introduction essay about juvenile delinquency

Juvenile Crime, Juvenile Justice (2001)

Chapter: introduction, introduction.

Juvenile crime is one of the nation's serious problems. Concern about it is widely shared by federal, state, and local government officials and by the public. In recent years, this concern has grown with the dramatic rise in juvenile violence that began in the mid-1980s and peaked in the early 1990s. Although juvenile crime rates appear to have fallen since the mid-1990s, this decrease has not alleviated the concern. Many states began taking a tougher legislative stance toward juveniles in the late 1970s and early 1980s, a period during which juvenile crime rates were stable or falling slightly, and federal reformers were urging prevention and less punitive measures. Some of the dissonance between the federal agenda and what was happening in the states at that time may have been caused by significant changes in legal procedures that made juvenile court processes more similar—though not identical—to those in criminal (adult) court. The main response to the most recent spike in violent juvenile crime has been enactment of laws that further blur distinctions between juvenile courts and adult courts. States continued to toughen their juvenile crime laws in recent years, making sentencing more punitive, expanding allowable transfers to criminal (adult) court, or doing away with some of the confidentiality safeguards of juvenile court. Many such changes were enacted after the juvenile violent crime rate had already begun to fall. The rehabilitative model embodied in the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, focusing on the needs of the young offender, has lost ever more ground over the past 20 years to punitive models that focus mainly on the offense committed. These puni-

tive policies have had a disproportionate impact on some minority groups, particularly black youngsters, an important issue that is explored in depth in Chapter 6 .

Crime policies in the United States have been moving in the direction of treating juveniles as adults, even though many young people continue to grow up in settings that “fail to provide the resources, the supports, and the opportunities essential to a healthy development and reasonable preparation for productive adulthood” (National Research Council, 1993a:2)—settings that put young people at high risk for delinquency. In 1997, 40 percent of all those living below the poverty level in the United States were under the age of 18 (Snyder and Sickmund, 1999). Structural changes in society, including fewer two-parent homes and more maternal employment, have contributed to a lack of resources for the supervision of children's and adolescents' free time.

Government policy on juvenile delinquency must often struggle with the appropriate balance of concern over the healthy development of children and adolescents who violate the law and a public desire to punish criminals. This tension between rehabilitation and punishment when dealing with children and adolescents who commit crimes results in an ambivalent orientation toward young offenders. Criminal acts must be suppressed, condemned, and punished. Nevertheless, children and adolescents who commit criminal acts must be educated and supported in a growth process that should be the objective of government policy for all young people, including young offenders.

A number of cognitive and social features of childhood and adolescence influence the content of juvenile crime policy. Historically, children under the age of seven have been considered below the age of reason, and therefore unable to formulate the criminal intent necessary to be held accountable for criminal offenses. In practice, children younger than age 10 are rarely involved in the juvenile justice system. Arrests of those younger than 10 years old account for less than 2 percent of all juvenile arrests. By the age of 16 or 17, most adolescents are deemed to have sufficient cognitive capacity and life experience to be held accountable for intended wrongful acts. How to deal appropriately with those who commit crimes between the ages of 10 and 17 is the issue faced in juvenile crime policy. Adolescence is a period of dating, driving, and expanding social networks—all choices that can produce positive or negative consequences for the adolescent and the community. Public policies in the areas of education, medical care, alcoholic beverage control, and juvenile crime reflect beliefs that adolescents have not acquired the abilities or capacities necessary for adult status. Creating the appropriate public policy for a period of semiautonomy is no small task (Zimring, 1982). To

further complicate the matter, crime rates peak in mid- to late adolescence, making policy toward young offenders of special importance.

To best answer the questions of how to deal with young offenders requires knowledge of factors in the individual, family, social settings, and community that influence the development of delinquent behavior; of the types of offenses committed by young people; and of the types of interventions that can most efficiently and effectively prevent offending in the first place or prevent its recurrence. This study reviews literature in all of these areas to provide an objective view of juvenile crime and the juvenile justice system in the United States.

CHILD AND ADOLESCENT DEVELOPMENT: NOT JUST LITTLE ADULTS

What is often missing from discussions of juvenile crime today is recognition that children and adolescents are not just little adults, nor is the world in which they live the world of adults. Physical, emotional, and cognitive development continue throughout adolescence. Although young people can approach decisions in a manner similar to adults under some circumstances, many decisions that children and adolescents make are under precisely the conditions that are hardest for adults—unfamiliar tasks, choices with uncertain outcomes, and ambiguous situations (see, for example, Beyth-Marom and Fischhoff, 1997; Cohn et al., 1995). Further complicating the matter for children and adolescents is that they often face deciding whether or not to engage in a risky behavior, such as taking drugs, shoplifting, or getting into a fight, in situations involving emotions, stress, peer pressure, and little time for reflection.

Young people are liable to overestimate their own understanding of a situation, underestimate the probability of negative outcomes, and make judgments based on incorrect or incomplete information (Quadrel et al., 1993). Although adults are also prone to the same misperceptions, children's and adolescents' lack of experience increases their vulnerability. Quadrel et al. (1993) found that high-risk adolescents (with legal and substance abuse problems, recruited from group homes) were more likely than middle-class youngsters to have incorrect information about risks, while being extremely confident in their information.

Emotions can affect decision making for both adolescents and adults. When people are experiencing positive emotions, such as excitement, happiness, love (as adolescents often do when with groups of their peers), they tend to underestimate the possibility of negative consequences to their actions. When experiencing negative emotions, such as anger, jealousy, sadness, people tend to focus on the near term and lose sight of

the big picture. This is particularly relevant for adolescents, who have been found to experience wider and more rapid mood swings than adults (Larson et al., 1980; Larson and Lampman-Petraitis, 1989; Larson and Richards, 1994).

Studies of young people's understanding of legal processing and the consequences of various legal choices, such as forfeiting the right to remain silent or to have an attorney, show differences between those younger and older than about 15 years (Grisso, 1997). Those under age 15 often misunderstand the concept of a right, in general, and of Miranda rights, in particular. They foresee fewer alternative courses of action in legal proceedings and tend to concentrate on short-term rather than long-term consequences (Grisso, 1980; 1981). For example, younger youth often misconstrue the right to remain silent, believing it means they should be quiet until they are told to talk. Nor do they completely understand the right to have an attorney present, without charge, before they talk (Abramovitch et al., 1995; Grisso, 1981). These misunderstandings raise concerns about children's and young adolescents' competence to stand trial in adult court. Children and adolescents from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds and those with low IQs fare worse in understanding the legal process and their rights than do other children and adolescents of comparable ages (Grisso, 1997). Furthermore, experience with the justice system does not ensure that young people fully understand the process, their rights, or the implications of the decisions they make. Both Grisso (1981) and Lawrence (1983) have found that adolescent delinquents had much poorer understanding of their rights than did adult defendants.

Emerging research using magnetic resonance imaging of the brain demonstrates the cognitive and emotional differences between adolescents and adults. Children and adolescents process emotionally charged information in the part of the brain responsible for instinct and gut reactions. Adults process such information in the “rational” frontal section of the brain (Baird et al., 1999). Children and adolescents may be physiologically less capable than adults of reasoning logically in the face of particularly strong emotions. In a recent study, Thompson et al. (2000) found that the brain continues to develop and change through at least midadolescence, with the most active parts of the brain changing during development. These new insights on brain development may have implications for holding children and adolescents criminally responsible in the same way as adults and raise concerns about initiatives to transfer younger and younger defendants to adult courts.

INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE 1

Looking at the policies of other countries provides some perspective on criminal justice in the United States. An international study of 15 countries—Australia, Austria, Belgium, Denmark, England and Wales, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Japan, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Russia, Sweden, and Switzerland—notes that all have special provisions for young criminals in their justice systems, although some (such as Denmark, Russia, and Sweden) have no special courts for juveniles. Table 1-1 depicts some of the differences among countries, showing the range in variability for the minimum age of criminal responsibility, the age at which full responsibility as an adult can be assumed, the type of court that handles young people committing crimes, whether such young people can be tried in courts that also try adults, the maximum length of sentencing for a juvenile, and policies regarding incarcerating juveniles with adults.

The United States was not alone in seeing a dramatic increase in violent crime by juveniles in the 1980s and early 1990s. Many European countries and Canada experienced increases in their rates of violent crime, particularly among juveniles (Hagan and Foster, 2000; Pfeiffer, 1998). It is difficult to compare rates across countries, because legal definitions of crime vary from country to country. For example, in Germany, assault is counted as a violent crime only if a weapon is used during the commission of the crime, whereas in England and Wales, the degree of injury to the victim determines whether or not an assault counts as a violent crime. Crime is also measured differently in each country. For example, the United States commonly relies on numbers of arrests to measure crime. In Germany, Austria, and Italy, among other countries, crime is measured by the number of cases solved by police (even if the offender has been apprehended) (Pfeiffer, 1998). Nevertheless, trends in juvenile violent crime appeared similar in many developed countries in the 1980s and early 1990s, 2 although the rates were different.

The United States has a high violent crime rate—particularly for homicide—in comparison to other countries, although property crime rates, particularly burglary, are higher than U.S. rates in Canada, England and Wales, and The Netherlands (Hagan and Foster, 2000; Mayhew and White, 1997). In 1994, the violent crime arrest rate (includes homicide, aggravated assault, robbery, and rape) for 13- to 17-year-olds in the United

TABLE 1-1 International Comparisons of Juvenile Justice Systems

States was nearly 800 per 100,000 (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 1995). In England and Wales, about 600 per 100,000 14- to 16-year-olds were convicted or cautioned by the police for violent crimes (homicide, assault, robbery, and rape) in 1994. In Germany, 650 per 100,000 14- to 17-year-olds and in The Netherlands 450 per 100,000 12- to 17-year-olds were suspects of violent crime in 1994 (Pfeiffer, 1998).

Comparing how different countries deal with juvenile offenders is equally challenging. Countries differ in the ages of young people considered legal juveniles, in how juvenile courts are organized, and in the types of institution used to sanction juvenile offenders. As Table 1-1 shows, the minimum age for being considered criminally responsible varies from 7 years (in Switzerland and the Australian state of Tasmania) to 16 (in Belgium and Russia). The age of full criminal responsibility (i.e., the age at which an offender is automatically handled as an adult) is 18 in most of the countries studied by Weitekamp et al. (1999), but is as low as 16 in some Australian states and is 20 in Japan. In the United States, both minimum and maximum ages of juvenile court jurisdiction vary by state, with most states having no minimum age (although in practice, children younger than 10 are seldom seen in juvenile courts). The maximum age of juvenile court jurisdiction is younger in many U.S. states than in the other countries studied, with 3 states having a maximum age of 15, 10 of 16, and the remaining states having a maximum age of 17.

At the same time that states and the federal government in the United States have been moving toward treating juvenile offenders more like adult criminals, many other countries retain a strong rehabilitative stance. The 1988 Youth Court Law of Austria, for example, describes juvenile offending as a normal step in development for which restorative justice, not punishment, is the appropriate response. The Belgium Youth Court Protection Act specifies that the only measures that can be imposed on a juvenile are for his or her care, protection, and education. In New Zealand, since 1989, Family Group Conferences have been used to replace or supplement youth courts for most of the serious criminal cases. In the early 1980s, England and Wales moved toward community-based sanctions for young offenders and away from institutional placements. This trend was reversed in the 1990s, however, when England and Wales reacted to the upswing in juvenile violence in a manner similar to the United States, focusing on the offense, rather than the offender. The U.K. Criminal Justice and Public Order Act of 1994 made it easier to place offenders younger than 15 years in juvenile correctional facilities and extended the maximum length of allowable sentences. The U.K. Crime and Disorder Act of 1998 moved the English juvenile justice system even further toward a punitive, offense-based model.

Neither Sweden nor Denmark uses a separate juvenile court, but youthful immaturity is considered a mitigating factor in deciding their criminal responsibility. In Denmark, maximum punishments well below those available for adults are specified in law for juveniles 15 and older; juveniles under the age of 15 may not be punished, but may be referred to a social welfare agency. In Sweden, imprisonment may only be imposed on juveniles under exceptional circumstances, and even then, the sentences imposed are shorter than for adults.

The United States has a very high overall rate of incarceration. At 645 per 100,000, the U.S. incarceration rate is second only to that of Russia at 685 per 100,000 (Walmsley, 1999). Although adequate juvenile incarceration figures do not exist in the United States, the incarceration rate for homicides committed by juveniles is illustrative of the difference in incarceration rates. In 1992, 12.5 people per 100,000 were incarcerated in the United States for homicides committed as juveniles. Comparable numbers in other countries are 2.3 per 100,000 in The Netherlands, 1.6 per 100,000 in Italy, and 1.3 per 100,000 in Germany (Pfeiffer, 1998). Some of the differences in juvenile homicide incarceration rates are likely to be due to differences in homicide commission rates. In none of the 15 countries surveyed by Weitekamp et al. (1999) can a juvenile who commits a crime be executed, whereas this practice is allowed in the United States.

CHARGE TO THE PANEL

The Panel on Juvenile Crime: Prevention, Treatment, and Control was asked to identify and analyze the full range of research studies and datasets that bear on the nature of juvenile crime, highlighting key issues and data sources that can provide evidence of prevalence and seriousness; race, gender, and class bias; and impacts of deterrence, punishment, and prevention strategies. The panel was further asked to analyze the factors that contribute to delinquent behavior, including a review of the knowledge on child and adolescent development and its implications for prevention and control; to assess the current practices of the juvenile justice system, including the implementation of constitutional safeguards; to examine adjudication, detention and waiver practices; to explore the role of community and institutional settings; to assess the quality of data sources on the clients of both public and private juvenile justice facilities; and to assess the impact of the deinstitutionalization mandates of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 on delinquency and community safety.

To meet this charge, the study panel and staff gathered information in a number of ways. Relevant research studies were identified through

targeted searches of UnCover, Medline, Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), and the National Criminal Justice Research Service (NCJRS). The panel met six times between June 1998 and October 1999 to discuss data availability and research findings, identify critical issues, analyze the data and issues, seek additional information on specific concerns, formulate conclusions and recommendations, and develop this report. Four of these meetings were preceded by workshops at which experts presented information on selected topics and engaged in discussions with panel members. Workshops were held on education and delinquency, juvenile justice system issues, developmental issues relevant to delinquency, and racial disparity in the juvenile justice system. (See Appendix E for workshop agendas.) In addition to the workshops, Howard Snyder, research director of the National Center for Juvenile Justice, spent part of one meeting discussing relevant datasets with the panel members. The panel commissioned three papers: “International Comparison of Juvenile Justice Systems ” by Elmar Weitekamp, Hans-Juergen Kerner, and Gernot Trueg; “Police Encounters with Juvenile Suspects” by Robert Worden and Stephanie Myers; and “The Indeterminancy of Forecasts of Crime Rates and Juvenile Offenses ” by Kenneth Land and Patricia McCall. Several members of the panel made site visits to juvenile detention and correctional facilities in Texas and New York. Study panel members and staff also consulted informally with various experts between meetings.

The charge to the panel was extremely broad, covering many topics that merit books unto themselves, and indeed some of the areas have been the subject of more than one recent book. The panel chose to provide a broad overview of juvenile crime and the juvenile justice system, touching on all the topics in its charge, but going into various levels of depth depending on the amount and quality of data available. In organizing its plan for the study, the panel focused on answering several questions:

What have been the major trends in juvenile crime over the past 20 to 30 years, and what can be predicted about future trends?

What is the role of developmental factors in delinquent behavior and how do families, peers, communities, and social influences contribute to or inhibit that behavior?

What responses are in place to deal with juvenile crime today, are they developmentally appropriate, and do they work?

This report reviews the data and research available to answer these questions, suggests areas that require additional research, and makes recommendations about policies for dealing with child and adolescent offenders.

DEFINITIONS USED IN THIS REPORT

The terms juvenile and delinquency (or delinquent ) have specific legal meanings in state and federal law. In this report, however, the panel uses the term juvenile 3 in its general sense, referring to anyone under the age of 18, unless otherwise specified. The terms young person, youngster, youth, and child and adolescent are used synonymously with juvenile. For many of the analyses of crime trends in Chapter 2 , juvenile refers to those between the ages of 10 and 17, because those under the age of 10 are seldom arrested. We use the term adolescent to refer specifically to young people between the ages of 13 and 17.

The term delinquency 4 in this report refers to acts by a juvenile that would be considered a crime if committed by an adult, as well as to actions that are illegal only because of the age of the offender. The report uses the term criminal delinquency to refer specifically to the former and status delinquency to refer specifically to the latter. Criminal delinquency offenses include, for example, homicide, robbery, assault, burglary, and theft. The term juvenile crime is used synonymously with criminal delinquency. Status delinquency offenses include truancy, running away from home, incorrigibility (i.e., habitually disobeying reasonable and lawful commands of a parent, guardian, or custodian; also referred to in various statutes as unruly, uncontrollable, or ungovernable behavior), and liquor law violations. In some states, status delinquents are referred to the child welfare or social service systems, while in others status delinquents are dealt with in the juvenile justice system.

PLAN OF THE REPORT

Following this introduction, Chapter 2 discusses the datasets commonly used to measure juvenile crime rates, examining the relative strengths and weaknesses of each. The chapter then discusses the trends in juvenile crime rates over the past several decades and how trends differ depending on the dataset employed. Differences in crime rates and

types of offense by sex and race are noted. The chapter ends with a discussion of forecasting juvenile crime rates.

Chapter 3 examines factors related to the development of antisocial behavior and delinquency. Several other recent reports (Loeber et al., 1998; Rutter et al., 1998) have extensively reviewed the research on many of these factors, particularly as they relate to the development of serious, violent offending. In this report we have attempted to supplement these other reports rather than duplicate their literature reviews. In addition, this report does not confine its discussion to serious, violent offending.

Chapters 4 and 5 cover responses to the problem of youth crime. Chapter 4 focuses on preventive interventions aimed at individuals, peer groups, and families, interventions delivered in schools, and community-based interventions. Chapter 5 describes the juvenile justice system process in the United States and discusses treatment and intervention programs delivered through the juvenile justice system.

Chapter 6 examines the issue of racial disparity in the juvenile justice system, discussing explanations that have been put forth to explain that disparity and the research support for those explanations.

The panel's conclusions and recommendations for research and policy can be found at the end of each chapter.

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.

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.

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.

• Subject List
• Take a Tour
• For Authors
• Subscriber Services
• Publications
• African American Studies
• African Studies
• American Literature
• Anthropology
• Architecture Planning and Preservation
• Art History
• Atlantic History
• Biblical Studies
• British and Irish Literature
• Childhood Studies
• Chinese Studies
• Cinema and Media Studies
• Communication

Criminology

• Environmental Science
• Evolutionary Biology
• International Law
• International Relations
• Islamic Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Latino Studies
• Linguistics
• Literary and Critical Theory
• Medieval Studies
• Military History
• Political Science
• Public Health
• Renaissance and Reformation
• Social Work
• Urban Studies
• Victorian Literature
• Browse All Subjects

How to Subscribe

• Free Trials

In This Article Expand or collapse the "in this article" section Juvenile Delinquency

Introduction, general overviews.

• Theoretical Foundations
• Families and Delinquency
• Schools and Delinquency
• Peers and Delinquency
• Communities and Delinquency
• Individual Factors and Delinquency
• Demographic Differences in Delinquency
• Anti-Delinquency Programs and Policies

Related Articles Expand or collapse the "related articles" section about

About related articles close popup.

Lorem Ipsum Sit Dolor Amet

Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Aliquam ligula odio, euismod ut aliquam et, vestibulum nec risus. Nulla viverra, arcu et iaculis consequat, justo diam ornare tellus, semper ultrices tellus nunc eu tellus.

• Adverse Childhood Experiences
• Delinquency and Crime Prevention
• Developmental and Life-Course Criminology
• Gangs, Peers, and Co-offending
• Juvenile Courts
• Marvin Wolfgang
• Prisons and Jails
• School Policing
• Self-Report Crime Surveys
• Social Ecology of Crime
• Substance Use and Abuse
• The Juvenile Justice System

Other Subject Areas

Forthcoming articles expand or collapse the "forthcoming articles" section.

• Education Programs in Prison
• Mixed Methods Research in Criminal Justice and Criminology
• Victim Impact Statements
• Find more forthcoming articles...
• Export Citations
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Juvenile Delinquency by Terrance J. Taylor LAST REVIEWED: 27 October 2017 LAST MODIFIED: 14 December 2009 DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780195396607-0026

Juvenile delinquency has received substantial recognition as a pressing social problem. What is encompassed by the term “juvenile delinquency,” however, is quite broad. Thus, various texts on “juvenile delinquency” may often focus on different topical issues. For example, some may examine serious and persistent youth violence, while others may focus on programs designed to prevent youth from engaging in more benign, everyday disorderly activities. In addition to general overviews and theoretical foundations of juvenile delinquency, the following readings are organized into key domains of risk or protective factors associated with delinquency. Specifically, topical areas include family, schools, peers, and community factors. Additionally, race, ethnicity, and delinquency are intertwined (although not always in the way that people expect). Finally, efforts to prevent and respond to juvenile delinquency are examined.

A number of excellent texts providing overviews of juvenile delinquency as a social problem exist. Some of these—for example, Shoemaker 2005 —focus on theoretical approaches for understanding the etiology of delinquency; others, such as Snyder and Sickmund 2006 , are purely descriptive, while still others, such as Howell 2003 , provide an important link between theory and policy. Consistent with a perception of an emergent “youth violence epidemic” and an emphasis on targeting serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders during the late 1990s and early 2000s, a number of relevant works emerged during this period. Thus, Howell, et al. 1995 and Loeber and Farrington 1998 provide excellent entrees into these areas. Similarly, a concern about increasing delinquency among very young offenders (those younger than twelve years old) provides the context for Loeber and Farrington 2001 . Tonry and Moore 1998 is a compilation of essays on youth-violence research and policy written by top scholars, providing an excellent introduction to the topic. Regardless of their emphases or scope, the following texts provide thorough coverage for those interested in learning more about juvenile delinquency.

Howell, James C. 2003. Preventing and reducing juvenile delinquency: A comprehensive framework . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

An excellent book examining history, trends, and anti-delinquency programs. Packed with detailed coverage of the issues, couched within the “Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Comprehensive Strategy,” this book is a must-read for undergraduate and graduate students, but also very useful for policymakers.

Howell, James C., Barry Krisberg, J. David Hawkins, and John J. Wilson, eds. 1995. Serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders: A sourcebook . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

A compilation of research studies examining serious, chronic, and violent juvenile offenders. Examines patterns and trends, risk factors, and strategies associated with the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention’s Comprehensive Strategy for dealing with these youth.

Loeber, Rolf, and David P. Farrington, eds. 1998. Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Another excellent compilation of studies associated with serious and violent juvenile offenders. Provides detailed information about the issue and ways in which society responds.

Loeber, Rolf, and David P. Farrington, eds. 2001. Child delinquents: Development, intervention, and service needs . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

A comprehensive introduction to research on young delinquents. Coverage of topics ranges from known risk factors to prevention and intervention programs aimed at child delinquents.

Shoemaker, Donald J. 2005. Theories of delinquency: An examination of explanations of delinquent behavior . 5th ed. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

A very good undergraduate- or graduate-level text providing a comprehensive introduction to theories of juvenile delinquency.

Snyder, Howard N., and Melissa Sickmund. 2006. Juvenile offenders and victims: 2006 national report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

A publication from the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention providing facts and figures about American juvenile offending and victimization. The definitive government source for recent figures. Available online .

Tonry, Michael, and Mark H. Moore. 1998. Crime and justice: A review of research . Vol. 24, Youth violence . Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.

A collection of essays from the leaders in the field. This volume focuses specifically on the problem of youth violence.

back to top

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login .

Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here .

• About Criminology »
• Meet the Editorial Board »
• Active Offender Research
• Adler, Freda
• Adversarial System of Justice
• Aging Prison Population, The
• Airport and Airline Security
• Alcohol and Drug Prohibition
• Alcohol Use, Policy and Crime
• Alt-Right Gangs and White Power Youth Groups
• Animals, Crimes Against
• Back-End Sentencing and Parole Revocation
• Bail and Pretrial Detention
• Batterer Intervention Programs
• Bentham, Jeremy
• Big Data and Communities and Crime
• Biosocial Criminology
• Black's Theory of Law and Social Control
• Blumstein, Alfred
• Boot Camps and Shock Incarceration Programs
• Burglary, Residential
• Bystander Intervention
• Capital Punishment
• Chambliss, William
• Chicago School of Criminology, The
• Child Maltreatment
• Chinese Triad Society
• Civil Protection Orders
• Collateral Consequences of Felony Conviction and Imprisonm...
• Collective Efficacy
• Commercial and Bank Robbery
• Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children
• Communicating Scientific Findings in the Courtroom
• Community Change and Crime
• Community Corrections
• Community Disadvantage and Crime
• Community-Based Justice Systems
• Community-Based Substance Use Prevention
• Comparative Criminal Justice Systems
• CompStat Models of Police Performance Management
• Confessions, False and Coerced
• Conservation Criminology
• Consumer Fraud
• Contextual Analysis of Crime
• Control Balance Theory
• Convict Criminology
• Co-Offending and the Role of Accomplices
• Corporate Crime
• Costs of Crime and Justice
• Courts, Drug
• Courts, Juvenile
• Courts, Mental Health
• Courts, Problem-Solving
• Crime and Justice in Latin America
• Crime, Campus
• Crime Control Policy
• Crime Control, Politics of
• Crime, (In)Security, and Islam
• Crime Prevention, Delinquency and
• Crime Prevention, Situational
• Crime Prevention, Voluntary Organizations and
• Crime Trends
• Crime Victims' Rights Movement
• Criminal Career Research
• Criminal Decision Making, Emotions in
• Criminal Justice Data Sources
• Criminal Justice Ethics
• Criminal Justice Fines and Fees
• Criminal Justice Reform, Politics of
• Criminal Justice System, Discretion in the
• Criminal Records
• Criminal Retaliation
• Criminal Talk
• Criminology and Political Science
• Criminology of Genocide, The
• Critical Criminology
• Cross-National Crime
• Cross-Sectional Research Designs in Criminology and Crimin...
• Cultural Criminology
• Cultural Theories
• Cybercrime Investigations and Prosecutions
• Cycle of Violence
• Deadly Force
• Defense Counsel
• Defining "Success" in Corrections and Reentry
• Digital Piracy
• Driving and Traffic Offenses
• Drug Control
• Drug Trafficking, International
• Drugs and Crime
• Elder Abuse
• Electronically Monitored Home Confinement
• Employee Theft
• Environmental Crime and Justice
• Experimental Criminology
• Family Violence
• Fear of Crime and Perceived Risk
• Felon Disenfranchisement
• Feminist Theories
• Feminist Victimization Theories
• Fencing and Stolen Goods Markets
• Firearms and Violence
• Forensic Science
• For-Profit Private Prisons and the Criminal Justice–Indust...
• Gender and Crime
• Gendered Crime Pathways
• General Opportunity Victimization Theories
• Genetics, Environment, and Crime
• Green Criminology
• Halfway Houses
• Harm Reduction and Risky Behaviors
• Hate Crime Legislation
• Healthcare Fraud
• Hirschi, Travis
• History of Crime in the United Kingdom
• History of Criminology
• Homelessness and Crime
• Homicide Victimization
• Honor Cultures and Violence
• Hot Spots Policing
• Human Rights
• Human Trafficking
• Identity Theft
• Immigration, Crime, and Justice
• Incarceration, Mass
• Incarceration, Public Health Effects of
• Income Tax Evasion
• Indigenous Criminology
• Institutional Anomie Theory
• Integrated Theory
• Intermediate Sanctions
• Interpersonal Violence, Historical Patterns of
• Interrogation
• Intimate Partner Violence, Criminological Perspectives on
• Intimate Partner Violence, Police Responses to
• Investigation, Criminal
• Juvenile Delinquency
• Juvenile Justice System, The
• Kornhauser, Ruth Rosner
• Labeling Theory
• Labor Markets and Crime
• Land Use and Crime
• Lead and Crime
• LGBTQ Intimate Partner Violence
• LGBTQ People in Prison
• Life Without Parole Sentencing
• Local Institutions and Neighborhood Crime
• Lombroso, Cesare
• Longitudinal Research in Criminology
• Mandatory Minimum Sentencing
• Mapping and Spatial Analysis of Crime, The
• Mass Media, Crime, and Justice
• Measuring Crime
• Mediation and Dispute Resolution Programs
• Mental Health and Crime
• Merton, Robert K.
• Meta-analysis in Criminology
• Middle-Class Crime and Criminality
• Migrant Detention and Incarceration
• Mixed Methods Research in Criminology
• Money Laundering
• Motor Vehicle Theft
• Multi-Level Marketing Scams
• Murder, Serial
• Narrative Criminology
• National Deviancy Symposia, The
• Nature Versus Nurture
• Neighborhood Disorder
• Neutralization Theory
• New Penology, The
• Offender Decision-Making and Motivation
• Offense Specialization/Expertise
• Organized Crime
• Outlaw Motorcycle Clubs
• Panel Methods in Criminology
• Peacemaking Criminology
• Peer Networks and Delinquency
• Performance Measurement and Accountability Systems
• Personality and Trait Theories of Crime
• Persons with a Mental Illness, Police Encounters with
• Phenomenological Theories of Crime
• Plea Bargaining
• Police Administration
• Police Cooperation, International
• Police Discretion
• Police Effectiveness
• Police History
• Police Militarization
• Police Misconduct
• Police, Race and the
• Police Use of Force
• Police, Violence against the
• Policing and Law Enforcement
• Policing, Body-Worn Cameras and
• Policing, Broken Windows
• Policing, Community and Problem-Oriented
• Policing Cybercrime
• Policing, Evidence-Based
• Policing, Intelligence-Led
• Policing, Privatization of
• Policing, Proactive
• Policing, School
• Policing, Stop-and-Frisk
• Policing, Third Party
• Polyvictimization
• Positivist Criminology
• Pretrial Detention, Alternatives to
• Pretrial Diversion
• Prison Administration
• Prison Classification
• Prison, Disciplinary Segregation in
• Prison Education Exchange Programs
• Prison Gangs and Subculture
• Prison History
• Prison Labor
• Prison Visitation
• Prisoner Reentry
• Prisons, HIV in
• Private Security
• Probation Revocation
• Procedural Justice
• Property Crime
• Prosecution and Courts
• Prostitution
• Psychiatry, Psychology, and Crime: Historical and Current ...
• Psychology and Crime
• Public Criminology
• Public Opinion, Crime and Justice
• Public Order Crimes
• Public Social Control and Neighborhood Crime
• Punishment Justification and Goals
• Qualitative Methods in Criminology
• Queer Criminology
• Race and Sentencing Research Advancements
• Race, Ethnicity, Crime, and Justice
• Racial Threat Hypothesis
• Racial Profiling
• Rape and Sexual Assault
• Rape, Fear of
• Rational Choice Theories
• Rehabilitation
• Religion and Crime
• Restorative Justice
• Risk Assessment
• Routine Activity Theories
• School Bullying
• School Crime and Violence
• School Safety, Security, and Discipline
• Search Warrants
• Seasonality and Crime
• Self-Control, The General Theory:
• Sentencing Enhancements
• Sentencing, Evidence-Based
• Sentencing Guidelines
• Sentencing Policy
• Sex Offender Policies and Legislation
• Sex Trafficking
• Sexual Revictimization
• Situational Action Theory
• Snitching and Use of Criminal Informants
• Social and Intellectual Context of Criminology, The
• Social Construction of Crime, The
• Social Control of Tobacco Use
• Social Control Theory
• Social Disorganization
• Social Learning Theory
• Social Networks
• Social Threat and Social Control
• Solitary Confinement
• South Africa, Crime and Justice in
• Sport Mega-Events Security
• Stalking and Harassment
• State Crime
• State Dependence and Population Heterogeneity in Theories ...
• Strain Theories
• Street Code
• Street Robbery
• Surveillance, Public and Private
• Sutherland, Edwin H.
• Technology and the Criminal Justice System
• Technology, Criminal Use of
• Terrorism and Hate Crime
• Terrorism, Criminological Explanations for
• Testimony, Eyewitness
• Therapeutic Jurisprudence
• Trajectory Methods in Criminology
• Transnational Crime
• Truth-In-Sentencing
• Urban Politics and Crime
• US War on Terrorism, Legal Perspectives on the
• Victimization, Adolescent
• Victimization, Biosocial Theories of
• Victimization Patterns and Trends
• Victimization, Repeat
• Victimization, Vicarious and Related Forms of Secondary Tr...
• Victimless Crime
• Victim-Offender Overlap, The
• Violence Against Women
• Violence, Youth
• Violent Crime
• White-Collar Crime
• White-Collar Crime, The Global Financial Crisis and
• White-Collar Crime, Women and
• Wilson, James Q.
• Wolfgang, Marvin
• Women, Girls, and Reentry
• Wrongful Conviction
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility

Powered by:

• [66.249.64.20|185.66.14.133]
• 185.66.14.133

Juvenile Delinquency

Theory, Research, and the Juvenile Justice Process

• © 2020
• Peter C. Kratcoski 0 ,
• Lucille Dunn Kratcoski 1 ,
• Peter Christopher Kratcoski 2

Sociology/Justice Studies, Kent State University, Tallmadge, USA

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Tallmadge, USA

Williams, Welser & Kratcoski LLC, Kent, USA

Provides an overview of major topics related to Juvenile Delinquency for advanced undergraduate and graduate-level students

Includes quantitative and qualitative research findings, with new interviews and discussions of the experiences of child care professionals and juvenile justice practitioners

Provides an interpretation of theory to practice in the criminal justice system

Explores recent discussion of children as victims, such as non-fault children who are victims of abuse, neglect, and at-risk situations such as violence and bullying

Incorporates international perspectives on juvenile justice and delinquency, in addition to addressing changes in the characteristics of delinquents, changes in laws, and the influence of social media and electronic communications devices on juvenile delinquency

50k Accesses

18 Citations

3 Altmetric

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this book

• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Other ways to access

Licence this eBook for your library

Institutional subscriptions

Table of contents (16 chapters)

Front matter, the transition of child to adult.

• Peter C. Kratcoski, Lucille Dunn Kratcoski, Peter Christopher Kratcoski

Past and Current Bio-Social Perspectives on Delinquency Causation

Social-psychological theories of delinquency, social organization perspectives on delinquency causation, perspectives on interpersonal relationships in the family, perspectives on gangs and peer group influences pertaining to delinquency causation, perspectives on delinquency and violence in the schools, laws and court cases pertaining to children: offenders and victims, perspectives on children as victims of abuse and neglect, the police role in delinquency prevention and control, processing the juvenile offender: diversion, informal handling, and special dockets, the juvenile court process, probation and community-based programs, perspectives on juveniles incarcerated in secure facilities, parole and community supervision, counseling and treatment of juvenile offenders, back matter.

• juvenile delinquency
• juvenile justice
• at-risk children
• at-risk youth
• status offenders
• juvenile court
• family court
• juvenile corrections
• developmental and life-course criminology
• age-crime curve

About this book

Authors and affiliations.

Peter C. Kratcoski

Lucille Dunn Kratcoski

Williams, Welser & Kratcoski LLC, Kent, USA

Peter Christopher Kratcoski

About the authors

Peter Charles Kratcoski earned a PhD in sociology from the Pennsylvania State university, a MA in sociology from the University of Notre Dame and a BA in sociology from King’s College. He taught at St. Thomas College and Pennsylvania State University before assuming the position of assistant professor of sociology at Kent State University. He retired as professor  of  sociology/criminal justice studies and Chairman of the Department of Criminal Justice Studies at Kent State University. He is currently a professor emeritus and adjunct professor at Kent State. He has published many books, book chapters and journal articles in juvenile delinquency, juvenile justice, juvenile victimization and crime prevention as well as completing numerous research  projects   relating to policing, crime prevention, juvenile delinquency prevention and victimization. His most recent publications include author of Correctional Counseling and Treatment (6 th edition) 2017, co-editor of Corruption, Fraud, Organized Crime, and the Shadow Economy, 2016 and co-editor of Perspectives on Elderly Crime and Victimization, 2018.

Lucille Dunn Kratcoski was awarded a  Bachelor of Arts degree  from Marywood College and a Master degree in music from Pennsylvania State University. She has numerous years teaching experience at the elementary, high school and university levels as well as providing private instruction. She co-authored Juvenile Delinquency and a number of book chapters and journal articles on the subject of juvenile delinquency and juvenile justice. In addition to her private practice, she serves as a  Kratcoski Research Associate.

Bibliographic Information

Book Title : Juvenile Delinquency

Book Subtitle : Theory, Research, and the Juvenile Justice Process

Authors : Peter C. Kratcoski, Lucille Dunn Kratcoski, Peter Christopher Kratcoski

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31452-1

Publisher : Springer Cham

eBook Packages : Law and Criminology , Law and Criminology (R0)

Copyright Information : Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Hardcover ISBN : 978-3-030-31451-4 Published: 16 December 2019

Softcover ISBN : 978-3-030-31454-5 Published: 06 January 2021

eBook ISBN : 978-3-030-31452-1 Published: 03 December 2019

Edition Number : 6

Number of Pages : XXVI, 442

Number of Illustrations : 6 b/w illustrations

Additional Information : Originally published by Pearson Education, Inc., Old Tappan, New Jersey, 2003

Topics : Youth Offending and Juvenile Justice , Criminological Theory

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

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

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

• 1(877)219-7556 1(877)733-3925

Fully unique works only

Your privacy is our concern

Writing that is plagiarism free

Free Juvenile Delinquency Essay Sample

Introduction.

The issue of juvenile delinquency has existed in the whole world for a long time. Children often go beyond the limits and boundaries set by parents and other authoritative personnel. Rebellious character in adolescents has always existed because of their exploration and ignorant nature. However, some children constantly participate in disruptive and problematic behaviors that affect them and their family negatively. These children present problems for their family and sometimes for the whole community. The behaviors that children get involved result into crimes because of lack of guidance. This paper looks at the causes of juvenile delinquency and the strategies and interventions that can help prevent juvenile delinquency.

Juvenile delinquency refers to the condition where children commit crimes. The term juvenile refers to people who have not attained adulthood or the age considered legally as an adult in the legal systems of countries. Mostly, the law determines the age of the majority or adulthood. This happens especially in the case of minor crimes. Major crimes can force the court system to try a juvenile as an adult. This happens when a juvenile has committed crimes, such as murder or violence with robbery. This happens in significant situations that may require the judge to sentence the juvenile for life imprisonment.  Delinquency refers to committing offences that the state considers as crimes.

When a child commits crime, their trial happens in a different court system separate from those that try adults who have committed crimes. After the court has proved that a juvenile has committed a crime, the court confines juveniles in prisons specifically created for juveniles. These detention centers are referred to as juvenile detention centers. The court has the responsibility of ascertaining the risk and danger that the juvenile poses to the society. This influences the duration that the court will decide to incarcerate the juvenile. Juvenile court judges possess a greater responsibility especially when it comes to children of a younger age. They have the responsibility of finding the appropriate ways that will help the child not to engage in the same crime or delinquency behavior.

Juvenile delinquency comes because of many factors.  Social, economic and cultural conditions influence the severity or juvenile delinquency occurrences. The causes of juvenile crime occur at each level of the social structure, including the society, social groups, social organizations and interpersonal relations that people share in families and in the society.

Economic factors have become the major cause of juvenile delinquency in the modern-day world. Most juvenile delinquency cases occur in instances where the children suffer from poverty. They engage in crimes because they try to get food or money that can enable them gets their basic needs. The widening of the gap between the rich and the poor has weakened major institutions including the family, public education and public assistance. These have opened ways for children to engage in crimes. Sometimes parents encourage their children to commit crimes so that they can get food and other necessities.

Cultural factors also cause delinquent behavior. It occurs in settings where the norms for societal values and acceptable behavior have broken down. Under these circumstances, many of the rules that the society has set to control crimes from occurring or to deter people from committing crimes may fail and lose their relevance in the society. In situations like these, children respond to threatening and disparaging changes in the social certainty by engaging in insubordinate and criminal activities because of failure in the legal systems.

The likelihood of juvenile delinquency occurring in such situations depends not only on the failure of the legal opportunities but also on access to illegal opportunities.

Urbanization has also caused juvenile delinquency. Research evidence shows that urbanized countries register high-crime rates juvenile delinquencies included.  This attributes to the differences in social control and social cohesion. The process of urbanization in developed countries contributes to the rate of juvenile involvement in crime. The features that exist in the urban environment foster the establishment of new forms of social behavior that occur mainly from weakened social relations and the increase of reliance on media.

Urbanization has made parents busy with work an issue that does not give them time to spent with their children and teach them morality. In most cases, children remain at home with their elder siblings or with house helps. Therefore, children grow without the advice and guidance that they require in life. Because of this failure in the parent to child relationship, children may engage in crimes and unwanted behavior because of lack of morality. They may also do this to attract the attention of their parents.

Individual risk factors also cause juvenile delinquency. A child who has a low intelligence and who has not received education has high chances of getting involved in delinquent behavior.  Impulsive behavior and uncontrolled aggression can lead to juvenile delinquency. When a child does not know the ways of controlling their anger, they can engage in delinquent behavior as a form of revenge. Uncontrolled anger can make a child kill. Therefore, children who have no knowledge on the effects of uncontrolled aggression can engage in juvenile delinquency.

Inability to delay gratification among juveniles has also become one of the common causes of juvenile delinquency. Whenever the child feels that, he or she needs to satisfy their aggression they can do anything to ensure that happens. This may make them steal or rob to get what they desire. Therefore, multiple individual risk factors make juveniles involve themselves in harmful and illegal activities that may attract detention.

Substance abuse also causes juveniles to engage in illegal activities. With the spread of drug and substance abuse and the availability of drugs and substances, have increased cases of juvenile delinquency. In the current world today, the number of children abusing substances and drugs has increased considerably.  This increase can be attributed to the failure of family institutions, availability of drugs and parental influence. The use of substances and drugs motivate children to engage in illegal activities that may help them get access to the drugs. The people providing the children with drugs and substances ay force the children to steal something for them so that they can get the drugs. The children may also engage in illegal activity, for instance, stealing so that they can get money to buy the drugs and substance. Sometimes when the children abuse drugs and substances, they get the motivation to do anything that their mind tells them to do. It makes them careless and thus engages in delinquent behaviors.

The search for identification can also lead to juvenile delinquency. This happens especially in the adolescent age. Many teenagers in the adolescent stage try new things and strive to please others and prove that they have worth. When peer pressure combines with the search of identification, juvenile delinquency becomes obvious. Adolescents can do anything to belong to certain groups or feel a part of a group. When their counterparts engage in delinquent behaviors, they can accept to participate as long as they attract the attention of their peers. This makes teenagers engage in delinquent behaviors for the personal gain they get out of the experience. Teenagers can break rules and regulations at this point without thinking of the detrimental consequences that may come out of it. They think of the things they gain out of that experience as essential than the consequences.

Juvenile delinquency causes suffering to the child, the family of the offender, as well as the victims of the act. When juveniles get incarcerated in juvenile detention centers, they go through mental and psychological torture. When in detention, they do not get to see their parents, siblings and friends often. Every child needs the love and care of their parents and the attention of friends and siblings. Freedom plays a significant role to the development of children. Therefore, when they miss these essential aspects in their early lives, they suffer.

Our features

300 words per page instead of 280

Free revision (on demand)

Discount system

Affiliate program

VIP services

Round-the-clock support

Parents suffer the agony of leaving without their children knowing that the actions that their children got into made them get into jail. Parents suffer because of the shame that the child has put them through and the fact that their child may experience a difficult time in the detention center.  This makes some parents plead with the court judges to let their children serve their term through home detention. Some opt for split sentencing, so that their children can serve part of their term in detention centers and part of it at home.

The victims of juvenile delinquency suffer the effects of the act. Victims suffer the effects of injuries that the juveniles might have inflicted on them. This may make them spent a lot of money in hospital bills. Victims of juvenile delinquency loss their property and incur many losses. This happens especially when juveniles engage in robbery and stealing activities. They can steal money or property worth a lot of money. Juvenile delinquency can also cause deaths. This happens because juveniles can use guns or other objects that can injure victims and even kill them.

The history of juvenile justice in America traces back to the late nineteenth century.  By 1909, much had changed with regard to juvenile justice. It marked the period when Julian mark, a judge in Harvard proposed that juvenile offenders be treated the way a father treats his children when they engage in the wrong behavior.  In 1960s, the rehabilitative model started to thrive. In 1967, the Supreme Court gave youths the permission to have an attorney during their trial.  In 1968, the congress passed the juvenile delinquency prevention act that got strength from the juvenile and delinquency act in 1974. However, this progress met a blow when conservative politicians ridiculed the system citing the increase in juvenile and youth crimes.

In the 1990s, legislators enacted tough policies in various legislative structures that could apply in juvenile courts. These legislatures reduced the age of juvenile transfer to allow prosecution of children of about fourteen years and younger. Some legislation resulted to the transfer of youths to adult prisons involving specific cases. However, the contemporary juvenile justice system law attracted politics that do not offer a sound regime. The fact that law reforms have been flawed which made the policies anomalous, as a form of legal regulation has not answered the question of whether criminalization of juvenile justice should be seen as a deficient or efficient legal activity.

The stakeholders involved in the juvenile justice system include juvenile court judges. They make the final decision whether a juvenile has committed a crime. A judge also incarcerates a juvenile incase he is found guilty. Attorneys have the responsibility of helping juveniles to prove their innocence. Sociologists and legislators have the responsibility of making major changes to juvenile laws and legislation. Sometimes psychologists and counselors can function as stakeholders in juvenile courts to decide whether the child who has committed a crime has the right mental capacity.

Several strategies and interventions formulated to prevent juvenile delinquency exist. Violence against children imperils their human rights. Therefore, it requires that communities put aside, time, resources and expertise in order to address the issue of juvenile delinquency.

A number of United Nations instruments that address juvenile delinquency issues advocate for a social way of addressing juvenile delinquency rather than the judicial system. Early phase intervention represents the best measure to prevent juvenile delinquency. This involves making individuals, groups and organizational effort that can prevent children and teenagers from breaking the law. Different ways of preventing children and teenagers from breaking the law exist. Some measures focus on punitive ways of preventing juvenile crime. This involves scaring potential law offenders by making them aware of the possibility of a severe punishment in case they commit crimes. It may also involve taking action to prevent recurrent crime by explaining to juveniles the negative aspects of committing an offence. It may also involve reconciling offenders with their victims. 

Early phase prevention may entail offering adolescents with more ways of generating money. This might involve offering them professional training, education, assistance in starting and organizing businesses and arranging new workplaces for them. These strategies can help prevent teenagers and youth from engaging in delinquent behavior. The disadvantage with this strategy involves the fact that it necessitates a lot of capital and commitment. It also requires that the youth receive regular advice on how to manage their work or businesses.

Recreation and youth assistance and development activities that interest the youth can help them move away from delinquent behavior. These activities make them active and offer them a chance to participate in self-building activities that give them no time to think about committing crimes.

Another way may involve changing an urban environment. This involves altering the physical features and the architectural design and providing opportunities to engage the interest of young people. People can do this by establishing more leisure and recreational activities and introducing a number of positive evening activities for the youth.  Despite the fact that this option could help solve the issue of juvenile delinquency remarkably, it requires a lot of money and support. If people do not have money and cannot offer assistance to the youth, it can fail considerably.

Another way of preventing juvenile delinquency requires the involvement of the whole society. This means that all members of the society should work together to restore the failed social institutions and the values of the community. This may call for involvement of religion and advice from the elderly. People may decide to incorporate values to the societal system that prevents juveniles from engaging in crime. The disadvantage with this intervention strategy involves the fact that it requires a lot of obligation and investment in terms of duration and personal interest.

The society can also initiate institutional programs that provide social and psychological support for the youth that gives them hope to avoid getting in to crime. The most essential thing that the youth and teenagers need so that they do not engage in juvenile delinquency involves advice, support, education and economic empowerment. All these help the youth not to engage in juvenile delinquency actions.

Juvenile delinquency affects the society in many ways. It comes mainly because of failure in the social and economic systems, in the society. Juvenile delinquency requires that people in the society join forces to prevent it from happening. Provision of advice and economic empowerment can really help to prevent occurrences of juvenile delinquencies.

Have NO Inspiration to write your essay?

Ask for Professional help

Search Free Essay

Please note!

Some text in the modal.

Juvenile Delinquency Research Paper

This sample juvenile delinquency research paper features: 6300 words (approx. 21 pages), an outline, and a bibliography with 76 sources. Browse other research paper examples for more inspiration. If you need a thorough research paper written according to all the academic standards, you can always turn to our experienced writers for help. This is how your paper can get an A! Feel free to contact our writing service for professional assistance. We offer high-quality assignments for reasonable rates.

Introduction

Juveniles placed in institutions, creation of the juvenile court, influence of positivism, the emergence of sociological theory, peers and gangs, the use of drugs and its relationship to delinquent behavior, biological explanations of delinquent behavior, psychological explanations of delinquent behavior, sociological explanations of delinquent behavior, is delinquent behavior rational, developmental paths of delinquency, human agency and delinquency across the life course, gender and delinquent behavior, delinquency prevention.

• Bibliography

Juvenile delinquency—crimes committed by young people—constitute, by recent estimates, nearly one fifth of the crimes against people and one-third of the property crimes in the United States. The high incidence of juvenile crime makes the study of juvenile delinquency vital to an understanding of American society. The Uniform Crime Reports, juvenile court statistics, cohort studies, self-report studies, and victimization surveys are the major sources of data used to measure the extent and nature of delinquent behavior. These forms of examination have generally agreed on the following findings:

Academic Writing, Editing, Proofreading, And Problem Solving Services

Get 10% off with 24start discount code.

• Juvenile delinquency is widespread in the United States.
• The majority of youths have committed some form of delinquency during their adolescent years.
• Three out of four juvenile arrests are arrests of males.
• Lower-class youths tend to commit more frequent and serious offenses than do higher-class youths.
• Minority youths, especially African American, tend to commit more serious delinquent acts than do white youths.

The number of juvenile homicides has been going down since the mid-1990s. Philip J. Cook and John Laub (1998) found that a changing context, as well as a more limited availability of guns, helped explain the reduced rate of juvenile homicides. Cook and Laub predicted that this changing context would continue to decrease youth homicides in the immediate future. Cook and Jens Ludwig (2004) and Anthony A. Braga (2003) also identified the high correlation between gun ownership and juvenile homicides.

The study of juvenile delinquency is full of conflicting positions. There are those who believe that this area of study should be limited to the theories of why juveniles become involved with crime. Others contend that the study of delinquency also ought to include the environmental influences on juvenile crime, such as the family, school, peer and gang participation, and drug involvements. Still others conclude that the study of delinquency should include the social control of juvenile crime, as well as causation theories and environmental influences.

The study of delinquency has clearly changed over the years. Throughout the twentieth century, delinquency studies became more interdisciplinary, more concerned about the integration with other theories, more methodologically sophisticated, and more focused on long-term follow-up of juveniles, sometimes for several decades. The importance of human agency and delinquency across the life course, both of which rose in theoretical importance during the 1990s, are generating considerable excitement in the early years of the twenty-first century.

The main concerns of this research paper are the origins of the study of delinquency; the emergence of sociological theory; the environmental influences on delinquency; the biological, psychological, and sociological theories that have influenced the field of delinquency; the interdisciplinary theories that are affecting the study of juvenile delinquency; and the prospects for future developments.

Origins of the Study of Juvenile Delinquency

What to do with wayward juveniles has long been a concern of American society. Before the end of the eighteenth century, the family was believed to be the source of cause of deviancy, and therefore, the idea emerged that perhaps the well-adjusted family could provide the model for a correctional institution for children. The house of refuge, the first juvenile institution, reflected the family model wholeheartedly; it was designed to bring the order, discipline, and care of the family into institutional life. The institution was to become the home, the peers, the siblings, the staff, and the parents (Rothman 1971).

The New York House of Refuge, which opened on January 1, 1825, with six girls and three boys, is generally acknowledged as the first house of refuge. Over the next decade, Bangor, Boston, Chicago, Cincinnati, Mobile, Philadelphia, and Richmond followed suit in establishing houses of refuge. Twenty-three schools were chartered in the 1830s and another 30 in the 1840s. Some houses of refuge were established by private agencies, some by state governments or legislatures, and some jointly by public authorities and private organizations (Rothman 1971).

One of the changes in juvenile institutions throughout the remainder of the nineteenth century was the development of the cottage system. Eventually called “training schools” or “industrial schools,” these institutions would house smaller groups of youths in separate buildings, usually no more than 20–40 youths per cottage. House parents, typically a man and his wife, constituted the staff in these cottages. Early cottages were log cabins; later cottages were constructed from brick or stone.

Barbara M. Brenzel’s (1983) study of the State Industrial School for Girls in Lancaster, Massachusetts, the first state reform school for girls in the United States, revealed the growing disillusionment in the mid- to late nineteenth century regarding training schools. Intended as a model reform effort, Lancaster was the first “familystyle” institution in the United States and embodied new theories about the reformation of youths. However, an “examination of a reform institution during the second half of the nineteenth century reveals the evolution from reformist visions and optimistic goals at mid-century to pessimism and ‘scientific’ determinism at the century’s close” (p. 1). Brenzel added that “the mid-century ideal of rehabilitative care changed to the principle of rigid training and custodial care by the 1880s and remained so into the early twentieth century” (pp. 4–5).

During the final decades of the nineteenth century, the Progressive Reformers viewed childhood as a period of dependency and exclusion from the adult world. To institutionalize childhood, they enacted a number of “child saving” laws, including child labor and compulsory school attendance laws. The juvenile court was viewed as another means to achieve unparalleled age segregation of children (Feld 1999). The following are a number of contextual factors that influenced the creation of this court.

Legal Context

The juvenile court was founded in Cook County (Chicago), Illinois, in 1899, when the Illinois legislature passed the Juvenile Court Act, and later that year was established in Denver, Colorado. The parens patriae doctrine provided a legal catalyst for the creation of the juvenile court, furnishing a rationale for use of informal procedures for dealing with juveniles and for expanding state power over the lives of children.

Political Context

In the Child Savers, Anthony Platt (1977) developed the political context of the origin of the juvenile court. He stated that the juvenile court was established in Chicago and later elsewhere because it satisfied several middleclass interest groups. He saw the juvenile court as an expression of middle-class values and of the philosophy of conservative political groups. In denying that the juvenile court was revolutionary, Platt charged that

the child-saving movement was not so much a break with the past as an affirmation of faith in traditional institutions. . . . What seemingly began as a movement to humanize the lives of adolescents soon developed into a program of moral absolutism through which youths were to be saved from movies, pornography, cigarettes, alcohol, and anything else which might possibly rob them of their innocence. (Pp. 98–99)

Economic Context

Platt (1977) argued that the behaviors that the child savers selected to be penalized—such as roaming the streets, drinking, fighting, engaging in sex, frequenting dance halls, and staying out late at night—were found primarily among lower-class children. Accordingly, juvenile justice from it inception, he contended, reflected class favoritism that resulted in the frequent processing of poor children through the system while middle- and upper-class children were more likely to be excused.

Sociocultural Context

The social conditions that were present during the final decades of the nineteenth century were the catalysts that led to the founding of the juvenile court. One social condition was that citizens became increasingly incensed by the treatment of children, especially the policy of jailing children with adults. Another social condition was that the higher status given middle-class women made them interested in exerting their newfound influence to improve the lives of children (Faust and Brantingham 1974).

These pressures for social change took place in the midst of a wave of optimism that swept through the United States during the Progressive Era, the period from 1899 to 1920. The emerging social sciences assured reformers that their problems with delinquents could be solved through positivism. According to positivism, youths were not responsible for their behavior and required treatment rather than punishment.

The concept of the juvenile court spread rapidly across the United States; by 1928, only two states did not have a juvenile court statute. In Cook County, the amendments that followed the original act brought the neglected, the dependent, and the delinquent together under one roof. The “delinquent” category comprised both status offenders and actual violators of criminal law.

Urban juveniles courts, especially, had clinics that provided psychological services for those youths referred to them by the juvenile court. Those who provided such services in the clinics were psychiatrists, clinical psychologists, or psychiatric social workers. The treatment modality that was frequently used was various versions of Freudian psychoanalysis. Typically, in a one-to-one relationship with a therapist, youths in trouble were encouraged to talk about past conflicts that caused them to express emotional problems through aggressive or antisocial behavior. The insights that youths gained from this psychotherapy were intended to help them resolve the conflicts and unconscious needs that drove them to crime. As a final step of psychotherapy, youths would become responsible for their behaviors.

From the second decade of the twentieth century, the Chicago School of Sociology developed a sociological approach to delinquency that differed greatly from that found in psychological positivism. The intellectual movement of social disorganization theory came out of this Chicago school. To William I. Thomas and Florian Znaniecki (1927), social disorganization reflected the influence of an urban, industrial setting on the ability of immigrant subcultures, particularly parents, to socialize and effectively control their children. S. P. Breckinridge and Edith Abbott (1970) contributed the idea of plotting “delinquency maps.” Frederick M. Thrasher (1927) viewed the youth gang as a substitute socializing institution whose function was to provide order, or social organization where there was none, or social disorganization.

Clifford R. Shaw and Henry D. McKay extended social disorganization by focusing specifically on the social characteristics of the community as a cause of delinquency. Their pioneering investigations established that delinquency varied in inverse proportion to the distance from the center of the city, that it varied inversely with socioeconomic status, and that delinquency rates in a residential area persisted regardless of changes in racial and ethic composition of the area (Reiss 1976).

Shaw and McKay viewed juvenile delinquency as resulting from the breakdown of social control among the traditional primary groups, such as the family and the neighborhood, because of the social disorganization of the community. Urbanization, rapid industrialization, and immigration processes contributed to the disorganization of the community. Thus, delinquent behavior became an alternative mode of socialization through which youths who grew up in disorganized communities were attracted to deviant lifestyles (Finestone 1976).

Shaw and McKay turned to ecology to show this relationship between social disorganization and delinquency. Shaw (1929) reported that marked variations of school truancy, juvenile delinquency, and adult criminality existed among different areas in Chicago. Shaw found that the nearer a given locality was to the center of the city, the higher its rates of delinquency and crime. Shaw further found that areas of concentrated crime maintained their high rates over a long period, even when the composition of the population changed markedly. Shaw and McKay (1931), in a study performed for the National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, reported that this basic ecological finding was also true for a number of other cities.

In their classic work Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas, Shaw and McKay (1942) developed these ecological insights in greater scope and depth. They studied males who were brought into the Cook County juvenile court on delinquency charges in 1900–1906, 1917–1923, and 1927–1933. Over this 33-year period, they discovered that the vast majority of the delinquent boys came from either an area adjacent to the central business and industrial areas or along two forks of the Chicago River. Then, applying Burgess’s concentric zone hypothesis of urban growth, they measured delinquency rates by zone and by areas within the zone. They found that in all three periods, the highest rates of delinquency were in Zone I (the central city), the next highest in Zone II (next to the central city), in progressive steps outward to the lowest in Zone V. Significantly, although the delinquency rates changed from one period to the next, the relationship among the different zones remained constant, even though in some neighborhoods the ethnic compositions of the population changed totally.

Shaw and McKay eventually refocused their analysis from the influence of social disorganization of the community to the importance of economics on high rates of delinquency. They found that the economic and occupational structure of the larger society was more influential in the rise of delinquent behavior than was the social life of the local community. They concluded that the reason members of lower-class groups remained in the inner-city community was less a reflection of their newness of arrival and their lack of acculturation to American institutions than it was a function of their class position in society (Finestone 1976).

Environmental Influences on Juvenile Delinquency

The importance of the Shaw and McKay tradition of the environment and community has long remained in the study of delinquency. An examination of the relationship between the family and delinquency, school performance and delinquency, drug use and delinquency, and participation in gangs and delinquency are generally found in studies of environmental influences on delinquency.

In the midst of conflicting findings about the relationship between delinquency and the family, the following observations have received wide support:

• Family conflict and poor marital adjustment are more likely to lead to delinquency than the structural breakup of the family (Loeber and Stouthamer-Loeber 1986).
• Children who have delinquent siblings or criminal parents seem to be more prone to delinquent behavior than those who do not (Lauritsen 1993).
• Rejected children appear to be more prone to delinquent behavior than those who have not been rejected. Children who have experienced severe rejection are more likely to become involved in delinquent behavior than those who have experienced a lesser degree of rejection (Loeber and Stouthamer-Loeber 1986).
• Consistency of discipline within the family appears to be important in deterring delinquent behavior (McCord, McCord, and Zola 1959).
• The rate of delinquency seems to increase with the number of unfavorable factors in the home. Thus, multiple handicaps within the family are associated with a higher probability of juvenile delinquency than are single handicaps (Loeber and Stouthamer-Loeber 1986).

Studies have found that the school is a critical context, or arena, of learning delinquent behavior. For example, Eugene Maguin and Rolf Loeber’s (1996) meta-analysis found that “children with lower academic performance offended more frequently, committed more serious and violent offenses, and persisted in their offending” (p. 15).

The extent of delinquency in the school, including vandalism, violence, gangs, and the use of drugs, has received considerable examination (Bartollas 2006). The consequences of dropping out of school have also been investigated (Jarjoura 1993). In addition, there have been a number of efforts to improve the quality of the school experience. The development of alternative schools, the process of designing effective school-based violenceprevention programs, and the process of developing more positive school-community relationships have been three of the most promising intervention strategies in the school setting (Bartollas 2006).

Researchers usually agree that most delinquent behavior, particularly more violent forms, takes place in groups, but they disagree on the quality of relationships within delinquent groups and on the influence of groups on delinquent behavior (Breckinridge and Abbott 1970; Piper 1985). There is still debate on several theoretical questions about groups and delinquency: How do delinquent peers influence each other? What causes the initial attraction to delinquent groups? What do delinquents receive from these friendships that result in continuing them?

Youth gangs represent one of the most serious forms of delinquency groups. Frederick Thrasher’s (1927) definition of gangs is still one of the best definitions:

A gang is an interstitial group originally formed spontaneously and then integrated through conflict. It is characterized by the following types of behavior: meeting face to face, milling, movement through space as a unit, conflict and planning. The result of this collective behavior is the development of tradition, unreflective, internal structure, esprit de corps, solidarity, morale, group awareness, and attachment to local territory. (P. 57)

Juveniles are involved in urban street gangs, where they are typically a minority of the membership. However, they make up nearly the total membership of emerging gangs that spread across the United States in the late 1980s and early 1990s. What has received considerable documentation is that law-violating behaviors increase with gang activities, that core members are involved in more serious delinquent acts than are fringe members, and that gang activities contribute to a pattern of violent behavior (Wolfgang, Thornberry, and Figlio 1987; Battin-Pearson et al. 1998; Miller 2001; Miller and Decker 2001).

Drug and alcohol use and juvenile delinquency have been identified as the most serious problem behaviors of juveniles. The good news is that substance abuse among adolescents has dropped significantly since the late 1970s. The bad news is that drug use has significantly increased among high-risk youths and is becoming commonly linked to juvenile delinquency (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2004; Johnston et al. 2004). In addition, more adolescents are selling drugs than ever before in the history of this nation. Moreover, the spread of AIDS within populations of drug users and their sex partners promises to make the problem of substance abuse even more difficult to control.

The Biological, Psychological, and Sociological Theories

A number of theoretical answers have been given to the continually raised question: Why do juveniles commit crime? Early in the twentieth century, biological and psychological causes of delinquent behavior received more attention. In the last two-thirds of the twentieth century, sociological explanations to delinquency behavior received greater support with students of delinquency.

The belief in a biological explanation for criminality has a long history. Early approaches attempted to pinpoint the source of criminality in physical anomalities (Lombroso-Ferrero 1972), genealogical deficiencies (Shah and Roth 1974), and theories of human somatotypes or body types (Glueck and Glueck 1956; Cortes 1972). More recently, research has stressed the interaction between the biological factors within an individual and the influence of the particular environment. Supporters of this form of biological positivism claim that what produces delinquent behavior, like other behaviors, is a combination of genetic traits and social conditions. Recent advances in experimental behavior genetics, human population genetics, knowledge of the biochemistry of the nervous system, experimental and clinical endocrinology and neurophysiology, and other related areas have led to more sophisticated knowledge of the way in which the environment and human genetics interact to affect the growth, development, and functioning of the human organism (Shah and Roth 1974; Fishbein 1990).

Psychological factors have long been popular in the positivist approach to the cause of juvenile delinquency because the very nature of parens patriae philosophy requires treatment of youths who are involved in various forms of delinquency. Psychoanalytic (Freudian) theory was first used with delinquents, but more recently other behavioral and humanistic schools of psychology have been applied to the problem of the illegal behaviors of juveniles. For example, some researchers in the 1980s and 1990s addressed the relationship between sensation seeking and crime (White, Labouvie, and Bates 1985; Fishbein 1990). Jack Katz’s (1988) Seductions of Crime conjectures that when individuals commit crime, they become involved in “an emotional process—seductions and compulsions that have special dynamics” (p. 9). It is this “magical” and “transformative” experience that makes crime “sensible,” even “sensually compelling.” James Q. Wilson and Richard Herrnstein’s (1985) Crime and Human Nature is another example of the influence of psychological factors on criminal or delinquent behaviors. They consider potential causes of crime and noncrime within the context of reinforcement theory, that is, the theory that behavior is governed by its consequent rewards and punishments, as reflected in the history of the individual. The rewards of crime, according to Wilson and Herrnstein (1985), are found in the form of material gain, revenge against an enemy, peer approval, and sexual gratification. The consequences of crime include pangs of conscience, disapproval of peers, revenge by the victim, and, most important, the possibility of punishment.

Sociological theories related to delinquency causation have been grouped in a number of ways; the following sections will group them in structural theories of delinquency causation, process theories of delinquency causation, reaction theories of delinquency causation, and integrated theories of delinquency causation.

Structural Theories of Delinquency Causation

The setting for delinquency, as proposed by social structural theories, is the social and cultural environment in which juveniles grow up or the subcultural groups in which they choose to become involved. Using official statistics as their guide, these analysts claim that such forces as social disorganization, cultural deviance, status frustration, and social mobility are so powerful that they induce youths, especially lower-class ones, to become involved in delinquent behavior. Strain theory is a structural theory that has been widely applied to explaining delinquent behavior. Robert K. Merton’s theory of anomie, Albert K. Cohen’s theory of delinquent subcultures, and Richard A. Cloward and Lloyd E. Ohlin’s opportunity theory are the most widely cited strain theories. Merton (1957) examined how deviant behavior is produced by different social structures. His primary aim was to discover how some social structures exerted pressure upon individuals in the society to engage in nonconforming rather than conforming behavior. Cohen’s (1955) thesis in his book Delinquent Boys: The Culture of the Gang was that lower-class youths are actually protesting against the goals of middle-class culture, but they experience status frustration, or strain, because they are unable to attain these goals. Cloward and Ohlin (1960) conceptualized success and status as separate strivings that can operate independently of each other. They portrayed delinquents who seek an increase in status as striving for membership in the middle class, whereas other delinquent youths try to improve their economic post without changing their class position.

Social Process Theories of Delinquency Causation

Social process theories of delinquency causation examine the interactions between individuals and the environment that influence them to become involved in delinquent behaviors. Differential association, drift, and social control theories became popular in the 1960s because they provided a theoretical mechanism for the translation of environmental factors into individual motivation. Edwin H. Sutherland’s (1947) formulation of differential association theory proposes that delinquents learn crime from others. His basic premise was that delinquency, like any other form of behavior, is a product of social interaction. In developing the theory of differential association, Sutherland contended that individuals are constantly being changed as they take on the expectations and points of view of the people with whom they interact in small, intimate groups. The process of becoming a delinquent, David Matza (1964) says, begins when an adolescent neutralizes himself or herself from the moral bounds of the law and drifts into delinquency. Drift, according to Matza, means that “the delinquent transiently exists in limbo between convention and crime, responding in turn to the demands of each, flirting now with one, now the other, but postponing commitment, evading decision. Thus he drifts between criminal and conventional action” (p. 28). Walter C. Reckless’s (1961) control theory is based on the assumption that strong inner containment and reinforcing external containment provide insulation against deviant behavior. Travis Hirschi’s (1967) Causes of Delinquency linked delinquent behavior to the quality of the bond an individual maintains with society, stating that “delinquent acts result when an individual’s bond to society is weak or broken” (p. 16). He argues that humans’ basic impulses motivate them to become involved in crime and delinquency unless there is reason for them to refrain from such behavior.

Social Reaction Theories of Delinquency Causation

Labeling theory, symbolic interactionst theory of delinquency, and conflict theory can be viewed as social reaction theories of delinquency causation because they focus on the role that social and economic groups and institutions have in producing delinquent behavior. The labeling perspective, whose peak of popularity was in the 1960s and 1970s, is based on the premise that society creates deviance by labeling those who are different from other individuals, when in fact they are different merely because they have been tagged with a deviant label part played by social audiences and their responses to the norm violations of juveniles (Tannenbaum 1938; Lemert 1951; Becker 1963; Triplett and Jarjoura 1994). Ross L. Matsueda (1992) and Karen Heimer (1995) have developed a symbolic interactionist theory of delinquency. This interactionist perspective “presupposes that the social order is the product of an ongoing process of social interaction and communication” (Matsueda 1992:1580). What is “of central importance is the process by which shared meanings, behavioral expectations, and reflected appraisals are built up in interaction and applied to behavior” (p. 1580). The conflict perspective views social control as an outcome of the differential distribution of economic and political power in society; thus, laws are seen as creation by the powerful for their own benefit (Shichor 1980). Conflict criminology has a great deal of variation; some theories emphasize the importance of socioeconomic class, some focus primarily on power and authority relationships, and others emphasize group and cultural conflict.

Integrated Theory

The theoretical development of integrated explanations of delinquency in the 1980s and 1990s has made a significant contribution to the understanding of delinquent behavior. Theory integration usually implies the combination of two or more existing theories on the basis of their perceived commonalities. Three of the better-known integrated theories are Michael R. Gottfredson and Travis Hirschi’s (1990) general theory of crime; Delbert S. Elliot, Suzanne A. Ageton, and Rachelle J. Canter’s (1979) integrated social process theory; and Terence P. Thornberry’s (1987) interactional theory.

In A General Theory of Crime, Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990) define lack of self-control as the common factor underlying problem behaviors. Thus, self-control is the degree to which an individual is “vulnerable to the temptations of the moment.” The other pivotal construct in this theory of crime is crime opportunity, which is a function of the structural or situational circumstances encountered by the individuals (Grasmick et al. 1993).

Elliott et al. (1979) offer “an explanatory model that expands and synthesizes traditional strain, social control, and social learning perspectives into a single paradigm that accounts for delinquent behavior and drug use” (p. 11). They argue that all three theories are flawed in explaining delinquent behavior. Integrating the strongest features of these theories into a single theoretical model, Elliott and colleagues theorize that there is a high probability of involvement in delinquent behavior when bonding to delinquent groups is combined with weak bonding to conventional groups. In Thornberry’s interaction theory of delinquency, the initial impetus toward delinquency comes from a weaning of the person’s bond to conventional society, represented by attachment to parents, commitment to school, and belief in conventional values. Associations with delinquent peers and delinquent values make up the social settling in which delinquency, especially prolonged serious delinquency, is learned and reinforced. These two variables, along with delinquent behavior itself, form a mutually reinforcing casual loop that leads toward increasing delinquency involvement over time (Thornberry 1987, 1989; Thornberry et al. 2003) (Table 1).

     Table 1

In the 1970s and 1980s, a variety of academic areas, including the sociology of deviance, criminology, economics, and cognitive psychology, began to view crime as the outcome of rational choices and decisions. The ecological tradition in criminology and the economic theory of markets, especially, have applied the notion of rational choice to crime.

Rational choice theory, borrowed primarily from the utility model in economics, was one area of intense interest during the 1980s and 1990s, especially within criminology, sociology, political science, and law. Rational choice theory, an extension of the deterrence doctrine of the classical school, includes incentives as well as deterrents and focuses on the calculation of payoffs and costs before delinquent and criminal acts are committed (Cornish and Clarke 1986; Akers 1990).

An analysis of delinquent behavior leads to the conclusion that antisocial behavior often appears rational and purposeful. Some delinquents clearly engage in delinquent behavior because of the low cost or risk of such behavior. The low risk comes from the parens patriae philosophy that is based on the presumption of innocence for the very young, as well as of reduced responsibility for those up to their midadolescence. Thus, in early adolescence, the potential costs of all but the most serious forms of delinquent behavior are relatively slight.

Conclusion and Prospects for the 21st Century

The development of both sociology and juvenile delinquency was influenced by the rise of the Chicago School of Sociology early in the twentieth century. With this common background, it is not surprising that juvenile delinquency has been so closely related to the discipline of sociology. Juvenile delinquency has been taught in the majority of sociology departments, as well as in many criminology or criminal justice programs in university settings and community colleges. The study of juvenile delinquency is further indebted to sociology because so many of the theories of delinquency causation are sociological theories of crime. Even though the study of juvenile delinquency has become interdisciplinary, sociological principles and theories remain critical in understanding the field of delinquency. Indeed, the new trends in delinquency, such as human agency and delinquency across the life course, are adapted from theoretical and empirical contributions largely taken from the field of sociology.

The prospects for the study of delinquency in the twenty-first century are vibrant and exciting.

Some of the emphases that will guide the study of delinquency are the examination of the development paths of delinquent behavior, a continued examination of human agency and delinquency across the life course, an investigation of the ways in which gender affects the study of delinquency, and a renewed search for more effective means of delinquency prevention.

One of the most exciting aspects about the study of juvenile delinquency today is the increasing number of developmental studies that have followed youth cohorts for a few years or even decades. One of the most widely respected of these studies is the research done by Terrie E. Moffitt and colleagues. For example, Moffitt, Donald R. Lynam, and Phil A. Silva’s (1994) examination of the neuropsychological status of several hundred New Zealand males between the ages of 13 and 18 found that poor neuropsychological scores “were associated with early onset of delinquency” but were “unrelated to delinquency that began in adolescence” (p. 277). Moffitt’s (1993) developmental theory views delinquency as proceeding along two developmental paths. On one path, children develop a lifelong path of delinquency and crime as early as age 3. They may begin to bite and hit shoplift and be truant at age 10, sell drugs and steal cars at age 16, rob and rape at age 22, and commit fraud and child abuse at age 30. These “life-course-persistent” (LCP) delinquents, according to Moffitt, continue their illegal acts throughout the conditions and situations they face. During childhood, they may also exhibit such neuropsychological problems as deficit disorders or hyperactivity and learning problems in schools.

On the other path, the majority of delinquents begin offending during the adolescent years and desist from delinquent behaviors around the 18th birthday. Moffitt refers to these youthful offenders as “adolescent-limited” (AL) delinquents. The early and persistent problems found with members of the LCP group are not found with the AL delinquents. Yet the frequency of offending and even the violence of offending during the adolescent years may be as high as the LCP. Moffitt notes that the AL antisocial behavior is learned from peers and sustained through peerbased rewards and reinforcements. AL delinquents continue in delinquent acts as long as such behaviors appear profitable or rewarding to them, but they have the ability to abandon those behaviors when prosocial styles become more rewarding (Moffitt 1993; Moffitt et al. 2001).

This enormous database of these developmental studies has contributed to the examination of such subjects as the importance of human agency in the lives of youths and later when they become adults and to delinquency or crime across the life course. Human agency refers to the importance given to juveniles who are not only acted upon by social influence and structural constraints but who make choices and decisions based on the alternatives that they see before them. Symbolic interactionism and life history studies have long acknowledged the importance of agency and rationality, and rational choice and routine activities research have more recently placed an importance on rationality in delinquent and criminal behavior. However, it has been the increased attention given to the life course in both sociology and delinquency studies that has sparked a dramatic resurgence of interest in agency in contemporary research.

The various perspectives on the life course relate individuals to their broader social context, but within the constraints of their world, individuals make choices among options that are available to them. It is these decisions that are so important in constructing their life course. Delinquency across the life course has been examined extensively by Robert J. Sampson and James H. Laub’s reanalysis of the Gluecks’ data (Sampson and Laub 1993; Laub and Sampson 2003). This perspective of delinquency and crime across the life course has been employed in studies of the effects of youth gangs, faulty family relationships, poor performance in school, drug use, and gender variations in youth offending (Bartollas 2006).

Moreover, this interactive process develops over the person’s life cycle. During early adolescence, the family is the most influential factor in bonding the youngster to conventional society and reducing delinquency. But as the youth matures and moves through middle adolescence, the world of friends, school, and youth culture becomes the dominant influence over behavior. Finally, as the person enters adulthood, commitment to conventional activities, and to family, especially, offers new avenues to reshape the person’s bond to society and involvement with delinquent behavior (Thornberry 1987; Krohn et al. 2001).

The study of delinquency has been traditionally shaped by male experiences and understanding of the social world (Daly and Chesney-Lind 1988). Carol Smart (1976) and Dorie Klein (1995) were two early criminologists to suggest that a feminist criminology should be formulated because of the neglect of the feminist perspective in classical delinquency theory. Feminist criminologists have been quick to agree that adolescent females have different experiences compared with adolescent males. They generally support that females are more controlled than males, enjoy more social support, are less disposed to crime, and have fewer opportunities for certain types of crimes (Mazerolle 1998).

However, feminist criminologists disagree on how the male-oriented approach to delinquency should be handled. One approach focuses on the question of generalizability. In research on samples that include males and females, a routine strategy for those who emphasize cross-gender similarities is to test whether the given theoretical constructs account for the offending of both groups and to pay little attention to how gender itself might intersect with other factors to create different meanings in the lives of males and females. Those who support this gender-neutral position have generally examined such subjects as the family, social bonding, social learning, delinquent peer relationships, and, to a lesser degree, deterrence and strain (Daly 1995).

In contrast, other feminist theorists argue that new theoretical efforts are needed to help us understand female delinquency and women’s involvement in adult crime. Eileen Leonard (1995), for example, questioned whether anomie, differential association, labeling, and Marist theories can be used to explain the crime patterns of women. She concluded that these traditional theories do not work for explaining female offending. Meda ChesneyLind’s (1989, 1995) application of the male-oriented theories to female delinquency has argued that existing delinquency theories are inadequate to explain female delinquency. She suggested that there is a need for a feminist model of delinquency, because a patriarchal context has shaped the explanations and handling of female delinquents and status offenders. What this means is that adolescent females’ sexual and physical victimizations at home and the relationship between these experiences and their crimes have been systematically ignored.

Delinquency prevention has a long but somewhat disappointing history. The best-known models of delinquency prevention have included the Boston’s Mid-city Project, Cambridge-Somerville Youth Study in Massachusetts, Chicago Area Projects, La Playa de Ponce in Puerto Rico, New York City Youth Board, and Walter C. Reckless and Simon Dinitz’s self-concept studies in Columbus, Ohio. A number of studies have examined the effectiveness of these delinquency-prevention programs and have generally found that few studies showed significant results (Lundman, McFarlane, and Scarpitti 1976; Lundman and Scarpitti 1978).

Beginning in the 1980s and continuing to the present, a number of new delinquency-prevention efforts have been established. The Blueprints for Violence Prevention, developed by the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence at the University of Colorado–Boulder and supported by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, identified 11 model programs, as well as a number of promising violence-prevention and drug abuse programs. The identified model programs were Big Brothers Big Sisters of America; Bully Prevention Program; Functional Family Therapy (FFT); Incredible Years: Parent, Teacher, and Child Training Series; Life Skills Training; Midwestern Prevention Project; Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care (MTFC); Multisystemic Therapy (MST); Nurse-Family Partnership; Project Towards No Drug Abuse; and Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (Mihalic et al. 2004).

The popularity of delinquency-prevention programs, of course, is found in the realization that the most desirable strategy is to prevent delinquent behavior before it can occur. Even though delinquency-prevention programs have generally fallen short of controlling youth crime, there is every reason to believe that renewed efforts will be continued throughout the twenty-first century.

Bibliography:

• Akers, Ronald L. 1990. “Rational Choice, Deterrence, and Social Learning Theory in Criminology: The Path Not Taken.” Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 81:653–76.
• Bartollas, Clemens. 2006. Juvenile Delinquency. 7th ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
• Battin-Pearson, Sara R., Terence P. Thornberry, J. David Hawkins, and Marvin D. Krohn. 1998. “Gang Membership, Delinquent Peers, and Delinquent Behavior.” Juvenile Justice Bulletin, October .
• Becker, Howard S. 1963. New York: Free Press.
• Braga, Anthony A. 2003. “Serious Youth Gun Offenders and the Epidemic of Youth Violence in Boston.” Journal of Quantitative Criminology 19:33–54.
• Breckinridge, S. P. and Edith Abbott. 1970. The Delinquent Child and the Home. New York: Arno Press.
• Brenzel, Barbara. 1983. Daughters of the State. Cambridge: MIT Press.
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2004. Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance-United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
• Chesney-Lind, Meda. 1989. “Girls, Crime and Women’s Place.” Crime and Delinquency 35:5–29.
• Chesney-Lind, Meda. 1995. “Girls, Delinquency and Juvenile Justice: Toward a Feminist Theory of Young Women’s Crime.” Pp. 71–88 in The Criminal Justice System and Women, edited by B. R. Price and N. J. Sokoloff. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Cloward, Richard A. and Lloyd E. Ohlin. 1960. Delinquency and Opportunity: A Theory of Delinquent Gangs. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
• Cohen, Albert K. 1955. Delinquent Boys: The Culture of the Gang. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
• Cook, Philip J. and John Laub. 1998. “The Unprecedented Epidemic in Youth Violence.” Pp. 27–64 in Crime and Justice, edited by M. H. Moore and M. Tonry . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
• Cook, Philip J. and Jens Ludwig. 2004. “Does Gun Prevalence Affect Teen Gun Carrying After All?” Criminology 42:27–54.
• Cornish, Derek and Ronald V. Clarke, eds. 1986. The Reasoning Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending. New York: Springer.
• Cortes, Juan B., with Florence M. Gatti. 1972. Delinquency and Crime: A Biopsychosocial Approach; Empirical, Theoretical, and Practical Aspects of Criminal Behavior. New York: Seminar Press.
• Daly, Kathleen. 1995. “Looking Back, Looking Forward: the Promise of Feminist Transformation. Pp. 447–48 in The Criminal Justice System and Women, edited by B. R. Price and N. J. Sokoloff. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Daly, Kathleen and Meda Chesney-Lind. 1988. “Feminism and Criminology?” Justice Quarterly 5:497–538.
• Elliott, Delbert S., Suzanne S. Ageton, and Rachelle J. Canter. 1979. “An Integrated Theoretical Perspective on Delinquent Behavior.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 16:3–27.
• Faust, Frederic and Paul J. Brantingham, eds. 1974. Juvenile Justice Philosophy. Paul, MN: West.
• Feld, Barry. 1999. Bad Kids: Race and the Transformation of the Juvenile Court. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Finestone, Harold. 1976. Victims of Change: Juvenile Delinquents in American Society. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
• Fishbein, Diana. H. 1990. “Biological Perspectives in Criminology.” Criminology 28:27–72.
• Glueck, Nelson and Eleanor Glueck. 1956. Physique and Delinquency. New York: Harper & Row.
• Gottfredson, Michael R. and Travis Hirschi. 1990. A General Theory of Crime. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
• Grasmick, Harold G., Charles R. Tittle, Robert J. Bursik Jr., and Bruce J. Arneklev. 1993. “Testing the Core Empirical Implications of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s General Theory of Crime.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 30:5–29.
• Heimer, Karen. 1995. “Gender, Race, and the Pathways to Delinquency.” Pp. 140–53 in Crime and Inequality, edited by J. Hagen and R. D. Peterson . Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
• Hirschi, Travis. 1967. Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley: California University Press.
• Jarjoura, G. Roger. 1993. “Does Dropping Out of School Enhance Delinquent Involvement? Results from a Large-Scale National Probability Sample.” Criminology 31:149–71.
• Johnston, L. D., P. M. O’Malley, J. G. Bachman, and J. E. Schulenberg. 2004. Monitoring the Future: Monitoring the Future National Results on Adolescent Drug Use: Overview of Key Findings. Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Drug Abuse.
• Katz, Jack. 1988. Seductions of Crime: Moral and Sensual Attractions in Doing Evil. New York: Basic Books.
• Klein, Dorie. 1995. “The Etiology of Female Crime:A Review of the Literature.” Pp. 30–53 in The Criminal Justice System and Women, edited by B. R. Price and N. J. Sokoloff. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Krohn, Marvin D., Terence P. Thornberry, Craig Rivera, and Marc Le Blanc. 2001. “Later Delinquency Careers.” Pp. 67–93 in Child Development, edited by R. Loeber and D. P. Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Laub, James H. and Robert J. Sampson. 2003. Shared Beginnings, Divergent Lives Delinquent Boys to Age 70. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Lauritsen, Janet L. 1993. “Sibling Resemblance in Juvenile Delinquency: Findings from a National Youth Survey.” Criminology 31:387–409.
• Lemert, Edwin M. 1951. Social Pathology. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Leonard, Eileen. 1995. “Theoretical Criminology and Gender.” Pp. 55–70 in The Criminal Justice System and Women, edited by B. R. Price and N. J. Sokoloff. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Loeber, Rolf and M. Stouthamer-Loeber. 1986. “Family Factors as Correlates and Predictors of Juvenile Conduct Problems and Delinquency.” Pp. 29–149 in Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research, edited by M. Tonry and N. Morris. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
• Lombroso-Ferrero, Gina. 1972. Criminal Man According to Classification of Cesare Lombroso. Montclair, NJ: Patterson Smith.
• Lundman, Richard J., Paul T. McFarlane, and Frank R. Scarpitti. 1976. “Delinquency Prevention: A Description and Assessment of Projects Reported in the Professional Literature.” Crime and Delinquency 22:297–309.
• Lundman, Richard J. and Frank R. Scarpitti. 1978. “Delinquency Prevention: Recommendations for Future Projects.” Crime and Delinquency 24:207–20.
• Maguin, Eugene and Rolf Loeber. 1996. “Academic Performance and Delinquency.” Pp. 145–264 in Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, 20, edited by M. Tonry. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
• Matsueda, Ross. L. 1992. “Reflected Appraisals: Parental Labeling, and Delinquency: Specifying a Symbolic Interactionist Theory.” American Journal of Sociology 97:1577–611.
• Matza, David. 1964. Delinquency and Drift. New York: John Wiley.
• Mazerolle, Paul. 1998. “Gender, General Strain, and Delinquency:An Empirical Examination.” Justice Quarterly 15:65–91.
• McCord, W. J., J. McCord, and Irvin Zola. 1959. The Origins of Crime. New York: Columbia University Press.
• Robert K. 1957. Social Theory and Social Structure. 2d ed. New York: Free Press.
• Mihalic, Sharon, Katerine Irwin, Abigail Fagan, Diane Ballard, and Delbert Elliott. 2004. Blueprints for Violence Prevention. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
• Miller, Jody. 2001. One of the Guys: Girls, Gangs, and Gender. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Miller, Jody and Scott Decker. 2001. “Young Women and Gang Violence: Gender, Street Offending, and Violent Victimization in Gangs.” Justice Quarterly 18:115–39.
• Moffitt, Terrie. 1993. “Adolescent-Limited and Life-CoursePersistent Antisocial Behavior: A Developmental Taxonomy.” Psychological Review 100:674–701.
• Moffitt, Terrie, Donald R. Lynam, and Phil A. Silva. 1994. “Neuropsychological Tests Predicted Persistent Male Delinquency.” Criminology 32:277–300.
• Moffitt, Terrie E., Avshalom Caspi, Michael Rutter, and Phil A. Silva. 2001. Sex Differences in antisocial behavior. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
• Piper, Elizabeth S. 1985. “Violent Offenders: Lone Wolf or Wolfpack.” Presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, San Diego, CA.
• Platt, Anthony. 1977. The Child Savers. 2d ed. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
• Reckless, Walter C. 1961. “A New Theory of Delinquency and Crime.” Federal Probation 24:42–46.
• Reiss, Albert J., Jr. 1976. “Setting the Frontiers of a Pioneer in American Criminology: Henry McKay.” Pp. 64–88 in Delinquency: Crime and Society, edited by J. F. Short . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
• Rothman, David J. 1971. Discovery of the Asylum. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.
• Sampson, Robert J. and James H. Laub. 1993. Crime in the Making: Pathways and Turning Points through Life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Shah, Saleem A. and Loren H. Roth. 1974. “Biological and Psychophysiological Factors in Criminality.” Pp. 101–73 in Handbook of Criminology, edited by D. Glaser . Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
• Shaw, Clifford R. 1929. Delinquent Areas. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
• Shaw, Clifford R. and Henry D. McKay. 1931. Social Factors in Juvenile Delinquency. Washington, DC: National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement.
• Shaw, Clifford R. and Henry D. McKay. 1942. Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
• Smart, Carol. 1976. Women, Crime and Criminology: A Feminist Critique. Boston, MA: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
• Shichor, David. 1980. “The New Criminology: Some Critical Issues.” British Journal of Criminology 20:1–19.
• Sutherland, Edwin H. 1947. Principles of Criminology. 10th ed . Philadelphia, PA: J. P. Lippincott.
• Frank. 1938. Crime and the Community. New York: Columbia University Press.
• Thomas, William I. and Florian Znaniecki. 1927. The Polish Peasant in Europe and America. 5 vols. New York: Knopf.
• Thornberry, Terence P. 1987. “Toward an Interactional Theory of Delinquency.” Criminology 25:863–91.
• Thornberry, Terence P. 1989. “Reflections on the Advantages and Disadvantages of Theoretical Integration.” Pp. 51–60 in Theoretical Integration in the Study of Deviance and Crime: Problems and Prospects, edited by S. Messner, M. Krohn, and A. Liska . Albany: State University of New York Press.
• Thornberry, Terence P., Marvin D. Krohn, Alan J. Lizotte, Carolyn A. Smith, and Kimberly Tobin. 2003. Gangs and Delinquency in Developmental Perspective. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
• Thrasher, Frederick. 1927. The Gang: A Study of 1313 Gangs in Chicago. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
• Triplett, Ruth Ann and G. Roger Jarjoura. 1994. “Theoretical and Empirical Specification of a Model of Informal Labeling.” Journal of Quantitative Criminology 10:241–76 .
• White, Herlene Raskin, Erich W. Labouvie, and Marsha E. Bates. 1985. “The Relationship between Sensation Seeking and Delinquency: A Longitudinal Analysis.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 22:195–211.
• Wilson, James Q. and Richard J. Herrnstein. 1985. Crime and Human Nature. New York: Simon & Schuster.
• Wolfgang, E. Marvin, Terence P. Thornberry, and Robert F. Figlio. 1987. From Boy to Man: From Delinquency to Crime. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER

Developing Solutions to the Juvenile Delinquency Problem Essay

Problem statement.

Juvenile delinquency is still a significant problem in society. Juvenile delinquents pose a threat to public safety, damaging their lives and dignity as well as the material and mental well-being of others. As a rule, adolescents are not fully aware of the risks and responsibility for the actions they commit, so their offenses are based not so much on the conscious desire to cause harm as on the emotional excitement and inability to control these emotions. Statistics provide some surprising data on this issue. First, the data reports that, more often than not, all crimes are committed in the middle of the school day or on a weekend evening (OJJDP Statistical Briefing Book, 2018). Second, arrests have decreased every year since 1996, indicating either the effectiveness of prevention services or an improvement in juvenile criminal skills (OJJDP Statistical Briefing Book, 2020). However, juvenile crime rates are still high despite downward trends.

Primary solution

One option for the previously suggested solution is to use arts-based approaches. We will call art any activities related to the embodiment of the creative activity of individuals, be it singing, drawing, sculpture, handicrafts, and any other forms of creative realization of individuals. So, an arts-based approach, including art therapy, is aimed at replacing destructive intentions and emotions in the adolescent, working through trauma, and working on one’s own feelings in order to minimize the likelihood of committing crimes (Perkins et al., 2021). From this perspective, one can imagine art-based approaches as prevention, suggesting that adolescents release negative emotions through creativity in a way that ultimately reduces the need for destructive behaviors. Children from troubled families and orphans are known to be more prone to delinquent behavior (Butterfield, 2018). Consequently, arts-based prevention measures directed toward such children should help reduce the level of public danger in the region.

It is clear that the proposed approach looks pretty voluminous and requires careful elaboration of the functional aspects. Moreover, one cannot simply decide to use the arts as a juvenile delinquency problem if one ignores the organizational and financial details of this project. For this reason, in the following slides, I will present three different solutions that have been developed in an attempt to address juvenile delinquency using art (Colorni & Tsoukiàs, 2018). These include (i) the creation of a creative activity center, (ii) the mandatory introduction of art classes in schools, and (iii) the implementation of urban sports programs.

Creative activity center

For a region in which we seek to reduce juvenile delinquency, the creation of a creative activity center may be a tactical necessity. Such a solution refers to the creation of a large area physical office where teens come after school or on weekends to participate in individual and group art programs. The division into programs should be voluntary so that each teenager can participate only in those forms of creative activity that catch their attention. However, it should be possible for all individuals to freely attend any form of art that they might find interesting: theater, drawing, music, sports, dancing. In such an institution, there is a system of teachers who lead a class at an allotted time so that teenagers know precisely when to come and what to expect.

Strengths and weaknesses

The strengths of such a solution are hard to overestimate. The creation of a single urban center will not only provide an opportunity for the creative realization of adolescents but also form in their minds an image of an instrument or a solution that will always be glad to help them. So, in any of the problematic situations, teenagers can always turn to art, make acquaintances or spend time alone doing creative work. In addition, for teenagers, such time will be completely free, which increases the threshold of involvement and expands the target audience. On the other hand, creating a one-stop art center will not solve the problem of juvenile delinquency completely, as there is no way to regulate the participation of all teens. A voluntary basis implies personal will, which means that it is impossible to attract those problem teens who do not want to participate in such activities on their own. In addition, it takes time to build such a center (about six months), which does not solve the problem of juvenile delinquency right now. Finally, in the absence of proper marketing, it is not impossible to metamorphose the perception of such a center into a social correction center, which would create a stigma around it.

In terms of positive consequences, an urban arts center will attract more adolescents to creative fulfillment. In the long run, it will reduce juvenile delinquency, as it has been proven that participation in creativity affects it (U.S. Department of Justice, 2020). In addition, it will improve public safety and cultural vibrancy, as the large amount of artwork created by teens can be used for city installations and exhibitions. It is also expected that the urban center will catalyze the development of creative teenagers, which in the long run will improve the tourist image of the city of artists, musicians, and entertainers. In terms of negative consequences, the only problem may be turning the center into a gathering place for teenagers uninterested in creativity. Adolescents are known to like to visit malls aimlessly to spend time together (McDuling, 2020). Against the backdrop of their closure, opening an urban creative playground may become an alternative; as a result, it will cease to fulfill its initial function.

Financial considerations

Since this solution is large-scale, much time, financial and human resources will be required. Renting a commercial space to convert it into a creative center, hiring teachers and administrative staff, marketing costs, and the cost of purchasing equipment will all take a heavy toll on the budget. That said, who strictly is sponsoring the decision is unclear. If we are talking about private founders, these are vast amounts of money for a nonprofit business (Krlev et al., 2018). The solution may be to seek cooperation with authorities and law enforcement, as they have a direct interest in solving the problem of juvenile delinquency. This requires a careful business plan and formulation of a funding project on an ongoing basis to maintain the functionality of the center.

Mandatory art classes at school

A second alternative could be the introduction of art and art classes in schools and colleges for teens on a mandatory basis. In this case, pupils are not specified to attend specific sections, as getting credit for creative lessons will be a compulsory part of the final certification. In this solution, separate creative arts classes would be added to the children’s curriculum, with the student able to choose what he or she wants to attend. Within the school, it could be music, drawing, or dance classes, as well as sports. Unlike physical education and art classes, attendance in the classes being developed will be mandatory but will not put pressure on students.

Advantages and disadvantages

It is impossible not to notice the apparent advantages of this solution. First, the mandatory format of attendance significantly increases adolescent participation and attracts even those adolescents who would not want to engage in the arts voluntarily. Second, the amount of time devoted to school activities is increased, and thus the amount of free time in which teens can commit crimes is reduced. Finally, this approach is also related to students’ creative realization. Among the weaknesses is the possible emergence of a sense of compulsion and the resulting lack of motivation for adolescents to work. In addition, since the only deterrent is academic certification, it is not difficult to imagine that ultimately destructive adolescents who do not even go to school will not attend creative lessons either.

Ramifications of the decision

The negative consequences of such a decision include the possible deterioration of students’ personal experiences with school, which could result in a reduction in the validity of the entire decision (Langbein, 2016). Education is already a significant stressor for adolescents, and the introduction of another mandatory class will affect the development of hatred for school. In addition, competition among familiar students increases in creative fulfillment — children generally do not know how to control their words and actions, so much competition can take the form of bullying, abusive behavior, and even joking. Among the positive consequences, however, are the involvement of the large group in creativity, the possibility of developing hidden talents, and a healthy alternative to idleness among teenagers. In addition, the use of a school psychologist will allow potentially vulnerable families to be identified and prevention work to be carried out in advance.

This solution is significantly less costly because it is implemented strictly within the confines of the school. Using vacant rooms eliminates the need to rent space, and only hiring additional staff, art masters and teachers, and purchasing equipment would require a budget. Additionally, but not necessarily, it would be helpful to hire a psychologist who could address emotional trauma and experiences with teens in both individual and group formats. The school principal or city budget is responsible for funding these projects.

City sports events

Strange as it may seem, sports are a pure form of human art because they involve the realization of one’s skills and constant training. In addition, sports are known to be excellent tools for releasing accumulated anger, so the use of sporting events will focus on preventive work with emotions. This solution uses these beliefs to create a program of urban sports activities among teens. Soccer, basketball, tennis, swimming, wrestling, volleyball, and many other sports are just some of the activities that will be implemented within the solution. In fact, we are talking about creating our own training base, on the platform of which the city trains and competes teenagers in various sports.

Benefits and challenges

The advantages of this solution seem apparent: In addition to solving the public health problem by athleticizing teenagers, this program engages children in sports and increases the city’s athletic representation at the national level. Most importantly, of course, the program solves the problem of emotional undercurrents and injuries. Weaknesses include the inability to attract physically challenged teens, the voluntary basis of attendance, and the possible harm to health in the event of sports injuries.

Consequences

The consequences are also realized on two levels. On the one hand, the athletic development of the city is increased, so more experienced athletes can participate in national and international competitions. Tremendous enthusiasm for sports increases the attractiveness of local teenagers and gives them better mental health (Gorczynski et al., 2021). Meanwhile, because of the cult of sports in the city, stigma is likely to develop against overweight people who cannot or do not want to participate in sports.

Financial Outlay

This also requires a high expenditure of resources, since not only the establishment of a training facility but also the implementation of all organizational details, from the formation of training plans to the scheduling of matches and the hiring of independent referees. The purchase of sports equipment will also require significant expenditures. Funding for this solution is carried out in cooperation with the authorities of the city, as the participation of teenagers is again free of charge.

In order to choose the best solution for all criteria, it was decided to use inspection by numbers. In each of the rows of the table is a number showing the strength associated with these items on a five-point scale, from -2 to +2, where +2 is the most substantial impact. According to the classification, the creation of a creative center is the leading solution that will embrace the maximum number of aspects and will actually lead to a reduction in juvenile delinquency. It is recommended, then, that you begin conceptualizing this project, budgeting, and timing as soon as possible since the preparation and construction phases will take a long time.

Butterfield, F. (2018). When crime is a family affair . The Atlantic.

Colorni, A., & Tsoukiàs, A. (2018). What is a decision problem? Designing alternatives . Springer.

Gorczynski, P., Currie, A., Gibson, K., Gouttebarge, V., Hainline, B., Castaldelli-Maia, J. M., … & Swartz, L. (2021). Developing mental health literacy and cultural competence in elite sport. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 33 (4), 387-401. Web.

Krlev, G., Anheier, H. K., & Mildenberger, G. (2018). Introduction: Social innovation—what is it and who makes it? Social Innovation , 03-35.

Langbein, L. (2016). Defensible program evaluations: four types of validity . Routledge.

McDuling, J. (2020). American teens don’t hang out at malls anymore. They eat at restaurants . Quartz. Web.

OJJDP Statistical Briefing Book. (2018) Time of day . OJJDP. Web.

OJJDP Statistical Briefing Book. (2020). Juvenile arrest rate trends . OJJDP. Web.

Perkins, R., Mason-Bertrand, A., Tymoszuk, U., Spiro, N., Gee, K., & Williamon, A. (2021). Arts engagement supports social connectedness in adulthood: Findings from the HEartS Survey. BMC Public Health , 21(1), 1-15. Web.

U.S. Department of Justice. (2020). Arts and performances for prevention [PDF document]. Web.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, March 11). Developing Solutions to the Juvenile Delinquency Problem. https://ivypanda.com/essays/developing-solutions-to-the-juvenile-delinquency-problem/

"Developing Solutions to the Juvenile Delinquency Problem." IvyPanda , 11 Mar. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/developing-solutions-to-the-juvenile-delinquency-problem/.

IvyPanda . (2024) 'Developing Solutions to the Juvenile Delinquency Problem'. 11 March.

IvyPanda . 2024. "Developing Solutions to the Juvenile Delinquency Problem." March 11, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/developing-solutions-to-the-juvenile-delinquency-problem/.

1. IvyPanda . "Developing Solutions to the Juvenile Delinquency Problem." March 11, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/developing-solutions-to-the-juvenile-delinquency-problem/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Developing Solutions to the Juvenile Delinquency Problem." March 11, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/developing-solutions-to-the-juvenile-delinquency-problem/.

• Juvenile Delinquency
• Social Learning Theory and juvenile delinquency
• The Issue of Juvenile Delinquency
• The Problem of Juvenile Delinquency
• Juvenile Delinquency: Causes and Intervention
• Juvenile Delinquency, Its Factors and Theories
• Theories of Juvenile Delinquency
• Juvenile Delinquency and Reasons That Lead to It
• The Cognitive Theory in Juvenile Delinquency
• Juvenile Delinquency: Three Levels of Prevention
• The Community Policing Impact on Juvenile Crime
• Single Parenthood and Juvenile Delinquency in Modern Society
• “Palaszczuk Government Releases...” by Di Farmer
• Juvenile Delinquency and Affecting Factors
• Juvenile Law and Juvenile Sentencing