinquency and juvenile probation programs
• The influence of social norms on juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and juvenile diversion programs
• The role of gender in juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and juvenile court proceedings
• The impact of trauma-informed care on juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and substance abuse treatment programs
• The relationship between juvenile delinquency and child welfare services
• Juvenile delinquency and community-based programs
• The influence of school climate on juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and restorative justice practices
• The role of law enforcement in addressing juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and school resource officers
• The impact of social inequality on juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and mental health treatment
• The relationship between juvenile delinquency and trauma exposure
• Juvenile delinquency and gun violence
• The influence of family dynamics on juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and cyberbullying
• The role of community policing in preventing juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and school safety measures
• The impact of parental involvement on juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and substance abuse prevention programs
• The relationship between juvenile delinquency and foster care
• Juvenile delinquency and the juvenile justice reform movement
• The influence of social support networks on juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and the school-to-prison pipeline
• The role of mental health stigma in juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and trauma-informed education
• The impact of school discipline policies on juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and community engagement strategies
• The relationship between juvenile delinquency and child advocacy programs
• Juvenile delinquency and the juvenile justice system disparities
• The influence of trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy on juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and the impact of adverse childhood experiences
• The role of school counselors in addressing juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and the role of probation officers
• The impact of mentoring programs on juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and the role of school resource officers
• The relationship between juvenile delinquency and parental incarceration
• Juvenile delinquency and the impact of school suspensions
• The influence of community-based mental health services on juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and the role of school-based mental health screenings
• The impact of trauma-focused interventions on juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and the relationship between poverty and crime
• The role of parental involvement in preventing juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile delinquency and the impact of school climate on student behavior
• The relationship between juvenile delinquency and mental health disorders
• Juvenile delinquency and the role of community-based mental health services
• The influence of trauma-informed care on juvenile delinquency
• The impact of parental involvement in preventing juvenile delinquency

Choose a topic that interests you and conduct thorough research to support your arguments and findings. By shedding light on the complexities of juvenile delinquency, you can contribute to the ongoing dialogue on how to prevent and address this critical issue in our society.

Want to research companies faster?

Instantly access industry insights

Let PitchGrade do this for me

Leverage powerful AI research capabilities

We will create your text and designs for you. Sit back and relax while we do the work.

Explore More Content

• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Service

© 2024 Pitchgrade

Home — Essay Samples — Law, Crime & Punishment — Crime Prevention & Criminal Justice — Juvenile Delinquency

Essays on Juvenile Delinquency

Choosing juvenile delinquency essay topics.

When it comes to writing an essay on juvenile delinquency, choosing the right topic is crucial. The topic you select will have a significant impact on the overall quality and success of your essay. In this article, we will discuss the importance of the topic, provide advice on choosing a suitable topic, and offer a detailed list of recommended essay topics, divided into categories.

The Importance of the Topic

Writing an essay on juvenile delinquency provides an opportunity to explore and analyze critical issues that affect young people and society as a whole. The topic you choose should be relevant, thought-provoking, and engaging. By selecting a compelling topic, you can create a well-researched and persuasive essay that will capture the attention of your readers and contribute to the ongoing discourse on juvenile delinquency.

Choosing a Topic

When choosing a topic for your juvenile delinquency essay, it's essential to consider your interests, the scope of the assignment, and the potential impact of the topic. You should select a topic that you are passionate about and that aligns with the objectives of your essay. Additionally, the topic should be well-defined, manageable, and relevant to current issues in juvenile delinquency.

It's also important to conduct thorough research to ensure that you have access to credible and up-to-date sources of information. By choosing a topic with ample research material, you can support your arguments and strengthen the overall quality of your essay.

Recommended Essay Topics

Causes of juvenile delinquency.

• Family dysfunction and its impact on juvenile delinquency
• The influence of peer pressure on delinquent behavior
• The role of socioeconomic factors in juvenile delinquency
• The impact of substance abuse on youth crime

Prevention and Intervention Strategies

• Evaluating the effectiveness of juvenile justice programs
• The role of education in preventing juvenile delinquency
• The importance of mental health support for at-risk youth
• Restorative justice approaches for juvenile offenders

Legal and Ethical Considerations

• The debate on trying juveniles as adults in the criminal justice system
• The ethical implications of juvenile incarceration
• The impact of laws and policies on juvenile delinquency rates
• The rights of juvenile offenders in the legal system

Media and Popular Culture Influence

• The portrayal of juvenile delinquency in the media and its effects
• The influence of pop culture on youth behavior and attitudes
• The role of social media in promoting delinquent behavior
• The impact of violent video games on adolescent aggression

Global Perspectives on Juvenile Delinquency

• Comparing juvenile justice systems in different countries
• The cultural and societal factors influencing youth crime worldwide
• The role of globalization in shaping youth delinquent behavior
• Exploring the impact of war and conflict on juvenile delinquency

By selecting a topic from the recommended list or using these topics as inspiration, you can delve into various aspects of juvenile delinquency, providing a comprehensive analysis and contributing to the existing body of knowledge in this field.

Writing an essay on juvenile delinquency is an opportunity to raise awareness, provoke critical thinking, and advocate for positive change in the lives of young people. With the right topic and thorough research, you can create a compelling and impactful essay that addresses key issues and promotes understanding and solutions for juvenile delinquency.

Remember, the topic you choose will shape the direction and impact of your essay, so take the time to select a topic that resonates with you and has the potential to make a meaningful contribution to the discourse on juvenile delinquency.

The Factors of Social Problems of Juvenile Delinquency

The issue of confidentiality related to juvenile delinquency, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

The Role of Recreational Sport in Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency

The rise of juvenile delinquency and the flaws of the juvenile justice system, common pathway of delinquency by juveniles into street gangs, juvenile delinquency: the need to reform the juvenile justice system, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

My Bloody Life Book by Reymundo and Its Connections to Juvenile Delinquency

A study of juvenile delinquency and the juvenile justice system, discussion of whether juveniles should be tried as adults, how do a juvenile’s environment, social network, and personality increase or decrease their chances of becoming involved in delinquency, get a personalized essay in under 3 hours.

Expert-written essays crafted with your exact needs in mind

The Youth Criminal Justice Act

Accountability of criminal activity by minors, whether juveniles should be tried as adults and sent to adult prisons, biological and psychological theories on juvenile offenders, the factors contributing to the school to prison pipeline system, an analysis of the socioeconomic factors that cause juvenile delinquency, law reform regarding the age of criminal responsibility, parens patriae and the idea of best interests, the role of social control in youth crime, a look at juvenile offending in the criminal justice system, a study of the psychological impact of individual confinement in young inmates, correctional education: how education reduces recidivism rates for juvenile delinquents, the need to combat the school-to-prison pipeline trend in the u.s, the problem of school-to-prison pipeline in modern education, rethinking the correlations between the school to prison pipeline system, the issue of school to prison pipeline in the united states, discussion of the issue of death penalty for juveniles, bad parenting and juvenile delinquency, the theories of juvenile delinquency and its causes, relevant topics.

• Mass Incarceration
• Criminal Behavior
• Forensic Science
• Juvenile Justice System
• War on Drugs
• School Shooting
• Domestic Violence
• Serial Killer
• Child Abuse

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Bibliography

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Question and Answer forum for K12 Students

Juvenile Delinquency Essay | Essay on Juvenile Delinquency for Students and Children in English

Juvenile Delinquency Essay: “In our country, children are considered a gift from heaven and if the child is a boy then nothing could be more soothing for the family as from the very beginning children are exempted from severe punishment for any wrong commitment on their part irrespective of the gravity of the act.” This one statement itself says and justifies for the social evil, our society is facing today: Juvenile Delinquency.

You can read more  Essay Writing  about articles, events, people, sports, technology many more.

Long and Short Essays On Juvenile Delinquency for Kids and Students in English

Given below are two essays in English for students and children about the topic of ‘Juvenile Delinquency’ in both long and short form. The first essay is a long essay on the Juvenile Delinquency of 400-500 words. This long essay about Juvenile Delinquency is suitable for students of class 7, 8, 9 and 10, and also for competitive exam aspirants. The second essay is a short essay on Juvenile Delinquency of 150-200 words. These are suitable for students and children in class 6 and below.

Long Essay on Juvenile Delinquency 500 Words in English

Below we have given a long essay on Juvenile Delinquency of 500 words is helpful for classes 7, 8, 9 and 10 and Competitive Exam Aspirants. This long essay on the topic is suitable for students of class 7 to class 10, and also for competitive exam aspirants.

In ordinary terms, a child roughly between the age of 7 to 16/18 years who is involved in some kind of a ‘status offence’ such as vagrancy, immortality, truancy and ungovern ability is a juvenile delinquent. Thus, juvenile delinquency is not just about under-aged criminals, who get involved in criminal activities. In fact, the term ‘juvenile delinquency’ refers to the violation of a code of conduct or a regular occurrence of certain patterns of disapproved behaviour of children and adolescents. The well accepted age at present for juvenile delinquents is 16 years for boys and 18 years for girls.

Juvenile delinquents are mainly classified on the basis of their behavioural patterns. They range from the escapers, who keep away from school and get involved in petty thefts and armed robberies, destruction of property, violence and sexual offences. They are also classified according to the type of violation they commit.

Thus, psychologists have grouped juvenile delinquents on the basis of their personality traits as mentally defective, psychotic, neurotic, situational and cultural delinquents. According to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) report, the trend of children committing crime has an alarming echo across the country.

It is extremely hard to trace and keep a check on juvenile delinquency as of all the delinquencies committed by juveniles, only a small percentage come to the notice of the police and the courts. Traditionally, surveys suggest that delinquencies like theft, burglary, robbery, dacoity and other such offences are most commonly committed by juveniles. But recent statistics reveal that juveniles have also been found actively involved in riots, murder, rape, kidnapping and abduction as well.

Reason being that courts and juvenile rights advocates believe that second chance should be given to youth who commit crimes, so criminals are walking in the streets, living as our neighbours and in many cases committing additional crimes.

The delinquency rates are comparatively much higher among boys than in girls. Children from broken homes or disturbed families who are either homeless or living with guardians are more likely to indulge in criminal activities. Low education or illiteracy and poor economic background are major features of juvenile delinquents. But now-a-days, it’s not only street children who take to crime, even children from well-off middle and upper middle class families are turning to crime due to peer pressure and crime thrill the hunger of adolescents to be heroes among their friends, the need to portray class and style, effect of cinema have propelled the rate of juvenile delinquency in the society.

The media plays a major role in creating bogus desires and images in the minds of the youth, for which they are willing to do anything. Moreover, unmonitored access to the internet is another reason for growth in these crimes, as many are caught swindling money from bank accounts. Children belonging to the elite class, who are either sons or daughters of politicians, businessmen are also found involved in criminal acts. This largely attributes to criminals going scot-free in high-profile criminal cases, so the fear barrier no longer exists.

Increased exposure combined with isolation is the root cause of these behavioural issues. Children are growing up much faster, but their conscience and ability to distinguish between right and wrong isn’t developing at the same rate and they don’t feel the need to think things through. In most cases, the cause behind juvenile delinquency is defective upbringing or no upbringing, faulty or no family interaction. Children are not born criminals.

It’s the situations and circumstances that lead them into delinquencies. Mostly all juvenile offences have deeper roots and serious situational factors which are responsible for a child behaving in a particular way. Family plays a vital role in structuring the mental, emotional and behavioural patterns of a child. Other factors that are responsible for the rise in juvenile delinquency are unhealthy neighbourhood, cinema, pornographic literature and bad company.

In UK, child between 10 to 18 years become criminally responsible for his action and be tried by the youth court or could be tried in an adult court as per the gravity of the offence committed. In our country too, the time has come to bring some reforms in the Juvenile laws. There is a steep rise in serious crimes involving youth of 16 to 18 years of age as they very well know that below 18 years is the ‘getaway pass’ for them from criminal prosecution. The punishment should be made a big deterrent in order to inject the feeling of fear in the mind of the criminals.

Short Essay on Juvenile Delinquency 200 Words in English

Below we have given a short essay on Juvenile Delinquency is for Classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. This short essay on the topic is suitable for students of class 6 and below.

In the recent 2012 Delhi gang rape case, media too highlighted that ‘Most Brutal’ of all the accused person was the juvenile. For the brutalising act, he has been sentenced to imprisonment for the period of 3 years where others have got the death sentence. The principle that should have been followed for trying juvenile offenders is that Juvenility should be decided as per the state of mind and not just the state of body.

Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 was enacted by our Parliament in order to provide care, protection, treatment, development and rehabilitation of neglected or delinquent as a uniform system of juvenile justice mechanism throughout our country. These days we have observation homes, reformatory schools, custody institutions, probation homes etc., to help juvenile delinquents reform themselves so that they can be gradually absorbed into the mainstream society.

Moreover, we need to pay greater attention to improving the average condition in a society so that no child confronts such situations that force them to adopt unacceptable behavioural patterns. We need to find ways and means to pool the youthful energy of the children in a constructive and desired direction.

11 Lines to Remember Essay on Juvenile Delinquency

• Exempted – to free from an obligation or liability to which others are subject
• Vagrancy – a person without a settled home or regular work who wanders from place to place and lives by begging
• Truancy – the action of staying away from school without good reason; absenteeism
• Psychotic – mentally unstable; intensely upset, anxious, or angry
• Neurotic – abnormally sensitive, obsessive, or anxious; disturbed; irrational
• Echo – a sound heard again and again, any repetition of the ideas or opinions
• Burglary -theft, robbery, illegal entry of a building with intent to commit a crime
• Propelled – drive or push something forward, to urge onward
• Bogus – false, fake, not genuine
• Swindling – to obtain money by fraud, to cheat for money
• Deterrent – a thing that discourages or is intended to discourage someone from doing something

• Essay Editor

Juvenile Delinquency Essay Examples & Topics

• Antisocial Behaviour
• Fight Against Crime
• Forensic Science
• Law Enforcement
• School Shooting
• Serial Killer

High-Profile Kidnapping Cases

1. Introduction Despite their regular occurrence, kidnappings in the United States remain misunderstood. Geographic differences in the number and characteristics of kidnapping incidents are often reported, but kidnapping typologies and offender characteristics are not well known. The UCR's Criterion and Definitions aid the codification of kidnapping incidents, but they do not present a complete picture of what offenders look like, why they commit kidnapping, or who they target. In 2014, more th ...

The effectiveness of evidence-based rehabilitation programs in reducing recidivism rates among juvenile offenders

1. Introduction Research identifies the most effective juvenile offender rehabilitation program type as being cognitive-behavioral, an evidence-based approach to tackling antisocial thinking patterns and behaviors in youth. The fact that many rehabilitation programs available for juvenile offenders are not based on an evidence-based description of this practice, or offer insufficient quantities of this type of treatment, may help to explain the recidivism rates often experienced. This research, ...

Lessons Learned from the Fells Acres Case

1. Introduction The experiences of the Massachusetts judicial system, as illustrated by the Fells Acres Trial, which involved a child day-care worker accused and convicted of sexually abusing children, are grounded in a trial transcript, trial record, and state appellate review documentation. As is apparent from documents made available by the Children's Institute International LLP ("the CII", a group involved in the investigation of cases for evidence of and based upon an assumption of child s ...

The Societal Impact of the Fells Acres Day Care Case

1. Introduction Imagine a small suburban day care run by a young woman and her mother in a comfortable neighborhood. All is normal, until an investigator appears with a series of bizarre allegations and shocks the town into the belief that the children in the day care have been sexually abused to the worst degree. From 1984 to 1986, Malden, Massachusetts had Alice-in-Wonderland experiences with the serious allegations, the bizarre accusations, and the actions of the criminal justice system and ...

The Fells Acres Case: Legal Perspectives

1. Introduction The Fells Acres case has created a number of problems for legal scholars and practitioners. Historically, child abuse was regarded as a deviation from social and family norms and punished privately through the criminal justice system. As public dependency and delinquency then outpaced deviancy as the social problem of the day, the State assumed the discretion of determination on whether to remove children from their homes. In Fells Acres, the role of judge became the pivotal fun ...

What Happened at Fells Acres? A Historical Overview

1. Introduction Throughout the last half of the 20th century, day-care centers in various parts of the country became embroiled in an increasing number of allegations of child abuse at the hands of their day-care providers. The typical case involved an allegation of bizarre abuse against the day-care provider, such as acts done to sharks, or ritually cutting the children with knives. Allegations were often made in the course of difficult custody cases or in the midst of contentious divorces. Wh ...

Rehabilitation and Recidivism: The Case of Keith Wuornos

1. Introduction Over the past 20 years, significant resources have been spent on developing a range of programs at both national and international levels attempting to rehabilitate individual offenders and to ameliorate society's low tolerance for crime. However, the ease of society's preoccupation with condemning the act of criminality allows the more difficult question to escape scrutiny: is it possible and how probable is it that correctional programs can, in fact, deter an individual from a ...

El impacto de la delincuencia en la sociedad moderna

1. Introducción La visibilidad actual de la delincuencia no se registró antes, pero la inseguridad, el miedo y el daño existente crecieron de un modo avasallante. La inseguridad, el miedo y el devastador daño en las personas, acuden con una insistencia cruel y nos plantean preguntas acuciantes: ¿por qué la intimidad de las gentes está más desprotegida y amenazada que nunca? ¿Por qué la sociedad moderna, en particular la de América Latina, se ha vuelto hacia dentro, hedonista, competitiva y desa ...

The impact of socioeconomic factors on the rise of delinquency rates in urban areas

1. Introduction Understanding socioeconomic determinants of urban delinquency growth is one way to establish the link between current events and older findings. Current explanations contradict one another, fail to account for substantial empirical regularities, and otherwise remain incomplete. In some months, consumer price hikes and supposed labor shortages coexist with reduced employment and idle unemployment. The delinquency business is transacted overwhelmingly in common urban neighborhoods ...

La delincuencia en la sociedad contemporánea: Causas, consecuencias y soluciones.

1. Introducción El presente trabajo tiene por cometido presentar y analizar un fenómeno que concierne a aspectos materiales e inmateriales de la sociedad contemporánea: la delincuencia. Según informes del Consejo de Seguridad Interior del Ministerio del Interior, la tasa delictiva en Uruguay tenía una asimilación regional del orden del 10% en 1979, pasando al 30% en 1983, sosteniéndose a partir de ese momento en tasas similares con leves oscilaciones. Los delitos que se elevan del 10 al 30% en ...

Effective Rehabilitation Programs for Juvenile Offenders to Reduce Recidivism Rates

1. Introduction The criminal activity of juvenile offenders should invoke more concern among citizens and officials. Indeed, without concern and immediate action to prevent these crimes, a ratio of approximately six to one of juvenile to adult offenders in the United States indicates that many of today’s youngsters will become the adult offenders of tomorrow. Drawing up an agenda to help break the chain of violence should include consideration of a mandatory rehabilitation program for repeat ju ...

Factors Affecting Juvenile Delinquency

1. Introduction This chapter outlines both the historical perspective on juvenile delinquency as well as a review of the earlier and current theories meant to explain it. These theories, encompassing sociological, psychological, and biological perspectives, have aspired to locate the causes of delinquency in individual differences and characteristics, in structures and processes of society, in the socialization processes of families, in the immediate social environment, and even in the personal ...

The Concepts Of Juvenile Delinquency

1. Introduction The numerous concepts which are used to recognize a 'juvenile delinquent' have gained their significance from the increasing incidents of delinquency among children. Being a rather recent and socially constructed problem, the present concept of a 'juvenile delinquent' developed its significance in the backdrop of both the industrial revolution and mechanisms of discipline, nurtured by an emerging society, that took over the role deserted by the family. As the family ceased to be ...

Environmental Effects On Juvenile Delinquents

1. Introduction This is an interesting as well as a murky point. There are a number of possible environmental effects for crime behavior. The variance in children's crime behavior is not zero, therefore indicating that a portion of children's crime behavior is not an artifact of the state of the economic pressure and class conflict. The debate is not about the cause of a portion of children's crime behavior, but rather about the portion that manifests itself. If the economic determinants of cri ...

Anomie Theory And Juvenile Delinquency

1. Introduction to Anomie Theory 1. Introduction It never fails that during a class discussion session on anomie theory, some student will raise his hand and ask, "What is anomie anyway?" As has been mentioned in the introduction to a number of criminological discussions, the concept of anomie is one of the most widely used, or at least one of the most frequently referred to, by criminologists. Unfortunately, however, it is one of the most misused and misinterpreted concepts as well. The confus ...

• What types of essay examples can I find on Aithor? At Aithor, you can find a wide range of essay examples including but not limited to narrative, descriptive, expository, persuasive, argumentative, analytical, and compare and contrast essays.
• Are the essay examples free to access? Yes, all the essay examples on Aithor are free to access and read. Our goal is to provide valuable resources to help students improve their writing skills.
• Can I use the essay examples for my own work? The essay examples are provided for educational and inspirational purposes. While you can use them to guide your own writing, we strongly discourage plagiarism. Always ensure that your work is original and properly cited.
• How can these essay examples help me improve my writing? By studying these examples, you can learn about essay structure, proper formatting, argument development, and effective writing techniques. This can help you understand how to construct your own essays more effectively.
• Are there essay examples for all academic levels? Yes, we offer essay examples suitable for high school, college, and university students. You can find essays appropriate for various academic levels and subjects.
• How are the essay examples selected? Our team of educators and writing professionals carefully selects and reviews each essay to ensure it meets our quality standards. We choose examples that demonstrate strong writing, clear organization, and insightful analysis.
• Do you update the essay examples regularly? Yes, we regularly update our collection with new essay examples to ensure that we provide the most relevant and up-to-date resources for our users.
• Can I use these essay examples to prepare for standardized tests? Absolutely! Our essay examples can be a valuable resource for understanding the types of essays often required in standardized tests and can help you practice writing in a structured and effective manner.

• Juvenile Delinquency Project: Trends and Theories Words: 5751
• Researching of Juvenile Delinquency Words: 1837
• The Nature of Juvenile Delinquency Words: 1332
• Correlation Between Poverty and Juvenile Delinquency Words: 1952
• Juvenile Delinquency in U.S. Words: 770
• Juvenile Delinquency: Causes and Preventive Measures Words: 2953
• Theories for Juvenile Delinquency Words: 2811
• Intervention Plans in Juvenile Delinquency Words: 846
• Juvenile Delinquency: The Marginalized Youths Words: 669
• System and Theory Evaluation for Juvenile Delinquency Words: 2324
• The Problem of Juvenile Delinquency Words: 557
• Juvenile Delinquency Prevention in Our Community Words: 724
• How Social Learning Theories Impact Juvenile Delinquency and Crime Words: 5197
• Why Does Juvenile Delinquency Occur Words: 1140
• Family’s Role in Juvenile Delinquency Policy Change Words: 2829
• Crime and Juvenile Delinquency Impact on Justice Words: 646
• Juvenile Delinquency and Punishment Words: 385
• The Problem of Juvenile Delinquency: Definition and Analysis Words: 2062
• Social Problems Assignment: Juvenile Delinquency Words: 604
• Why Juveniles Should be Tried As Adults Words: 1733
• Juvenile Delinquency in Minority Groups Words: 906
• Juvenile Delinquency as Social Problem of Vulnerable Populations Words: 555

Juvenile Delinquency Causes and Effects

Causes and effects of juvenile delinquency: essay abstract, effects and causes of juvenile delinquency: essay introduction.

• Juvenile delinquency statistics
• Causes of juvenile delinquency
• Effects of juvenile delinquency
• Prevention of juvenile delinquency
• Solutions to juvenile delinquency

Effects and Causes of Juvenile Delinquency: Essay Conclusion

Works cited.

Given the widespread family, societal, community, and individual costs that come with high rates of juvenile delinquency, one cannot help to wonder what the government is doing about it. It is also everybody’s concern that the government may not be doing enough to make a difference.

At this point, it is important to note that one can effortlessly appear non-delinquent after a correctional program while the delinquent characteristics are intact deep inside him/her. Delinquency programs for the youth have continually focused on individual behavior while ignoring community, family, and neighborhood factors, which are the most critical factors contributing to delinquent behavior.

It is common knowledge that the problem of juvenile delinquency is immense in society, and thus a change of tact is critical if society is to overcome this problem. This paper will explore other factors that lead to juvenile delinquency and propose solutions to this problem.

Delinquency refers to the violation of a law by a child. It is analogous to the commitment of a crime by an adult. Juvenile delinquency is an issue of great concern in law enforcement and correctional circles.

Every state in the U.S. aims to reduce the number of juveniles being recruited to delinquency and the number of juvenile delinquents recidivating.

Despite the efforts taken in a bid to reduce the number of delinquents and recidivists, the U.S. continues to record high numbers of juvenile offenders in juvenile correctional facilities. This situation, therefore, calls for a nuanced approach to the issue of juvenile delinquency.

It is critical to understand the extent of the growth of juvenile offending. Statistics released by bureaus in various states indicate that the rate of juvenile offenses is increasing. Offending patterns among groups previously described as risk groups for juvenile delinquency are worsening or, at least, unchanging.

There is, therefore, the need to analyze the causes of juvenile delinquency, evaluate the effects that delinquency has on society, and develop interventions that can lead to a reduction in the rate of delinquency and recidivism among juveniles. This paper describes the problem of juvenile recidivism and suggests ways to reduce the delinquency rate.

Juvenile Delinquency Statistics

A substantial percentage of arrests made each day in the U.S. comprises people below the age of 18. It is estimated that the percentage of violent crime arrests currently stands at about 17 % (Barker 1). “Juveniles accounted for 16% of all violent crimes arrests and 32% of all property crime arrests in 1999. They accounted for 54% of all arson arrests, 42% of vandalism arrests, 31 % of larceny arrests, and 33% of burglary arrests” (“Juvenile Justice” 1).

The number of juveniles engaging in delinquent behavior in various states depends on racial disparities. Currently, black juveniles constitute the highest number of youths being held in residential custody. Their number is almost twice the number of Hispanics held in residential custody and five times the number of white juveniles held in residential custody in the United States (“Juvenile Justice” 1).

In several cases, Juveniles are tried in adult courts. In fact, the Kansas and Vermont states in the U.S. have statutory provisions that allow the trial of juveniles as young as 10 years of age in adult courts. This situation may need review. It is because youth held in adult prisons tend to have a higher recidivism rate than those in juvenile systems (“Juvenile Justice” 1).

More than 1.7 million juvenile delinquency cases in the United States were disposed of in 1997. Two thousand of the aforementioned cases were criminal homicides. Forcible rape constituted 6,500, while aggravated assault cases totaled 67,900. Out of the 1.7 million, 180,000 cases were drug-related (“Juvenile Justice” 1).

The statistics outlined above show the seriousness of the issue of delinquency in the United States. Given the effects of delinquency on society, it is vital to understand the causes of delinquency. It is also critical to develop solutions and prevention strategies for delinquency.

Causes of Juvenile Delinquency

There have been heated debates among criminologists, psychologists, and sociologists concerning the possible causes of juvenile delinquency. The causes included in the following discussion have been proven through practical research.

One of the leading causes of delinquent behavior among juveniles is peer influence. Research shows that young people who form relationships with positive individuals and groups that pursue positive commitments tend to shun delinquent behavior. However, juveniles can engage in activities that do not have concrete objectives and commitments.

These activities will likely lead to volatile relationships that may encourage delinquent behavior. Examples of these behaviors include drinking and smoking. Other behaviors without commitment that juveniles may engage in include watching television and spending too much time watching movies.

Although most people attach no harm to these activities, research has proven that the more time peers spend watching television, the more likely they are to engage in delinquent behaviors (Mandel 1).

Family influence is another factor that has been proven to contribute to juvenile delinquency. It is even suspected that family influence contributes to delinquent behavior more than peer pressure. Research has proven that families in which there is no strong emotional bonding tend to have juveniles who turn out to be delinquent.

The reason is that the juveniles may develop psychological problems like rejection and low self-esteem, leading to delinquent behavior. Other causes of psychological problems like trauma and low self-esteem are also linked to delinquency. The two can originate from sources outside the family.

Children abused or exposed to family violence are likely to be delinquents. Some studies have linked genes to delinquency, arguing that children whom criminals and drug addicts raise are likely to become delinquent. Another risk is a family in which there are no effective communication channels. Children raised in this kind of family may have issues they want to address, but they may lack an audience.

This cause is likely to make them result in delinquent behavior. Non-traditional families like reconstituted families and single-parent families may also be a factor. Research has shown that children raised by single parents or divorcees tend to be more delinquent than their counterparts raised in traditional families (Mandel 1).

Race is a significant factor in predicting delinquent behavior. The main reason why race is a determinant factor for delinquency is that minority groups are not accorded the same treatment as other races. This makes them live disgruntled lives, which may make them have delinquent behavior.

Once the delinquency trend is set in a certain race, peer influence fuels recidivism and fresh offense. It is important to note that numerous scholars argue that race is not the factor, but racism is (Mandel 1).

Effects of Juvenile Delinquency

Juvenile delinquency is a big problem that affects not only the victims of the delinquents but also the juvenile delinquents themselves, their families, and even society as a whole. Juvenile delinquents may not be able to predict the effect of their crimes on themselves, but, as stated, they are seriously affected by these crimes.

Most of these crimes make the juvenile lose his/her freedom because he/she may be placed on probation or even incarcerated. This will also affect the academic welfare of the juvenile because he or she will miss academic activities that will take place during probation or incarceration.

In cases where the juvenile is placed in a residential center for the detention of juveniles, he/she may be influenced by more experienced juvenile delinquents (Barker 1). It will make the juvenile more likely to recidivate and suffer re-offense consequences. The delinquency of the minor may even dictate his or her career choices in the future.

The trauma of having a juvenile delinquent in a family can create instability for other family members. The family has to meet the needs of the juvenile in trouble and raise lawyer’s fees. The family also has an ethical obligation to the victim of the delinquent. Families are required to attend counseling sessions as a group. This is usually costly and disruptive (Barker 1).

Juvenile delinquency is closely related to sexual behavior, drug use, gang involvement, etc. All these negatively affect the community because it makes the community unsafe and makes the government spend colossal sums of money on school safety and law enforcement.

As stated, juvenile delinquency has severe effects on some societal groups. It, therefore, affects society negatively by affecting the community, families, individuals, etc. The problem also challenges government agencies, organizations, educators, faith communities, and politicians (Barker 1).

Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency

Due to the contribution of family influence to juvenile delinquent behavior, it is vital to ensure that families positively impact children. This can be achieved by ensuring strong emotional bonding in the family and by laying out effective strategies for communication.

Children raised by families that do not conform to the traditional family should be closely watched to curb the development of delinquent behavior. Schools should also ensure that they know the backgrounds of children in order to fill the gaps that may be left by the parents (Saminsky 1). For instance, teachers can help to counsel a child who witnesses violence at home or a child whose parent is a criminal.

Parents should ensure that they closely monitor the kind of company that their children keep. They should ensure their children engage in productive social activities (Saminsky 1). These measures will help reduce the chances of their children becoming delinquents. In school, teachers should keep a close eye on pupils to ensure that they know their activities.

Pupils should be appropriately searched in school to ensure they do not carry guns and drugs. This step will ensure that delinquent pupils do not influence others. It will also help identify delinquent children so they can be counseled or even sent for correctional services.

Although controversial, another way of preventing delinquency is reducing or eradicating racism. This method will target delinquents in minority groups. It will help reduce the number of juveniles in these minority groups who commit offenses because they will not commit racism-inspired crimes.

It will also help boost teenagers’ self-esteem in these minority groups. Thus instances of offenses caused by low self-esteem will be limited in these minority groups (Saminsky 1).

Solutions to Juvenile Delinquency

The best way to reduce the number of delinquency cases is by using the preventative measures outlined in the paragraph above. The preventative measures should be holistic in the sense that they should include all the people in the lives of the juveniles.

The juveniles should be monitored and guided while at home and counseled and monitored while in school. Juveniles who are at high risk of developing delinquent behavior should be watched closely and given special treatment so that they do not end up offending (Rose 1).

Another way of reducing the number of delinquency cases is by reducing the rates at which juvenile delinquents recidivate. It can be achieved by having legislation that ensures that juveniles are corrected differently and in facilities different from the ones used for adult correction.

The reason is that, from the statistics section, juveniles corrected in the same facilities as adult offenders are more likely to recidivate than their counterparts in juvenile facilities. The recidivism rates of young offenders can also be reduced by having a program to correct delinquents. This is most appropriately implemented while the delinquents are in custody.

The program should be holistic, and thus it should consist of counseling services offered by a psychologist, recreational facilities, and training (Rose 1). The counseling services will give a platform in which the juveniles can freely share their experiences, and thus their healing process can be sped up.

The recreational facilities will give the juveniles alternative hobbies that will occupy their time after they are released from custody. Thus they will have less time to consider re-offending. Lastly, the training will equip the juvenile who may have quit school with entrepreneurial skills that they can utilize to make money after they are released from custody. It will, therefore, help to reduce the number of cases where juveniles re-offend due to financial problems.

Juvenile delinquency can also be reduced by effective policing that will ensure that community criminals do not recruit juveniles into crime. It is common to hear of gangs using schoolchildren to market drugs and carry assault weapons. This practice should be discouraged by vigilance from parents and teachers and effective community policing.

From the discussion above, it is clear that delinquency is an enormous societal problem. Juvenile delinquency is caused by several factors, including peer influence, influence by the juvenile’s family, race, and other related factors like low self-esteem and trauma.

The effects of delinquency are far-reaching, and they, therefore, affect the community, victims of the delinquent, society as a whole, and even the delinquents themselves. Therefore, it is vital to address this issue to reduce the rates of offense and re-offense.

Several interventions can be used to prevent and reduce delinquency and recidivism. These interventions can be implemented in the family, school, or even correctional facilities. School and family-level interventions are mainly aimed at preventing recidivism, while the interventions implemented at correctional facilities are aimed at reducing recidivism.

Thus, these interventions must be taken seriously to reduce the number of delinquents in society. This will, in turn, reduce the number of delinquency victims, the number of affected families, and the amount of resources that the government will spend on law enforcement and correctional services. Therefore, it will lead to a better society.

Barker, Leslie. “ The Effects of Juvenile Delinquency ”. Ehow.com . 2011.

Juvenile Justice. “Basic Statistics”. Pbs.org . 2011.

Mandel, Sharon. “ What Causes Juvenile Delinquency? ” Filthylucre.com . 2008.

Rose, Nancy. “ The Solution to Juvenile Delinquency is Simple ”. Public.asu.edu . 2010.

Saminsky, Alina. “ Preventing Juvenile Delinquency : Early Intervention and Comprehensiveness as Critical Factors”. Studentpulse.com . 2011.

Cite this paper

• Chicago (N-B)
• Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2020, January 12). Juvenile Delinquency Causes and Effects. https://studycorgi.com/juvenile-delinquency-causes-and-effects/

"Juvenile Delinquency Causes and Effects." StudyCorgi , 12 Jan. 2020, studycorgi.com/juvenile-delinquency-causes-and-effects/.

StudyCorgi . (2020) 'Juvenile Delinquency Causes and Effects'. 12 January.

1. StudyCorgi . "Juvenile Delinquency Causes and Effects." January 12, 2020. https://studycorgi.com/juvenile-delinquency-causes-and-effects/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "Juvenile Delinquency Causes and Effects." January 12, 2020. https://studycorgi.com/juvenile-delinquency-causes-and-effects/.

StudyCorgi . 2020. "Juvenile Delinquency Causes and Effects." January 12, 2020. https://studycorgi.com/juvenile-delinquency-causes-and-effects/.

This paper, “Juvenile Delinquency Causes and Effects”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: August 23, 2023 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

Juvenile Crime, Juvenile Justice (2001)

Chapter: the development of delinquency, the development of delinquency.

Research over the past few decades on normal child development and on development of delinquent behavior has shown that individual, social, and community conditions as well as their interactions influence behavior. There is general agreement that behavior, including antisocial and delinquent behavior, is the result of a complex interplay of individual biological and genetic factors and environmental factors, starting during fetal development and continuing throughout life (Bock and Goode, 1996). Clearly, genes affect biological development, but there is no biological development without environmental input. Thus, both biology and environment influence behavior.

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). Similarly, most serious, chronically delinquent children and adolescents experience a number of risk factors at various levels, but most children and adolescents with risk factors do not become serious, chronic delinquents. Furthermore, any individual factor contributes only a small part to the increase in risk. It is, however, widely recognized that the more risk factors a child or adolescent experiences, the higher their risk for delinquent behavior.

A difficulty with the literature on risk factors is the diversity of the outcome behaviors studied. Some studies focus on behavior that meets diagnostic criteria for conduct disorder or other antisocial behavior disorders; others look at aggressive behavior, or lying, or shoplifting; still others rely on juvenile court referral or arrest as the outcome of interest. Furthermore, different risk factors and different outcomes may be more salient at some stages of child and adolescent development than at others.

Much of the literature that has examined risk factors for delinquency is based on longitudinal studies, primarily of white males. Some of the samples were specifically chosen from high-risk environments. Care must be taken in generalizing this literature to girls and minorities and to general populations. Nevertheless, over the past 20 years, much has been learned about risks for antisocial and delinquent behavior.

This chapter is not meant to be a comprehensive overview of all the literature on risk factors. Rather it focuses on factors that are most relevant to prevention efforts. (For reviews of risk factor literature, see, for example, Hawkins et al., 1998; Lipsey and Derzon, 1998; Rutter et al., 1998.) The chapter discusses risk factors for offending, beginning with risks at the individual level, including biological, psychological, behavioral, and cognitive factors. Social-level risk factors are discussed next; these include family and peer relationships. Finally, community-level risk factors, including school and neighborhood attributes, are examined. Although individual, social, and community-level factors interact, each level is discussed separately for clarity.

INDIVIDUAL-LEVEL RISK FACTORS

A large number of individual factors and characteristics has been associated with the development of juvenile delinquency. These individual factors include age, gender, complications during pregnancy and delivery, impulsivity, aggressiveness, and substance use. Some factors operate before birth (prenatal) or close to, during, and shortly after birth (perinatal); some can be identified in early childhood; and other factors may not be evident until late childhood or during adolescence. To fully appreciate the development of these individual characteristics and their relations to delinquency, one needs to study the development of the individual in interaction with the environment. In order to simplify presentation of the research, however, this section deals only with individual factors.

Studies of criminal activity by age consistently find that rates of offending begin to rise in preadolescence or early adolescence, reach a peak in

late adolescence, and fall through young adulthood (see, e.g., Farrington, 1986a; National Research Council, 1986). Some lawbreaking experience at some time during adolescence is nearly universal in American children, although much of this behavior is reasonably mild and temporary. Although the exact age of onset, peak, and age of desistance varies by offense, the general pattern has been remarkably consistent over time, in different countries, and for official and self-reported data. For example, Farrington (1983, 1986a), in a longitudinal study of a sample of boys in London (the Cambridge Longitudinal Study), found an eightfold increase in the number of different boys convicted of delinquent behavior from age 10 to age 17, followed by a decrease to a quarter of the maximum level by age 24. The number of self-reported offenses in the same sample also peaked between ages 15 and 18, then dropped sharply by age 24. In a longitudinal study of boys in inner-city Pittsburgh (just over half the sample was black and just under half was white), the percentage of boys who self-reported serious delinquent behavior rose from 5 percent at age 6 to about 18 percent for whites and 27 percent for blacks at age 16 (Loeber et al., 1998). A longitudinal study of a representative sample from high-risk neighborhoods in Denver also found a growth in the self-reported prevalence of serious violence from age 10 through late adolescence (Kelley et al., 1997). Females in the Denver sample exhibited a peak in serious violence in midadolescence, but prevalence continued to increase through age 19 for the boys. The study is continuing to follow these boys to see if their prevalence drops in early adulthood. Laub et al. (1998), using the Gluecks' data on 500 juvenile offenders from the 1940s, found that only 25 percent of them were still offending by age 32.

Much research has concentrated on the onset of delinquency, examining risk factors for onset, and differences between those who begin offending early (prior to adolescence) versus those who begin offending in midadolescence. There have been suggestions that early-onset delinquents are more likely than later-onset delinquents to be more serious and persistent offenders (e.g., Moffitt, 1993). There is evidence, however, that predictors associated with onset do not predict persistence particularly well (Farrington and Hawkins, 1991). There are also important problems with the choice of statistical models to create categories of developmental trajectories (Nagin and Tremblay, 1999).

Research by Nagin and Tremblay (1999) found no evidence of late-onset physical aggression. Physical aggression was highest at age 6 (the earliest age for which data were collected for this study) and declined into adolescence. The available data on very young children indicates that frequency of physical aggression reaches a peak around age 2 and then slowly declines up to adolescence (Restoin et al., 1985; Tremblay et al., 1996a).

Those who persist in offending into adulthood may differ from those who desist in a number of ways, including attachment to school, military service (Elder, 1986; Sampson and Laub, 1996), sex, age of onset of offending, incarceration, and adult social bonds (e.g., marriage, quality of marriage, job stability) (Farrington and West, 1995; Quinton et al., 1993; Quinton and Rutter, 1988; Sampson and Laub, 1990). Sampson and Laub (1993) found that marital attachment and job stability significantly reduced deviant behavior in adulthood. Farrington and West (1995) found that offenders and nonoffenders were equally likely to get married, but those who got married and lived with their spouse decreased their offending more than those who remained single or who did not live with their spouse. They also found that offending increased after separation from a spouse. Similarly, Horney et al. (1995) found that married male offenders decreased their offending when living with their spouses and resumed it when not living with them. Within marriages, only good marriages predicted reduction in crime, and these had an increasing effect over time (Laub et al., 1998). Warr (1998) also found that offending decreased after marriage but attributed the decrease to a reduction in the time spent with peers and a reduction in the number of deviant peers following marriage rather than to increased attachment to conventional society through marriage.

Laub et al. (1998) found no difference between persisters and desisters in most family characteristics during childhood (e.g., poverty, parental alcohol abuse or crime, discipline, supervision) or in most individual differences in childhood (e.g., aggression, tantrums, difficult child, verbal IQ). Brannigan (1997) points out that crime is highest when males have the fewest resources, and it lasts longest in those with the fewest investments in society (job, wife, children). Crime is not an effective strategy for getting resources. There is evidence that chronic offenders gain fewer resources than nonoffenders, after the adolescent period (Moffitt, 1993).

The evidence for desistance in girls is not clear. One review of the literature suggests that 25 to 50 percent of antisocial girls commit crimes as adults (Pajer, 1998). There is also some evidence that women are less likely to be recidivists, and that they end their criminal careers earlier than men (Kelley et al., 1997). However, the sexes appear to become more similar with time in rates of all but violent crimes. There is a suggestion that women who persist in crime past adolescence may be more disturbed than men who persist (Jordan et al., 1996; Pajer, 1998).

Prenatal and Perinatal Factors

Several studies have found an association between prenatal and perinatal complications and later delinquent or criminal behavior (Kandel et

al., 1989; Kandel and Mednick, 1991; Raine et al., 1994). Prenatal and perinatal risk factors represent a host of latent and manifest conditions that influence subsequent development.

Many studies use the terms “prenatal or perinatal complications” to describe what is a very heterogeneous set of latent and clinical conditions. Under the heading of prenatal factors, one finds a broad variety of conditions that occurs before birth through the seventh month of gestation (Kopp and Krakow, 1983). Similarly, perinatal factors include conditions as varied as apnea of prematurity (poor breathing) to severe respiratory distress syndrome. The former condition is relatively benign, while the latter is often life-threatening. Although they are risk factors, low birthweight and premature birth do not necessarily presage problems in development.

Prenatal and perinatal risk factors may compromise the nervous system, creating vulnerabilities in the child that can lead to abnormal behavior. Children with prenatal and perinatal complications who live in impoverished, deviant, or abusive environments face added difficulties. According to three major large-scale, long-term studies: (1) developmental risks have additive negative effects on child outcomes, (2) most infants with perinatal complications develop into normally functioning children, and (3) children with long-term negative outcomes who suffered perinatal complications more often than not came from socially disadvantaged backgrounds (Brennan and Mednick, 1997; Broman et al., 1975; Drillien et al., 1980; Werner et al., 1971).

Mednick and colleagues (Brennan and Mednick, 1997; Kandel and Mednick, 1991; Raine et al., 1994) have conducted several investigations in an attempt to elucidate the relationship between criminal behavior and perinatal risk. These and other studies have been unable to identify specific mechanisms to account for the fact that the number of prenatal and perinatal abnormalities tend to correlate with the probability that a child will become a criminal. In addition to the lack of specificity regarding the predictors and the mechanisms of risk, similar measures predict learning disabilities, mental retardation, minimal brain dysfunction, and others (Towbin, 1978). An association between perinatal risk factors and violent offending is particularly strong among offenders whose parents are mentally ill or very poor (Raine et al., 1994, 1997).

Most measures indicate that males are more likely to commit crimes. They are also more vulnerable to prenatal and perinatal stress, as is shown through studies of negative outcomes, including death (Davis and Emory, 1995; Emory et al., 1996).

Hyperactivity, attention problems, and impulsiveness in children have been found to be associated with delinquency. These behaviors can be assessed very early in life and are associated with certain prenatal and perinatal histories (DiPietro et al., 1996; Emory and Noonan, 1984; Lester

et al., 1976; Sameroff and Chandler, 1975). For example, exposure to environmental toxins, such as prenatal lead exposure at very low levels, tends to adversely affect neonatal motor and attentional performance (Emory et al., 1999). Hyperactivity and aggression are associated with prenatal alcohol exposure (Brown et al., 1991; Institute of Medicine, 1996). Prenatal exposure to alcohol, cocaine, heroin, and nicotine appear to have similar effects. Each tends to be associated with hyperactivity, attention deficit, and impulsiveness (Karr-Morse and Wiley, 1997).

Individual Capabilities, Competencies, and Characteristics

In recent investigations, observable behaviors, such as duration of attention to a toy and compliance with mother's instructions not to touch an object, that are particularly relevant to later misbehavior are observable in the first year of life (Kochanska et al., 1998). However, the ability to predict behavior at later ages (in adolescence and adulthood) from such traits early in life is not yet known. Aggressive behavior is nevertheless one of the more stable dimensions, and significant stability may be seen from toddlerhood to adulthood (Tremblay, 2000).

The social behaviors that developmentalists study during childhood can be divided into two broad categories: prosocial and antisocial. Prosocial behaviors include helping, sharing, and cooperation, while antisocial behaviors include different forms of oppositional and aggressive behavior. The development of empathy, guilt feelings, social cognition, and moral reasoning are generally considered important emotional and cognitive correlates of social development.

Impulsivity and hyperactivity have both been associated with later antisocial behavior (Rutter et al., 1998). The social behavior characteristics that best predict delinquent behavior, however, are physical aggression and oppositionality (Lahey et al., 1999; Nagin and Tremblay, 1999). Most children start manifesting these behaviors between the end of the first and second years. The peak level in frequency of physical aggression is generally reached between 24 and 36 months, an age at which the consequences of the aggression are generally relatively minor (Goodenough, 1931; Sand, 1966; Tremblay et al., 1996a, 1999a). By entry into kindergarten, the majority of children have learned to use other means than physical aggression to get what they want and to solve conflicts. Those who have not learned, who are oppositional and show few prosocial behaviors toward peers, are at high risk of being rejected by their peers, of failing in school, and eventually of getting involved in serious delinquency (Farrington and Wikstrom, 1994; Huesmann et al., 1984; Miller and Eisenberg, 1988; Nagin and Tremblay, 1999; Tremblay et al., 1992a, 1994; White et al., 1990).

The differentiation of emotions and emotional regulation occurs during the 2-year period, from 12 months to 36 months, when the frequency of physical aggression increases sharply and then decreases almost as sharply (Tremblay, 2000; Tremblay et al., 1996a, 1999a). A number of longitudinal studies have shown that children who are behaviorally inhibited (shy, anxious) are less at risk of juvenile delinquency, while children who tend to be fearless, those who are impulsive, and those who have difficulty delaying gratification are more at risk of delinquent behavior (Blumstein et al., 1984; Ensminger et al., 1983; Kerr et al., 1997; Mischel et al., 1989; Tremblay et al., 1994).

A large number of studies report that delinquents have a lower verbal IQ compared with nondelinquents, as well as lower school achievement (Fergusson and Horwood, 1995; Maguin and Loeber, 1996; Moffitt, 1997). Antisocial youth also tend to show cognitive deficits in the areas of executive functions 1 (Moffitt et al., 1994; Seguin et al., 1995), perception of social cues, and problem-solving processing patterns (Dodge et al., 1997; Huesmann, 1988). The association between cognitive deficits and delinquency remains after controlling for social class and race (Moffitt, 1990; Lynam et al., 1993). Few studies, however, have assessed cognitive functioning during the preschool years or followed the children into adolescence to understand the long-term link between early cognitive deficits and juvenile delinquency. The studies that did look at children 's early cognitive development have shown that poor language performance by the second year after birth, poor fine motor skills by the third year, and low IQ by kindergarten were all associated with later antisocial behavior (Kopp and Krakow, 1983; Stattin and Klackenberg-Larsson, 1993; White et al., 1990). Stattin and Klackenberg-Larsson (1993) found that the association between poor early language performance and later criminal behavior remained significant even after controlling for socioeconomic status.

Epidemiological studies have found a correlation between language delay and aggressive behavior (Richman et al., 1982). Language delays may contribute to poor peer relations that, in turn, result in aggression (Campbell, 1990a). The long-term impact of cognitively oriented preschool programs on the reduction of antisocial behavior is a more direct indication that fostering early cognitive development can play an important role in the prevention of juvenile delinquency (Schweinhart et al., 1993; Schweinhart and Weikart, 1997). It is important to note that since poor cognitive abilities and problem behaviors in the preschool years also

lead to poor school performance, they probably explain a large part of the association observed during adolescence between school failure and delinquency (Fergusson and Horwood, 1995; Maguin and Loeber, 1996; Tremblay et al., 1992).

Several mental health disorders of childhood have been found to put children at risk for future delinquent behavior. Conduct disorder is often diagnosed when a child is troublesome and breaking rules or norms but not necessarily doing illegal behavior, especially at younger ages. This behavior may include lying, bullying, cruelty to animals, fighting, and truancy. Most adolescents in U.S. society at some time engage in illegal behaviors, whether some kind of theft, aggression, or status offense. Many adolescents, in the period during which they engage in these behaviors, are likely to meet formal criteria for conduct disorder. Behavior characterized by willful disobedience and defiance is considered a different disorder (oppositional defiant disorder), but often occurs in conjunction with conduct disorder and may precede it.

Several prospective longitudinal studies have found that children with attention and hyperactivity problems, such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, show high levels of antisocial and aggressive behavior (Campbell, 1990b; Hechtman et al., 1984; Loney et al., 1982; Sanson et al., 1993; Satterfield et al., 1982). Early hyperactivity and attention problems without concurrent aggression, however, appear not to be related to later aggressive behavior (Loeber, 1988; Magnusson and Bergman, 1990; Nagin and Tremblay, 1999), although a few studies do report such relationships (Gittelman et al., 1985; Mannuzza et al., 1993, 1991).

Another disorder that is often associated with antisocial behavior and conduct disorder is major depressive disorder, particularly in girls (Kovacs, 1996; Offord et al., 1986; Renouf and Harter, 1990). It is hypothesized that depression during adolescence may be “a central pathway through which girls' serious antisocial behavior develops ” (Obeidallah and Earls, 1999:1). In girls, conduct disorder may be a kind of manifestation of the hopelessness, frustration, and low self-esteem that often characterizes major depression.

For juveniles as well as adults, the use of drugs and alcohol is common among offenders. In 1998, about half of juvenile arrestees in the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring Program tested positive for at least one drug. In these same cities, 2 about two-thirds of adult arrestees tested

positive for at least one drug (National Institute of Justice, 1999). Of course, drug use is a criminal offense on its own, and for juveniles, alcohol use is also a status delinquent offense. A number of studies have consistently found that as the seriousness of offending goes up, so does the seriousness of drug use as measured both by frequency of use and type of drug (see Huizinga and Jakob-Chien, 1998). In the longitudinal studies of causes and correlates of delinquency in Denver, Pittsburgh, and Rochester (see Thornberry et al., 1995), serious offenders had a higher prevalence of drug and alcohol use than did minor offenders or nonoffenders. In addition, about three-quarters of drug users in each sample were also involved in serious delinquency (Huizinga and Jakob-Chien, 1998). Similarly, in the Denver Youth Survey, serious offenders had the highest prevalence and frequency of use of alcohol and marijuana of all youth in the study. Nevertheless, only about one-third of serious delinquents were problem drug users (Huizinga and Jakob-Chien, 1998).

Although there appears to be a relationship between alcohol and drug use and criminal delinquency, not all delinquents use alcohol or drugs, nor do all alcohol and drug users commit delinquent acts (other than the alcohol or drug use itself). Those who are both serious delinquents and serious drug users may be involved in a great deal of crime, however. Johnson et al. (1991) found that the small group (less than 5 percent of a national sample) who were both serious delinquents and serious drug users accounted for over half of all serious crimes. Neverthless, it would be premature to conclude that serious drug use causes serious crime (McCord, 2001).

Whatever characteristics individuals have, resulting personalities and behavior are influenced by the social environments in which they are raised. Characteristics of individuals always develop in social contexts.

SOCIAL FACTORS

Children's and adolescents' interactions and relationships with family and peers influence the development of antisocial behavior and delinquency. Family interactions are most important during early childhood, but they can have long-lasting effects. In early adolescence, relationships with peers take on greater importance. This section will first consider factors within the family that have been found to be associated with the development of delinquency and then consider peer influences on delinquent behavior. Note that issues concerning poverty and race are dealt with under the community factors section of this chapter. Chapter 7 deals specifically with issues concerning race.

Family Influences

In assigning responsibility for childrearing to parents, most Western cultures place a heavy charge on families. Such cultures assign parents the task of raising children to follow society's rules for acceptable behavior. It should be no surprise, therefore, when families have difficulties with the task laid on them, that the product often is juvenile delinquency (Kazdin, 1997). Family structure (who lives in a household) and family functioning (how the family members treat one another) are two general categories under which family effects on delinquency have been examined.

Family Structure

Before embarking on a review of the effects of family structure, it is important to raise the question of mechanisms (Rutter et al., 1998). It may not be the family structure itself that increases the risk of delinquency, but rather some other factor that explains why that structure is present. Alternatively, a certain family structure may increase the risk of delinquency, but only as one more stressor in a series; it may be the number rather than specific nature of the stressors that is harmful.

Historically, one aspect of family structure that has received a great deal of attention as a risk factor for delinquency is growing up in a family that has experienced separation or divorce. 3 Although many studies have found an association between broken homes and delinquency (Farrington and Loeber, 1999; Rutter and Giller, 1983; Wells and Rankin, 1991; Wilson and Herrnstein, 1985), there is considerable debate about the meaning of the association. For example, longitudinal studies have found an increased level of conduct disorder and behavioral disturbance in children of divorcing parents before the divorce took place (Block et al., 1986; Cherlin et al., 1991). Capaldi and Patterson (1991) showed that disruptive parenting practices and antisocial personality of the parent(s) accounted for apparent effects of divorce and remarriage. Thus, it is likely that the increased risk of delinquency experienced among children of broken homes is related to the family conflict prior to the divorce or separation, rather than to family breakup itself (Rutter et al., 1998). In their longitudinal study of family disruption, Juby and Farrington (2001) found that boys who stayed with their mothers following disruption had delinquency rates that were almost identical to those reared in intact families.

Being born and raised in a single-parent family has also been associated with increased risk of delinquency and antisocial behavior. Research that takes into account the socioeconomic conditions of single-parent households and other risks, including disciplinary styles and problems in supervising and monitoring children, show that these other factors account for the differential outcomes in these families. The important role of socioeconomic conditions is shown by the absence of differences in delinquency between children in single-parent and two-parent homes within homogeneous socioeconomic classes (Austin, 1978). Careful analyses of juvenile court cases in the United States shows that economic conditions rather than family composition influenced children 's delinquency (Chilton and Markle, 1972). Statistical controls for the mothers' age and poverty have been found to remove effects attributed to single-parent families (Crockett et al., 1993). Furthermore, the significance of being born to a single mother has changed dramatically over the past 30 years. In 1970, 10.7 percent of all births in the United States were to unmarried women (U.S. Census Bureau, 1977). By 1997, births to unmarried women accounted for 32.4 percent of U.S. births (U.S. Census Bureau, 1999). As Rutter and colleagues (1998:185) noted about similar statistics in the United Kingdom: “It cannot be assumed that the risks for antisocial behavior (from being born to a single parent) evident in studies of children born several decades ago will apply to the present generation of births. ” Recent work seems to bear out this conclusion. Gorman-Smith and colleagues found no association between single parenthood and delinquency in a poor, urban U.S. community (Gorman-Smith et al., 1999).

Nevertheless, children in single-parent families are more likely to be exposed to other criminogenic influences, such as frequent changes in the resident father figure (Johnson, 1987; Stern et al., 1984). Single parents often find it hard to get assistance (Ensminger et al., 1983; Spicer and Hampe, 1975). If they must work to support themselves and their families, they are likely to have difficulty providing supervision for their children. Poor supervision is associated with the development of delinquency (Dornbusch et al., 1985; Glueck and Glueck, 1950; Hirschi, 1969; Jensen, 1972; Maccoby, 1958; McCord, 1979, 1982). Summarizing their work on race, family structure, and delinquency in white and black families, Matsueda and Heimer (1987:836) noted: “Yet in both racial groups non-intact homes influence delinquency through a similar process—by attenuating parental supervision, which in turn increases delinquent companions, prodelinquent definitions, and, ultimately, delinquent behavior.” It looks as if the effects of living with a single parent vary with the amount of supervision, as well as the emotional and economic resources that the parent is able to bring to the situation.

A number of studies have found that children born to teenage mothers

are more likely to be not only delinquent, but also chronic juvenile offenders (Farrington and Loeber, 1999; Furstenberg et al., 1987; Kolvin et al., 1990; Maynard, 1997; Nagin et al., 1997). An analysis of children born in 1974 and 1975 in Washington state found that being born to a mother under age 18 tripled the risk of being chronic offender. Males born to unmarried mothers under age 18 were 11 times more likely to become chronic juvenile offenders than were males born to married mothers over the age of 20 (Conseur et al., 1997).

What accounts for the increase in risk from having a young mother? Characteristics of women who become teenage parents appear to account for some of the risk. Longitudinal studies in both Britain and the United States have found that girls who exhibit antisocial behavior are at increased risk of teenage motherhood, of having impulsive liaisons with antisocial men, and of having parenting difficulties (Maughan and Lindelow, 1997; Quinton et al., 1993; Quinton and Rutter, 1988). In Grogger's analysis of data from the National Longitudinal Study of youth, both within-family comparisons and multivariate analysis showed that the characteristics and backgrounds of the women who became teenage mothers accounted for a large part of the risk of their offsprings' delinquency (Grogger, 1997), but the age at which the mother gave birth also contributed to the risk. A teenager who becomes pregnant is also more likely than older mothers to be poor, to be on welfare, to have curtailed her education, and to deliver a baby with low birthweight. Separately or together, these correlates of teenage parenthood have been found to increase risk for delinquency (Rutter et al., 1998). Nagin et al. (1997), in an analysis of data from the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development, found that the risk of criminality was increased for children in large families born to women who began childbearing as a teenager. They concluded that “the onset of early childbearing is not a cause of children's subsequent problem behavior, but rather is a marker for a set of behaviors and social forces that give rise to adverse consequences for the life chances of children” (Nagin et al., 1997:423).

Children raised in families of four or more children have an increased risk of delinquency (Farrington and Loeber, 1999; Rutter and Giller, 1983). It has been suggested that large family size is associated with less adequate discipline and supervision of children, and that it is the parenting difficulties that account for much of the association with delinquency (Farrington and Loeber, 1999). Work by Offord (1982) points to the influence of delinquent siblings rather than to parenting qualities. Rowe and Farrington (1997), in an analysis of a London longitudinal study, found that there was a tendency for antisocial individuals to have large families. The effect of family size on delinquency was reduced when parents' criminality was taken into account.

Family Interaction

Even in intact, two-parent families, children may not receive the supervision, training, and advocacy needed to ensure a positive developmental course. A number of studies have found that poor parental management and disciplinary practices are associated with the development of delinquent behavior. Failure to set clear expectations for children 's behavior, inconsistent discipline, excessively severe or aggressive discipline, and poor monitoring and supervision of children predict later delinquency (Capaldi and Patterson, 1996; Farrington, 1989; Hawkins et al., 1995b; McCord, 1979). As Patterson (1976, 1995) indicates through his research, parents who nag or use idle threats are likely to generate coercive systems in which children gain control through misbehaving. Several longitudinal studies investigating the effects of punishment on aggressive behavior have shown that physical punishments are more likely to result in defiance than compliance (McCord, 1997b; Power and Chapieski, 1986; Strassberg et al., 1994). Perhaps the best grounds for believing that family interaction influences delinquency are programs that alter parental management techniques and thereby benefit siblings as well as reduce delinquent behavior by the child whose conduct brought the parents into the program (Arnold et al., 1975; Kazdin, 1997; Klein et al., 1977; Tremblay et al., 1995).

Consistent discipline, supervision, and affection help to create well-socialized adolescents (Austin, 1978; Bender, 1947; Bowlby, 1940; Glueck and Glueck, 1950; Goldfarb, 1945; Hirschi, 1969; Laub and Sampson, 1988; McCord, 1991; Sampson and Laub, 1993). Furthermore, reductions in delinquency between the ages of 15 and 17 years appear to be related to friendly interaction between teenagers and their parents, a situation that seems to promote school attachment and stronger family ties (Liska and Reed, 1985). In contrast, children who have suffered parental neglect have an increased risk of delinquency. Widom (1989) and McCord (1983) both found that children who had been neglected were as likely as those who had been physically abused to commit violent crimes later in life. In their review of many studies investigating relationships between socialization in families and juvenile delinquency, Loeber and Stouthamer-Loeber (1986) concluded that parental neglect had the largest impact.

Child abuse, as well as neglect, has been implicated in the development of delinquent behavior. In three quite different prospective studies from different parts of the country, childhood abuse and neglect have been found to increase a child's risk of delinquency (Maxfield and Widom, 1996; Smith and Thornberry, 1995; Widom, 1989; Zingraff et al., 1993). These studies examined children of different ages, cases of childhood abuse and neglect from different time periods, different definitions of

child abuse and neglect, and both official and self-reports of offending, but came to the same conclusions. The findings are true for girls as well as boys, and for black as well as for white children. In addition, abused and neglected children start offending earlier than children who are not abused or neglected, and they are more likely to become chronic offenders (Maxfield and Widom, 1996). Victims of childhood abuse and neglect are also at higher risk than other children of being arrested for a violent crime as a juvenile (Maxfield and Widom, 1996).

There are problems in carrying out scientific investigations of each of these components as predictors of juvenile delinquency. First, these behaviors are not empirically independent of one another. Parents who do not watch their young children consistently are less likely to prevent destructive or other unwanted behaviors and therefore more likely to punish. Parents who are themselves unclear about what they expect of their children are likely to be inconsistent and to be unclear in communications with their children. Parenting that involves few positive shared parent-child activities will often also involve less monitoring and more punishing. Parents who reject their children or who express hostility toward them are more likely to punish them. Parents who punish are more likely to punish too much (abuse).

Another problem is the lack of specificity of effects of problems in childrearing practices. In general, problems in each of these areas are likely to be associated with problems of a variety of types —performance and behavior in school, with peers, with authorities, and eventually with partners and offspring. There are also some children who appear to elicit punishing behavior from parents, and this may predate such parenting. Therefore, it is necessary to take account of children's behavior as a potential confounder of the relationship between early parenting and later child problems, because harsh parenting may be a response to a particular child's behavior (Tremblay, 1995). It is also possible that unnecessarily harsh punishment is more frequently and intensely used by parents who are themselves more aggressive and antisocial. Children of antisocial parents are at heightened risk for aggressive, antisocial, and delinquent behavior (e.g., McCord, 1991; Serbin et al., 1998).

Social Setting

Where a family lives affects the nature of opportunities that will be available to its members. In some communities, public transportation permits easy travel for those who do not own automobiles. Opportunities for employment and entertainment extend beyond the local boundaries. In other communities, street-corner gatherings open possibilities for illegal activities. Lack of socially acceptable opportunities leads to frustra-

tion and a search for alternative means to success. Community-based statistics show high correlations among joblessness, household disruption, housing density, infant deaths, poverty, and crime (Sampson, 1987, 1992).

Community variations may account for the fact that some varieties of family life have different effects on delinquency in different communities (Larzelere and Patterson, 1990; Simcha-Fagan and Schwartz, 1986). In general, consistent friendly parental guidance seems to protect children from delinquency regardless of neighborhoods. But poor socialization practices seem to be more potent in disrupted neighborhoods (McCord, 2000).

Neighborhoods influence children's behavior by providing examples of the values that people hold, and these examples influence children's perception of what is acceptable behavior. Communities in which criminal activities are common tend to establish criminal behavior as acceptable. Tolerance for gang activities varies by community (Curry and Spergel, 1988; Horowitz, 1987).

In sum, family life influences delinquency in a variety of ways. Children reared by affectionate, consistent parents are unlikely to commit serious crimes either as juveniles or as adults. Children reared by parents who neglect or reject them are likely to be greatly influenced by their community environments. When communities offer opportunities for and examples of criminal behavior, children reared by neglecting or rejecting parents are more likely to become delinquents. And delinquents are likely to become inadequate parents.

Peer Influences

A very robust finding in the delinquency literature is that antisocial behavior is strongly related to involvement with deviant peers. One longitudinal study reported that involvement with antisocial peers was the only variable that had a direct effect on subsequent delinquency other than prior delinquency (Elliott et al., 1985). Factors such as peer delinquent behavior, peer approval of deviant behavior, attachment or allegiance to peers, time spent with peers, and peer pressure for deviance have all been associated with adolescent antisocial behavior (Hoge et al., 1994; Thornberry et al., 1994). In other words, the effects of deviant peers on delinquency are heightened if adolescents believe that their peers approve of delinquency, if they are attached to those peers, if they spend much time with them, and if they perceive pressure from those peers to engage in delinquent acts.

There is a dramatic increase during adolescence in the amount of time adolescents spend with their friends, and peers become increasingly

important during this developmental period. Moreover, peers appear to be most important during late adolescence, with their importance peaking at about age 17 and declining thereafter (Warr, 1993). Thus the decline in delinquency after about age 18 parallels the decline in the importance of peers, including those with deviant influences. Consistent with this view, in the longitudinal research of antisocial British youth by West and Farrington (1977), deviant youth reported that withdrawal from delinquent peer affiliations was an important factor in desistance from offending.

Peer influences appear to have a particularly strong relationship to delinquency in the context of family conflict. For example, adolescents ' lack of respect for their parents influenced their antisocial behavior only because it led to increases in antisocial peer affiliations (Simmons et al., 1991). Patterson et al. (1991) showed that association with deviant peers in 6th grade could be predicted from poor parental monitoring and antisocial activity in 4th grade. And 6th grade association with deviant peers, in turn, predicted delinquency in 8th grade. In adolescence, susceptibility to peer influence is inversely related to interaction with parents (Kandel, 1980; Kandel and Andrews, 1987; Steinberg, 1987).

Other research suggests that adolescents usually become involved with delinquent peers before they become delinquent themselves (Elliott, 1994b; Elliott et al., 1985; Simons et al., 1994). In those cases in which an adolescent was delinquent prior to having delinquent friends, the delinquency was exacerbated by association with deviant peers (Elliott, 1994b; Elliott and Menard, 1996; Thornberry et al., 1993).

The influence of peers varies depending on the influence of parents. In general, peer influence is greater among children and adolescents who have little interaction with their parents (Kandel et al., 1978; Steinberg, 1987). Parents seem to have more influence on the use of drugs among working-class than among middle-class families, and among blacks more than whites (Biddle et al., 1980). Parents also appear to be more influential for the initial decision whether to use any drugs than for ongoing decisions about how and when to use them (Kandel and Andrews, 1987). Patterson and his coworkers emphasize both family socialization practices and association with deviant peers as having strong influences on the onset of delinquency. He hypothesized that “the more antisocial the child, the earlier he or she will become a member of a deviant peer group” (Patterson and Yoerger, 1997:152).

Adolescents report an increasing admiration of defiant and antisocial behavior and less admiration of conventional virtues and talents from age 10 to age 18. They also consistently report that their peers are more antisocial and less admiring of conventional virtues than they are. At age 11, boys report peer admiration of antisocial behavior at a level that is equivalent to what peers actually report at age 17 (Cohen and Cohen,

1996). Adolescents may be more influenced by what they think their peers are doing than by what they actually are doing (Radecki and Jaccard, 1995).

Not only may association with delinquent peers influence delinquent behavior, but also committing a crime with others—co-offending—is a common phenomenon among adolescents (Cohen, 1955; Reiss and Farrington, 1991; Reiss, 1988; Sarnecki, 1986). Much of this behavior occurs in relatively unstable pairings or small groups, not in organized gangs (Klein, 1971; Reiss, 1988). The fact that teenagers commit most of their crimes in pairs or groups does not, of course, prove that peers influence delinquency. Such an influence may be inferred, however, from the increase in crime that followed successful organization of gangs in Los Angeles (Klein, 1971). More direct evidence comes from a study by Dishion and his colleagues. Their research points to reinforcement processes as a reason why deviance increases when misbehaving youngsters get together. Delinquent and nondelinquent boys brought a friend to the laboratory. Conversations were videotaped and coded to show positive and neutral responses by the partner. Among the delinquent pairs, misbehavior received approving responses—in contrast with the nondelinquent dyads, who ignored talk about deviance (Dishion et al., 1996). In addition, reinforcement of deviant talk was associated with violent behavior, even after statistically controlling the boys ' histories of antisocial behavior and parental use of harsh, inconsistent, and coercive discipline (Dishion et al., 1997).

The powerful influence of peers has probably not been adequately acknowledged in interventions designed to reduce delinquency and antisocial behavior. Regarding school-based interventions, among the least effective, and at times harmful, are those that aggregate deviant youth without adult supervision, such as in peer counseling and peer mediation (Gottfredson et al., 1998). Furthermore, high-risk youth are particularly likely to support and reinforce one another 's deviant behavior (e.g., in discussions of rule breaking) when they are grouped together for intervention. Dishion and his colleagues have labeled this process “deviancy training,” which was shown to be associated with later increases in substance use, delinquency, and violence (see the review in Dishion et al., 1999). They argued that youth who are reinforced for deviancy through laughter or attention, for example, are more likely to actually engage in deviant behavior. It is evident that intervenors need to give serious attention to the composition of treatment groups, especially in school settings. It may be more fruitful to construct intervention groups so that low- and moderate-risk youth are included with their high-risk counterparts to minimize the possibility of deviancy training and harmful intervention effects.

Studies of gang participants suggest that, compared with offenders who are not gang members, gang offenders tend to be younger when they begin their criminal careers, are more likely to be violent in public places, and are more likely to use guns (Maxson et al., 1985). Several studies have shown that gang membership is associated with high rates of criminal activities (e.g., Battin et al., 1998; Esbensen et al., 1993; Huff, 1998; Thornberry, 1998; Thornberry et al., 1993). These and other studies (e.g., Pfeiffer, 1998) also suggest that gangs facilitate violence. The heightened criminality and violence of gang members seem not to be reducible to selection. That is, gang members do tend to be more active criminals prior to joining a gang than are their nonjoining, even delinquent peers. During periods of gang participation, however, gang members are more criminally active and more frequently violent than they were either before joining or after leaving gangs. Furthermore, some evidence suggests that gang membership had the greatest effects on those who had not previously committed crimes (Zhang et al., 1999). The literature on gang participation, however, does not go much beyond suggesting that there is a process that facilitates antisocial, often violent, behavior. Norms and pressure to conform to deviant values have been suggested as mechanisms. How and why these are effective has received little attention.

COMMUNITY FACTORS

School policies that affect juvenile delinquency.

Delinquency is associated with poor school performance, truancy, and leaving school at a young age (Elliott et al., 1978; Elliott and Voss, 1974; Farrington, 1986b; Hagan and McCarthy, 1997; Hawkins et al., 1998; Huizinga and Jakob-Chien, 1998; Kelly, 1971; Maguin and Loeber, 1996; Polk, 1975; Rhodes and Reiss, 1969; Thornberry and Christenson, 1984). To what extent do school policies contribute to these outcomes for high-risk youngsters? This section outlines what is known about the effects of some of the major school policies that have a particular impact on adolescent delinquents and those at risk for delinquency. The topics covered are grade retention, suspension, and expulsion as disciplinary techniques and academic tracking. These are complex topics about which there is a large literature. This section does not attempt to summarize that literature, but rather to highlight issues that appear to affect juvenile criminality.

Grade Retention

Grade retention refers to the practice of not promoting students to the next grade level upon completion of the current grade at the end of the

school year. Low academic achievement is the most frequent reason given by teachers who recommend retention for their students (Jimerson et al., 1997).

There is no precise national estimate of the number of youths who experience grade retention, but the practice was widespread in the 1990s. Contrary to the public perception that few students fail a grade (Westbury, 1994), it is estimated that approximately 15 to 19 percent of students experience grade retention.

Despite the intuitive appeal of retention as a mechanism for improving student performance, the retention literature overwhelmingly concludes that it is not as effective as promotion. Smith and Shepard (1987:130) summarize the effects of grade retention as follows:

The consistent conclusion of reviews is that children make progress during the year in which they repeat a grade, but not as much progress as similar children who were promoted. In controlled studies of the effect of nonpromotion on both achievement and personal adjustment, children who repeat a grade are worse off than comparable children who are promoted with their age-mates. Contrary to popular belief, the average negative effect of retention on achievement is even greater than the negative effect on emotional adjustment and self-concept.

Aside from the effectiveness issue, there are other negative consequences of retention. Retention increases the cost of educating a pupil (Smith and Shepard, 1987). According to Smith and Shepard (1987), alternatives to retention, such as tutoring and summer school, are both more effective and less costly. Retention has negative effects on the emotional adjustment of retainees. For example, Yamamoto and Byrnes (1984) reported that next to blindness and the death of a parent, children rated the prospect of retention as the most stressful event they could suffer. Retained students have more negative attitudes about school and develop characteristics of “learned helplessness,” whereby they blame themselves for their failure and show low levels of persistence. There is a consistent relationship between retention and school dropout (Roderick, 1994; Shepard and Smith, 1990). Dropouts are five times more likely to have repeated a grade than nondropouts, and students who repeat two grades have nearly a 100 percent probability of dropping out. Finally, there are issues of fairness and equity, in that males and ethnic minority children are more likely to be retained (Jimerson et al., 1997).

School Suspension and Expulsion

Unlike grade retention, which is a school policy primarily for young children in the early elementary grades who display academic problems,

suspension and expulsion are mainly directed toward older (secondary school) students whose school difficulties manifest themselves as behavioral problems. Both suspension and expulsion are forms of school exclusion, with the latter being presumably reserved for the most serious offenses.

Supporters of suspension argue that, like any other disciplinary action, suspension reduces the likelihood of misbehavior for the period immediately after suspension and that it can serve as a deterrent to other potentially misbehaving students. Opponents of suspension view the consequences of this disciplinary action as far outweighing any potential benefits. Some of the consequences cited include loss of self-respect, increased chances of coming into contact with a delinquent subculture, the vicious cyclical effects of being unable to catch up with schoolwork, and the stigma associated with suspension once the target child returns to school (Williams, 1989). Furthermore, most investigations of school suspensions have found that serious disciplinary problems are quite rarely the cause of suspension (Cottle, 1975; Kaeser, 1979; McFadden et al., 1992). The majority of suspensions in districts with high suspension rates are for behavior that is not threatening or serious.

The probability of being suspended is unequal among students. Urban students have the highest suspension rates, suburban students have the second highest rates, and rural school students have the lowest rates (Wu et al., 1982). Suspension rates also vary according to sex, race, socioeconomic background, and family characteristics. Male students in every kind of school and education level are about three times more likely to be suspended as females. Suspension rates also vary by race. Statistics indicate that minority students are suspended disproportionately compared with their share in the population and their share of misbehavior, and these racial disparities have the greatest impact on black students; their rate of suspension is over twice that of other ethnic groups, including whites, Hispanics, and Asians (Williams, 1989). Furthermore, black students are likely to receive more severe forms of suspension than other students, even for similar behaviors requiring disciplinary action. In one study, for example, white students were more likely to receive in-school suspension than out-of-school suspension, whereas the reverse pattern was true for black students who had violated school rules (McFadden et al., 1992). This inequality in treatment exists even when factors such as poverty, behavior and attitudes, academic performance, parental attention, and school governance are considered. Students at the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum tend to be more frequently suspended. Many suspended students come from single-parent families in which the parent had less than a 10th grade education.

Suspended students frequently have learning disabilities or inad-

equate academic skills. Wu et al. (1982) noted a positive relationship between the student suspension rate in a school and the average percentage of students of low ability reported by all teachers in a school. Low-ability students are suspended more than expected, given the number of incidents of misbehavior attributed to them. According to Wu et al. (1982), this phenomenon appears to work in either of two ways. If a student's academic performance is below average, the probability of being suspended increases. And if a school places considerable emphasis on the academic ability of its students, the probability of suspension increases.

Although there is not very much recent empirical research on the effects of school suspension, it appears to be especially detrimental to low-achieving students who may misbehave because they are doing poorly in school. Nor does suspension appear to reduce the behavior it is designed to punish. For example, McFadden et al. (1992) reported that the rate of recidivism remained extremely high across all groups of suspended students in their large study of a Florida school district. Less than 1 percent of disciplined youngsters were one-time offenders, 75 percent were cited for one to five subsequent events during the school year, and 25 percent engaged in more than five serious misbehaviors.

There appear to be clear biases in the use of suspension as a disciplinary action, with black students more likely to be the target of this bias. In the McFadden et al. (1992) study, white students were more likely than their black counterparts to be referred for such misbehaviors as truancy, defiance of authority, and fighting. However, it was the black students who were disproportionately more likely to receive the most severe sanctions, including corporal punishment and out-of-school suspension. As these authors state: “Even though black pupils accounted for only 36.7% of the disciplinary referrals, they received 54.1% of the corporal punishment and 43.9% of the school suspensions, but only 23.1% of the internal suspensions. Additionally, 44.6% of all black pupils referred received corporal punishment, compared to only 21.7% of white pupils and 22.7% of Hispanic pupils” (p. 144).

In sum, the literature reveals that school suspension is academically detrimental, does not contribute to a modification of misbehavior, and is disproportionately experienced by black males, among students who misbehave.

In recent years, expulsion has become a part of the debate on school discipline that has accompanied the rising concern about school violence, particularly that related to weapons possession and increasingly defiant, aggressive behavior by students in school. One result of this debate has been what Morrison et al. (1997) refer to as “zero-tolerance ” disciplinary policies. In California, for example, principals and superintendents are legally obligated to recommend expulsion from the school district for any

student who commits certain offenses, such as bringing weapons to school, brandishing a knife at another person, or unlawfully selling illegal drugs (California Department of Education, 1996-Education Code Section 48900). Such a policy may be expected to increase expulsion given that school officials are required to recommend it in these cases.

Characteristics of children who are expelled parallel those of children who are suspended from school. Students who are expelled tend to be in grades 8 through 12 (Bain and MacPherson, 1990; Hayden and Ward, 1996). There is a fairly substantial group of younger schoolchildren expelled from school; most of them come from the higher age range of students in elementary school. Expulsion is, however, primarily a secondary school phenomenon. About 80 to 90 percent of expelled students are boys, urban students are expelled at a higher rate that students from suburban and rural areas, and minority students are more likely to be expelled than white students.

Morrison and D'Incau (1997) specified four factors related to school adjustment that predicted behavior resulting in recommendation for expulsion. The first is academic performance; poor grade point average, particularly in English and math, and low achievement scores appear to be related to behavior that leads to expulsion. The second is attendance; many expelled students were habitual truants. The third is discipline; many students who experienced expulsion had records of previous suspension. The last factor is special education history; approximately 25 percent of expelled students were either currently, in the past, or in the process of being determined as eligible for special education services.

When children are suspended or expelled from school, their risk for delinquency increases. Exclusion from school makes it more difficult for a child to keep up with academic subjects. Furthermore, with extra time out of school, children are likely to have more time without supervision, and therefore be in a situation known to encourage crime. Effects of school suspension seem to extend beyond childhood. Even after accounting for juvenile criminality, in a national sample of male high school graduates, those who had been suspended were more likely to be incarcerated by the age of 30 (Arum and Beattie, 1999).

School Tracking

Academic tracking, also known as “ability grouping” or “streaming,” describes teaching practices whereby students who seem to be similar in ability are grouped together for instruction. The idea is to reduce the range of individual differences in class groups in order to simplify the task of teaching. Informal tracking is common in elementary schools. For example, teachers may divide children into reading groups based on their

reading skills. Some schools divide students into classrooms based on their assumed ability to learn. These groupings typically also set off upper- and middle-class white children from all others. Because of the fluidity of learning, the particular group into which a child is placed reflects the opinions of the person making the placement at least as much as the ability of the child (see Ball et al., 1984).

Unlike retention, which has been employed mostly in elementary school, and suspension and expulsion, which are largely secondary school phenomena, tracking has proliferated at all levels of schooling in American education. According to Slavin (1987), the practice is nearly universal in some form in secondary schools and very common in elementary schools. A good deal of informal evidence shows that when children considered to be slow learners are grouped together, they come to see themselves in an unfavorable light. Such self-denigration contributes to dislike for school, to truancy, and even to delinquency (Berends, 1995; Gold and Mann, 1972; Kaplan and Johnson, 1991).

Reviews of the effects of tracking in secondary school reach four general conclusions, all suggesting that the impact is largely negative for students in low tracks (see Oakes, 1987). Students in the low-track classes show poorer achievement than their nontracked counterparts. Slavin (1990) found no achievement advantage among secondary school students in high- or average-track classes over their peers of comparable ability in nontracked classes. Rosenbaum (1976) studied the effects of tracking on IQ longitudinally and found that test scores of students in low tracks became homogenized, with a lower mean score over time. Furthermore, he found that students in low tracks tend to be less employable and earn lower wages than other high school graduates; they also often suffer diminished self-esteem and lowered aspirations, and they come to hold more negative attitudes about school. These emotional consequences greatly increase the likelihood of dropping out of school and engaging in delinquent behavior (both in and out of school). One of the clearest findings in research on academic tracking in secondary school is that disproportionate numbers of poor and ethnic minority youngsters (particularly black and Hispanic) are placed in low-ability or noncollege prep tracks (Oakes, 1987). Even within the low-ability (e.g., vocational) tracks, minority students are frequently trained for the lowest-level jobs. At the same time, minority youngsters are consistently underrepresented in programs for the talented and gifted. These disparities occur whether placements are based on standardized test scores or on counselor and teacher recommendations. Oakes and other sociologists of education (e.g., Gamoran, 1992; Kilgore, 1991; Rosenbaum, 1976) have argued that academic tracking frequently operates to perpetuate racial inequality and social stratification in American society.

It is quite evident that all of the policies reviewed here are associated with more negative than positive effects on children at risk for delinquency. As policies to deal with low academic achievement or low ability, neither retention nor tracking leads to positive benefits for students who are experiencing academic difficulty and may reinforce ethnic stereotypes among students who do well. As policies to deal with school misbehavior, neither suspension nor expulsion appears to reduce undesired behavior, and both place excluded children at greater risk for delinquency. Furthermore, every policy covered in this overview has been found to impact ethnic minority youngsters disproportionately.

Neighborhood

Growing up in an adverse environment increases the likelihood that a young person will become involved in serious criminal activity during adolescence. Existing research points strongly to the relationship between certain kinds of residential neighborhoods and high levels of crime among young people. Research also points to a number of mechanisms that may account for this association between neighborhood and youth crime. While more research is needed to improve understanding of the mechanisms involved, the link between neighborhood environment and serious youth crime is sufficiently clear to indicate a need for close attention to neighborhood factors in the design of prevention and control efforts.

Two different kinds of research point to the importance of social environment in the generation of antisocial behavior and crime. First, research on the characteristics of communities reveals the extremely unequal geographic distribution of criminal activity. Second, research on human development points consistently to the importance of environment in the emergence of antisocial and criminal behavior. While researchers differ on their interpretation of the exact ways in which personal factors and environment interact in the process of human development, most agree on the continuous interaction of person and environment over time as a fundamental characteristic of developmental processes. Although certain persons and families may be strongly at risk for criminal behavior in any environment, living in a neighborhood where there are high levels of poverty and crime increases the risk of involvement in serious crime for all children growing up there.

This section reviews various strands of research on neighborhoods and crime and on the effects of environment on human development for the purpose of evaluating the contributions of neighborhood environment to patterns of youth crime and prospects for its prevention and control.

Neighborhood Concentrations of Serious Youth Crime

Crime and delinquency are very unequally distributed in space. The geographic concentration of crime occurs at various levels of aggregation, in certain cities and counties and also in certain neighborhoods within a given city or county. For example, cities with higher levels of poverty, larger and more densely settled populations, and higher proportions of unmarried men consistently experience higher homicide rates than those that do not share these characteristics (Land et al., 1990). Serious youth crime in recent years has also been concentrated in certain urban areas. At the peak of the recent epidemic of juvenile homicide, a quarter of all apprehended offenders in the entire United States were arrested in just five counties, containing the cities of Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Detroit, and New York. In contrast, during that same year, 84 percent of counties in the United States reported no juvenile homicides (Sickmund et al., 1997).

The concentration of serious crime, especially juvenile crime, in certain neighborhoods within a given city is just as pronounced as the concentration in certain cities. A great deal of research over a period of many decades employing a wide range of methods has documented the geographic concentration of high rates of crime in poor, urban neighborhoods. Classic studies established the concentration of arrests (Shaw and McKay, 1942) and youth gang activity (Thrasher, 1927) in poor neighborhoods located in inner cities. This relationship has been confirmed in replication studies over the years (Bordua, 1958; Chilton, 1964; Lander, 1954; Sampson and Groves, 1989).

In addition to this correlation of neighborhood poverty levels and high crime rates at any given time, research has also found that change in neighborhood poverty levels for the worse is associated with increasing rates of crime and delinquency (Schuerman and Kobrin, 1986; Shannon, 1986). The causal relationship between increases in neighborhood poverty and increases in crime can move in either direction. In the earlier stages of the process of neighborhood deterioration, increases in poverty may cause increases in crime, while, in later stages, crime reaches such a level that those who can afford to move out do so, thereby increasing the poverty rate even further.

Other social characteristics of poor urban neighborhoods change over time and between nations. In the early part of the 20th century in the United States, poor urban neighborhoods tended to be quite mixed in ethnicity (e.g., Italian, Irish, Polish, Jewish), reflecting an era of immigration, and were often located in the older, central parts of cities that were expanding rapidly in outward, concentric waves (Shaw and McKay, 1942). Since the 1950s, poor, urban neighborhoods in the United States have

been much more likely to be dominated by a single cultural group. Blacks and Hispanics, in particular, have experienced an extraordinary degree of residential segregation and concentration in the poorest areas of large cities as a result of racial discrimination in labor and housing markets (Massey and Denton, 1993). In their reanalysis of the Chicago data collected by Shaw and McKay (1942), Bursik and Webb (1982) found that after 1950, changing rates of community racial composition provided a better predictor of juvenile delinquency rates than did the ecological variables.

Poverty and residential segregation are not always urban phenomena. American Indians also experience a great degree of residential segregation and poverty, but rather than in cities, they are segregated on poor, rural reservations. Elsewhere in the developed world, residential concentrations of poor people occur on the periphery of large urban areas, rather than in the center. The construction of large public housing estates in England following World War II produced this kind of urban configuration (Bottoms and Wiles, 1986), in contrast to the concentration on inner-city public housing projects in the United States.

Two important qualifications must be noted with respect to the well-documented patterns of local concentrations of crime and delinquency. First, these patterns do not hold true for minor forms of delinquency. Since a large majority of all adolescent males break the law at some point, such factors as neighborhood, race, and social class do not differentiate very well between those who do or do not commit occasional minor offenses (Elliott and Ageton, 1980).

Second, although some areas have particularly high rates of deviance, in no area do all or most children commit seroius crimes (Elliott et al., 1996; Furstenburg et al., 1999). Still, the concentration of serious juvenile crime in a relatively few residential neighborhoods is well documented and a legitimate cause for concern, both to those living in these high-risk neighborhoods and to the wider society.

Neighborhoods as Mediators of Race and Social Class Disparities in Offending

While studies using differing methods and sources of data are not in agreement on the magnitude of differences in rates of involvement in youth crime across racial, ethnic, and social class categories, most research shows that race, poverty, and residential segregation interact to predict delinquency rates. For example, the three most common approaches to measurement—self-report surveys, victimization surveys, and official arrest and conviction statistics—all indicate high rates of serious offending among young black Americans. There is substantial reason to believe

that these disparate offending rates are directly related to the community conditions under which black children grow up. There is no other racial or ethnic group in the United States of comparable size whose members are nearly as likely to grow up in neighborhoods of concentrated urban poverty (Wilson, 1987). Summarizing this situation, Sampson (1987:353-354) wrote: “the worst urban contexts in which whites reside with respect to poverty and family disruption are considerably better off than the mean levels for black communities.” Although there are more poor white than black families in absolute number, poor white families are far less likely to live in areas where most of their neighbors are also poor. Studies that show stronger effects of race than of class on delinquency must be interpreted in light of the additional stresses suffered by poor blacks as a result of residential segregation.

In comprehensive reviews, scholars have found that adding controls for concentrated neighborhood poverty can entirely eliminate neighborhood-level associations between the proportion of blacks and crime rates. Without controls for concentrated poverty, this relationship is quite strong (Sampson, 1997; Short, 1997). Such research strongly indicates that the unique combination of poverty and residential segregation suffered by black Americans is associated with high rates of crime through the mediating pathway of neighborhood effects on families and children.

These deleterious neighborhood effects have been studied mostly with respect to blacks, but, as the United States has experienced renewed immigration, evidence has also begun to point to similar problems among newer groups of immigrants from Asia, Europe, and Latin America. Much of the evidence at this point is contained in ethnographic studies of youthful gang members and drug dealers (Bourgois, 1995; Chin, 1996; Moore, 1978, 1991; Padilla, 1992; Pinderhughes, 1997; Sullivan, 1989; Vigil, 1988; Vigil and Yun, 1990).

Neighborhood-Level Characteristics Associated with High Rates of Crime and Delinquency

Although the relationship between neighborhood poverty and crime is robust over time and space, a number of other social characteristics of neighborhoods are also associated with elevated levels of crime and delinquency. Factors such as concentrations of multifamily and public housing, unemployed and underemployed men, younger people, and single-parent households tend to be linked to higher crime rates (Sampson, 1987; Wilson, 1985). These social characteristics frequently go along with overall high levels of poverty, but they also vary among both poor and nonpoor neighborhoods and help to explain why neighborhoods with similar average income levels can have different rates of crime.

Recent research has also begun to examine the social atmosphere of neighborhoods and has found significant relationships with crime rates. Neighborhoods in which people tell interviewers that they have a greater sense of collective efficacy—the sense that they can solve problems in cooperation with their neighbors if they have to —have lower crime rates, even when controlling for poverty levels and other neighborhood characteristics (Sampson et al., 1997).

The number and type of local institutions have often been thought to have an effect on neighborhood safety, and some research seems to confirm this. High concentrations of barrooms are clearly associated with crime (Roncek and Maier, 1991). One recent study has also found a crime-averting effect of youth recreation facilities when comparing neighborhoods with otherwise very high rates of crime and criminogenic characteristics to one another (Peterson et al., 2000). Since assessing the number, characteristics, and quality of neighborhood institutions is quite difficult, this remains an understudied area of great importance, given its considerable theoretical and practical interest.

One type of pernicious neighborhood institution, the youth gang, has been studied extensively and is clearly associated with, though by no means synonymous with, delinquency and crime. Although it is true that an adolescent's involvement with youth gangs is associated with a greatly increased risk of criminal behavior, that risk also accompanies association with delinquent peer groups more generally. A very high proportion of youth crime, much higher than for adults, is committed by groups of co-offenders (Elliott and Menard, 1996; Miller, 1982). Most of these delinquent peer groups do not fit the popular stereotypes of youth gangs, with the attendant ritual trappings of distinctive group names, costumes, hand signs, and initiation ceremonies (Sullivan, 1983, 1996). The broader category of delinquent peer groups, most of which are not ritualized youth gangs, drives up neighborhood delinquency rates.

Comparative neighborhood studies, examining the presence of delinquent and unsupervised adolescent peer groups, have found that these groups are more likely to be found in poor neighborhoods. The strength of this finding is such that the presence of these groups appears to be one of the major factors connecting neighborhood poverty and delinquency (Elliott and Menard, 1996; Sampson and Groves, 1989).

Although most adolescent co-offending is committed in the context of delinquent peer groups that are not ritualized youth gangs, the emergence of ritualized gangs in a neighborhood appears to be associated with even higher levels of offending than occur when ritualized gangs are not present (Spergel, 1995; Thornberry, 1998). For this reason, the recent spread of youth gangs across the United States is cause for serious concern. In the decade from the mid-1980s through the mid-1990s, youth

gangs emerged in a growing number of cities in the United States, not only in large cities, but also in smaller cities and towns (Klein, 1995; National Youth Gang Center, 1997).

Despite widespread rumors and mass media allegations, this spread of youth gangs does not appear to be the result of systematic outreach, recruitment, and organization from one city to another. The fact that groups calling themselves by similar names, such as Bloods and Crips, have been spreading from city to city may have very little to do with conscious efforts by members of those groups in Los Angeles to build criminal organizations in other cities. Movies and popular music, rather than direct connections between cities, seem to be at least partly responsible for this copying of gang terminology between cities (Decker and Van Winkle, 1996).

Ethnographic Perspectives on Neighborhoods and Development

A second stream of research that examines adolescent development from the perspective of neighborhood environment consists of ethnographic field studies of delinquent individuals and groups growing up in high-crime neighborhoods. These studies range from classic studies conducted in the 1920s and 1930s (Shaw, 1930; Whyte, 1943), through a second wave in the 1960s (Short and Strodtbeck, 1965; Suttles, 1968) and a more recent wave since the late 1980s (Bourgois, 1995; Chin, 1996; Moore, 1978, 1991; Padilla, 1992; Pinderhughes, 1997; Sullivan, 1989; Vigil, 1988; Vigil and Yun, 1990).

Drawing conclusions from these studies about neighborhood effects on child and adolescent development must be approached carefully, because these studies were primarily designed to describe systems of activity and interaction rather than processes of personal development. As a result, there are many limitations on using this body of research for the purpose of examining neighborhood effects on development, chief among them the predominant focus on single, high-crime areas and the focus within those areas on those engaged in delinquent and criminal activity. Because of this double selection on the dependent variables of both area and individual criminal behavior, these studies generally do not allow systematic comparison between high-crime and low-crime areas or between nondelinquent and delinquent youth within areas.

Despite these limitations, the authors of the studies virtually always end up attributing the ongoing nature of delinquent activity in the areas studied to the influences of the local area on development, particularly among males. In other words, studies not designed primarily to examine development appeal to neighborhood-level influences on development in order to explain their findings. These conclusions about neighborhood

influence on development generally emerge from a much closer scrutiny of the social contexts of development made possible by the in-depth approach of case study and qualitative methods (Sullivan, 1998; Yin, 1989).

One exception to the general lack of comparisons across neighborhoods in the ethnographic studies of development is Sullivan's systematic comparison of three groups of criminally active youths in different neighborhoods of New York City. Using this comparative approach, he demonstrated close links between the array of legitimate and illegitimate opportunities in each place and the developmental trajectories of boys who became involved in delinquency and crime. Even though the early stages of involvement were similar in all three areas, youths from the white, working-class area aged out of crime much faster than their black and Hispanic peers living in neighborhoods characterized by racial and ethnic segregation, concentrated poverty, adult joblessness, and single-parent households. The youths from the more disadvantaged areas had less access to employment and more freedom to experiment with illegal activity as a result of lower levels of informal social control in their immediate neighborhoods (Sullivan, 1989).

Neighborhood-Level Concentrations of Developmental Risk Factors

If neighborhood effects are defined as the influence of neighborhood environment on individual development net of personal and family characteristics, then the amount of variation left over to be attributed to neighborhood in a given study can vary a great deal according to the data and methods used. As many researchers note, neighborhood effects may be mediated by personal and family factors (see, e.g., Farrington and Loeber, 1999); however, it is also necessary to examine whether personal and family characteristics are themselves affected by neighborhood environment. To the extent that this is the case, then neighborhoods affect individual development through their effects on such things as the formation of enduring personal characteristics during early childhood and the family environments in which children grow up. From this perspective, efforts such as those described earlier to measure neighborhood effects net of personal and family characteristics may substantially underestimate neighborhood effects as a result of artificially separating personal and family characteristics from those neighborhood environments. Similarly, if the subsets are not separately analyzed, neighborhood effects will be artificially minimized if some, but not all, types of family constellations increase the impact of neighborhood conditions (McCord, 2000).

A number of studies demonstrate neighborhood concentrations of risk factors for impaired physical and mental health and for the development of antisocial behavior patterns. To date, little research has been able

to trace direct pathways from these neighborhood risk factors through child and adolescent development, although some of the larger ongoing studies, such as the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods, are collecting the kind of comprehensive data on biological and social aspects of individual development as well as on the characteristics of a large number of ecological areas that could make this kind of analysis possible (Tonry et al., 1991). Nonetheless, existing research does indicate a number of ways in which deleterious conditions for individual development are concentrated at the neighborhood level. Furthermore, the neighborhoods in which they are concentrated are the same ones that have concentrations of serious youth crime. The risks involved begin for individuals in these areas before birth and continue into adulthood. They include child health problems, parental stress, child abuse, and exposure to community violence.

Neighborhoods with high rates of poverty and crime are often also neighborhoods with concentrations of health problems among children. In New York City, for example, there is a high degree of correlation at the neighborhood level of low birthweight and infant mortality with rates of violent death (Wallace and Wallace, 1990). Moffitt (1997) has pointed to a number of conditions prevalent in inner-city neighborhoods that are capable of inflicting neuropsychological damage, including fetal exposure to toxic chemicals, which are disproportionately stored in such areas, and child malnutrition. Thus, even to the extent that some neighborhoods have larger proportions of persons with clinically identifiable physical and psychological problems, these problems may themselves be due to neighborhood conditions. Thus it can be difficult to disentangle individual developmental risk factors from neighborhood risk factors.

Similarly, some parenting practices that contribute to the development of antisocial and criminal behavior are themselves concentrated in certain areas. McLloyd (1990) has reviewed a wide range of studies documenting the high levels of parental stress experienced by low-income black mothers who, as we have already seen, experience an extremely high degree of residential segregation (Massey and Denton, 1993). This parental stress may in turn lead, in some cases, to child abuse, which contributes to subsequent delinquent and criminal behavior (Widom, 1989). Child abuse is also disproportionately concentrated in certain neighborhoods. Korbin and Coulton's studies of the distribution of child maltreatment in Cleveland neighborhoods have shown both higher rates in poorer neighborhoods and a moderating effect of age structure. Using a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods, they showed that neighborhoods with a younger age structure experienced higher rates of child maltreatment, as measured by reported child abuse cases and inter-

views in a subset of the neighborhoods, than other neighborhoods with similar average family income levels (Korbin and Coulton, 1997).

Recent research has begun to demonstrate high levels of exposure to community violence across a wide range of American communities (Singer et al., 1995), but the degree of exposure also varies by community and reaches extraordinary levels in some neighborhoods. Studies in inner-city neighborhoods have found that one-quarter or more of young people have directly witnessed confrontations involving serious, life-threatening acts of violence, while even larger proportions have witnessed attacks with weapons (Bell and Jenkins, 1993; Osofsky et al., 1993; Richters and Martinez, 1993; Selner-O'Hagan et al., 1998). Various outcomes of this kind of exposure to community violence have been identified. The most commonly cited of these include depressive disorders and posttraumatic stress syndrome, but some links have also been found to increases in aggressive and antisocial behavior (Farrell and Bruce, 1997). Experimental research has shown a pathway from exposure to violence to states of mind conducive to and associated with aggressive behavior, particularly a pattern of social cognition characterized as hostile attribution bias, in which people erroneously perceive others' behavior as threatening (Dodge et al., 1990).

Taken together, these studies point to a multitude of physical, psychological, and social stressors concentrated in the same, relatively few, highly disadvantaged neighborhood environments. Besides affecting people individually, these stressors may combine with and amplify one another, as highly stressed individuals encounter each other in crowded streets, apartment buildings, and public facilities, leading to an exponential increase in triggers for violence (Bernard, 1990). Agnew (1999), having demonstrated the effects of general psychological strain on criminal behavior in previous research, has recently reviewed a wide range of studies that point to just such an amplification effect at the community level.

Environmental and Situational Influences

Other aspects of the environment that have been examined as factors that may influence the risk of offending include drug markets, availability of guns, and the impact of violence in the media.

The presence of illegal drug markets increases the likelihood for violence at the points where drugs are exchanged for money (Haller, 1989). The rise in violent juvenile crime during the 1980s has been attributed to the increase in drug markets, particularly open-air markets for crack cocaine (Blumstein, 1995; National Research Council, 1993). Blumstein (1995) points out the coincidence in timing of the rise in drug arrests of

nonwhite juveniles, particularly blacks, beginning in 1985, and the rise in juvenile, gun-related homicide rates, particularly among blacks. As mentioned earlier, Blumstein argues that the introduction of open-air crack cocaine markets in about 1985 may explain both trends. The low price of crack brought many low-income people, who could afford to buy only one hit at a time, into the cocaine market. These factors led to an increase in the number of drug transactions and a need for more sellers. Juveniles provided a ready labor force and were recruited into crack markets. Blumstein (1995:30) explains how this led to an increase in handgun carrying by juveniles:

These juveniles, like many other participants in the illicit-drug industry, are likely to carry guns for self-protection, largely because that industry uses guns as an important instrument for dispute resolution. Also, the participants in the industry are likely to be carrying a considerable amount of valuable product—drugs or money derived from selling drugs—and are not likely to be able to call on the police if someone tries to rob them. Thus, they are forced to provide for their own defense; a gun is a natural instrument.

Since the drug markets are pervasive in many inner-city neighborhoods, and the young people recruited into them are fairly tightly networked with other young people in their neighborhoods, it became easy for the guns to be diffused to other teenagers who go to the same school or who walk the same streets. These other young people are also likely to arm themselves, primarily for their own protection, but also because possession of a weapon may become a means of status-seeking in the community. This initiates an escalating process: as more guns appear in the community, the incentive for any single individual to arm himself increases.

Other researchers concur that juveniles responded to the increased threat of violence in their neighborhoods by arming themselves or joining gangs for self-protection and adopting a more aggressive interpersonal style (Anderson, 1990, 1994; Fagan and Wilkinson, 1998; Hemenway et al., 1996; Wilkinson and Fagan, 1996). The number of juveniles who report carrying guns has increased. In 1990, approximately 6 percent of teenage boys reported carrying a firearm in the 30 days preceding the survey (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1991). By 1993, 13.7 percent reported carrying guns (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1995). Hemenway et al. (1996) surveyed a sample of 7th and 10th graders in schools in high-risk neighborhoods in a Northeastern and a Midwestern city. Of these, 29 percent of 10th grade males and 23 percent of 7th grade males reported having carried a concealed gun, as did 12 percent of 10th grade females and 8 percent of 7th grade females. The overwhelm-

ing majority gave self-defense or protection as their primary reason for carrying weapons. Moreover, juveniles who reported living in a neighborhood with a lot of shootings or having a family member who had been shot were significantly more likely to carry a gun than other students. Additional student surveys also have found that protection is the most common reason given for carrying a gun (e.g., Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1993; Sheley and Wright, 1998).

By studying trends in homicide rates, several researchers have concluded that the increase in juvenile homicides during the late 1980s and early 1990s resulted from the increase in the availability of guns, in particular handguns, rather than from an increase in violent propensities of youth (Blumstein and Cork, 1996; Cook and Laub, 1998; Zimring, 1996). Certainly, assaults in which guns are involved are more likely to turn deadly than when other weapons or just fists are involved. The increase in gun use occurred for all types of youth homicides (e.g., family killings, gang-related killings, brawls and arguments). Furthermore, the rates of nonhandgun homicides remained stable; only handgun-related homicides increased.

Public concern about the role of media in producing misbehavior is as old as concern regarding the socialization of children. Although few believe that the media operate in isolation to influence crime, scientific studies show that children may imitate behavior, whether it is shown in pictures of real people or in cartoons or merely described in stories (Bandura, 1962, 1965, 1986; Maccoby, 1964, 1980). Prosocial as well as aggressive antisocial behavior has been inspired through the use of examples (Anderson, 1998; Eisenberg and Mussen, 1989; Eron and Huesmann, 1986; Huston and Wright, 1998; Staub, 1979). Thus media models can be seen as potentially influencing either risk or protectiveness of environments.

In addition to modeling behavior, exposure to media violence has been shown to increase fear of victimization and to desensitize witnesses to effects of violence (Slaby, 1997; Wilson et al., 1998). Children seem particularly susceptible to such effects, although not all children are equally susceptible. Violent video games, movies, and music lyrics have also been criticized as inciting violence among young people. Cooper and Mackie (1986) found that after playing a violent video game, 4th and 5th graders exhibited more aggression in play than did their classmates who had been randomly assigned to play with a nonviolent video game or to no video game. Anderson and Dill (2000) randomly assigned college students to play either a violent or a nonviolent video game that had been matched for interest, frustration, and difficulty. Students played the same game three times, for a total of 45 minutes, after which they played a competitive game that involved using unpleasant sound blasts against

the rival player. After the second time, measures of the accessibility of aggressive concepts showed a cognitive effect of playing violent video games. After the third time, those who had played the violent video game gave longer blasts of the unpleasant sound, a result mediated by accessibility of aggression as a cognitive factor. The authors concluded that violent video games have adverse behavioral effects and that these occur through increasing the aggressive outlooks of participants.

None of these studies, however, finds direct connections between media exposure to violence and subsequent serious violent behavior. Steinberg (2000:37) summarized the literature on media and juvenile violence by noting: “exposure to violence in the media plays a significant, but very small, role in adolescents' actual involvement in violent activity. The images young people are exposed to may provide the material for violent fantasies and may, under rare circumstances, give young people concrete ideas about how to act out these impulses. But the violent impulses themselves, and the motivation to follow through on them, rarely come from watching violent films or violent television or from listening to violent music . . . . I know of no research that links the sort of serious violence this working group is concerned about with exposure to violent entertainment.”

THE DEVELOPMENT OF DELINQUENCY IN GIRLS

Research on the development of conduct disorder, aggression, and delinquency has often been confined to studies of boys. Many of the individual factors found to be related to delinquency have not been well studied in girls. For example, impulsivity, which has been linked to the development of conduct problems in boys (Caspi et al., 1994; White et al., 1994), has scarcely been studied in girls (Keenan et al., in press).

Behavioral differences between boys and girls have been documented from infancy. Weinberg and Tronick (1997) report that infant girls exhibit better emotional regulation than infant boys, and that infant boys are more likely to show anger than infant girls. This may have implications for the development of conduct problems and delinquency. Although peer-directed aggressive behavior appears to be similar in both girls and boys during toddlerhood (Loeber and Hay, 1997), between the ages of 3 and 6, boys begin to display higher rates of physical aggression than do girls (Coie and Dodge, 1998). Girls tend to use verbal and indirect aggression, such as peer exclusion, ostracism, and character defamation (Bjorkqvist et al., 1992; Crick and Grotpeter, 1995), rather than physical aggression. Research by Pepler and Craig (1995), however, found that girls do use physical aggression against peers, but tend to hide it from adults. Through remote audiovisual recordings of children on a play-

ground, they found the rates of bullying by girls and boys to be the same, although girls were less likely than boys to admit to the behavior in interviews.

Internalizing disorders, such as anxiety and depression, are more frequent in girls and may well overlap with their conduct problems (Loeber and Keenan, 1994; McCord and Ensminger, 1997). Theoreticians have suggested that adolescent females may direct rage and hurt inward as a reaction to abuse and maltreatment. These inward-directed feelings may manifest themselves in conduct problems, such as drug abuse, prostitution, and other self-destructive behaviors (Belknap, 1996).

Whether or not the rate of conduct problems and conduct disorder in girls is lower than that in boys remains to be definitively proven. Girls who do exhibit aggressive behavior or conduct disorder exhibit as much stability in that behavior and are as much at risk for later problems as are boys. Tremblay et al. (1992) found equally high correlations between aggression in early elementary school and later delinquency in boys and girls. Boys and girls with conduct disorder are also equally likely to qualify for later antisocial personality disorder (Zoccolillo et al., 1992).

Delinquency in girls, as well as boys, is often preceded by some form of childhood victimization (Maxfield and Widom, 1996; Smith and Thornberry, 1995; Widom, 1989). Some have speculated that one of the first steps in female delinquency is status offending (truancy, running away from home, being incorrigible), frequently in response to abusive situations in the home (Chesney-Lind and Shelden, 1998). Indeed, Chesney-Lind (1997) has written that status offenses, including running away, may play an important role in female delinquency. In what she refers to as the “criminalization of girls' survival strategies,” Chesney-Lind (1989:11) suggests that young females run away from the violence and abuse in their homes and become vulnerable to further involvement in crime as a means of survival. In one community-based longitudinal study, however, a larger proportion of boys than of girls had left home prior to their sixteenth birthday (McCord and Ensminger, 1997). In a long-term follow-up of a sample of documented cases of childhood abuse and neglect, Kaufman and Widom (1999) reported preliminary results indicating that males and females are equally likely to run away from home, and that childhood sexual abuse was not more often associated with running away than other forms of abuse or neglect. However, the motivation for running away may differ for males and females. For example, females may be running away to escape physical or sexual abuse or neglect in their homes. For boys, running away may be an indirect consequence of childhood victimization or may be part of a larger constellation of antisocial and problem behaviors (Luntz and Widom, 1994).

From the small amount of research that has been done on girls, it appears that they share many risk factors for delinquency with boys. These risk factors include early drug use (Covington, 1998), association with delinquent peers (Acoca and Dedel, 1998), and problems in school (Bergsmann, 1994). McCord and Ensminger (1997) found, however, that, on average, girls were exposed to fewer risk factors (e.g., aggressiveness, frequent spanking, low I.Q., first-grade truancy, early leaving home, and racial discrimination) than were boys.

Delinquent girls report experiencing serious mental health problems, including depression and anxiety, and suicidal thoughts. In a study of delinquent girls conducted by Bergsmann (1994), fully half said that they had considered suicide, and some 64 percent of these had thought about it more than once.

In a survey of mental disorders in juvenile justice facilities, Timmons-Mitchell and colleagues (1997) compared the prevalence of disorders among a sample of males and females and found that the estimated prevalence of mental disorders among females was over three times that among males (84 versus 27 percent). The females in the sample scored significantly higher than males on scales of the Milton Adolescent Clinical Inventory, which measure suicidal tendency, substance abuse proneness, impulsivity, family dysfunction, childhood abuse, and delinquent predisposition. Timmons-Mitchell et al. (1997) concluded from these data that incarcerated female juveniles had significantly more mental health problems and treatment needs than their male counterparts.

Teen motherhood and pregnancy are also concerns among female juvenile offenders. Female delinquents become sexually active at an earlier age than females who are not delinquent (Greene, Peters and Associates, 1998). Sexual activity at an early age sets girls up for a host of problems, including disease and teenage pregnancy, that have far-reaching impacts on their lives and health. Teen mothers face nearly insurmountable challenges that undermine their ability to take adequate care of themselves and their families. Dropping out of school, welfare dependence, and living in poor communities are only a few of the consequences of teen motherhood. And the effects are not limited to one generation. Teen mothers are more likely than women who have children in their early 20s to have children who are incarcerated as adults (Grogger, 1997; Nagin et al., 1997; Robin Hood Foundation, 1996).

CONCLUSIONS

Although a large proportion of adolescents gets arrested and an even larger proportion commits illegal acts, only a small proportion commits

serious crimes. Furthermore, most of those who engage in illegal behavior as adolescents do not become adult criminals.

Risk factors at the individual, social, and community level most likely interact in complex ways to promote antisocial and delinquent behavior in juveniles. Although there is some research evidence that different risk factors are more salient at different stages of child and adolescent development, it remains unclear which particular risk factors alone, or in combination, are most important to delinquency. It appears, however, that the more risk factors that are present, the higher the likelihood of delinquency. Particular risk factors considered by the panel are poor parenting practices, school practices that may contribute to school failure, and community-wide settings.

Poor parenting practices are important risk factors for delinquency. Several aspects of parenting have been found to be related to delinquency:

neglect or the absence of supervision throughout childhood and adolescence;

the presence of overt conflict or abuse;

discipline that is inconsistent or inappropriate to the behavior; and

a lack of emotional warmth in the family.

School failure is related to delinquency, and some widely used school practices are associated with school failure in high-risk children. These practices include tracking and grade retention, as well as suspension and expulsion. Minorities are disproportionately affected by these educational and social practices in schools.

Both serious crime and developmental risk factors for children and adolescents are highly concentrated in some communities. These communities are characterized by concentrated poverty. Residents of these communities often do not have access to the level of public resources available in the wider society, including good schools, supervised activities, and health services. Individual-level risk factors are also concentrated in these communities, including health problems, parental stress, and exposure to family and community violence. The combination of concentrated poverty and residential segregation suffered by ethnic minorities in some places contributes to high rates of crime.

Although risk factors can identify groups of adolescents whose probabilities for committing serious crimes are greater than average, they are not capable of identifying the particular individuals who will become criminals.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Delinquency is associated with poor school performance, truancy, and leaving school at a young age. Some pedagogical practices may exacerbate these problems. The available research on grade retention and tracking and the disciplinary practices of suspension and expulsion reveal that such policies have more negative than positive effects. For students already experiencing academic difficulty, tracking and grade retention have been found to further impair their academic performance. Furthermore, tracking does not appear to improve the academic performance of students in high tracks compared with similar students in schools that do not use tracking. Suspension and expulsion deny education in the name of discipline, yet these practices have not been shown to be effective in reducing school misbehavior. Little is known about the effects of these policies on other students in the school. Given the fact that the policies disproportionately affect minorities, such policies may unintentionally reinforce negative stereotypes.

Recommendation: Federal programs should be developed to promote alternatives to grade retention and tracking in schools.

Given that school failure has been found to be a precursor to delinquency, not enough research to date has specifically examined school policies, such as tracking, grade retention, suspension, and expulsion in terms of their effects on delinquent behavior in general. It is important that evaluations of school practices and policies consider their effects on aggressive and antisocial behavior, incuding delinquency. This type of research is particularly salient given the concern over school violence. Research on tracking should examine the effects on children and adolescents in all tracks, not only on those in low tracks.

Recommendation: A thorough review of the effects of school policies and pedagogical practices, such as grade retention, tracking, suspension, and expulsion, should be undertaken. This review should include the effects of such policies on delinquency, as well as the effects on educational attainment and school atmosphere and environment.

Prenatal exposure to alcohol, cocaine, heroin, and nicotine is associated with hyperactivity, attention deficit, and impulsiveness, which are risk factors for later antisocial behavior and delinquency. Biological insults suffered during the prenatal period may have some devastating effects on development. Consequently, preventive efforts during the pre-

natal period, such as preventing fetal exposure to alcohol and drugs, may have great benefits. Reducing alcohol and drug abuse among expectant parents may also improve their ability to parent, thus reducing family-related risk factors for delinquency.

Recommendation: Federal, state, and local governments should act to provide treatment for drug abuse (including alcohol and tobacco use) among pregnant women, particularly, adolescents.

Most longitudinal studies of delinquent behavior have begun after children enter school. Yet earlier development appears to contribute to problems that become apparent during the early school years. Much remains to be known about the extent to which potential problems can be identified at an early age.

Recommendation: Prospective longitudinal studies should be used to increase the understanding of the role of factors in prenatal, perinatal, and early infant development on mechanisms that increase the likelihood of healthy development, as well as the development of antisocial behavior.

Research has shown that the greater the number of risk factors that are present, the higher the likelihood of delinquency. It is not clear, however, whether some risk factors or combinations of risk factors are more important than other risk factors or combinations in the development of delinquency. Furthermore, the timing, severity, and duration of risk factors, in interaction with the age, gender, and the environment in which the individual lives undoubtedly affect the behavioral outcomes. A better understanding of how risk factors interact is important for the development of prevention efforts, especially efforts in communities in which risk factors are concentrated.

Recommendation: Research on risk factors for delinquency needs to focus on effects of interactions among various risk factors. In particular, research on effects of differences in neighborhoods and their interactions with individual and family conditions should be expanded.

The panel recommends the following areas as needing particular research attention to increase understanding of the development of delinquency:

Research on the development of language skills and the impact of delayed or poor language skills on the development of aggressive and antisocial behavior, including delinquency;

Research on children's and adolescents' access to guns, in particular handguns, and whether that access influences attitudes toward or fear of crime;

Research on ways to increase children's and adolescents' protective factors; and

Research on the development of physical aggression regulation in early childhood.

Research on delinquency has traditionally focused on boys. Although boys are more likely to be arrested than girls, the rate of increase in arrest and incarceration has been much larger in recent years for girls than boys, and the seriousness of the crimes committed by girls has increased.

Recommendation: The Department of Justice should develop and fund a systematic research program on female juvenile offending. At a minimum, this program should include:

Research on etiology, life course, and societal consequences of female juvenile offending;

Research on the role of childhood experiences, neighborhoods and communities, and family and individual characteristics that lead young females into crime; and

Research on the role of psychiatric disorders in the etiology of female juvenile crime, as well as its role as a consequence of crime or the justice system's response.

Even though youth crime rates have fallen since the mid-1990s, public fear and political rhetoric over the issue have heightened. The Columbine shootings and other sensational incidents add to the furor. Often overlooked are the underlying problems of child poverty, social disadvantage, and the pitfalls inherent to adolescent decisionmaking that contribute to youth crime. From a policy standpoint, adolescent offenders are caught in the crossfire between nurturance of youth and punishment of criminals, between rehabilitation and "get tough" pronouncements. In the midst of this emotional debate, the National Research Council's Panel on Juvenile Crime steps forward with an authoritative review of the best available data and analysis. Juvenile Crime, Juvenile Justice presents recommendations for addressing the many aspects of America's youth crime problem.

This timely release discusses patterns and trends in crimes by children and adolescents—trends revealed by arrest data, victim reports, and other sources; youth crime within general crime; and race and sex disparities. The book explores desistance—the probability that delinquency or criminal activities decrease with age—and evaluates different approaches to predicting future crime rates.

Why do young people turn to delinquency? Juvenile Crime, Juvenile Justice presents what we know and what we urgently need to find out about contributing factors, ranging from prenatal care, differences in temperament, and family influences to the role of peer relationships, the impact of the school policies toward delinquency, and the broader influences of the neighborhood and community. Equally important, this book examines a range of solutions:

• Prevention and intervention efforts directed to individuals, peer groups, and families, as well as day care-, school- and community-based initiatives.
• Intervention within the juvenile justice system.
• Role of the police.
• Processing and detention of youth offenders.
• Transferring youths to the adult judicial system.
• Residential placement of juveniles.

The book includes background on the American juvenile court system, useful comparisons with the juvenile justice systems of other nations, and other important information for assessing this problem.

READ FREE ONLINE

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• BJPsych Bull
• v.41(1); 2017 Feb

Juvenile delinquency, welfare, justice and therapeutic interventions: a global perspective

Susan young.

1 Imperial College London, London, UK

2 Broadmoor Hospital, Crowthorne, UK

Richard Church

3 South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK

This review considers juvenile delinquency and justice from an international perspective. Youth crime is a growing concern. Many young offenders are also victims with complex needs, leading to a public health approach that requires a balance of welfare and justice models. However, around the world there are variable and inadequate legal frameworks and a lack of a specialist workforce. The UK and other high-income countries worldwide have established forensic child and adolescent psychiatry, a multifaceted discipline incorporating legal, psychiatric and developmental fields. Its adoption of an evidence-based therapeutic intervention philosophy has been associated with greater reductions in recidivism compared with punitive approaches prevalent in some countries worldwide, and it is therefore a superior approach to dealing with the problem of juvenile delinquency.

Recent years have seen sustained public and academic interest in criminality and mental health, with attention often focused on antisocial behaviour by children and adolescents. The scale of the problem of juvenile delinquency has provoked mixed responses from governments and the media across the world, with calls for improved rehabilitation and support for juvenile offenders competing with voices advocating more punitive approaches. 1 Meanwhile, decades of rigorous academic scrutiny have shed light on the complex and diverse needs of children who come into conflict with the law. 2 – 5 Much of the growing body of literature on juvenile offenders shows considerable overlap between criminological, social and biomedical research, with a consensus emerging around the significance of a developmental understanding of the emergence of juvenile delinquency.

Importantly, juvenile offenders have consistently been identified as a population that suffers from a markedly elevated prevalence and severity of mental disorder compared with the general juvenile population. 6 , 7 Meeting the needs of these young offenders presents practical and ethical challenges concerning treatment and management, including liaison with other agencies.

What is juvenile delinquency?

Who counts as juvenile.

Juvenile delinquency is a term commonly used in academic literature for referring to a young person who has committed a criminal offence, although its precise definition can vary according to the local jurisdiction. The specific reasons underlying these differences are unclear, but they may arise from the lack of an agreed international standard. 8

A ‘juvenile’ in this context refers to an individual who is legally able to commit a criminal offence owing to being over the minimum age of criminal responsibility, but who is under the age of criminal majority, when a person is legally considered an adult. The minimum age of criminal responsibility varies internationally between 6 and 18 years, but the age of criminal majority is usually 18 years.

In some cases individuals older than 18 years may be heard in a juvenile court, and therefore will still be considered juveniles; indeed, the United Nations (UN) defines ‘youth’ as between 15 and 24 years of age. The term ‘child delinquents’ has been used in reference to children below the age of 13 who have committed a delinquent act, 9 although elsewhere ‘children’ are often defined as being under 18 years of age. The term ‘young offenders’ is broad, and can refer to offenders aged under 18 years or include young adults up to their mid-20s.

What is a crime?

A ‘delinquent’ is an individual who has committed a criminal offence. Delinquency therefore encompasses an enormous range of behaviours which are subject to legislation differing from one jurisdiction to another, and are subject to changes in law over time. Whereas acts of theft and serious interpersonal violence are commonly considered to constitute criminal offences, other acts including alcohol consumption and sexual behaviour in young people are tolerated to very differing degrees across the world. Sometimes these differences arise as a consequence of historical or cultural factors, and they may be underpinned by traditional religious laws, such as in some Middle Eastern countries. Some offences may be shared between jurisdictions but be enforced to differing standards – for instance, ‘unlawful assembly’, often used to prevent riots, is applied in Singapore to young people meeting in public in groups of five or more as part of police efforts to tackle youth gangs. Furthermore, ‘status offences’ – acts that would be permissible in adults but criminalised in children, such as consumption of alcohol or truancy – not only vary between jurisdictions, but contribute to discontinuity when comparing juvenile delinquency with adult populations in the same jurisdiction.

Lack of clarity can also arise in jurisdictions where a young offender is processed via a welfare system rather than a youth justice process. Countries with a high minimum age of criminal responsibility may not technically criminalise young people for behaviour that would normally be prosecuted and therefore classed as ‘delinquent’ elsewhere.

Not all incarcerated juveniles are ‘delinquent’, since some may be detained pre-trial and may not be convicted of an offence. Even if convicted, it would be wrong to assume that every ‘juvenile delinquent’ meets criteria for a diagnosis of conduct disorder; offences vary considerably and may not be associated with a broad repertoire of offending behaviour. Also, most ‘juvenile delinquents’ do not pose an immediate risk of violence to others, and the vast majority of convicted juveniles serve their sentences in the community.

To meet the diagnostic criteria of conduct disorder requires evidence of a persistent pattern of dissocial or aggressive conduct, such that it defies age-appropriate social expectations. Behaviours may include cruelty to people or animals, truancy, frequent and severe temper tantrums, excessive fighting or bullying and fire-setting; diagnosis of conduct disorder can be made in the marked presence of one of these behaviours. 10

Overall, the term ‘juvenile delinquent’ is used extensively in academic literature, but requires some care. It can be a potentially problematic term, and in some contexts can strike a pejorative tone with misleading negative assumptions. For several years the UN has used the phrase ‘children in conflict with the law’ to describe the breadth of the heterogeneous group of individuals under the age of 18 who have broken the law or are at risk of doing so.

General principles of juvenile justice

Welfare v. justice models.

The sentencing of an individual convicted of a criminal offence is largely driven by three key considerations: retribution (punishment), deterrence and rehabilitation. In the case of juvenile offenders the principle of rehabilitation is often assigned the greatest weight. 11

Special consideration for juveniles within the criminal justice system is not a new concept. In Roman law, the principle of doli incapax protected young children from prosecution owing to the presumption of a lack of capacity and understanding required to be guilty of a criminal offence. Most countries have some provision for special treatment of children who come into conflict with the law, however, the degree to which this is provided varies across the world. 1 , 12 In some countries a ‘welfare’ model prevails, which focuses on the needs of the child, diagnosis, treatment and more informal procedures, whereas other countries favour a ‘justice’ model, which emphasises accountability, punishment and procedural formality.

Belgium is frequently cited as an example of a country with a strong welfare process, supported by a high minimum age of criminal responsibility of 18 years. Similarly, France built a strong welfare reputation by placing education and rehabilitation at the centre of youth justice reforms in the 1940s. New Zealand in 1989 established the widely praised system of Family Group Conferencing as an integral part of youth justice, with a focus on restoration of relationships and reduction of incarceration that would be considered part of a welfare approach. In contrast, the UK and the USA have traditionally been associated with a justice model and low age of criminal responsibility – 10 years in England and Wales, and as low as 6 years in several US states.

Within welfare or justice models, a young person may at some point be ‘deprived of liberty’ – defined as any form of detention under official authorities in a public or private location which the child is not permitted to leave. Locations in which children may be deprived of liberty include police stations, detention centres, juvenile or adult prisons, secure remand homes, work or boot camps, penitentiary colonies, locked specialised schools, educational or rehabilitation establishments, military camps and prisons, immigration detention centres, secure youth hostels and hospitals. 13

Between the less and more punitive systems

The UN supports the development of specialised systems for managing children in conflict with the law. When the first children's courts were set up in the USA in the 1930s, they were widely praised as a progressive system for serving the best interests of the child. Although informality was championed as a particular benefit, in the 1960s substantial concerns arose about due process and the protection of the legal rights of minors. The subsequent development of formal juvenile courts occurred in the context of a continuing ethos of rehabilitation of young people, with a move away from incarceration of juveniles in the 1970s, especially in Massachusetts and California. However, following a marked peak in juvenile offending statistics during the 1980s and 1990s, public and political opinion swung firmly in a more punitive direction. This was accompanied by legal reforms that increased the severity of penalties available to juvenile courts and lowered the age threshold for juveniles to be tried in adult criminal courts.

When the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child entered into force in 1990, the USA was not a signatory owing to 22 states permitting capital punishment of individuals who had committed their crimes as juveniles. It is reported that 19 juvenile offenders were executed in the USA between 1990 and 2005. Although this number may represent a small percentage of the total who faced the death penalty in the USA during that period, the practice was widely criticised by international bodies and organisations. 14 A landmark ruling in the US Supreme Court 15 outlawed the execution of juvenile offenders in the USA, but to date a small number of countries worldwide still implement this practice, sometimes as a result of religious laws.

However, it would be wrong to assume that welfare systems are automatically preferable to a juvenile justice approach, since welfare arrangements can be equally coercive in terms of deprivation of liberty of juveniles. They may lack due process, safeguards for obtaining reliable evidence from young people, processes for testing evidence, and procedures for scrutiny or appeal following disposal.

Trends in youth crime

The USA witnessed a dramatic increase in arrest rates of young people for homicide and other violent crimes in the 1980s and 1990s, sometimes referred to as the ‘violence epidemic’. 16 The ensuing moral panic led to harsh and punitive policy changes in juvenile justice and, although official statistics document a subsequent fall of 20% in court case-loads between 1997 and 2009, victimisation surveys have indicated a degree of continuity in high levels of offending, consistent with a reported increase in juvenile offending between 2000 and 2006. 17

In common with the USA and several other high-income countries, the UK also experienced a rise in juvenile offending in the 1980s and 1990s, but figures from the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales appear to indicate a general improvement in recent years. Between 2009/2010 and 2014/2015 a 67% reduction has been observed in the number of young people entering the juvenile justice system for the first time, a 65% reduction in the number of young people receiving a caution or court disposal and a 57% reduction in the number of young people in custody. 18 These figures support an overall decrease in juvenile offending noted since the early 1990s. 19

Youth crime figures from Australia have documented a 4% reduction in the overall number of young offenders in 2013/2014, 20 although the number of violent offences committed by young people in the urbanised and densely populated region of Victoria has increased by 75% between 2000 and 2010. 21

The Nordic countries have witnessed an increase in the number of law-abiding youths from 1994 and 2008. 22 In Sweden, both objective levels of juvenile crime 23 and self-reported involvement in juvenile crime 24 have fallen between 1995 and 2005. Similarly in Finland, where, despite fluctuating trends in juvenile drug use, juvenile property and violent crime is reported to have decreased between 1992 and 2013. 25

To summarise, whereas regional and annual trends in juvenile offending are observed and expected, a global trend characterised by decreased juvenile offending appears to have emerged in recent years. Indeed, UN data from a sample of 40 countries lend support to this conclusion, indicating a decrease in the proportion of juveniles suspected (10.9% to 9.2%) and convicted (7.5% to 6%) of crime between 2004 and 2012, respectively. 26

Juvenile gang membership

Influence on crime involvement.

One of the features of urbanisation across the world has been the rise of youth gangs, groups of young people often defined by geographical area, ethnic identity or ideology; recent reports indicate a rise in groups with extremist views. Explanatory models for the rise in youth gangs include factors such as economic migration, loss of extended family networks, reduced supervision of children, globalisation and exposure to inaccessible lifestyle ‘ideals’ portrayed in modern media.

Authorities in Japan attributed a surge in serious youth crime in the 1990s primarily to juvenile bike gangs known as ‘bosozoku’, who were deemed responsible for over 80% of serious offences perpetrated by juveniles, putatively bolstered by a crackdown on yakuza organised crime syndicates. 27 Although difficult to quantify, gang involvement appears to feature in a large proportion of juvenile offences, and there is evidence that gang membership has a facilitating effect on perpetration of the most serious violence including homicide. 28

Mental health

Compared with general and juvenile offender populations, juvenile gang members exhibit significantly higher rates of mental health problems such as conduct disorder/antisocial personality disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety disorders and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). 29 Gang members, compared with non-violent men who do not belong to a gang, are far more likely to utilise mental health services and display significantly higher levels of psychiatric morbidity, most notably antisocial personality disorder, psychosis and anxiety disorders. 30 Gang membership has also been positively correlated with an increased incidence of depressed mood and suicidal ideation among younger gang members. 31 Prevalence of ADHD is significantly greater in incarcerated youth populations (30.1%) than in general youth population estimates (3–7%), 32 therefore it may be reasonable to expect a similarly increased prevalence in juvenile gang members. ADHD has also been associated with a significantly increased risk of comorbid mood/affective disorder. 33

Forensic child and adolescent psychiatric services

Increased awareness of constitutional and environmental factors that contribute to juvenile offending has strengthened a public health perspective towards the problem, and in the UK entry into the youth justice system has been adopted as an indicator of general public health. 34

Dictionaries frequently define ‘forensic’ as meaning ‘legal’, implying a relationship with any court of law. Indeed, many forensic psychiatrists, particularly in child and adolescent services, undertake roles that encompass multiple legal domains relevant to mental health, including criminal law, family and child custody proceedings, special educational tribunals, and immigration or extradition matters.

Specialist forensic psychiatric services vary considerably between countries, 35 but usually forensic psychiatrists assess and treat individuals in secure psychiatric hospitals, prisons, law courts, police stations and in the community under various levels of security, supervision and support. In some countries there has been a trend towards forensic psychiatrists working almost exclusively with courts of law, providing independent specialist opinion to assist the court.

In the UK, forensic child and adolescent psychiatry has emerged as a clinical subspecialty. Some services are based in specialist secure hospitals for young people and cater for the relatively small number of high-risk young offenders with the most severe mental disorders. In the absence of such specialist resources, young people may be managed in suboptimal environments such as juvenile prisons, secure residential placements or secure mental health wards for adults, or even fail to receive treatment at all.

In light of growing evidence-based interventions for juvenile offenders within a public health framework, 36 the role of child and family mental health services may increase over time. Aside from direct clinical roles, practitioners in forensic child and adolescent psychiatry are also well placed to work with a wide range of partner agencies on the planning and delivery of broader interventions for the primary and secondary prevention of juvenile delinquency.

Prevalence of mental health problems among juvenile offenders

Rates of mental health problems among juvenile offenders are significantly higher than in their non-offender peers, with two-thirds of male juvenile offenders in the USA suggested as meeting criteria for at least one psychiatric disorder. 37 One in five juvenile offenders is estimated to suffer severe functional impairment as a result of their mental health problems. 38 Paradoxically, these needs are often unmet, 39 , 40 despite evidence of increased contact with mental health services, particularly among first-time juvenile offenders. 41 , 42 Of additional concern are the reported associations between mental health problems and mortality in incarcerated juveniles, 43 including an elevated suicide rate for males. 44 Mental health problems must be a target in interventions for juvenile offenders; however, treatments which focus solely on clinical problems are unlikely to result in benefit for criminogenic outcomes. 45 There is therefore a clear need for effective interventions which address both the clinical and criminogenic needs of these individuals.

Evidence-based treatments for mental health problems

Treatment of ptsd.

Estimates regarding the prevalence of PTSD among juvenile offenders suggest that 20 to 23% meet the clinical criteria, 46 , 47 with prevalence rates significantly higher among females than males (40% v . 17%). 46 Moreover, with 62% experiencing trauma within the first 5 years of life 47 and up to 93% experiencing at least one traumatic event during childhood or adolescence, 48 this should be a target for intervention.

Cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) is regarded as the most effective intervention for adults with PTSD 49 and also has demonstrated efficacy for juvenile non-offenders. 50 , 51 There is limited evidence suggesting a significant reduction in self-reported symptoms of PTSD following group-based CBT in male juvenile offenders, 52 and of an adapted version of CBT, cognitive processing therapy, 53 also resulting in a significant reduction in self-reported symptoms of PTSD and depression compared with waitlist controls. 54

A trauma-focused emotion regulation intervention (TARGET) has received preliminary empirical support for use in this population. TARGET resulted in nearly twice as much reduction in PTSD symptom severity as treatment as usual (TAU), 55 in addition to significant reductions in depression, behavioural disturbances and increased optimism. 56

Mood/anxiety disorders and self-harm

Juvenile offenders in the UK present with a high prevalence of mood and anxiety disorders (67% of females, 41% of males), self-harm (11% of females, 7% of males) and history of suicide attempts (33% of females, 20% of males). 57 Similarly high prevalence has also been observed cross-culturally, namely in the USA, 37 , 58 Switzerland 59 and Finland. 60

Despite such high prevalence, there appears to be a paucity of high-quality evaluations regarding the effectiveness of interventions for juvenile offenders with mood and/or anxiety disorders, or problems with self-harm. However, the limited evidence that is available suggests that group-based CBT may aid symptom reduction. 61 Recovery rates for major depressive disorder following group-based CBT are over double those for a life skills tutoring intervention (39% v . 19%, respectively), although no significant difference was noted at 6- or 12-month follow-up. CBT also resulted in significantly greater improvements in self- and observer-reported symptoms of depression and social functioning. 62

However, group-based CBT is not reported to be significantly different from TAU in reduction of self-harm, 63 whereas individual CBT is not significantly different from TAU in outcomes for depression, anxiety, conduct disorder or PTSD. 64 Yet recruitment to and retention in intervention seems good, suggesting that CBT is feasible to implement in juvenile offender populations. 64

Evaluations of alternative interventions have posited muscle relaxation as effective in improving juvenile offenders' tolerance of frustration. 65 Dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT) has also been reported to significantly reduce incidences of physical aggression in a juvenile offender population 66 and among juvenile non-offenders expressing suicidal ideation. 67 It significantly reduced serious behavioural problems and staff punitive actions among juvenile offenders within a mental health unit, although no similar significant reductions were observed for those without mental health problems. 68

Evidence-based treatments for conduct disorder: family approaches

Relationships with family and peers are recognised as key factors in the criminogenic profile of juvenile offenders. 69 Multisystemic therapy (MST) is a family-focused intervention targeting characteristics related to antisocial behaviour, including family relationships and peer associations, 70 with evidence from US and UK studies suggesting MST is a beneficial intervention for juvenile offenders. When compared with conventional services offered by juvenile offending services, MST was associated with a significant reduction in the likelihood of reoffending, 71 maintained 2 and 4 years post-treatment. 72 , 73 Offenders engaging in MST are reported to be significantly less likely to become involved in serious and violent offending. 73 , 74 Significant improvements have also been observed in both self- and parent-reported delinquency, 74 family relations and interactions, 73 and home, school, community and emotional functioning. 71 A cost offset analysis of MST among UK juvenile offenders suggested that combining MST and conventional services provides greater cost savings than conventional services alone, as a result of its positive effects on recidivism. 75 Qualitative impressions of MST from juvenile offenders and their parents indicate that key components of a successful delivery of MST include the quality of the therapeutic relationship and ability to re-engage the offender with educational systems. 76

Some evidence also exists regarding the efficacy of MST when delivered to non-offender antisocial juvenile populations outside the USA and the UK. Compared with TAU, MST resulted in a significantly greater increase in social competence and caregiver satisfaction, and a significant reduction in referrals for out-of-home placements, in Norwegian juveniles exhibiting serious behavioural problems. 77 However, no significant difference between MST and TAU was reported in outcomes for antisocial behaviour and psychiatric symptoms in Swedish juvenile offenders. 78 MST was also found to have no significant benefit over TAU in outcomes including recidivism in a sample of Canadian juvenile offenders. 79 These differing outcomes have been posited as the result of barriers in transferring MST from US and UK populations owing to differing approaches to juvenile justice between countries (i.e. a welfare v . justice approach). 78 The heterogeneous nature of studies concerning MST in juvenile offender populations prevent a firm conclusion being drawn as to its superiority over alternative interventions, although this does not diminish the positive outcomes which have been observed. 80

Substance misuse

Motivational interviewing represents a promising approach for juvenile offenders, particularly as a treatment for substance misuse. 81 Group-based motivational interviewing has received positive feedback from participants when implemented with first-time juvenile alcohol or drug offenders, 82 and compared with TAU, juvenile offenders in receipt of motivational interviewing have greater satisfaction and display lower, though not statistically significant, rates of recidivism at 12-months post-motivational interviewing. 83 There is therefore preliminary evidence for the acceptability and feasibility of motivational interviewing for substance-misusing juvenile offenders, but future research regarding long-term outcomes is warranted. To date, motivational interviewing for difficulties faced by juvenile offenders beyond that of substance misuse does not appear to have received much research attention. Juvenile offenders are known for their difficulty to engage in rehabilitative services, therefore further investigation of the effectiveness of motivational interviewing in encouraging engagement is warranted.

Preliminary investigations have also developed a conceptual framework for the delivery of mindfulness-based interventions (MBI) to incarcerated substance-misusing juveniles, with qualitative impressions suggesting this is a potentially feasible and efficacious intervention. 84 Although literature regarding the effectiveness of MBI in juvenile offenders is scarce, qualitative feedback has indicated positive reception of this style of intervention, with particular improvements in subjective well-being reported by juvenile participants. 85

Employment and education

Engaging juvenile offenders with education and skills-based training is an important component of successful rehabilitation, with positive engagement in meaningful activities associated with improvements in areas such as self-belief 86 and protection against future participation in criminal activities. 87 It is concerning therefore that an evaluation of the use of leisure time over a 1-week period by probationary juvenile offenders in Australia indicated only 10% of this time was spent engaging in productive activities, such as employment or education, with 57% used for passive leisure activities, a level 30% higher than that of their non-offender peers. 88

Efforts to engage juvenile offenders in vocational and/or occupational activities have shown benefits in a number of areas. A specialised vocational and employment training programme (CRAFT) emphasising practical skills was evaluated against conventional education provision to juvenile offenders in the USA. Over a 30-month follow-up period, those engaged in CRAFT were significantly more likely to be in employment, to have attended an educational diploma programme and to have attended for a significantly longer period of time. 89 Benefits have also been reported with regard to risk of reoffending, with an after-school programme in the USA incorporating practical community projects, educational sessions and family therapy resulting in a significant reduction in recidivism at 1-year follow-up. 90

Qualitative investigations of US juvenile offenders suggest there is not a lack of interest in pursuing education among this population, but rather a disconnection with educational systems when education providers are perceived not to care about students' progress. 91 Ensuring education providers are perceived as proactive and caring in this regard may therefore be an important consideration for efforts to engage juvenile offenders with educational systems. Significant barriers to engagement include difficulties in obtaining accurate information regarding the offender's educational history, in addition to identifying community-based education providers willing to accept previously incarcerated juveniles on their release. 92

Language and communication

Difficulties with language and communication skills appear to be prevalent among juvenile offenders, with estimates of those falling into the poor or very poor categories ranging from 46 to 67%; overall, up to 90% of juvenile offenders demonstrated language skills below average. 93 Specifically, high rates of illiteracy are reported in this population, 94 with evidence to suggest that an awareness of such problems among juvenile offenders themselves is associated with dissatisfaction and poor self-esteem. 95 These difficulties may act as barriers to engagement in therapeutic interventions, particularly those delivered in group settings, as well as re-engagement with educational systems. Awareness of the challenges these young people face with regard to confidence and ability to communicate is important, and potential involvement of a speech and language therapist could be considered. Preventing deficits in language and communication through effective schooling and appropriate support in the early years of life may serve as an aid to effective engagement in rehabilitative interventions, and may also mitigate the risk of engagement in criminal activities in the first instance.

Delivery of therapeutic services

Common challenges to a therapeutic youth justice pathway.

There are common obstacles to smooth care pathways between different parts of systems, such as in transitions between secure settings and the community, between prisons and secure psychiatric settings, and between child and adult services. In some jurisdictions individuals can only be treated pharmacologically against their will in a hospital setting, a safeguard which limits the extent to which individuals can be treated in prison, but there is still great scope for intervention by prison mental health teams in juvenile prisons.

Factors associated with good outcomes

A meta-analysis has revealed three primary factors associated with effective interventions for juvenile offenders: a ‘therapeutic’ intervention philosophy, serving high-risk offenders, and quality of implementation. 96 These findings are consistent with factors posited as correlating with good outcome in residential centres for troubled adolescents and juvenile offenders: good staff-adolescent relations, perception of staff as pro-social role models, positive peer pressure, an individualised therapeutic programme approach, developmentally appropriate programmes and activities, clear expectations and boundaries, and placement locations which allow for continued family contact. 97 , 98

In the community, coercive styles of engagement have been found to be less successful at achieving adherence among juvenile offenders than a client-centred approach. 99

Factors associated with poor outcomes

‘Scared Straight’ programmes expose juveniles who have begun to commit offences to inmates of high-security prisons, yet these approaches have been discredited due to evidence that risk of recidivism may in fact increase following such exposure. 100 Similarly poor outcomes have been observed in programmes modelled on military boot camps, in which harsh discipline is considered to be of therapeutic benefit, 101 and initiatives such as curfew, probation and hearing juvenile cases in adult court were also shown to be ineffective in reducing recidivism. 13

Over recent years it has been repeatedly demonstrated that exposure to juvenile court itself appears to have a detrimental effect on juvenile offending. 102 – 104 This may be partially explained by effects of labelling, stigma and negative self-image associated with a criminal conviction, but also the practical consequences of sentences, including assortment of delinquent peers in community or prison sentences. Incarceration presents several additional harms, including disturbance of care and pro-social relationships, discontinuity in education, association with delinquent peers, and exposure to violence. Half of detained young offenders in the UK reported victimisation during their current prison term, 57 while 12% of incarcerated youth in the USA reported sexual victimisation in the previous year. 105 International agreements state that deprivation of liberty (such as juvenile prison) should be used as a last resort and for the shortest time necessary, so should be reserved for the highest-risk offenders. The cost of juvenile antisocial behaviour is known to be high, and to fall on many agencies. 106 The current climate of austerity in public services demands that any interventions should be not only effective, but also cost-effective, raising a clear challenge – and opportunity – for the implementation of interventions for this population of vulnerable young people. For example, parenting programmes have demonstrated sustained benefits for this population, 107 , 108 with economic analysis indicating gross savings of £9288 per child over a 25 year period. 109 Considered together with wider costs of crime, these gross savings exceed the average cost of parenting programmes (£1177) by a factor of approximately 8 to 1.

Conclusions

Many argue that we have a long way to go before arriving at ‘child friendly’ juvenile justice. 110 Around the world there are variable and inadequate legal frameworks that are not age-appropriate, there is a lack of age-appropriate services and establishments, and a lack of a specialist workforce, leading to challenges around training and supervision to work with this vulnerable population. In the UK and other high-income countries worldwide, forensic child and adolescent psychiatry is a multifaceted discipline incorporating legal, psychiatric and developmental fields. This approach has navigated clinical and ethical challenges and made an important contribution to welfare and justice needs by its adoption of an evidence-based therapeutic intervention philosophy.

Declaration of interests S.Y. has received honoraria for consultancy, travel, educational talks and/or research from Janssen, Eli Lilly, Shire, Novartis, HB Pharma and Flynn Pharma.

Psychology Discussion

• Essay on Juvenile Delinquency

ADVERTISEMENTS:

In this essay we will discuss about Juvenile Delinquency. After reading this essay you will learn about: 1. Introduction to Juvenile Delinquency 2. Meaning of Juvenile Delinquency 3. Incidence 4. Causes 5. Variables 6.  Treatment.

• Treatment of Juvenile Delinquency

Essay # 1. Introduction to Juvenile Delinquency:

Delinquency has always been considered as a social problem over and above the fact that it is a legal problem. It is also a psychological problem. Hence to avoid this social evil one has to tackle the complex problem of delinquency from the social psychological and to familial angles.

Although laws regarding Juvenile delinquencies have been formed long since, they are also being changed from time to time. Currently, in all the progressive and civilized countries of the world the laws with regard to the Juvenile delinquents have been changed.

Special courts are established with specially trained Magistrates for the trial of the delinquents. Today delinquency is being considered as a misbehaviour, a social nuisense than a crime. So, in every state the children’s Act (1944) required custody, control and punishment of young offenders.

It also provides for the establishment of reformatory schools for them. But the revised Bombay children’s Act of 1948 provided not only for custody and control but also for treatment and rehabilitation of young offenders.

Essay # 2. Meaning of Juvenile Delinquency:

Crime committed by children and adolescents under the age of 18 years, is called delinquency. The maximum age limit and also the meaning of delinquency varies from country to country. But it is always below 18 years of age which is the statutory age for delinquency.

In India any person between the age of 7 and 18 years, who violates the provisions of the children’s Acts, the IPC and the CPO will be considered as delinquent. Persons above this age are considered as criminals.

Juvenile delinquency is defined by the Pensylvania Juvenile Court Act as “A delinquent child is one who violated any laws of the common wealth ordinance of the city, a child who by reasons of being way ward or habitually disobedient is uncontrolled by his parents, guardian, custodian or legal representative, a child who is habitually trunt from school or home or child who habitually so deports himself is to injury or endanger the moral or health of himself or others”.

Delinquency in the view of the Coleman (1981) refers to “behaviour 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”.

Delinquency includes all sorts of crimes committed by children. Starting from the business and use of illegal drugs and homicide murder, it may include various types of dangerous criminal offences.

Delinquency undoubtedly is a social evil. It is a socially unacceptable behaviour committed by boys and girls below the age of 18 years. Instead of giving these delinquents punishment, they are kept in Juvenile jail and correction homes where various corrective measures are taken to change their behaviour in the positive direction.

It is observed that crime and delinquency are increasing day by day with the increase in population and complexity of culture. As population increases the small societies become bigger ones and are found in the form of mass society.

In mass societies there is less scope for mutual interaction and face to face contact. The family bonds and community bonds thus become weak to weaker. Now a days no one knows or cares to know who is staying next door. Parents and children do not meet.

While motivation is derived from the Latin word “Movere” which means move, social motivation refers to those social factors and situations which influence the person to behave in a particular style in a society. To eat is a biogenic need, but what to eat and how to eat is influenced by social forces and social interaction.

One feels hungry, it is a biogenic need but how to satisfy these hunger need and where to ask for food is determined by socialization process.

A child who has gone to a neighbour’s house to play, feels hungry, but he has been taught not to ask for food from outsiders. He is taught only to ask for food at his own house. This is a case of biological motive being influenced by socialization process.

Most of our needs and motives, attitudes and aspirations regarding food, dress, style of living are determined by our cultural values and norms of the society. The process of socialization puts a strong stamp mark on the behaviour of an individual in the society.

Essay # 3 . Incidence of Juvenile Delinquency :

Coleman’s Study (1981) indicates that the rate of delinquency increased by 100 per cent within seven years i.e., between 1968-1975. Though, mainly boys are involved in delinquency, now a days it is found that girls are also actively engaged in this antisocial work.

During these 20 years delinquency has further increased. One may not believe, but it is true that almost half of the serious crimes in U.S.A. are committed by juveniles.

Common delinquent acts in females are sexual offences, small thefts, drug usage, running away from home etc. Among the males delinquents are more engaged in stealing, drug usage, robbery, aggravated assaults, sexual abuses etc. Particularly, now a days, the incidence of delinquency is increasing alarmingly in large metropolitan cities and this has become a matter of great concern for the public and country.

While evidences from some studies show that children from lower class families and those residing in slum areas are more engaged in delinquency, other studies do not support this view. In an important study, Heary and Gold (1973) found significant relationship between social status and delinquent behaviour.

In another significant study, it was noticed that the rate of delinquency in case of socially disadvantaged youths appears about equal for whites and non-whites.

Like any other country, as reports of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt, of India, shows, there is a steady rise in the percentage of delinquency in India. While it was 16,160 in 1961, it was, 40,666 in 1974. Thus, in 13 years the increase in the incidence of delinquency, as reports show, has the highest percentage of Juvenile crimes (24.8%).

Second place goes to M.P. (20.5%) and third place to Gujarat (10.9%). Kerala has an incidence rate of only 0.2%.

Essay # 4 . Causes of Delinquency :

In many under-developed and developing countries including many parts of india, criminal tendency of a person is looked upon as the results of evil deeds in the past life of the parents. this is undoubtedly a misconception and prejudice., in the other extreme of the case, when a child develops delinquency many believe that it is due to the fault actions, omissions and commissions of his parents during his childhood..

Delinquents lack ethical standards and emotional ties. They are very impulsive and indulge in acts at the spur of the moment. They are socially insensitive and lack guilt feeling. Delinquents, inspite of their socially unacceptable behaviours, created difficulties for the self as well as for others.

Considered as a learned behaviour, delinquency was found to be highly correlated with low life styles with lack of recreational facilities and lack of permanent residence.

Essay # 5. Variables of Juvenile Delinquency:

The variables of delinquency may broadly be divided into:

(A) Personality characteristics of individual factors

(B) General socio-cultural factors indulging family pattern and interaction, delinquent gang and subculture.

(A) Personality Characteristics/ Individual Factors:

No social factors alone-can contribute to the causation of delinquency though social and cultural factors contribute their share to delinquency. Personality characteristics and individual factors also contribute a lot to the causation of delinquency.

(i) Brain Damage:

As per the reports of Caputo and Mandell (1970), Kiestor (1974) in about one per cent of the delinquents brain damage leads to lower inhibitory controls and a tendency to show violent behaviour. The genetic theorists argue the presence of an extra ‘Y’ chromosome in delinquents.

(ii) Psychopathic Personality :

Large number of persistent delinquents have been found to possess the traits and characteristics of antisocial and psychopathic personalities. A number of studies conducted in UK and India using Eysenck’s personality inventory show delinquents to be more extroverts, more neurotic, more psychotic and to have more criminal tendencies than the control group.

They seem to be quite impulsive, callus, and socially insensitive, they do not have the feelings of sorrow, guilt and repentance. They are not able to establish suitable interpersonal relationship and they do not learn anything from experience in a constructive way.

The persistent delinquents also do not seem to have any reality control or inner conscience or morality. So, they indulge in whatever they wish, which give them pleasure and satisfy their ego with assessing its impact upon the society and their final consequence.

For example, they may steal a very little money actually they do not need or they may steal a scooter, a car or snatch a golden chain without any need or necessity.

Just to fulfil their aggressive and sadistic tendency they may drive their car to a small distance, break some parts of the car and leave it there. They just want to satisfy their destructive tendency, which gives them pleasure. Many psychopathic delinquents are found to cut the brand new cushions in theaters and movie halls.

This author has also observed many delinquents of 10-12 years age who are in the habit of breaking the electric bulb in every lamp post on the road without any reason, in the presence of other people in broad day light. They just did not care, use abusive language and again repeat their aggressive behaviour with more vigour.

Actually, the delinquents do not involve themselves in such nuisance for personal gain, but it really reflects their underlying resentment and hostility towards the outer world, the world for which they have no feeling of involvement or belongingness.

There are others who just move around in a gang aimlessly and get pleasure in eve teasing, in passing filthy remarks whenever a member of the fair sex passes by. Such people are really at the mercy of their uncontrolled, uninhibited impulses.

It would be interesting to note that currently the incidence of psychopathic personality in female delinquents has increased quite rapidly as reports suggest. Fine and Fishman (1968) conducted a study on 155 girls in a State Correctional Institution in Kentuky to know their general personality characteristics.

They found rebelliousness, inadequacy, impulsiveness, instability and immature characteristics commonly found in the psychopathic personality.

It was also found by Ganzer and Sarason (1973) that females more frequently come from personally and socially disorganised families than did males. The theories of both sheldon and Eysenck stress genetic aspects along with environmental aspects to explain delinquent behaviour.

(iii) Drug Abuse :

Quite a large number of delinquents particularly those who are engaged in theft, prostitution and physical assault are found to be addicted to drugs, like heroin, secobarbital and alcohol. Drug addicted females are usually engaged in stealing and prostitution.

(iv) Mental Retardation/Mental Deficiency :

Various studies have been conducted to find out the relationship between intelligence and delinquent behaviour to solve the controversy whether delinquency is environmental or genetic. Long ago, an Italian Scientist Lumbroso made certain empirical studies on crime, and held that criminals have defective physical structure and defective intelligence.

Therefore, various steps have been taken to measure the I.Q. of Juvenile delinquents to verify this view. The study conducted by Healy, Burt and others have demonstrated clearly that delinquents are not mental defectives.

But, nevertheless, the average intelligence of the delinquent group is lower than the average intelligence of the normal group. It is also found that compared to the normal children a larger proportion of mental defectives are found in the Juvenile group.

Various investigators have reported different percentage of average I.Q. for the delinquents, compared to the average I.Q. of the normal as 100. Healy and Bronner (1926) found it to be 90, Burt (1925) found it to be 85, Merril (1947) found it to be 92.5.

The above data of different investigators reveal that the average intelligence of delinquents happen to be lower than the average I.Q. of normals. These data also give clear signal that the Juvenile delinquents as a group, at large, are not mentally defective though they are below average.

However, a low intelligence and mental retardation among 5% of the delinquents may be accounted to delinquent behaviour. Such people have no foresight to the consequences and significance of their action.

That is why, they commit various impulsive behaviour, like small aggressive acts, petty stealing and various other sexual offences. Even more intelligent psychopaths and gangs exploit them and include them in their group. In some cases, mental retardation is associated with serious brain damage and leads to a combination of features of both the organic and the mentally retarded delinquents.

The above facts lead one to conclude that Juvenile delinquents differ from normal persons in degree and not in kind so far, as their I.Q. is concerned. Hence, Juvenile delinquents cannot be looked upon as a group of mental defectives.

Some other studies also show that below 70 I.Q. there are only about 3% of the children who are mental defectives in an unselected population of children. But in the delinquent groups there are 12 to 15 per cent mental defectives.

Thus, the number of mentally defective children among the delinquents is about 4-5 times larger than in a normal population says Kupuswamy. Uday Sankar (1958) conducted a study 011 the mental ability of the delinquents and found that the proportions of mentally defective children is very high among the 140 Juvenile delinquents he has studied. 27.4% of them are below 70 I.Q.

Merril made a comparative study of the average intelligence of the delinquents and non-delinquents. It was found that the average intelligence of juvenile delinquents from socially and economically handicapped group is low.

While those coming from higher socio economic groups was higher. The average intelligence of children from the non- delinquent, but lower groups is also low. Merril took a controlled group and an experimental group, each group with 300 boys and girls.

In the experimental group, the 300 boys and girls were delinquents while in the control group they were non-delinquents. The socio-economic status of both the groups were kept constant. Results showed that while the average I.Q. of the 300 delinquents children was 86.7, the average I.Q. of the 300 non-delinquent children was 89.3.

The results, thus, did not show any significant difference between the I.Q. of the controlled and the experimental group though there was some obtained difference. So, Merril held that it is not justified to assume that larger proportion of the delinquents have lower I.Q. However, it is possible that the higher I.Q. delinquents and criminal may utilize the lower I.Q. children for their criminal purpose and gang work.

In case, they are caught by the police, the intelligent juveniles escape while the less intelligent juveniles arc trapped. Such incidents are not rare in our society. The innocent ones are caught easily because of their lack of understanding and lack of capacity to solve the immediate problems facing them.

(v) Neurosis :

About 3 to 5 per cent of delinquent behaviour, seems to be directly associated with psychoneurotic disorders. Here, the delinquent act is mainly tinged with compulsive behaviour, such as stealing things which one actually does not need, or compelled to do.

He will not be stable and remain at peace unless he does these acts. This type of compulsive acts also lead to sexual deviant behaviour because of the sexual restrictions and beliefs that masturbation and other forms of overt sexual behaviour are very much undesirable and a sin.

(vi) Psychosis :

In a limited number of cases, i.e. about 3 to 5%, delinquent, behaviour is associated with psychotic disorders. In Bandurar’s opinion (1973) often this involves prolonged emotional and social withdrawal arising out of long standing frustration.

Then, there is an explosive outburst of violent behaviour like volcanic eruption. Here, the delinquent act is the function of terrible personality, maladjustment and disturbances rather than a consistent antisocial orientation.

(vii) Emotional Problems :

Delinquency as an antisocial personality is the function of certain pathological and ill developed social environment. Wrong handling and faulty upbringing of the child lead to several emotional problems in the child. Various observations, case histories and interviews have indicated that quite a high percentage of the delinquents displayed emotional disturbances.

Heally and Bronner found that 92% of the delinquents showed emotional disturbances. Feeling of inadequacy, inferiority etc. were frequently found in them. In about 50% of the group, they were persistently present.

The feeling of insecurity, rejection of the parents and other members of the family were next important factors causing delinquent behaviour. About 33% of the group experienced strong feeling of being thwarted. Disharmony and problems of discipline were found in one third of the delinquents.

Quite a number of them also expressed sibling rivalry and jealousy. All these data lead to show that various emotional problems like insecurity, inferiority, jealousy, feeling of being neglected and let down were very common among the delinquent children.

The need for recognition and resentment against the sense of insecurity provides enough scope for a person to be delinquent. Rebellious feeling in oneself makes one antisocial and delinquent.

Because of these emotional problems which are created by dehumanised social conditions the person becomes a delinquent and tries to take action, against others. It is a fact that by their antisocial, sadistic and aggressive action they try to get pleasure and mental satisfaction.

Because of their emotional problems, they should be considered as maladjusted personalities and not as peculiar human beings, who differ from other human beings not in degree but in kind. They should not be considered as abnormal human beings.

Their needs and desires are very much normal, but they have become so because of faulty family upbringing. They become hostile and aggressive because they feel threatened and insecured.

According to Friedlander, delinquent character is the result of three factors:

(i) The strength of the unmodified instinctive urges,

(ii) The weaknesses of the ego and

(iii) The lack of independence and strength of the super ego. He is not able to control his impulsive needs. In his case neither realistic considerations, nor moral considerations operate to check his impulsive actions. Stott (1950) holds that delinquent breaks down is an escape from emotional situation which for the particular individual with the various conditioning of his background becomes almost temporarily invariable.

(viii) Faulty Discipline and Child Rearing Practice :

When the parents or one of them use rigid discipline, it increases hostility in the child. Why? Because of rigid discipline all his wishes and desires are suppressed and restrained. This leads to the development of an antisocial, rebellious and hostile personality in the growing child.

By constant suppression of desires the child never feels free and clear. Conflicting views of parents and teachers regarding discipline also contribute.

If the child rearing practices are faulty and are based on rigid, dictatorial principles, if the child is always left to cry and cry, if the child is not handled with due love and affection, if the discipline is harsh, inconsistent and irrational, his suppressed and repressed aggression is vented through anti-social and delinquent behaviour.

Prolonged parental deprivation particularly at the early age of life, between 1-5 years is extremely adverse for the normal personality development of the child. The affectionless and loveless life due to proper parenting and judicious child rearing practices lead to several maladjustments and in some cases juvenile delinquency.

Bowlby (1946) compared 44 children who committed various thefts and hence were kept in the London child Guidance Clinic for treatment with 44 normal children of the same age and Socio-economic status, who came to the clinic for treatment but who did not steal.

Results showed that 17 of the 44 thief’s had suffered from prolonged separation from their mothers. But in the control group only 02 were separated from their mothers.

Of course, the question why the remaining 27 thief’s of the experimental group inspite of being with their mother took recourse to thefts has not been explained by this factor. But there are other factors besides parental deprivation which influence the development of delinquency.

Stott is of opinion that security, affection, love and proper attention from the parents are basically required for the proper growth of personality of the child. Those children who do not get this from their parents become susceptible to delinquency.

By becoming delinquents they try to get attention from their parents. Further they with an attitude of revolt try to teach their parents a lesson. Some also become vindictive and develop antisocial, reactionary, negative behaviour. They get sadistic satisfaction by giving pain to their parents and causing them worry. They get pleasure by seeing them suffering.

Lower socio-economic status parents usually remain absent from home for earning their bread. Both the father and mother work from morning to evening outside. So the child is deprived from parental care and is neglected.

They also cannot provide a baby sister to take care of the baby because of their poverty. Since the parents of low S.E.S. are not properly educated and properly trained, they cannot take proper care of their children. To add to this the school going children do not get scope for going to good school for their educational and social development. All these factors either separately or in combination pave the way for delinquency.

(ix) Broken Homes :

Studies show that children coming from broken homes, where parents are separated or divorced, lead to delinquent behaviour, than those children coining from broken homes where the home is broken by the death of the parents or one of the parents. In Western countries, where separation and divorce of parents are more common, this is a major cause of delinquency.

But in India, though currently separation and divorce cases are increasing day by day, they are not so rampant like their Western counterparts and hence, is not a major cause of delinquency.

In a study of institutionalized delinquents in the State of Colorado, Barker and Adams (1962) found that only about one-third of the boys and girls come from complete home setting, i.e. where they live with both their original parents. British and American Investigations reveal that nearly 50 per cent of the delinquents come from broken homes.

(x) Socio-pathic Parental Models :

Glueck and Glueck (1969), Ulmar (1971) and Bandura (1973) have found high presence of socio- pathic traits in the parents of the delinquents. Socio-pathic traits include alcoholism, brutality, anti­social attitudes, failure to provide unnecessary frequent absences from home, lack of communication with the child etc. All these traits make the father an inadequate and unacceptable model for the child.

According to Scharfman and Clark (1967) the chief variables of the delinquent behaviour of girls were:

(a) Broken homes combined with emotional deprivation,

(b) Irrational, harsh and inconsistent parental discipline,

(c) Patterns of only aggressive and sexual behaviour modelled by psychopathic parents.

(xi) Parental Absenteeism :

In studies on juvenile delinquency, Martin (1961) and others have emphasized the feeling of unrelatedness and detachment from the family and society as a key cause of delinquency. Communication gap with one or both parents leads to the failure to learn appropriate social values. This finally leads to a tendency to act out inner tension in hostile and destructive manner.

The question is why this feeling of unrelatedness or insecurity arises in young people who differ vastly in age I.Q., personality make up and socio-economic standard. A key source of this feeling appears to be parental absenteeism.

When parents are too much absorbed in their own occupations and activities and do not provide the youth optimum attention, necessary support and encouragement during the crisis period of the growing age, they turn to peers and others as models who might be lacking the qualities of ideal models for the child.

(xii) Mother Dominance :

When the father is mostly busy with his own work and commitments or in other works, and if he plays a submissive role in the family, the mother takes over the function of providing affection and discipline of the boy.

In certain cases, it is found that by nature the mother because of her aggressive personality pattern or earning capacity plays a dominant role compared to the father. When the child grows up with a mother dominance atmosphere in the family, he starts identifying with the mother and greatly depends upon him as a role model.

With this type of attitude when he reaches adolscence, it becomes difficult for the boy to develop a masculine self concept. Thus, now he tries to express his masculanity, independence courage and finally the so called male ego in rebellious and proving offences. By being engaged in such anti-social acts, he gets the satisfaction that he is really masculine.

(xiii) Father Rejection :

Andry, on the basis of the findings of his studies, concluded that the delinquent boys felt rejected by their fathers but loved by their mothers. Non-delinquent boys on the other hand felt to be equally loved and cared by both the parents. A child who is rejected by his parents day in and day out, develops, naturally, an inner feeling of hostility towards him.

The gap in communication and lack of understanding between the father and the child paves the way for anti-social behaviour in the form of anguish, aggression and hostility. When he finds that a large part of his world is unable to deal with him properly, he in turn does not like to understand the world either.

This hostility is transformed in the form of anti-social and delinquent behaviour. He, infact, lacks normal inner controls. He does not have the basic values of life. So, he tends to act out his aggressive impulses.

(xiv) Undesirable Peer Relationship :

Delinquency is said to be a gang experience. In support of this view, Haney and Gold (1973) found that about 66 per cent of the delinquent behaviours are committed in association with other persons. Usually it is a homogenious group so far, as sex is concerned. But in selected cases, as found now a days girls and boys also form gangs and delinquent groups.

(B) General Socio-Cultural Factors:

(i) Alienation and Rebellion :

Many ego psychologists view that the modern youth is only a bundle of confusions as far as his values of life is concerned. Most surprisingly, it is common in youths coming from all socio-economic levels. There is a communication gap and a generation gap.

They do not accept the values of their parents or grandparents and they are even confused of their so called own values and sense of identity. There is also identity crisis in many of them. Thus, in short, they are all in a mess.

They do not know what to accept and what to reject. They always experience a feeling of alienation from family as well as society. This lack of identification and development of clear values turn them to the outer world to peers gangs and friends for guidance and approval. They may take drugs and engage in illegal anti­social activities like thefts, pick pockets, violences etc.

There are innumerable instances where many modern youths who run away from home as a sort of reaction to their rebellious feeling, tend to join gangs indulged in delinquent behaviour, prostitution etc. In the same manner, socially disadvantaged youths, such as belonging to lower income groups, lower caste groups and having very little education, having lower status in the society may turn to delinquency also.

(ii) The Social Rejects :

With the increase in urbanization and industrialization, family ties grow weaker. Joint family systems are gradually disintegrating. People prefer to have their own family of husband and wife and children.

With the formation of mass society, influence of technology on society and erosion of values, social disintegration is increasing day by day. Joint family system has now become a dream. Tolerance and sense of sacrifice and feeling of cooperation is decreasing day by day.

Divorce and remarriage are quite common in the Western countries and urban areas. Though some decades back in India the public opinion was very strong against divorce and remarriage, now it has changed to some extent with the increase in industrialization and urbanization.

The effect of social disintegration, erosion of values, lack of sense of social sacrifice and commitment for the society may make many children social rejects. Young boys and girls who lack the motivation to do well in school because of various familial and social factors and become drop outs who are social isolates as soon as they can.

Normally, they do not qualify for any job. Irrespective of class, sex social status and wealth, they generally feel useless and unneeded by the society. This lack of hope, feeling of uselessness and that they are rejected by the society, lead them to show undesirable anti-social behaviour.

Many of them remain unemployed. Those who somehow get some employment are funnily unable to hold the job, and so, they shift from job to job, engage in delinquent behaviour, partly as a result of frustration and partly due to confusion and hopelessness.

(iii) Delinquent Gang Subculture :

This includes the rebellion with the norms of the society. If a person is rejected by the society, his inner tension is often revealed in serious delinquent acts beating and fighting leading to serious physical injury.

As Jenkins has put it, the socialized delinquents represent not a failure of socialization but a limitation of loyalty to a more or less pedatory peer group. The basic capacities for social relationship has been achieved. What is lacking in an effective integration with the larger society as a contributing member.

(iv) Gangs and Companions :

In addition to other important causes of delinquency, those who feel inadequate and rejected by the group and society join gangs, peer groups and companions and indulge in anti-social activities. As a child grows, he mixes with the members of the neighbourhood and always becomes an important member of their play group. The norms set up for the child at home may not be similar to the norms set up by the play groups.

Because of such differences there may be conflict of values, ideas and norms. Even in the school these norms may be different. He has to conform and adjust with one set of norms at home and another set of norms in the play group and another in the school.

Various studies indicate that secondary groups, like neighbourhood, playmates, peers and school, and others in the society which the child comes in contact more often than not all have tremendous effects on the personality of the child. All these agents of socialization play important role in the process of socialization of the growing child.

Overcrowding of cities, lack of space at home, residence at slum areas, location of various shops and business centres in various residential areas of the city, environmental pollution create a lot of social problems. Such problems have an adverse effect on the social development of the child. Children of such areas do not have a park to play, do not have many recreational facilities.

Some of these children of the slum areas invade the industrial belts nearby for some occasional job and are sometimes thrown out because of their inefficiency. Being frustrated and finding no way out, they mix with other children of the similar category and form gangs. Street corner gangs have tremendous contribution to Juvenile delinquency.

Initially, the gang starts as a play group. In the absence of play ground facility, the children start playing in the streets and eventually organise themselves in to gangs. Various groups of the same or nearby area then start fighting.

Very recently one incident occurred in my residential colony. There is one ‘paan’ (bettle) shop in front of my house. Two days before the last Ganesh Puja when I reached home from market, I found that the two boys of the paan shop along with some outside teenagers are constructing a pendal adjacent to the paan shop.

On enquiry, my orderly peon told me that these boys belong to another nearby colony and they are going to celebrate Ganesh Puja here. They decorated the pendal and also started playing film songs using a mike two days before the Puja.

We were very much disturbed by these unnecessary loud sounds. But nobody dared to object with the apprehension of being misbehaved and malhandled by them. On the night prior to the Puja day this gang of 10 to 12 boys prepared a feast near the pendal and ate to their heart’s content.

At about 2 A.M. we heard loud noise of fighting and shouting in front of our house. We got up from sleep and saw that two gangs are fighting with each other. Some of them broke the image of Ganesh and broke the mike.

Consequently one members of a gang fell down on the ground with severe blows and head injury. After this incident immediately the culprits lied from the spot leaving the injured boy there. After ten minutes two persons came and took away the injured boy in a rickshaw.

After 3-4 minutes Police came to the spot and after necessary enquiry booked the culprits. Members of both the gangs were kept under the custody of the Police for the whole day.

Alas! the Puja could not be performed in time. Why the two gangs fought? Gang No. 1 did not want gang No.2 to celebrate a separate Ganesh Puja. Gang No. 1 wanted Gang No. 2 to contribute to their Puja. So there was conflict and quarrel between the two gangs.

Numerous such quarrels, violence’s and conflicts occur every day between the street corner and Zhopodi gangs. Some members of these gangs are involved in petty theft and anti-social behaviour. They are famous for creating social nuisense.

Why a person becomes a member of a gang? Gang membership provides them a sense of status and approval and a sense of belongingness which they did not get from their family and other social agents. In a gang, the responsibility or blame of threat is not shouldered by any individual member, but by the gang as a whole just like in a mob.

Thus, some prefer to steal or booze and do other illegal acts in the name of gang. Studies have indicated that the groups outside the home have a tremendous impact on the personality of the adolescent. The gang starts as a play group.

In the absence of play ground facility, the children start playing in the streets and eventually form a gang and the behaviour of the person is mostly influenced by the gang and so he develops delinquent tendencies.

Though the gang has all the qualities of an in group like cooperation, unity, fellow feeling and belongingness, it is also associated with crimes, like stealing, eveteasing, rioting, homicide, rape, murder, boozing, taking various drugs and abusing them, dacoity, assault and murders etc.

Thus, they form a racket and in an organised way they create terror in the area. Studies have indicated that these children are roughly between 10-16 years age. They also come from poor families with constant friction between parents and family members. Those children who usually become the members of the gang have often little or no parental guidance.

Studies also indicate that delinquency is committed in groups and in companies. Shaw analysed 6,000 cases of crime and observed that in 72 per cent of the cases two or more companions were involved.

Healy reported that companionship was a single factor causing delinquency in 34 per cent of the cases while Burt gives the figure at 18 per cent. Uday Sankar gives the figure at 23 per cent. Sometimes parents are seen complaining that their child became a delinquent by mixing in bad company.

But bad companionship is not the only cause of delinquency unless there are some defects in the character formation of the individual. However, bad companionship is never the less an important factor which lead to delinquency, since delinquency is also a learnt behaviour.

In a gang or a restricted group the influence of social norm is there, sense of responsibility is divided and a boy feels that cinema and various electronic medias, like TV, Video films of violent and sexual nature lead children to delinquency by being helped through various techniques of delinquency shown in the screen.

However, it is quite reasonable to assume that early childhood training and parental attitude, how the child is reared up, all these have tremendous impact in deciding delinquent behaviour. These predisposing characters are precipitated in a gang thus leading to delinquency.

Recently female delinquents have also formed their gangs with a purpose to protect and defy themselves. They find a sense of acceptance, belongingness and give and take, sympathy, understanding, companionships, loyalty, power and authority which they do not find in a socialized world which they consider to be an out group.

(v) Poverty :

Ample evidences are there to hold that a large percentage of the delinquent children come from poor homes. It is found that even 50 per cent of the delinquents come from lower strata of the society with very poor economic background and hand to mouth living standard. Glueck’s (1934) study revealed that only 28.8% of the children came from comfortable homes with good economic status of parents.

Those who are disadvantaged and under privileged due to their poverty had to take recourse to some anti-social action for their living also.

Hence, keeping all other factors constant, a child coming from a comfortable home has relatively less chance for becoming a delinquent than a child coming from a poor under privileged family, Glueck’s study also showed that 37% of the fathers of delinquent children were skilled labourers while 23% were semi-skilled labourers and 40% were unskilled labourers.

Findings of his study showed that not a single parent of the delinquent children came from the clerical services. Glueck’s study, thus, brings the fact to light that the nature of job of parents is also an important determinant of delinquency.

Of course, Glueck’s study was conducted about sixty four years back and much changes have taken place during these six to seven decades. Children of some well to do highly educated parents doing very good jobs in government and non-govt.

Offices also, now a days, are engaged in delinquency and the percentage is growing up day by day. But compared to their lower SES counterparts the percentage is very low. According to Uday Sankar’s Study 83% of the Juvenile delinquents came from poor homes, 13% from border line (neither poor nor rich) homes and only 4% came from comfortable homes.

But poverty cannot be the role cause of delinquency. Had it been so, in India where poverty is found in most homes, the number of delinquents would have been more than the rich and better off countries which is not a fact. In India the percentage of Juvenile delinquency is very low and most people are peace loving and disciplined unlike other developed and developing countries.

A study conducted by the Ministry of Education (1952) Govt, of India indicates that 32,400 children were awarded sentences for delinquency in 1949. But in 1950 it was noticed that 40,119 children of all the states of India except U.P. were put up for trial in the Juvenile courts. But besides these recorded cases, there might have been some unrecorded cases also.

Poor parents have to leave their children and go for work. Thus, the mother is not available to take proper care of the child. They are neglected and the child becomes wayward. Children from poor homes also do not get scope for education as they have to supplement the earning of their parents. Poverty is, therefore, a contributing cause of delinquency, although it is not the sole cause.

(vi) Stress :

Serious traumatic experiences may lead one to become a delinquent. Clark (1961) found that one- third of the cases studied by him were found to be suffering from trauma. These traumatic experiences may range from death of parents, children husband or wife, broken homes, disorganised families etc.

Burks and Harrison (1962) have also stressed the function of stresses which directly threaten the adolescent feeling of inadequacy and worth as precipitating events in some cases of aggressive antisocial behaviour. Finkelstein (1968) holds that accumulation of emotional tensions also lead to a final outbreak the form of delinquency.

(vii) Delinquent Areas :

Studies of Burt in England indicates that there are certain localities from which majority of delinquent children come. In these areas, there are poor housing overcrowding and lack of recreational facilities. Most delinquents also come from the areas where cinema houses and hotels are located.

Burt found a high correlation of 77 between delinquency and density of population. Shaw in a similar study found that the majority of the Juvenile delinquents came from the centres of Chicago and the number of juveniles decreased from centre to periphery. But this is not applicable to all children staying in the crowded localities.

Essay # 6 . Treatment of Juvenile Delinquency :

What is a crime after all? An act which is a crime in one society may not be a crime in another society as crimes are acts which violate the rights of a person or property as envisaged by law or tradition. But never the less certain acts are considered as criminal in every society like murders, theft etc.

Inspite of the cultural variations in different parts of the world, criminals are always punished by the society or law, although the degree of punishment may vary from society to society. Many in the society believe that punishment should be exemplary so that others will not dare to commit it.

This purpose of giving punishment to the culprit in a major way is to prevent criminal acts. But the question arises whether Juvenile delinquents who are below 18 years of age should be punished like the convicts and criminals or not.

Rehabilitation of delinquents has been a great social issue. Delinquency is an anti-social behaviour and it creates unrest and indiscipline in the society. It makes social life hazardous and dangerous. It also affects the peace and prosperity of the nation. It is, therefore, imperative that the readjustment problem of delinquents should be dealt very sincerely and effectively.

Many people in the society feel that Juvenile delinquents should be given severe punishment so that not only they, but others will not dare to repeat such illegal, anti-social action in future. But sociologists and psychologists strongly hold that since Juvenile delinquency refers to the cases of young minds and children at their tender age, one has to deal with such cases very cautiously and carefully.

Juvenile delinquency being a social disease the child or the adolscent has to be treated in such a manner, so that he can readjust with the society. His maladjustment with the society has to be changed.

Since delinquency is mainly caused in the society under social conditions mostly because his basic needs are not fulfilled, efforts should be made first to fulfil the basic needs of every child in a socially approved manner whether delinquent or non-delinquent and extra care should be taken of the delinquent child.

Each delinquent child tries to fulfil his needs in an anti-social manner. But it would be the job of the social reformers and psychologists dealing with the care of the delinquents, to fulfil their needs in a socially accepted manner according to the norms of the society and legal sanctions.

Further, each delinquent has to be considered individually focussing attention on the fulfillment of his needs for power, prestige and recognition. Each individual case of delinquency has to be studied separately keeping in view his specific problems. Then only, it will be possible to rehabilitate, recondition and readjust the individual in the society.

In recent years there has not only been any transformation in the past attitude of the society and social thinkers towards delinquency there has also been change in law with regard to Juvenile delinquency. The outlook is now more progressive and dynamic. Special courts have been established with specially trained Magistrates to handle the cases of delinquents.

They are also sheltered in special homes instead of jails and special care is taken so that they can be rehabilitated in the society. Remand homes are established by law to which the young offenders are sent. Trained social workers are also engaged to study each case. For each case a separate file is built up with the detailed case history, type of crime committed and further improvement in behaviour.

Clinical psychologists and psychiatrists are also engaged in many remand homes to reform these anti-socials. Instead of giving physical punishment to the offenders, constant efforts are made to bring change in their outlook and attitude towards society, towards themselves. In short, the aim of everyone involved is to rehabilitate the individual in the society as a normal individual.

Special schools are also established otherwise known as ‘Reformatory Schools’ with specially trained teachers to help the delinquents to overcome the deficiencies in their socialization and develop the right kind of attitude towards themselves. The teachers of such schools gradually try to become substituted parents and help the children in generating a sense of security, self confidence, right attitude towards society.

They are given various craft and other vocational training to earn their livelihood, once they are rehabilitated in the society. The schools also develop a number of group activities to change the ego and super ego of these children.

In Western countries delinquents in small groups are brought up in residential areas and given individual treatment, to have in them a feeling that they are part and parcel of the society. Thus, they are removed from the aversive environment and allowed to learn about the world of which they are a member.

If required, they are given individual therapy, group therapy and psychological counselling. Here, their behaviour is resocialized by the help of group pressure. Counselling with the parents in the rehabilitation centre is also of great help for the rehabilitation of the Juvenile delinquents.

Institutionalization may not be quite successful in case of Juvenile offenders, i.e. youths whose offenses have involved acts that world not be considered criminal, if committed by an adult such as running away from home or engaging in sexual relations. If such types of delinquents are kept with those who have committed serious crimes, they would in turn learn these from them.

It may, therefore, aggravate their behavioural problems instead of correcting them. The teachers of reformatory schools should also keep in mind to act as substitutes of good, warm and understanding parents and help the children to generate a sense of security and involvement. They should give up the idea that their life is meaningless and their birth is useless.

The school also should make efforts to develop a number of group activities in debate, sports, various social functions, picnics, exhibitions and study tours to change the ego of the delinquent child, to create a feeling of togetherness, belongingness, we feeling, sense of sacrifice and cooperation along with healthy competition.

Positive human values like honesty, sociability, amiability, truthfulness etc. are to be developed through teaching and action. One has to remember that changes are to be made from negative to positive outlooks and values of life.

Parents have also tremendous role to play in the rehabilitation of their delinquent children. They, therefore, must be helped to develop insight to their own behaviour and analyse their own behaviour which might have led to the maladjustment in the child.

They should, therefore, try to rectify their own behaviour so that in future there is no problem from the side of parents when the child returns from the reformatory home to be rehabilitated in the society. Since a lot depends upon parental behaviour and attitude, they should be very cautious.

Finally, the society and public should also change their outlook and attitude towards delinquency in general. They should not hate or distrust the delinquents. The delinquents must be dealt with sympathy, understanding and good behaviour.

They should not be hurt emotionally. Society as a whole should give up its fear and hostility towards the delinquents and anti-socials. It should develop a flexible attitude so that proper analysis of the causes of delinquency is made and adequate steps are taken both with respect to the prevention and treatment of delinquency.

Mentally retarded children should be specially and cautiously, dealt with parents and teachers. Otherwise, they may become susceptible to delinquency. They should be handled with proper care and should be taught in such a way so that their attention can be sustained.

The psychopathic and neurotic children should be given the opportunities of necessary therapeutic measures and prevent the development of delinquent behaviour.

All kinds of delinquents should not be treated identically, in a group or and should not be given similar rehabilitation facilities. For this purpose, differential diagnosis of the delinquents is essentially required. This can be possible by the, services of psychiatrists and clinical psychologists.

Increase of population without proportionate increase of space and other living conditions is one of the major causes of rise in delinquency. Particularly people migrate to cities from villages and the cities, semi-urban and urban areas for earning their livelihood.

So they are overcrowded. Various difficulties crop up and so problems of socialization are also experienced. Slum areas in cities create more problems leading to the growth of anti-social feelings in children.

Therefore, vast programmes are now being undertaken to clear the slum areas and for providing educational and recreational facilities for the slum children like parks, gardens, play grounds, doll house. As a result, the children need not play in street corners and constitute consciously or unconsciously street corner gangs.

Large amount of money are being spent in Western countries to rehabilitate the delinquents through various remedial measures. Various steps are also being taken at different quarters to prevent the rise of delinquents. But since delinquency is a very complex problem being caused by multifarious factors, it is difficult, though not impossible, to control it and prevent it.

Inspite of the various rehabilitation programmes developed by different countries of the world, they do not appear to be sufficient to reduce the percentage of delinquency from the society or prevent it significantly.

The inadequacies of the correctional system are being changed as and when necessary. Effective rehabilitation programmes, long range programmes to prevent delinquency should also be prepared to combat the rise of delinquency in the society.

This can be made possible by improving the conditions of the slum areas, providing suitable educational facilities for children staying in slum areas, near railway station, bus stand, market etc.

Along with this minimum education, vocational training and training in different trades should also be provided. By being engaged in work and earning some money during the training period, they can be normalized and can also adjust with the main stream.

The manual training will not only encourage their creative abilities, but also would give them satisfaction. When a child or an adolscent produces a bag or a basket, a toy in mud or a painting he gets immense satisfaction. This sense of achievement produces in him a sense of security and confidence, a sense of adequateness.

Orphanage and destitute homes are not sufficient to rehabilitate the juvenile delinquents in view of their increasing numbers during the recent years. Hence, these along with recreational centres should be increased.

In the school the teacher should show sympathetic treatment to the Juveniles. They should not hate them. Their approach should be different from what they show to the normal children and each Juvenile delinquent should be given individual attention. Mentally handicapped and retarded children should not be ridiculed by class mates and peers. The teacher should give special attention to this.

The rehabilitation programmes are not enough keeping in view the rapid growth of Juvenile delinquency in the entire world. The inadequacies of the correctional system are being changed. Besides effective rehabilitation programmes, long range programmes to prevent delinquency should be prepared.

This can be made possible by improving the conditions of the slum areas, provision for suitable educational and recreational facilities, education of parents disciplined and organised society with role relationship defined, development of proper ego identity and etc.

Odell (1974) has developed a programme that combined educational development and job placement facilitating entry in to the opportunity structure more effective than traditional case work methods in preventing Juvenile recidivision. Finally, it can be said that the emphasis should be more on rehabilitation than punishment.

Juvenile delinquency cannot be curbed fully from the society. No society can ever completely prevent or eliminate crime, practically speaking. However, delinquency and crime can be reduced social scientists and psychologists can plan to reduce delinquency and crime.

Related Articles:

• Social Development in Children: 6 Factors | Psychology
• Essay on Delinquency | Psychology
• Essay on Cooperation

Juvenile Delinquency and Reasons That Lead to It Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Drugs correlation with youth crimes.

There are various reasons why there exists crime in various parts of this world. Juvenile delinquency is a term that is commonly used to describe illegal or antisocial behavior portrayed by children especially adolescents. Various issues can be attributed towards juvenile delinquency for example bipolar or more commonly known as stress attributed to a post-traumatic experience or peer pressure. Irrespective of the cause of juvenile delinquency, juvenile drug abuse is certainly most commonly related directly to either an increase or a decrease in any form of juvenile delinquency. Using existing databases as the main research method, we are going to prove the validity of this hypothesis.

Drug or substance abuse is a maladaptive system or pattern in the use of a certain substance that can hardly be considered as a dependent substance. Abuse of drugs does not however always entirely exclude dependency. In the United States of America, the most commonly abused drugs are cocaine, alcohol, methaqualone, benzodiazepines, and barbiturates. However, the UN (United Nations) estimates the existence of over 0.5 Billion people in the world who knowingly and without any medical reason abuse cocaine, heroin, and even synthetic drugs. The most commonly abused drugs in the USA by juveniles are marijuana and alcohol (Puzzanchera, 2008).

Since the early 1990s, the high use of illegal drugs has been steadily rising amongst youth especially in the United States. According to Dickson (1997), the use of tobacco, alcohol, and other types of drugs among those children in the 12th grade has been on the rise statistically since 1981. By this time over 65 % of students in senior classes had already admitted to once having used these illicit drugs. Though the figures dropped slightly by 1992 to just slightly over 40 %, the figures again started increasing past 1993. By 1996, more than 50% of all seniors in high school had reported that they had used some illicit drugs (Dickson, 1997).

Concurrent with the rise in drug abuse among juveniles is the rise in several total arrests in the United States of America by the Federal Bureau of Investigations (Douglas, 2008). There has generally been a steady increase in the number of persons arrested in the USA since 1992 due to various crimes committed. This correlates to the increase in the use of drugs in this country. In 1992, there were slightly more than 13,898,234 arrests documented by the FBI. This was a drop from 14, 195, 100 documented arrest in 1990., these figures again correlates to the drop in drug use up to 40% by the youth in this same period. These figures of arrest have also been on a gradual increase in response to the gradual increase in drug use (Douglas, 2008).

One might question these findings since they affect the whole population but yet there has been documentation of 195,700 youth arrested for violations relating to drug abuse. This rate is known to have hit a 145% increase since 1990. Even though this represents only a fraction of the over 2,180,500 arrested juveniles for various other crimes, more often than not, they are charged with having committed more than one crime. If the first crime far outweighs the second crime, then it is usually recorded that they have been arrested for the serious crime only. Consequently, research into data of the arrested Juveniles has shown that besides their original charge, they are usually charged together with having abused drugs.

Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) is a program that is normally carried out by the Institute of National Justice. This program has previously measured drug abuse prevalence in male juvenile detainees. This study has also portrayed an increase in the use of drugs among juvenile males since 1993. It should also be interesting to note that there has also0 been an increase in the number of juvenile youth in detention centers since 1993. A substantial drug use rate was also found in juveniles that had committed serious criminal violations.

A more substantial data source for this claim might perhaps be found from one finding of Beck Kline in 1988 who after examining juvenile detainees, found out that 39 percent whose ages were below 18 years were under drug influence. 9 years later, a study by Defrancesco of 113 youth who were considered delinquent in a detention facility of the state found that up to 82 % of them all were daily alcohol users and other drugs (Douglas, A). Interestingly, another separate study was done in 1988 in the Washington District of the USA statistically showed that youth who were involved in peddling and using drugs most likely did commit other crimes more than those who only peddled the drugs.

It is therefore from the data discussed above that a conclusion portraying this hypothesis to be true is reached. Drug abuse is directly related to Juvenile delinquency as noted above. This is albeit the fact that further research needs to be conducted to find out whether drug abuse leads to juvenile delinquency or vice versa.

Dickinson, T. & Crowe, A. (1997). Juvenile Delinquency and Substance Abuse. Web.

Douglas, A. (2008). Drug War Facts. Web.

Puzzanchera, C. (2009). Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington D.C: U.S. Government Printing Office.

• The Rise of Juvenile Delinquency and the Influence of Drugs
• Restorative Justice Program
• The Problem of Juvenile Delinquency
• The Issue of Juvenile Delinquency
• Factors Associated With Juvenile Delinquency
• Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders
• Juvenile Court Philosophy
• Understanding the Causes of Juvenile Crime
• Youth Justice Conferencing as a Government Hybrid Technique
• Features of Conviction of Juvenile Offenders
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2022, March 22). Juvenile Delinquency and Reasons That Lead to It. https://ivypanda.com/essays/juvenile-delinquency-and-reasons-that-lead-to-it/

"Juvenile Delinquency and Reasons That Lead to It." IvyPanda , 22 Mar. 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/juvenile-delinquency-and-reasons-that-lead-to-it/.

IvyPanda . (2022) 'Juvenile Delinquency and Reasons That Lead to It'. 22 March.

IvyPanda . 2022. "Juvenile Delinquency and Reasons That Lead to It." March 22, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/juvenile-delinquency-and-reasons-that-lead-to-it/.

1. IvyPanda . "Juvenile Delinquency and Reasons That Lead to It." March 22, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/juvenile-delinquency-and-reasons-that-lead-to-it/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Juvenile Delinquency and Reasons That Lead to It." March 22, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/juvenile-delinquency-and-reasons-that-lead-to-it/.