Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Nature and nurture causes of criminal behavior criminology essay
Family role in juvenile delinquency
Why family is responsible for juvenile delinquency
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
It is important to consider the social elements of family to understand why some juveniles are motivated to commit crime. Many theories have a slue of ideological frameworks suggesting that families are important in explaining juvenile delinquency; however, they are uniquely distinguished by their internal and external factors. Hirschi's social control theory plays a big role in the sociology of why juveniles commit crime. Furthermore, Robert Agnew’s General Strain illuminates why relationships with family influence youth’s involvement in crime. Cohen paints a substantially different picture about how families are important in understanding juvenile delinquency by including links of social class with the type of parents the children are …show more content…
It suggests that socialization builds self-control and alleviates the inclination to become involved in delinquent behavior. “In this way, families inspire children to coform to parental norms and expectations, and to the norms and expectations of the larger society” (Burfeind and Bartusch, 2011: 171). Hirchi does not believe that motivation is a factor in understanding why youths become involved in juvenile delinquency. Instead, it stipulates that juveniles who offend have a lack of self-control due to a lack of social bonds that would of make the juvenile feel opposed to committing crime. It concludes that people engage in delinquent behavior when their social bond with society is …show more content…
Cohen elaborated on the general strain theory by including ideas of socialization and social class. He reasons that lower class boys and girls have lower-class parents that socialize them improperly to deal with social norms society. “According to Cohen, lower-class parents are “easy-going” and “permissive,” where middle-class parents are “rational, deliberate, and demanding” (Burfeind and Bartusch, 2011: 5). Cohen compares and contrasts middle and lower-class, creating a dichotomy between them—middle-class being authoritarian and lower-class families as permissive. In turn, these children are most likely to commit crime. Although this theory discusses families and their relation to crime, Cohen’s theory is more external. A family’s rank in society determines what kind of parents the youths are getting. This is inherently external. Cohen paints a substantially different picture about how families are important in understanding juvenile delinquency by including links of social class with the type of parents the children are going to have. Children that have lower-class parents will have higher chance of committing crime because their parents are more
The two theories that are being analyzed in this paper are Ronald Akers’ Social Learning Theory and Travis Hirschi’s Social Bonding Theory. Hirschi's social bonding theory is one of many control theories which all take on the task of explaining the core cause of crime; however, this particular theory seems to be the most popular and able to stand the test of time. The Social Bond theory contains four elements that explain what criminals lack that causes them to be more prone to illegal activity, these elements are attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief. On the other end of the spectrum is Akers’ Social Learning Theory, which attempts to explain the correlation between and individual's social environment and their behavior depending on what is praised or punished in an individual's specific social organization. (Walsh & Hemmens)
Many theories, at both the macro and micro level, have been proposed to explain juvenile crime. Some prominent theories include Social Disorganization theory, Differential Social Organization theory, Social Control theory, and Differential Association theory. When determining which theories are more valid, the question must be explored whether people deviate because of what they learn or from how they are controlled? Mercer L. Sullivan’s book, “Getting Paid” Youth Crime and Work in the Inner City clearly suggests that the learning theories both at the macro level, Differential social organization, and micro level, Differential association theory, are the more accurate of the two types of theory.
Why do people commit crime? This is a question many people have asked themselves for the past century. Over the years, many theorists, like Travis Hirschi and Edwin Lemert, have identified possible reasons for why people commit crimes. While each of these theories differ from one another, all point us to an understanding of the paths that bring individuals to commit crime.
According to Robert Agnew, “Strain Theory is based on the idea that delinquency results when individuals are unable to achieve their goals through legitimate channels, achievement or strike out at the source of their frustration in anger”. (Agnew, R. (1985). A Revised Strain Theory of Delinquency. Oxford journals. 64(1).151-166). The norms are violated to alleviate the strain that accompanies failure. When a good look is taken at the theories the strains might not only come from peoples frustrations with acquiring “ The American Dream”, but it becomes a mixture of strains such as economic deprivation, abuse, neglect, or the loss of a loved one. However, most people that experience strains do not commit crimes.
Across the wide body of studies delving into delinquency in America, it is easy to locate research on and analysis of minorities, underprivileged socioeconomic urban centers, and turbulent family structures. However, this leaves a significant section of the delinquent population largely neglected: white middle-class youth. Contrary to the factors shown to affect delinquency in others and the applications of theory applied to them, the issues plaguing this particular portion of adolescents are in many cases entirely unique, suggesting the necessity of a more nuanced approach from angles that have up until fairly recently remained unexplored.
According to Clarence C. Schrag author of Crime and Justice: American Style, “Juvenile delinquency isn’t rooted by the denial of middle-class values, but comes from lower-class culture, maintaining its own value system. This system has grown as a reaction to living in disadvantaged neighborhoods categorized by single-parent households” (Schrag). Norms of gang activities are the juvenile expressions of the lower-class culture. Some of the identified concerns to which lower-class males give persistent attention to include toughness, trouble, excitement, smartness, luck, and autonomy. Some criminologists wonder if lower- class boys are changing to their own value structure, and whether they suffer guiltiness or embarrassment after they commit delinquent
Krohn, M., & Massey, J. (1980). Social control and delinquent behavior: an examination of the elements of the social bond. The Socialogical Quarterly, 21(4), 529-544.
Thompson, W. E. and Bynum J. E. (2010). Juvenile Delinquency: A sociological Approach Eighth Edition. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
Across the nation, social scientists and criminologists have researched and hypothesized the main contributing factors that promote juvenile delinquency. The Strain/ Anomie theory introduced by Robert Merton and later revised by several other theorists, attempts to explain why juvenile subculture tend to behave certain ways when confronted with pressures from everyday life. Revised by other theorists, the Strain theory attempts to provide the framework of juvenile delinquency and its sources in order to analyze the effectiveness of this assumption, as well as to implement certain crime prevention policies and programs to curb this problem. This paper is going to analyze how the Strain theory contributes it’s principles of delinquency factors in order to explain and understand juvenile delinquency.
Juvenile delinquency is a conduct by a juvenile or a person below the legal age that is above parental control thus dealt with by the law. Crime in this case cannot be punishable by death or life imprisonment. There are many cases of juvenile delinquency in recent times that have raised many issues in the United State’s legal systems. There are many ways of explaining juvenile delinquency and crime when it comes to; cause, results, and legal actions pertaining to crimes. Alex Kotlowitz in his book, “There Are No Children Here” focuses on crime and juvenile delinquency through life experiences. This story is about the life of two boys who the author researched for a few years. The two boys were from Chicago, grew up in a poor family, surrounded by poverty, gangs, and violence as do many of us who come from low income, minority filled areas. The two boys unfortunately, sad to say end up in juvenile hall which clearly depicts the whole concept of crime and juvenile delinquency that arises from more issues than simply meets the eye . Issues relating to the social disorganization theory of poverty, disorganization, and low community control. This paper will analyze the story using themes that relate to juvenile delinquency and further discuss causes and ways to control juvenile delinquency
According to the text “Juvenile Delinquency: The Core” the social structure theory associates juvenile delinquency rates to socioeconomic structure conditions, for example poor communities, families that are usually unemployed, families that have a continuous cycle of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), single parent households, families with incarcerated fathers, sons and even moms and daughters. Some of these children are raised by grandparents or placed in the foster care system. Many young people in these communities are parents themselves – babies raising babies. This I know because this describes many of the youth in my community.
Many young people join street gangs due to weak family relationships and poor social control. Social Control Theory presumes that people will naturally commit crime if there were left to their own devices (i.e. no laws in society) and people do not commit crimes because of certain controlling forces, such as social bonds that hold individuals back partaking on their anti social behavior (Bell, 2011). Examples of controlling forces are family, school, peers, and the law. Young people who are t...
This could explain the effect of strains on crime by taken this theory into account. Once strain causes bonds to weaken amongst conventional groups and institutions such as family, school, and peer networks will open up doors to delinquent behaviors, because by being in these social roles causes the person to regulate by role expectations.
Families serve as one of the strongest socializing forces in a person's life. They help teach children to control unacceptable behavior, to delay gratification, and to respect the rights of others. Conversely, families can also teach children aggressive, antisocial, and violent behavior. In adults' lives, family responsibilities may provide an important stabilizing force. Given these possibilities, family life may directly contribute to the development of delinquent and criminal tendencies. Parental conflict and child abuse correlate with delinquency. Though not all children who grow up in conflictive or violent homes become delinquent, however, being exposed to conflict and violence appears to increase the risk of delinquency. At this point, researchers have not pin pointed what factors exactly push some at-risk youth into delinquency. A child with criminal parents faces a greater likelihood of becoming a delinquent than children with law-abiding parents. However, the influence appears not to be directly related to criminality but possibly to poor supervision.
Strain theories of criminal behaviour have been amongst the most important and influential in the field of criminology. Taking a societal approach, strain theories have sought to explain deficiencies in social structure that lead individuals to commit crime (Williams and McShane 2010). Strain theories operate under the premise that there is a societal consensus of values, beliefs, and goals with legitimate methods for achieving success. When individuals are denied access to legitimate methods for achieving success, the result is anomie or social strain. This often leads an individual to resort to deviant or criminal means to obtain the level of success that they are socialized to pursue. This is the basic premise of strain theory. This paper will explore the evolution of strain theories by first examining their intellectual foundations which laid the foundation for Robert Merton’s theories of anomie and strain. Merton’s strain theory will be discussed in detail including the modes of adaptation that people use when faced with societal strain. Finally, the paper will conclude with the strengths and weaknesses of Merton’s strain theory and an examination of the criminological theories and social policies it has influenced.