conclusion juvenile delinquency

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar

Criminal Justice

IResearchNet

Academic Writing Services

Juvenile delinquency.

The ways that juvenile delinquency has been defined, perceived, and responded to have changed over time and generally reflect the social conditions of the particular era. During the colonial era of the United States, for example, the conceptualization of juvenile delinquency was heavily influenced by religion. At this time, juvenile delinquency was viewed as not only a legal violation, but also a moral violation. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

I. Introduction

Ii. historical background, iii. major theories of juvenile delinquency, iv. types of juvenile delinquents.

V. Conclusion and Bibliography

Delinquent offenses are violations of legal statutes that also apply to adults in the criminal justice system. Delinquent offenses include acts of violence against persons, such as murder, rape, armed robbery, aggravated and simple assault, harassment, stalking, menacing, child abuse, and similar offenses. Delinquent offenses also include acts that are considered property crimes, such as burglary, theft or larceny, motor vehicle theft, arson, damage to property, criminal mischief, vandalism, and others. A variety of miscellaneous crimes sometimes known as public order offenses are also delinquent offenses. These include driving while intoxicated, cruelty to animals, possession and use of a controlled substance, forgery, fraud, disorderly conduct, weapons violations, prostitution and commercialized vice, vagrancy and loitering, traffic violations, and others.

Juvenile delinquency is important in society for several reasons but for three in particular. First, children and adolescents commit a significant amount of delinquent offenses that result in violent, property, or other forms of victimization. Each year, more than one million children and adolescents are arrested by police for their delinquent acts. Second, juvenile delinquency is itself seen as an indicator of the general health and prosperity of a society. In neighborhoods with high levels of delinquency, the antisocial behavior is seen as part of a larger set of social problems. In this sense, juvenile delinquency is troubling because of the victimizations that are inflicted and the perceptual image of society as unable to adequately control and supervise young people. Third, as this research paper will explore, juvenile delinquency has different meanings depending on its severity and other factors. For many young people, juvenile delinquency is a fairly normal facet of growing up. For a small group of youths, however, juvenile delinquency is simply the beginning stage of what will become a lifetime of antisocial behavior. This research paper offers a comprehensive look at juvenile delinquency including its historical background, major theories of juvenile delinquency, and types or typologies of juvenile delinquents.

The ways that juvenile delinquency has been defined, perceived, and responded to have changed over time and generally reflect the social conditions of the particular era. During the colonial era of the United States, for example, the conceptualization of juvenile delinquency was heavily influenced by religion. At this time, juvenile delinquency was viewed as not only a legal violation, but also a moral violation. Delinquent acts were viewed as affronts to God and God’s law, and as such, wrongdoers were treated in very punitive and vengeful ways.

American colonial society was similarly harsh toward children and the control of children’s behavior. Throughout society, there was a general notion that children were particularly susceptible to vice and moral violations. For instance, in 1641, the General Court of Massachusetts Bay Colony passed the Stubborn Child Law, which stated that children who disobeyed their parents would be put to death. The language and the spirit of the law were drawn from the biblical Book of Deuteronomy. The Stubborn Child Law descended from the Puritans’ belief that unacknowledged social evils would bring the wrath of God down upon the entire colony. The Puritans believed they had no choice but to react to juvenile misbehavior in a severe and calculated manner. However, not all colonies adopted the Stubborn Child Law. Outside Massachusetts, children found guilty of a serious crime frequently were punished via corporal punishment, which is the infliction of physical pain such as whipping, mutilating, caning, and other methods.

What would today be considered normal and routine adolescent behavior, such as “hanging out with friends,” was in early eras considered serious delinquent behavior, such as sloth and idleness. Today, the use of a death penalty or beatings for minor types of delinquency seems shocking; however, there are similarities between colonial juvenile justice and contemporary juvenile justice. In both eras, adult society held ambivalent views about children. On one hand, children and adolescents were seen as innocents that were not fully developed and required compassion, patience, and understanding. From this perspective, the response to juvenile delinquents should be tempered, tolerant, and used to teach or discipline. On the other hand, children and adolescents were viewed as disrespectful, annoying, and simply different from adults. It was believed that children were born in sin and should submit to adult authority.

Over time, the puritanical approach to defining, correcting, and punishing juvenile delinquency came under attack. Not only had these severe forms of juvenile justice failed to control juvenile delinquency, but also they were portrayed as primitive and brutal. In 1825, a progressive social movement known as the Child Savers changed the course of the response to juvenile delinquency and made corrections a primary part of it. Rather than framing juvenile delinquency as an issue of sin and morality, the Child Savers attributed it to environmental factors, such as poverty, immigration, poor parenting, and urban environments. Based on the doctrine of parens patriae, which means the state is the ultimate guardian of children, the Child Savers sought to remove children from the adverse environments that they felt contributed to children’s delinquency.

The Child Savers actively pursued the passage of legislation that would permit placing children in reformatories, especially juvenile paupers. The goal of removing children from extreme poverty was admirable, but resulted in transforming children into persons without legal rights. Children were placed into factories, poorhouses, and orphanages where they were generally treated poorly and where almost no attention was given to their individual needs. The first and most infamous of these facilities was the New York House of Refuge, which opened in 1825 and served to incarcerate thousands of children and adolescents viewed as threats to public safety and social order.

Another curious response to juvenile delinquency during this era was the use of transport. For example, between the 1850s and the Great Depression, approximately 250,000 abandoned children from New York were placed on orphan trains and relocated to locations in the West where they were adopted by Christian farm families. The process of finding new homes for the children was haphazard. At town meetings across the country, farming families took their pick of the orphan train riders. Children who were not selected got back on board the train and continued to the next town. The children who were selected and those who adopted them had one year to decide whether they would stay together. If either decided against it, the child would be returned, boarded on the next train out of town, and offered to another family.

Progressive reformers continued looking for new solutions to the growing problem of juvenile delinquency. Their most significant remedy was the creation of the juvenile court in Cook County, Illinois, in July 1899 via the passage of the Chicago Juvenile Court Act. The juvenile court attempted to closely supervise problem children, but unlike the houses of refuge, this new form of supervision was to more often occur within the child’s own home and community, not in institutions. In the juvenile court, procedures were civil as opposed to criminal, perhaps because social workers spearheaded the court movement. They thought that children had to be treated, not punished, and the judge was to be a sort of wise and kind parent. The new court segregated juvenile from adult offenders at all procedural stages.

The juvenile court reaffirmed and extended the doctrine of parens patriae. This paternalistic philosophy meant that reformers gave more attention to the “needs” of children than to their rights. In their campaign to meet the needs of children, the Child Savers enlarged the role of the state to include the handling of children in the judicial system. Because of its innovative approach, the juvenile court movement spread quickly, and by 1945, all states had specialized juvenile courts to respond to juvenile delinquency.

As juvenile courts across the United States continued in operation, two concerns emerged that would later motivate additional reforms. First, the informality of juvenile proceedings was seen as good in that justice could be tailored to the needs of individual youth. However, the informality also invited disparate treatment of offenders. The second and related point was that the juvenile court needed to become more formalized to ensure due process rights of delinquents that were comparable to the due process rights of adults in the criminal courts. These rights were established in a series of landmark cases during the 1960s and early 1970s.

An important milestone in the history of juvenile delinquency occurred in 1974 with the passage of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act. This act was the most sweeping change in juvenile justice since the founding of the juvenile court. There were five major points of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act. First, it mandated the decriminalization of status offenders so that they were not considered delinquent. Second, it mandated the deinstitutionalization of juvenile corrections so that only the most severe juvenile delinquents would be eligible for confinement. In addition, the act mandated that status offenders should not be institutionalized and that juveniles in adult jails and prisons should be separated by sight and sound from adults. Third, it broadened use of diversion as an alternative to formal processing in juvenile court. Fourth, it continued application of due process constitutional rights to juveniles. Fifth, it created the federal Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), which funded research to evaluate juvenile justice programs and disseminated research findings on the juvenile justice system.

The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act was modified in 1977, 1980, 1984, 1988, and as recently as 2002. For instance, in 1980 the act specified the jail and lockup removal requirement, which meant that juveniles could not be detained or confined in adult jails or lockups. Adult facilities had a 6-hour grace period to ascertain the age of the offender or transport the youth to a juvenile facility. (Rural jails had up to 48 hours.) In 1988, the act specified the disproportionate minority confinement requirement, which required juvenile corrections to gather data on the racial composition of their population compared to the racial composition of the state. In 2002, this was changed to disproportionate minority contact, whereby racial data were mandated for all aspects of the juvenile justice system. Correctional systems must comply with OJJDP guidelines to remain eligible for federal allocations from the Formula Grants Program.

Beginning in the 1960s and continuing until the early to mid-1990s, the United States experienced dramatic increases in the most serious forms of juvenile delinquency, such as murder, and an increasingly visible juvenile gang problem in major American cities. As a result, states enacted more legislation that targeted youths involved in the most serious types of juvenile delinquency. During the 1990s, 45 states made it easier to transfer juvenile offenders to adult criminal courts. Thirty-one states expanded the sentencing options to include blended sentencing, which allows juvenile courts to combine juvenile and adult punishment that is tailored to the needs of the individual offender. For instance, juvenile courts can combine a juvenile disposition with a criminal sentence that is suspended. If the delinquent complies with the juvenile disposition, the criminal sentence is never imposed. If not, the youth is eligible to receive the adult sentence.

In 34 states, there are “once an adult, always an adult” provisions that specify that once a youth has been tried as an adult, any subsequent offenses must also be waived to criminal court. Laws have been modified to reduce or remove traditional juvenile court confidentiality provisions and make juvenile records more open in 47 states. In 22 states, laws have increased the role of victims of juvenile crimes by allowing them more voice in the juvenile justice process.

Nationwide, adolescents account for about 1% of new court commitments to adult state prisons. This means that more than 4,000 adolescents are in adult prisons because they have been convicted of the most serious forms of delinquency, which includes offenses such as armed robbery, assault, burglary, murder, and sexual assault. More punitive measures such as waivers are justified based on the serious violence and chronic delinquencies of the most serious offenders; however, some of these provisions carry unintended consequences. For example, research suggests that youths who are waived to criminal court and receive adult punishments ultimately have higher recidivism levels than youths that receive juvenile court dispositions.

Over the past 20 years, American society has also struggled to understand the place of capital punishment as a way to punish the most violent juvenile delinquents. In 1988, in Thompson v. Oklahoma, the Supreme Court held that imposing the death penalty on a person who was 15 years at the time of his or her crime violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. One year later, in Stanford v. Kentucky, the Supreme Court held that no consensus exists that forbids the sentencing to death of a person that commits capital murder at age 16 or 17. That changed in 2005 with the landmark case Roper v. Simmons, which rendered capital punishment unconstitutional as applied to persons under age 18. The Roper decision invalidated the death penalty for juveniles, which is a far different approach from earlier eras. According to the Supreme Court, several factors contributed to a changing consensus about applying the death penalty to juveniles, including the fact that several states had abolished the juvenile death penalty in the intervening years since Stanford; most states that retained the juvenile death penalty basically never used it; the juvenile death penalty was not used in most parts of the Western world; and there was greater appreciation for the developmental differences between adolescent and adults in terms of decision making, emotional and behavioral control, and other neurocognitive factors that influence criminal decision making.

It is conventional wisdom within criminology to lament the increasing toughness or punitive stance that society takes toward juvenile delinquents, primarily through the process of transfer to criminal court. But it should be noted that the last 40 years of juvenile justice reflect a profound commitment to due process and the legal rights of adolescents, the abolishment of the juvenile death penalty, and a general hands-off policy stance toward status and low-level delinquents. Indeed, the juvenile justice system and particularly juvenile corrections have noted the diversity of the juvenile delinquent population and have focused resources disproportionately toward the most serious youths.

Any idea about the causes, extent, and correlates of juvenile delinquency is essentially a theory, such as equating juvenile delinquency with sin and violating God’s law. For more than two centuries, academic criminologists have developed a host of theories to explain juvenile delinquency. The major difference among them relates to the academic discipline in which the theorist was trained. The various disciplines, such as economics, psychology, and sociology, have differing assumptions about humans and human behavior, and these result in different conceptualizations about what causes juvenile delinquency. This section broadly examines theories of juvenile delinquency from economics, psychology, and—the most common theoretical approach—sociology.

Some of the earliest theories of juvenile delinquency were economic in their perspective. Economic theories are known as classical theories. They generally state that juveniles are rational, intelligent people who have free will, which is the ability to make choices. Young people calculate the costs and benefits of their behavior before they act. Delinquency is the result of juveniles imagining greater gains coming from breaking the law than from obeying it. In the same way, children and adolescents that skip school first weigh the likelihood of getting caught against the potential fun they will have. Similarly, juveniles who commit serious crime weigh the pleasure they imagine they will receive against potentially being arrested, prosecuted, convicted, and sent to prison. Since behavior is a conscious decision that youths make, they may be held responsible for their choices and their consequences.

One of the major figures in classical theory is Cesare Beccaria (1764-1963), who formulated his ideas about crime control during the 18th century when the criminal justice systems throughout Europe were cruel and ruthless and exercised a callous indifference toward human rights. People were punished for crimes against religion, such as atheism and witchcraft, and for crimes against the state, such as criticizing political leaders. Worse yet, “offenders” were rarely told why they were punished. No one was exempt. Any person could be hauled off to jail at any time, for any reason. Wealthy persons were generally spared the most torturous and degrading punishments, which were reserved for ordinary citizens who sometimes were burned alive, whipped, mutilated, or branded.

These conditions inspired Beccaria to write an essay titled “On Crimes and Punishments,” where he laid the framework for a new system of justice that emphasized humanity, consistency, and rationality. According to Beccaria, the system would follow these principles:

• Social action should be based on the utilitarian principle of the greatest happiness for the greatest number.
• Crime is an injury to society, and the only rational measure of crime is the extent of the injury.
• Crime prevention is more important than punishment. Laws must be published so that the citizenry can understand and support them.
• In criminal procedure, secret accusations and torture must be abolished. There should be speedy trials, and accused persons should have every right to present evidence in their defense.
• The purpose of punishment is to prevent crime. Punishment must be swift, certain, and severe. Penalties must be based on the social damage caused by the crime. There should be no capital punishment. Life imprisonment is a better deterrent. Capital punishment is irreparable and makes no provision for mistakes.
• Imprisonment should be widely used, but prison conditions should be improved through better physical quarters and by separating and classifying inmates as to age, sex, and criminal histories.

Another important classical theorist was the English economist Jeremy Bentham who, observing that people naturally seek pleasure and avoid pain, believed that the “best” punishment was one that would produce more pain than whatever pleasure the offender would receive from committing the crime. In other words, punishment must “fit the crime,” and no single punishment was always best. Instead, a variety of punishments should be used.

Today, classical theory is generally known as rational choice theory, which again asserts that people are rational and make calculated choices regarding what they are going to do before they act. Juvenile delinquents collect, process, and evaluate information about the crime and make a decision whether to commit it after they have weighed the costs and benefits of doing so. Juvenile delinquency represents a well-thought-out decision whereby delinquents decide where to commit the crime, who or what to target, and how to execute it.

Psychological theories explain juvenile delinquency with individual-level constructs that exist inside of all people and interact with the social world. For instance, behavioral theory proposes that behavior reflects people’s interactions with others throughout their lifetime. A leading behaviorist was the psychologist B. F. Skinner (1953), who theorized that children learn conformity and deviance from the punishments and reinforcements that they receive in response to their behavior. He believed the environment shapes behavior and that children identify those aspects of their environment they find pleasing and which ones are painful; their behavior is the result of the consequences it produces. He concluded that children and adolescents repeat rewarded behavior and terminate punished behavior.

Similarly, Albert Bandura (1977) argues that learning and experiences couple with values and expectations to determine behavior. In his social learning theory, Bandura suggests that children learn by modeling and imitating others. For example, children learn to be aggressive from their life experiences and learn aggression in different ways—for instance, by seeing parents argue, watching their friends fight, viewing violence on television and in movies, and listening to violent music. What children learn is that aggression is sometimes acceptable and can produce the desired outcome. The ideas of Skinner and Bandura would later be adopted by sociologists.

According to psychodynamic theory, unconscious mental processes that developed in early childhood control the personality, and these mental processes influence behavior, including juvenile delinquency. The main author of this theory is Sigmund Freud (1925), who theorized that the personality consists of three parts: the id, ego, and superego. The id, which is present at birth, consists of blind, unreasoning, instinctual desires and motives. The id represents basic biological and psychological drives and does not differentiate between fantasy and reality. The id also is antisocial and knows no rules, boundaries, or limitations. If the id is left unchecked, it will destroy the person. The ego grows from the id and represents the problem-solving dimension of the personality. It deals with reality, differentiates it from fantasy, and teaches children to delay gratification because acting on impulse will get them into trouble. The superego develops from the ego and is the moral code, norms, and values the child has acquired. The superego is responsible for feelings of guilt and shame and is more closely aligned with the conscience. In mentally healthy children, the three parts of the personality work together. When the parts are in conflict, children may become maladjusted and ready for delinquency. Freud did not write specifically about delinquency. However, he did influence criminologists, who took his ideas and applied them to the study of crime. The lasting importance of Freud and psychodynamic theory is evidenced in the way that early childhood experiences and mental processes have figured prominently in studies of human behavior.

The psychological theory that most explicitly matches the thinking patterns and personality of the individual with his or her subsequent involvement in juvenile delinquency is psychopathy. Psychopathy is a clinical construct that is usually referred to as a personality disorder defined by a set of interpersonal, affective, lifestyle, and behavioral characteristics that manifest in wide-ranging antisocial behaviors. The characteristics of psychopathy read like a blueprint for juvenile delinquency. Psychopathic persons are impulsive, grandiose, emotionally cold, manipulative, callous, arrogant, dominant, irresponsible, short-tempered individuals who tend to violate social norms and victimize others without guilt or anxiety.

Psychopathy is a controversial theory, and much disagreement centers on whether the theory should be applied toward children and adolescent delinquents. At the heart of psychopathy is the complete lack of feeling for other people evidenced by callous-unemotional traits, remorselessness, and the absence of empathy. Psychopathic persons do not experience the feelings that naturally inhibit the acting out of violent impulses, and their emotional deficiency is closely related to general under-arousal and the need for sensation seeking. Because of this inability to morally connect to other people, psychopathic persons are distinct from other offender groups. Research has also shown that the callous and unemotional traits that are indicators of psychopathy are present early in life during childhood, and these traits are mostly genetic in origin. In this way, psychopathy does not just implicate the personality and character of a person but also his or her genes.

Sociological theories of juvenile delinquency point to societal factors and social processes that in turn affect human behavior. Unlike other explanations, sociology explains people’s behavior using characteristics beyond the individual. Mostly, sociological theories assert that certain negative aspects of neighborhoods and society in general serve as structural inducements for young people to resort to juvenile delinquency. In this way, sociological theories tend to ignore or deny individual-level psychological differences that might partially explain who engages in delinquency.

One of the most prominent sociological theories is the social disorganization theory developed by Clifford Shaw and Henry McKay (1942), who suggested that juvenile delinquency was caused by the neighborhood in which a person lived. Instead of focusing on individual traits, Shaw and McKay studied the impact of the kinds of places, such as neighborhoods, that created conditions favorable to delinquency. They discovered that delinquency rates declined the farther one moved from the center of the city. They reached this conclusion after dividing Chicago into five concentric circles or zones. At the center was the Loop, the downtown business district where property values were highest (Zone I). Beyond the Loop was the zone of transition (Zone II) containing an inner ring of factories and an outer ring that included places of vice, such as gambling, prostitution, and the like. Zones III and IV were suburban residential areas, and Zone V extended beyond the suburbs. Delinquency rates were highest in the first two zones and declined steadily as one moved farther away from the city center.

Neighboring railroads, stockyards, and industries made Zone II the least desirable residential area, but also the cheapest one. Because of this, people naturally gravitated to this area if they were poor, as many new immigrants to the United States were. What did these findings say about juvenile delinquency? Shaw and McKay interpreted the findings in cultural and environmental terms. The rates of juvenile delinquency remained stable in certain Chicago neighborhoods, regardless of the race or ethnicity of the people who lived there. Areas that were high in juvenile delinquency at the turn of the 20th century were also high in juvenile delinquency several decades later, even though many of the original residents had moved away or died. Shaw and McKay explained juvenile delinquency via the following four points.

First, run-down areas create social disorganization. Cities such as Chicago were expanding industrially, their populations were increasing, and segregation was forcing new immigrants into the slums. These immigrants were not familiar with the city’s geography or culture; they arrived with different languages and work experiences; and they immediately faced new and overwhelming problems, including poverty, disease, and confusion.

Second, social disorganization fosters cultural conflicts. In low-delinquency areas of the city, there typically was agreement among parents on which values and attitudes were the “right” ones, with general consensus on the importance of education, constructive leisure, and other child-rearing issues. Local institutions, such as the PTA, churches, and neighborhood centers, reinforced these conventional values. No such consistency prevailed in high-delinquency areas. The norms of a variety of cultures existed side by side, creating a state of normative ambiguity, or anomie (cultural conflict). This condition was aggravated by the presence of individuals who promoted an unconventional lifestyle and defined behaviors such as theft as an acceptable way to acquire wealth. This value system could count on the support of criminal gangs, rackets, and semi-legitimate businesses.

Third, cultural conflict allows delinquency to flourish. Children raised in low-socioeconomic, high-delinquency areas were exposed to both conventional and criminal value systems. They saw criminal activities and organizations in operation daily. Successful criminals passed on their knowledge to younger residents, who then taught it to even younger children. Delinquency became a tradition in certain neighborhoods through the process of cultural transmission, where criminal values are passed from one generation to the next. Fourth, allowed to flourish, delinquency becomes a full-time career. Children in these Chicago neighborhoods dabbled in initially trivial forms of juvenile delinquency, but their acts became increasingly serious and prone to gang delinquency.

Edwin Sutherland (1947) developed differential association theory, which is one of the most popular and enduring theories of juvenile delinquency. The theory consists of nine principles. First, Sutherland asserted that delinquent behavior is learned and not inherited. Biological and hereditary factors are rejected as explanations for the cause of delinquency. Only sociological factors explain why youth commit delinquency. Second, delinquent behavior is learned through interaction with others by way of communication. The communication can be either verbal or nonverbal. Third, learning occurs in intimate groups. It is in small, face-to-face gatherings that children learn to commit delinquency. Fourth, in small, intimate groups, children learn techniques for committing crime, as well as the appropriate motives, attitudes, and rationalizations. The learning process involves exposure not only to the techniques of committing offenses, but also to the attitudes or rationalizations that justify those acts. Fifth, the specific direction of motives and drives is learned from definitions of the legal code as being favorable or unfavorable. The term definitions refers to attitudes.

Sixth, a juvenile becomes delinquent due to an excess of definitions favorable to the violation of law over definitions unfavorable to the violation of law. This sixth principle is the core of the theory. A parent who even hints through words or actions that it is acceptable to fight, treat women as potential conquests, cheat on income tax returns, or lie may promote juvenile delinquency in children unless these statements are outnumbered by definitions or attitudes that favor obeying the law—for example, driving the speed limit. Definitions favorable to the violation of law can be learned from both criminal and noncriminal people.

Seventh, the tendency toward delinquency will be affected by the frequency, duration, priority, and intensity of learning experiences. The longer, earlier, more intensely, and more frequently youths are exposed to attitudes about delinquency, both pro and con, the more likely they will be influenced. Sutherland used the term intensity to refer to the degree of respect a person gives to a role model or associate. Thus, correctional officers are not likely to become criminals despite the positive things inmates say about living a life of crime. The reason is that officers do not respect the inmates and therefore do not adopt their beliefs, values, and attitudes.

Eight, learning delinquent behavior involves the same mechanisms involved in any other learning. While the content of what is learned is different, the process for learning any behavior is the same. Ninth, criminal behavior and noncriminal behavior are expressions of the same needs and values. In other words, the goals of delinquents and nondelinquents are similar. What is different are the means they use to pursue their goals.

Decades of research supported the general claims of differential association and what is more broadly known as social learning theory. One of the strongest indicators of juvenile delinquency, for example, is the number of delinquent peers that an individual has. Youths that do not have delinquent peer associations tend not to be involved in juvenile delinquency. On the other hand, youths with many delinquent friends, such as adolescents that are involved in delinquent gangs, are significantly likely to commit status and delinquent offenses.

The other major sociological theory of juvenile delinquency is social control theory. This theory can be traced to 17th-century philosopher Thomas Hobbes, who believed that human beings are naturally aggressive, argumentative, shy creatures in search of glory that would naturally use violence to master other men, their wives, and their children. This profile described all men, not simply criminals. In Hobbes’s view, human beings were basically bad and at the very least, self-interested at the expense of others. Because of their fundamentally “bad” nature, a strong state or government was needed to strike fear into their hearts and punish them severely when they broke the law. Twentieth-century criminologists expanded upon Hobbes’s ideas and created social control theory. These theorists assumed that without controls, children would break the law. From this perspective, juvenile delinquency was expected behavior. Rather than look for factors that push children into delinquency, the purpose of social control theory is to identify the factors that stop, insulate, or prevent children from participating in delinquency in the first place. In social control theory, what must be explained is why most children conform to society’s rules most of the time. It is taken for granted that children break rules. The real question is, why do children not commit crime?

Arguably the most important social control theory is Travis Hirschi’s (1969) version, which is called social bond theory. A social bond describes a person’s connection to society and consists of four elements: attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief. Each component of the social bond forms its own continuum, ranging from low to high. When the continua are merged, they provide a gauge of how strongly a person is tied or bonded to society. The stronger the bond, the less likely the youth will commit juvenile delinquency. Hirschi asserted that the best predictor of delinquent behavior was a youth’s attachments to parents, schools, and peers, which are the primary agents of socialization. Decades of criminological research have consistently reported that children who are strongly tied to parents are less likely to become delinquent. In addition, their positive feelings promote acceptance of the parents’ values and beliefs. These children avoid juvenile delinquency because such behavior would jeopardize their parents’ affection. Belief in the moral validity of law also has been found to reduce the likelihood that a juvenile will commit crime. Hirschi maintains that in the United States, there is one belief system that centers on conventional values. From this perspective, there are no subcultures that regard theft and assault as proper and permissible, which is contrary to the claims of cultural deviance theories. Belief in the moral validity of law does seem to reduce the likelihood of committing crime.

The commitment component of the social bond is about success, achievement, and ambition. Social bond theory proposes that ambition or motivation to achieve keeps juveniles on the “straight and narrow” path because they know that getting into trouble will hurt their chances of success. In other words, children have a stake in conformity. The more time and energy they have invested in building an education, a career, or a reputation, the less likely they will risk their accomplishments by committing juvenile delinquency. Research examining the importance of commitment has reported that children who are more heavily invested in conventional activities are less likely to be delinquent.

Involvement in conventional activities has been seen as a way of preventing juvenile delinquency as illustrated by the popular phrase “Idle hands are the devil’s workshop.” The notion that people need to be involved in society and otherwise kept busy has inspired politicians and city planners to call for more and better playgrounds and afterschool sports programs to keep children off the streets. If these facilities are available, young people will have less time to engage in delinquent behavior. Unfortunately, involvement does not have as much impact on preventing delinquency as other components of the bond to society. This is because delinquency is not a full-time job. It requires so little time that anyone, no matter how involved in conventional activities, can find time for juvenile delinquency if he or she wants to.

There are many other theories of juvenile delinquency stemming from an array of academic disciplines. But the fields of economics, psychology, and sociology have been the most visible disciplinary starting points for understanding why young people commit criminal acts.

Juvenile delinquents are a diverse group of young people that varies in terms of the severity of delinquent acts they commit, the frequency with which they commit delinquent acts, how early they begin their delinquent career, and how long they commit delinquency. For many youths, juvenile delinquency is a short-lived flirtation that goes away as quickly as it emerges. It is common and even normal for adolescents to engage in trivial forms of misbehavior and delinquency as they mature through adolescence and enter adulthood. However, for some youths, juvenile delinquency has a more troubling meaning. Several decades of research have shown that a small subset of youths—comprising approximately 5% to 10% of the population—constitute serious, violent, and chronic offenders. Although this group is statistically small, they account for more than half of the juvenile delinquency occurring in a population and even greater levels of the most violent offenses, such as murder, rape, and armed robbery. Researchers have provided evidence of this group using samples from across North America, South America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. Because of the empirical consistency with which the small group of serious delinquents appears in crime data, criminologists have developed theories and helped to influence public policies that are tailored to the various needs and risk profiles of different types of juvenile delinquents.

For example, in 1993, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) published the Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders, which is a research-based framework of strategic responses to help local and state juvenile justice systems respond to delinquency. Two years later, the OJJDP conducted a national training and assistance initiative to put the Comprehensive Strategy into place. The Comprehensive Strategy has two main components, prevention and graduated sanctions. Prevention targets youths that are at risk for juvenile delinquency and attempts to enhance their prosocial development by focusing on healthy and nurturing families, safe communities, school attachment, prosocial peer relations, personal development and life skills, and healthy lifestyle choices. In other words, prevention provides education and guidance on the very factors that will insulate youths from selecting a delinquent career. Graduated sanctions, which is the second component of the Comprehensive Strategy, target the same prosocial developmental points but for a different target population of youths—those that have already begun their delinquent career.

The Comprehensive Strategy is multidisciplinary and uses the range or continuum of sanctions that exists in the juvenile justice system to address the needs of the range of youthful offenders, from those first experimenting with problem behaviors to those with sustained and violent records. It is guided by six principles: (1) strengthening the family in its primary responsibilities to instill moral values and provide support and guidance to children; (2) supporting core social institutions, such as schools, churches, and community organizations, to help develop capable, mature, and responsible youth; (3) promoting delinquency prevention as the most cost-effective approach to reducing juvenile delinquency; (4) intervening immediately and effectively when delinquent behavior first emerges to prevent it from becoming worse; (5) establishing a system of graduated sanctions that holds each juvenile offender accountable, protects public safety, and provides programs and services that meet treatment needs; and (6) identifying and controlling the small percentage of serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders who commit the majority of felony offenses.

What happens if nothing is done to prevent or intervene in delinquent careers once they are under way? A study by Kimberly Kempf-Leonard and her colleagues (Kempf-Leonard, Tracy, & Howell, 2001) is telling. Kempf-Leonard et al. studied more than 27,000 delinquent careers from the 1958 Philadelphia Birth Cohort Study and followed the youths until age 27. Among youth that had been serious delinquents, 48% were arrested as adults. For violent delinquents, 53%were arrested as adults. For chronic delinquents, 59% were arrested during adulthood. For those that were serious and chronic juvenile offenders, 63% were arrested during adulthood. For violent and chronic delinquents, over 63% were arrested as adults. In short, the deeper a youth becomes entrenched in his or her delinquency, the more likely antisocial behavior will be a lifelong problem.

V. Conclusion

Juvenile delinquency is a tremendous burden on society, and the most antisocial youths impose staggering costs in terms of victimization and correctional fees. A recent study by Brandon Welsh and his colleagues (2008) is illustrative. Welsh and his collaborators estimated the victimization costs created by the self-reported delinquency of 503 boys from the Pittsburgh Youth Study and produced several important findings. The cohort reported 12,514 crimes or about 25 crimes each. These crimes resulted in victimizations that ranged from $89 million to $110 million stemming from victims’ pain, suffering, and lost quality of life. The 34 chronic offenders averaged 142 crimes, which was nearly 10 times the criminal activity of other delinquents, and this group imposed 5 to 8 times the victimization costs of nonchronic offenders. Other research has shown that chronic criminal offenders, nearly all of whom began their career as serious juvenile delinquents, cost society more than $1 million per offender. In this way, juvenile delinquency will continue to be an area of intense criminological study because of the various costs that it imposes, the ways that it is viewed as a social indicator, and its relationship to more serious and violent forms of antisocial behavior.

Bibliography:

• Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
• Beccaria, C. (1963). On crimes and punishments (Henry Paolucci, Trans.). Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill. (Original work published 1764)
• Cleckley, H. (1941). The mask of sanity. St. Louis, MO: Mosby. Freud, S. (1925). The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud. London: Hogarth Press.
• Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
• Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Howell, J. C. (2003). Diffusing research into practice using the comprehensive strategy for serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 1, 219–245.
• In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967).
• In re Winshop, 397 U.S. 358 (1970).
• Kempf-Leonard, K., Tracy, P. E., & Howell, J. C. (2001). Serious, violent, and chronic juvenile offenders: The relationship of delinquency career types to adult criminality. Justice Quarterly, 18, 449–478.
• Kent v. United States, 383 U.S. 541 (1966).
• Lahey, B. B., Moffitt, T. E., & Caspi, A. (Eds.). (2003). Causes of conduct disorder and juvenile delinquency. New York: Guilford Press.
• Loeber, R., & Farrington, D. P. (Eds.). (1998). Serious and violent juvenile offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• McKeiver v. Pennsylvania, 403 U.S. 528 (1971).
• Moffitt, T. E. (1993). “Life-course persistent” and “adolescence-limited” antisocial behavior: A developmental typology. Psychological Review, 100, 674–701.
• Platt, A. (1969). The Child Savers: The invention of delinquency. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005).
• Rothman, D. J. (1970). The discovery of the asylum. Boston: Little, Brown.
• Schall v. Martin, 467 U.S. 253 (1984).
• Shaw, C. R., & McKay, H. D. (1942). Juvenile delinquency and urban areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: Macmillan.
• Sutherland, E. H. (1947). Principles of criminology. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott.
• Welsh, B. C., Loeber, R., Stevens, B. R., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Cohen, M. A., & Farrington, D. P. (2008). Costs of juvenile crime in urban areas: A longitudinal perspective. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 6, 3–27.
• Wilson, J. Q., & Herrnstein, R. J. (1985). Crime and human nature: The definitive study of the causes of crime. New York: Simon & Schuster.
• Wolfgang, M. E., Figlio, R. M., & Sellin, T. (1972). Delinquency in a birth cohort. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

• 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: 14 December 2009 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|81.177.180.204]
• 81.177.180.204

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.

• Search Menu
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Urban Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Acquisition
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Media
• Music and Religion
• Music and Culture
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Medical Ethics
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Ethics
• Business Strategy
• Business History
• Business and Technology
• Business and Government
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic History
• Economic Systems
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Public Policy
• Public Administration
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous chapter
• Published: December 2005
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

This chapter summarizes the discussions in the preceding chapters and presents some concluding thoughts from the author. This book shatters the myth of immaculate construction which posits that the juvenile court was born institutionally intact. As this history of America's first juvenile court reveals, juvenile justice evolved through trial and error. The most creative moments in this history have been when reformers sought to discover the root causes of juvenile dependency and delinquency. Such investigations led to the establishment of the juvenile court in the first place, its procedural innovations, and the development of family preservation programs, child guidance clinics, and indigenous community organizing programs. And, as this study has demonstrated, local politics shaped how these programs developed and operated. Thus, the juvenile court helped, not hindered, the establishment of innovative child welfare policies.

Signed in as

Institutional accounts.

• Google Scholar Indexing
• GoogleCrawler [DO NOT DELETE]

Personal account

• Sign in with email/username & password
• Get email alerts
• Save searches
• Purchase content
• Activate your purchase/trial code

Institutional access

• Sign in with a library card Sign in with username/password Recommend to your librarian
• Institutional account management
• Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Sign in through your institution

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

• Click Sign in through your institution.
• Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
• When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
• Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Sign in with a library card

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

• Click Sign in through society site.
• When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

• View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
• View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Rights and permissions
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Juvenile Delinquency: Causes, Effects, Prevention And Rehabilitation

Juvenile delinquency shows two general types of behaviours:.

• Status offense
• Delinquent offense
• CHINS (child in need of supervision)
• PINS (person in need of supervision)
• MINS (minor in need of supervision)
• FINS (family in need of supervision)
• YINS (youth in need of supervision)
• Firstly, children and adolescents commit significant delinquent acts and offenses that result in violence and other forms of victimization. More than one million children and adolescents are being arrested by co-ops for their delinquent acts every year.  
• Secondly, juvenile delinquency itself shows the general health and prosperity in a society. In neighbourhoods, due to high levels of delinquency, antisocial behaviour is seen as part of a larger set of social problems. In this way, juvenile delinquency is troubling because of the victimization that is inflicted. And, also, the perceptual image of society is unable to provide adequate control and supervise young people.  
• Finally, the meaning of Juvenile delinquency depends on its severity and other factors. For most young people, juvenile delinquency is a fairly normal facet of growing up. For a small group of youths, juvenile delinquency is just the beginning stage of what will become antisocial behaviour for a lifetime.

Causes of Delinquency

Effects of delinquency, juvenile justice and rehabilitation, the rehabilitative process includes:.

• Psychological assessment of the crime committed by the juvenile
• The environment which caused it to happen
• Therapeutic guidance
• Skill development which involves them in yoga and other activities for the development of the mind.

Followings, are given to juveniles at aftercare organizations:

• Vocational training
• Therapeutic training for improvement
• psychological behaviour
• Continuing education
• Consensus about social values
• Economical ability to support themselves
• Activities for physical and mental fitness.

Law Article in India

Please drop your comments, you may like.

Assessing Laws Governing Nu...

Addressing the Issue of Sex...

Discharge of Contract

The Relevance Of Squeeze

Workplace Sexual Harassment...

The Argument Against The De...

Legal question & answers, lawyers in india - search by city.

Law Articles

How to file for mutual divorce in delhi.

How To File For Mutual Divorce In Delhi Mutual Consent Divorce is the Simplest Way to Obtain a D...

Increased Age For Girls Marriage

It is hoped that the Prohibition of Child Marriage (Amendment) Bill, 2021, which intends to inc...

Facade of Social Media

One may very easily get absorbed in the lives of others as one scrolls through a Facebook news ...

Section 482 CrPc - Quashing Of FIR: Guid...

The Inherent power under Section 482 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (37th Chapter of t...

The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) in India: A...

The Uniform Civil Code (UCC) is a concept that proposes the unification of personal laws across...

Role Of Artificial Intelligence In Legal...

Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing various sectors of the economy, and the legal i...

File caveat In Supreme Court Instantly

Juvenile Delinquency: Definition and 10 Examples

Juvenile delinquency refers to behaviors by people not legally adults that are outside of the norms of society , either formally or informally.

Generally, it will refer specifically to behaviors that are illegal and enforced by formal social controls , such as through criminal justice agencies. However, it may also refer to engagement in taboo and personally destructive but not illegal behaviors.

Common examples of juvenile delinquency include shoplifting, petty theft, consuming illicit or regulated substances, and spraying graffiti.

Juvenile Delinquency Definition and Overview

The term ‘juvenile delinquency’ encompasses a wide range of actions, from minor offenses such as truancy and curfew violation, to severe criminal behaviors like theft and assault.

Juvenile delinquency is formally defined by Siegel and Welsh (2016) as:

“…the participation by a minor child, usually between the ages of 10 and 17, in illegal behavior or activities” (Siegel & Welsh, 2016, p. 13).

However, the concept and, therefore, the definition of juvenile delinquency is intrinsically linked to the legal and cultural context of a given society, meaning the age at which a person is considered a juvenile and the range of behaviors classified as delinquent can vary widely (Beck, Lee, & Kim, 2018).

Moreover, the approach toward dealing with juvenile delinquents has seen a significant shift over time.

Historically, societies dealt with juvenile offenders in the same way as adult criminals; however, the recognition of young people’s distinctive psychological, social, and developmental needs has brought about changes in law enforcement, sentencing, and rehabilitation approaches (Bala & Anand, 2020; Chen & Adams, 2021).

Namely, in most nations, there are laws around minimum ages at which people can be found criminally responsible for their behaviors. Furthermore, imprisoned juveniles are often kept separate from imprisoned adults.

Examples of Juvenile Delinquency

1. Vandalism: Vandalism is the destruction of either public property or the property of another private individual. This could range from a minor offence, such as scratching a name into a school desk, to severe, such as causing damage to a shopping mall or transit corridor. It tends to emerge in juveniles due to desire to engage in thrill-seeking behaviors, out of desire for recognition from peers, or inability to control emotions. Sometimes, it can also be engaged in as an expressive art form (see later: Graffiti). Vandalism can be indicative of environmental factors that need to be addressed such as lack of supervision, lack of appropriate outlets for play or expression, and peer pressure.

2. Shoplifting: Shoplifting is a common juvenile offense that involves taking items from a store without paying for them. This behavior may be caused by the desire to obtain material goods that the young person cannot access due to lack of participation in the labor market, but could also be the result of thrill-seeking behaviors and peer pressure. It may also be an exhibition of boredom among unsupervised teens.

3. Substance Abuse: Substance abuse among juveniles involves the consumption of illegal or controlled substances, often ones legal to adults but illegal to teens. However, it may also involve the abuse of prescribed substances as a way to seek thrills, or even, a result of curiosity, anxiety, or depression. This is extremely common among young people, with almost half of graduates from US high schools having abused a controlled substance.

4. Truancy: Truancy refers to the behavior of skipping school or other mandated events without permission. It tends to occur when young people feel excluded, isolated, or disconnected from their educational community. It can lead to poor grades at school, missed opportunities to develop important cognitive, social, and physical skills in formal education, and may also cause social isolation.

5. Cyberbullying: Since the rise of social media, society has been slow to support children in developing media literacy skills and the ability to communicate appropriately online (also known as netiquette). The anonymity provided by the internet can often make cyberbullies feel detached from the real-life consequences of their actions. While this behavior is often a violation of an informal norm rather than a legal infraction, it can lead to devastating consequences to the victims, who are usually also youths.

6. Physical assault: Physical assault is also common among juvenile delinquents, especially in school yards and other unregulated environments. Most common among male perpetrators ,  it is often seen and addressed as a symptom of poor problem-solving skills, poor impulse control , or inability to identify and model socially acceptable behaviors.

7. Arson: Arson refers to the fact of intentionally setting fires to public or private property. This act often leads to significant financial loss to the victims or costs to the public. Like many other acts of juvenile delinquency, it has a range of similar causes, including expressions of curiosity, thrill-seeking, or acts of revenge.

8. Joyriding: Joyriding refers to the act of stealing a vehicle, generally with the intent of driving it around, with disregard for its safety, before discarding it. This act is different from carjacking with the intent of making profits, and this is often because youths don’t have the social networks that can assist them in selling the goods on.

9. Graffiti: Graffiti involves using paints – often out of spray cans – to mark and deface public propery. Generally, it involves the use of unique ‘tags’ (designs) that young people use as a way to gain social status and credit. Graffiti is a particularly interesting version of juvenile delinquency because those who engage in it are often extremely talented artists, and create art that makes important social commentary. Nevertheless, it is considered illegal without the property owner’s consent.

10. Trespassing: Trespassing involves entering or staying on a property without the owner’s permission. Commonly, this occurs when young people have parties on abandoned public or private property. Juveniles may also trespass as a form of thrill-seeking, to engage in other illegal activies (such as graffiti art and theft), or out of peer pressure. It may also be an act of rebellion against the authority that owns or manages the property.

Theories of Juvenile Delinquency (Sociology and Criminology)

1. strain theory.

Strain theory , developed by American sociologist Robert Merton in the late 1930s, argues that crime is committed by juveniles because they do not have access to the means of legitimately obtaining social status, power, and wealth.

In the words of the theory, it holds that everyone aspires toward “cultural goals” such as status, power, and wealth, but if they cannot use “legitimate means” to access those goals, then they will choose to utilize illegitimate means, institutionalized means to achieve these goals.

This discrepancy between aspirations and legitimate means can lead to ‘strain’.

In the context of juveniles, this strain is often caused because they lack access to the labor market or other means to obtain culturally-desirable goals that are afforded to adults.

When juveniles perceive an imbalance between their ambitions (often influenced by societal standards) and their ability to fulfill these ambitions through legitimate means, they can experience frustration.

This strain can push them to resort to illegitimate methods, such as criminal activities, to achieve their goals, leading to delinquent behavior (Agnew, 1992).

2. Social Learning Theory

Proposed by Albert Bandura in the 1970s, the social learning theory holds that young people’s behaviors are a direct result of behaviors learned through observation of role models (Bandura, 1977).

A young person who observes delinquent behaviors among older siblings, parents, uncles, peers, neighbors, and so forth, may be more inclined to mirror and emulate those behaviors than young people who are exposed to role models who engage in prosocial behaviors .

The theory has implications for our understanding of whether we should expose our young people to violent and antisocial media, including movies and video games, and whether (and when) social services should be allowed to remove children from homes.

Moreover, the social learning theory argues that delinquent behaviors that are rewarded, reinforced, or normalized, will more likely be engaged in by youths.

3. Social Bond Theory

Hirschi’s social bond theory argues that young people will be less inclined to engage in delinquent behavior if they have strong social bond (Hirschi, 1969; Pratt et al., 2010).

In other words, social bonds control individuals by keeping them engaged with social and cultural norms and values .

Hirschi argued that having strong attachments to one’s family and community, and commitment to following rules and laws preserve social order in a society (Hirschi, 1969; Pratt et al., 2010).

Being involved with day to day routines such as going to work or school, attending church, and having a strong belief system , will socialize young people into internalizing appropriate social norms.

4. Labeling Theory

The labeling theory of deviance holds that society labels young people as deviants, and in that process of labeling, the young people will come to believe themselves to be deviant, and engage in deviant behavior as a result.

The simplest example is in schools, where a teacher labels a child a ‘bad kid’ and treats them as suspect, expecting them to engage in misbehavior. Over time, the child will internalize this belief (known as the secondary stage of deviance ), and at this point, will engage in misbehavior because it’s expected of them. They’re simply acting consistently with their social identity.

In other words, the labeled individual might experience “ self-fulfilling prophecy .”

The theory has its roots in symbolic interactionism, which asserts that the self-identity and behavior of individuals can be influenced by the terms used to describe or classify them (Becker, 1963).

Factors Influencing Juvenile Delinquency

Various factors can influence juvenile delinquency. These are often categorized into two broad groups: situational factors , which are tied to the circumstances and environment of the individual; and dispositional factors , which are inherent traits or characteristics of the individual.

1. Situational Factors

• Peer and Family Influence: Peers play a crucial role during adolescence, and association with deviant peers has been linked to increased risk of delinquent behavior (Dishion, Patterson, Stoolmiller, & Skinner, 1991). Similarly, as argued in the social learning theory, family role models are highly influential in affecting a young person’s behaviors.
• School Environment: Poor academic performance, low school attachment, and negative school experiences can contribute to delinquency (Hawkins, Catalano, & Miller, 1992).
• Neighborhood and Community Context: Some scholars argue that living in a high-crime neighborhood, or poverty-stricken areas can expose children to delinquency (Sampson, Raudenbush, & Earls, 1997). For example, the differential opportunity theory holds that people in neighborhoods where there are established gangs or crime groups are more likely to engage in organized crime, while the same child in a neighborhood without organized gangs will be more likely to engage in more petty delinquent behaviors.

2. Dispositional Factors

• Personality Traits: Certain personality traits, such as impulsivity, difficulty in delaying gratification, or a tendency towards aggression, may make a child more prone to delinquent behavior (Moffitt, 1993).
• Gender: Young men often face difficulties in dealing with emotions, testosterone spikes, and difficulty with developing an identity, which leads them into delinquency at much higher rates than young women.
• Psychological Difficulties: Mental health disorders like Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), conduct disorder, or depression are often associated with increased risk of delinquent behavior (Lynam, 1996). Of course, as with gender, having ADHD is not a deterministic factor – most people with ADHD do not engage in seriously delinquent behaviors.

It’s crucial to note that these factors do not act in isolation but interact with each other in complex ways to influence an individual’s likelihood of engaging in delinquent behavior.

Juvenile delinquency is a very common sociological phenomenon in most societies. Today, most juveniles are treated by social work, educational, and criminal justice institutions as having unique needs due to their still developing cognitive and psychological capacities. Generally, there are a range of petty crimes that juveniles will engage in, such as joyriding and vandalism, that can be addressed by looking at root causes such as peer pressure, thrill-seeking, and lack of supervision.

Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency. Criminology, 30 (1), 47-88.

Bala, N., & Anand, S. (2020). Evolution of the juvenile justice system: Implications for practice and policy. International Journal of Child Rights, 28 (2), 239-256.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. London: Prentice-Hall.

Beck, E., Lee, B., & Kim, H. (2018). The cultural and legal contexts of juvenile delinquency in South Korea. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 53 , 61-74.

Becker, H. (1963). Outsiders: Studies in the sociology of deviance. London: Free Press.

Brook, J. S., Brook, D. W., Zhang, C., Cohen, P., & Whiteman, M. (2002). D*ug use and the risk of major depressive disorder, alco**l dependence, and substance use disorders. Archives of General Psychiatry, 59 (11), 1039–1044.

Chen, P., & Adams, M. (2021). Understanding the patterns and characteristics of juvenile crime in the United States: An overview of the issues. Journal of Crime and Justice, 44 (2), 203-216.

Dishion, T. J., Patterson, G. R., Stoolmiller, M., & Skinner, M. L. (1991). Family, school, and behavioral antecedents to early adolescent involvement with antisocial peers. Developmental Psychology, 27 (1), 172-180.

Farrington, D. P., Loeber, R., & Van Kammen, W. B. (1990). Long-term criminal outcomes of hyperactivity-impulsivity-attention deficit and conduct problems in childhood. Straight and devious pathways from childhood to adulthood.

Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency . Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Merton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3 (5), 672-682.

Siegel, L. J., & Welsh, B. C. (2016). Juvenile Delinquency: The Core (6th ed.). Cengage Learning.

Zubaidah, S., Putri, N., & Hakim, A. (2019). Juvenile delinquency: A significant issue in many societies. International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanity Studies, 11 (1), 50-58.

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ Social-Emotional Learning (Definition, Examples, Pros & Cons)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ What is Educational Psychology?
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ What is IQ? (Intelligence Quotient)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 5 Top Tips for Succeeding at University

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

4 minute read

Juvenile Delinquency

This brief review of research indicates that a popular opinion about family impact is wrong: parental absence is not importantly related to juvenile delinquency. Family interactions have greater influence on delinquency. Children reared by competent, affectionate parents who avoid using physical forms of punishment are unlikely to commit serious crimes either as juveniles or as adults. On the other hand, children reared by parents who neglect or reject them are likely to be greatly influenced by their community environments, which may offer opportunities and encouragement for criminal behavior.

See also: C HILD A BUSE : P HYSICAL A BUSE AND N EGLECT ; C HILDHOOD , S TAGES OF : A DOLESCENCE ; C HILDREN OF A LCOHOLICS ; C ONDUCT D ISORDERS ; C ONFLICT : F AMILY R ELATIONSHIPS ; D ISCIPLINE ; D IVORCE : E FFECTS ON C HILDREN ; G ANGS ; I NTERPARENTAL C ONFLICT — E FFECTS ON C HILDREN ; N EIGHBORHOOD ; O PPOSITIONALITY ; P OVERTY ; R UNAWAY Y OUTHS ; S ELF -E STEEM ; S INGLE -P ARENT F AMILIES ; S PANKING ; S UBSTANCE A BUSE ; T EMPERAMENT

Bibliography

Arnett, J., and Balle-Jensen, L. (1993). "Cultural Bases of Risk Behavior: Danish Adolescents." Child Development 64(6):1842–1855.

Brook, J. S.; Brook, D. W.; De la Rosa, M.; Whiteman, M.; and Montoya, I. D. (1999). "The Role of Parents in Protecting Colombian Adolescents from Delinquency and Marijuana Use." Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine 153:457–464.

Chilton, R. J., and Markle, G. E. (1972). "Family Disruption, Delinquent Conduct and the Effect of Subclassification." American Sociological Review 37:93–99.

Crockenberg, S., and Litman, C. (1990). "Autonomy as Competence in Two-Year-Olds: Maternal Correlates of Child Defiance, Compliance, and Self-Assertion." Developmental Psychology 26:961–971.

Empey, L .T., and Erickson, M. L. (1972). The Provo Experiment: Evaluating Community Control of Delinquency. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Gorman-Smith, D.; Tolan, P. H.; and Henry, D. (1999). "The Relation of Community and Family to Risk among Urban-Poor Adolescents." In Where and When: Historical and Geographical Aspects of Psychopathology, ed. P. Cohen, C. Slomkowski, and L. N. Robins. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Gottfredson, G. D. (1987). "Peer Group Interventions To Reduce the Risk of Delinquent Behavior: A Selective Review and A New Evaluation." Criminology 25(3):671–714.

Harada, Y. (1995). "Adjustment to School, Life Course Transitions, and Changes in Delinquent Behavior in Japan." In Current Perspectives on Aging and the Life Cycle, Vol. 4: Delinquency and Disrepute in the Life Course, ed. Z. S. Blau and J. Hagan. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Juby, H., and Farrington, D. P. (2001). "Disentangling the Link Between Disrupted Families and Delinquency." British Journal of Criminology 41:22–40.

Liska, A. E., and Reed, M. D. (1985). "Ties to Conventional Institutions and Delinquency: Estimating Reciprocal Effects." American Sociological Review 50 (August):547–560.

Martens, P. L. (1992). Familj, Uppvaxt Och Brott (Family, environment and delinquency). Stockholm, Sweden: Brottsforebyggande radet. McCord, J. (1982). "A Longitudinal View of the Relationship Between Paternal Absence and Crime." In Abnormal Offenders, Delinquency, and the Criminal Justice System, ed. J. Gunn and D. P. Farrington. Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons.

McCord, J. (1997a). "On Discipline." Psychological Inquiry 8(3):215–217.

McCord, J. (1997b). "He Did It Because He Wanted To . . . ." In Motivation and Delinquency, ed. W. Osgood. Vol. 44. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Pfeiffer, C. (1998). "Juvenile Crime and Violence in Europe." In Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, ed. M. Tonry. Vol. 23. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Power, T. G., and Chapieski, M. L. (1986). "Childrearing and Impulse Control in Toddlers: A Naturalistic Investigation." Developmental Psychology 22(2):271–275.

Reckless, W. C., and Dinitz, S. (1967). "Pioneering with Self-Concept as a Vulnerability Factor in Delinquency." Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science 58:515–523.

Robins, L. N., and Hill, S. Y. (1966). "Assessing the Contribution of Family Structure, Class, and Peer Groups to Juvenile Delinquency." Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science 57:325–334.

Strassberg, Z.; Dodge, K. A.; Pettit, G.; and Bates, J.E. (1994). Spanking in the Home and Children's Subsequent Aggression toward Kindergarten Peers. Development and Psychopathology 6(3):445–461.

Terlouw, G., and Junger-Tas, J. (1992). "The International Juvenile Self-Report Delinquency Study: Design and First Results of the Dutch Survey." Paper presented at the 44th annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, New Orleans, LA.

Tremblay, R. E.; Vitaro, F.; Bertrand, L.; LeBlanc, M.; Beauchesne, H.; Boileau, H.; and David, L. (1992). "Parent and Child Training to Prevent Early Onset of Delinquency: The Montreal Longitudinal-Experimental Study." In Preventing Antisocial Behavior: Interventions from Birth through Adolescence, ed. J. McCord and R. E. Tremblay. New York: Guilford Press.

Weikart, D. P., and Schweinhart, L. J. (1992). "High/Scope Preschool Program Outcomes." In Preventing Antisocial Behavior, ed. J. McCord and R. E. Tremblay. New York: Guilford Press.

Other Resources

American Society of Criminology. Web site. Available from http://www.asc41.com .

International Society for Criminology. Web site. Available from http://perso.wanadoo.fr/societe.internationale.de.criminologie/index_ang.htm .

JOAN MCCORD

Additional topics

• Juvenile Delinquency - Community
• Other Free Encyclopedias

Marriage and Family Encyclopedia Family Social Issues Juvenile Delinquency - Family Structure, Community, Conclusion

132 Juvenile Delinquency Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

🏆 best juvenile delinquency topic ideas & essay examples, 💡 interesting topics to write about juvenile delinquency, 📌 simple & easy juvenile delinquency essay titles, 👍 good essay topics on juvenile delinquency, ❓ research questions on juvenile delinquency.

• The Impact of Media on Juvenile Delinquency Besides, the media have been at the forefront of the fight against juvenile-related crimes. In this view, this document aims at critically evaluating the role of various forms of media in escalating juvenile delinquency, and […]
• Methodologies Used to Measure Acts of Juvenile Delinquency Before moving into the aspects of measurement of actions of juvenile delinquents, it is necessary to define and know what a juvenile delinquent is, and what actions fall within the ambit of juvenile delinquency.
• Poverty Areas and Effects on Juvenile Delinquency The desire to live a better life contributes to the youths engaging in crimes, thus the increase in cases of juvenile delinquencies amid low-income families. The studies indicate that the fear of poverty is the […]
• The Broken Homes and Juvenile Delinquency The level of measurement in this study will be to assess the frequency of involvement in crime by the children from the broken homes as well as those from the two parent families.
• The Issue of Juvenile Delinquency At the onset of the industrial revolution, public awareness concerning the fair and ethical treatment of children in workplaces emerged. The role of supervising and guiding children is left to other children, grandparents, or hired […]
• Juvenile Delinquency in Ancient and Modern Times The only policy related to juvenile delinquency existing in ancient Greece was the law that prohibited the youth in ancient Greece from beating their parents.
• Juvenile Delinquency The defenders of the system on the other hand appreciate the marked role of juvenile justice system in rehabilitating juvenile delinquents and are advocating for the conservation of the system and reforming critical structures that […]
• Developing Solutions to the Juvenile Delinquency Problem These include the creation of a creative activity center, the mandatory introduction of art classes in schools, and the implementation of urban sports programs.
• Juvenile Delinquency: Causes and Intervention The role of the family and parents cannot be discounted in the causes of juvenile delinquency. The courts and the lawyers are involved in the trial and sentencing of juvenile offenders.
• Single Parenthood and Juvenile Delinquency in Modern Society The proposal seeks to establish the relationship between single parenthood and the increase in juvenile delinquency. I propose addressing child delinquency from the perspective of social and family background to understand the risks associated with […]
• Problems of Juvenile Delinquency The main aim of writing this paper is to carry out an examination of a juvenile delinquent in order to understand what pushes them into doing the act and applicable solutions which can be applied […]
• The Cognitive Theory in Juvenile Delinquency At this stage, a child can perform certain actions repeatedly and also be able to differentiate the means of doing actions.
• Juvenile Delinquency: Social Disorganization Theory Hence, according to Lopez and Gillespie, tenets of the social disorganization theory have been resourceful in the present-day juvenile delinquency system.
• The Problem of Juvenile Delinquency The addition of family context to the existing perception of adolescent crimes could be used to explore the core reasons for the crimes and to define possible methods for the prevention of juvenile crimes. The […]
• Adolescent Diversion Project in Juvenile Delinquency Treatment in Michigan The focus of the program is to prevent future delinquency by creating social attachments to family and other prosocial youth by providing community resources and keeping individuals away from the juvenile justice system which can […]
• The Relationship Between Parental Influence and Juvenile Delinquency Parents that do not allow their children to play with their neighbors, or discourage their children from associating with particular families lead to the children developing a negative attitude towards the families.
• Juvenile Delinquency and Affecting Factors The information gathered, synthesized, and analyzed in the research with the help of the proposed question has future value as it identifies factors that can be impacted by the society representatives.
• Juvenile Delinquency: Impact of Collective Efficacy and Mental Illnesses The perception of collective efficacy can be defined as the consideration that the people in a neighborhood are trustable and can do their part to partake in social control to benefit a specific community.
• Juvenile Delinquency: a Case Analysis The tracking of the juvenile from juvenile court to adult court and then through the system is shown in the outline below: Arrest.
• Implementing an Arts Program to Help Curb Juvenile Delinquency and Reduce Recidivism Therefore, the pieces of art will be customized to rhyme with society needs of the targeted children and the adolescents. Some of the enrollees to this program will be delinquents.
• Role of Family in Reducing Juvenile Delinquency Players in the criminal justice system recognize the contribution of family and familial factors to the development of criminal and delinquent tendencies and their potential to minimize minors’ engagement in illegal and socially unacceptable behaviors.
• Juvenile Delinquency is a Product of Nurture These criminals have been exposed to unfavorable conditions in their lives such as violence and poverty and turn to criminal behavior as a coping mechanism.
• Gangs and Juvenile Delinquency Hallsworth and Silverstone argues that although there have been a lot of violence, the main source is not quite clear and people live by speculations that the violence is linked to the emergence of a […]
• Juvenile Delinquency: Three Levels of Prevention It is made up of programs and ideals which are effective in treatment of the offender, reintegrating them in the society and limiting them from committing similar offenses. In conclusion, though most prevention programs are […]
• Day Treatment Centers and Juvenile Delinquency One of the core aspects that should not be disregarded is that such programs may be used as a particular assessment tool that would help to identify needs of a juvenile, and this approach may […]
• Court Unification and Juvenile Delinquency Speaking about the given issue, it is important to give the clear definition of this category and determine who could be judged by the juvenile court.
• Prevent Juvenile Delinquency in the USA Due to this fact, it is possible to describe the existing problem as the increase in the number of crimes that children commit.
• Juvenile Delinquency: Risk Assessment The investigatory processes to know the individual’s character and personality involve the use of complex and simple approaches, and these serve to provide organizations or institutions dealing with child welfare with important information that would […]
• Life Without Parole and Juvenile Delinquency The United States is one of the few countries which recognize the necessity of sentencing juveniles to life without parole. This is the main and only advantage of this approach.
• Juvenile Delinquency and Reasons That Lead to It Irrespective of the cause of juvenile delinquency, juvenile drug abuse is certainly most commonly related directly to either an increase or a decrease in any form of juvenile delinquency. This correlates to the increase in […]
• Drugs Influence on Juvenile Delinquency Additionally, parents are the ones who know the strengths and weaknesses of the children since they spend most of their time together, their suggestions and views towards the crime committed should be handled with a […]
• The Concepts of Nature and Nurture in Modern Psychologist to Explain Juvenile Delinquency Hence any behavior exhibited by a juvenile that is in total contrast with the value demands of the larger society can be termed as Juvenile Delinquency. On the one hand, it is believed that Juvenile […]
• Theories of Juvenile Delinquency Research showed individuals’ attitudes toward crime may herald their criminal behavior, in agreement with criminological theories such as control theory, learning theory and psychological theories like the theory of reasoned action.
• Criminology Theories and Juvenile Delinquency From the point of view of labeling theory, the initial drinking and the first fight at the party is John’s primary deviance.
• Juvenile Delinquency in the United States According to Pennsylvania laws, children at the age of 10 and above can be trialed as adults for first- and second-degree murders.
• Juvenile Delinquency and the Importance of Socialization At the time of the incident, according to the authors of the article, twenty students out of a total of thirty had arrived for the lecture.
• Theories and Suggestions on Juvenile Delinquency The other factor is that the norms that governed relationships in the different family and societal set-ups such as in the school and the workplace are being challenged.
• The Phenomenon of Juvenile Delinquency They are very important in the proceedings and even have additional authority to propose a waiver of the subject. The judges are the other officials in a juvenile court system.
• The Juvenile Delinquency Rate In order to reduce the rate of crime committed by young people in my community, there is a need to educate the youth in matters of drug and substance abuse.
• Juvenile Delinquency Recidivism Prevention Many studies have been carried out to examine the rates of recidivism among juveniles and the ineffectiveness of the juvenile prison.
• Juvenile Delinquency: The Columbine Shootings This paper seeks to discuss and analyze the casual theory of juvenile delinquency by describing an instance of juvenile delinquency as highlighted in the mass media, by describing the casual theory of juvenile delinquency with […]
• Juvenile Delinquency Theories in the United States School and family are extremely important to juveniles regarding their worldview, and the failure of those communities to guide them may result in turning to questionable ideals and morals.
• Crime Prevention and Juvenile Delinquency As a specific jurisdiction that will serve as the basis for assessing and implementing the provisions of the crime prevention program, the District of Florida will be considered.
• Adolescent Psychology and Juvenile Delinquency I will also promote the idea that when it comes to identifying the factors that contribute to the development of delinquency in youth, one must be willing to consider the effects of the combination of […]
• Juvenile Delinquency, Its Factors and Theories Under the individual risk factors, it is prudent to note that a lack of proper education coupled with lower intelligence might pose a serious risk to a minor in terms of engaging in criminal activities […]
• Factors Associated With Juvenile Delinquency Further, the authors propose that the family should be the main focus of prevention and clinical interventions and that establishment of social policy and programs should be directed to the family.
• Combating Juvenile Delinquency: Projects Management In order to prevent and reduce juvenile violence, the City of Hampton develops and implements various activities that were mentioned above, promoting the importance of moral standards.
• The Issue of Juvenile Delinquency: Recent Trends Violence and other criminal actions attract the attention of the government and the general public, as they affect the life of the society adversely.
• Juvenile Delinquency Investigation The social learning theory that is a part of it suggests that children observe the behavior of others and replicate it.
• Juvenile Delinquency’ Causes and Possible Treatments They investigated the issue in different perspectives but came up to the decision that the best way to treat young offenders is to utilize multisystemic therapy.
• Juvenile Delinquency: Criminological Theories These include the broken windows theory, the culture of the gang theory and the social disorganization theory. Cohen developed the culture of the gang theory to explain the origin of juvenile delinquency.
• Juvenile Delinquency and Criminal Gangs The proliferation of criminal gangs in my area of jurisdiction, as director of the county juvenile court, represents a nationwide problem. In the 1990s, the rate of crime rose in most parts of the world.
• Juvenile Delinquency, Treatment, and Interventions The performance of the child in school is one of the individual factors that are likely to cause the child to get involved in violent behaviors.
• Poverty and Juvenile Delinquency in the United States
• Roles of Family, School, and Church in Juvenile Delinquency
• Understanding Juvenile Delinquency and the Different Ways to Stop the Problem in Our Society
• Juvenile Delinquency and Crime as an Integral Part of the American Society
• Impact of Television Violence In Relation To Juvenile Delinquency
• The Vicious Circle of Child Abuse, Juvenile Delinquency, and Future Abuse
• Juvenile Delinquency, Domestic Violence, and the Effects of Substance Abuse
• The Explorers Program as a Preventative Measure in Juvenile Delinquency
• Juvenile Delinquency, Youth Culture, and Renegade Kids, Suburban Outlaws by Wooden
• The Alarming Rate of Juvenile Delinquency and Cases of Teenage Suicides in the U.S
• The Line Between Juvenile Delinquency And Adult Penalties
• Home Social Environment and Juvenile Delinquency
• The Effects of Neighborhood Crime on the Level of Juvenile Delinquency
• Interpersonal Learning Theory Plus Juvenile Delinquency
• How to Prevent Juvenile Delinquency in the U.S
• Relationship Between Juvenile Delinquency and Learning Disabilities
• The Impact of Television Violence and Its Relation to Juvenile Delinquency
• The Lack of Strong Parental Figures Causes Juvenile Delinquency
• Theories of Juvenile Delinquency: Why Young Individuals Commit Crimes
• Using Drugs and Juvenile Delinquency
• Theory of Social Disorganization and Juvenile Delinquency
• What Is the Best Way to Combat Juvenile Delinquency?
• The Marxist Crime Perspective On Juvenile Delinquency Of African Americans
• The Failures of the Act of Juvenile Delinquency in the United States
• Juvenile Delinquency And Its Effects On The Adult Justice System
• Juvenile Delinquency Contributing Factors Current Research and Intervention
• Impact Of Single Parents On Juvenile Delinquency Rates
• Video Game Violence Leading to Juvenile Delinquency
• Juvenile Delinquency: Exploring Factors of Gender and Family
• The Psychological Aspect of Juvenile Delinquency
• The Antisocial Behavior Leading to Juvenile Delinquency
• Lead and Juvenile Delinquency: New Evidence from Linked Birth, School and Juvenile Detention Records
• The Role of Family in Preventing Juvenile Delinquency and Behavioural Patterns of Children
• The Relationship Between Poverty and Juvenile Delinquency
• The Importance of Family in the Behavior of Children and in Preventing Juvenile Delinquency
• Preventing and Dealing with Juvenile Delinquency
• How Family Structures Can Play a Role in Juvenile Delinquency
• Juvenile Delinquency and A Child’s Emotional Needs
• Family Structural Changes and Juvenile Delinquency
• The Causes of the Problem of Juvenile Delinquency in the United States
• Juvenile Delinquency And The Juvenile Justice System
• The Curfew: Issues On Juvenile Delinquency And Constitutional Rights
• The Socioeconomic Triggers of Juvenile Delinquency: Analysis of “The Outsiders”
• Exploring the Root Causes of the Problem of Juvenile Delinquency
• The Rise of Juvenile Delinquency and the Flaws of the Juvenile Justice System
• The Causes And Possible Solutions Of Juvenile Delinquency
• The History of the Juvenile Delinquency and the Process of the Juvenile Justice System in Malaysia
• The Issue of Juvenile Delinquency Among Girls in the United States
• What Is the Importance of Studying Juvenile Delinquency?
• Does Authoritative Parenting Impact Juvenile Delinquency?
• What Are the Factors of Juvenile Delinquency?
• What Are Juvenile Delinquency Causes and Solutions?
• What Type of Problem Is Juvenile Delinquency?
• How Can Family Structures Play a Role in Juvenile Delinquency?
• What Is the Concept of Juvenile Delinquency?
• How Do You Explain Juvenile Delinquency?
• How Does Poverty and the Environment Cause or Contribute to Juvenile Delinquency?
• What Are the Leading Causes of Juvenile Delinquency?
• How Does Family Contribute to Juvenile Delinquency?
• How the Juvenile Delinquency Impact Society?
• Why Is Juvenile Delinquency a Problem?
• What Factors Cause Juvenile Delinquency?
• What Is the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency?
• What Are the Types of Juvenile Delinquency?
• What Is an Example of a Juvenile Delinquent?
• How Can We Prevent Juvenile Delinquency?
• How Does Juvenile Delinquency Affect the Community?
• How Does Juvenile Delinquency Affect Education?
• Why Is Juvenile Delinquency a Problem in Our Society?
• How Does Juvenile Delinquency Affect the Individual?
• What Is Another Name for Juvenile Delinquency?
• What Causes Juvenile Delinquency?
• How Does Birth Order Affect Juvenile Delinquency?
• What Is the Main Problem in Juvenile Delinquency?
• What Is the Difference Between Crime and Juvenile Delinquency?
• What Are Some Effects of Juvenile Delinquency?
• How Does Juvenile Delinquency Affect Social Life?
• What Is the Nature of Juvenile Delinquency?
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, November 9). 132 Juvenile Delinquency Essay Topic Ideas & Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/juvenile-delinquency-essay-topics/

"132 Juvenile Delinquency Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." IvyPanda , 9 Nov. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/juvenile-delinquency-essay-topics/.

IvyPanda . (2023) '132 Juvenile Delinquency Essay Topic Ideas & Examples'. 9 November.

IvyPanda . 2023. "132 Juvenile Delinquency Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." November 9, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/juvenile-delinquency-essay-topics/.

1. IvyPanda . "132 Juvenile Delinquency Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." November 9, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/juvenile-delinquency-essay-topics/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "132 Juvenile Delinquency Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." November 9, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/juvenile-delinquency-essay-topics/.

• Hacking Essay Topics
• Child Development Research Ideas
• Parenting Research Topics
• Crime Prevention Research Topics
• Video Game Topics
• Cyber Bullying Essay Ideas
• Serial Killer Paper Topics
• Criminal Procedure Titles

Home » Articles » Juvenile Delinquency in India: Challenges and Solutions

Juvenile Delinquency in India: Challenges and Solutions

Reading Time - 13 minutes

by Varsha | Jul 8, 2023 | 0 comments

Introduction

Juvenile Delinquency is a term used to describe criminal behaviour committed by minors, typically below the age of 18 years. Juvenile delinquency has become a growing concern in India, where the majority of the population is under the age of 25 years. According to the National Crime Records Bureau (2019), more than 39,000 juveniles were arrested for various offences. Generally speaking, the term refers to a large variety of disapproved behaviour in children and adolescents which the society do not approve of and for which some kind of admonition, punishment or corrective measure is justified in the public interest. It therefore can be said that a juvenile is an adolescent person between Childhood, Manhood, Womanhood as the case may be who may turn into a potential offender if not checked.

This includes behaviours such as vandalism, theft, drug abuse, gang affiliation, and violent acts. Juvenile delinquency is a complex social and legal issue that arises from various factors such as family dysfunction, poverty, peer pressure, substance abuse, and mental health disorders.

Juvenile delinquency is a serious problem that affects communities, families, and individuals. It can have long-term negative consequences for the individual as well as the society as a whole. It is essential to understand the root causes of juvenile delinquency to prevent it from occurring and intervene early to provide appropriate support and resources to those at risk. The criminal justice system and social service agencies play a significant role in addressing juvenile delinquency and rehabilitating young offenders.

Legal Development of Juvenile Laws in India

The development of juvenile laws in India can be traced back to the enactment of the Children Act, 1960. This law aimed to provide care, protection, and treatment to children below the age of 18 who are in need of such help. In 1986, the Juvenile Justice Act (JJA) replaced the Children Act with the objective of providing a comprehensive child protection framework that takes into account the best interests of the child. (Pranjape, 2022)

The JJA 1986 was amended in 2000 and 2006 to strengthen the protection of the child’s rights and to address concerns related specifically to children in conflict with the law. Under these amendments, the age of juveniles was increased from 16 to 18 years, keeping in line with the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The purpose of this change was to ensure that children are not treated as adults in the criminal justice system and to provide a separate and distinct framework for the management of juvenile justice. (Mishra, 2022)

Further amendments were made in 2011, and a new Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 was enacted. The JJ Act, 2015 aims to provide a more comprehensive framework for the care, protection, and rehabilitation of children. It introduces a restorative justice system that emphasizes reform and rehabilitation of children rather than punishment.

The JJ Act, 2015 also has provisions for the establishment of specialized juvenile justice bodies such as the Juvenile Justice Boards and Child Welfare Committees. These bodies are designed to ensure the effective implementation of the Act and to guarantee that the child’s best interests are given due consideration in all decisions that affect them.

Factors of Juvenile Delinquency

There is a growing tendency in youngsters to be arrogant, disobedient, disruptive and violent to the law with a result there has been a considerable rise in the incidence of juvenile delinquency. These kinds of behaviours are influenced by multiple factors present and are governed by a person’s experiences, associations, teachings, culture, influences etc, some of the factors which affect/causes are: (Kaur, 2019)

• Family problems – this can include parental neglect, abuse, divorce, or a lack of parental guidance. Family dynamics such as parental neglect or abuse, lack of supervision, parental conflict or separation, substance abuse, poverty, and criminal behaviour can contribute to delinquent behaviour among juveniles. The British Home Secretary Mr. Butler once said that “the natural consequence of broken homes is lack of parental control, absence of security and want of love and affection towards children, which are contributing factors for juvenile delinquency. An unprecedented increase in divorce cases and matrimonial disputes is one of the major causes for disrupting family solidarity. Discriminatory or step-motherly treatment of children also has an adverse effect on the psychology of the child. A neglected child shows certain behaviours which may lead him to either be numb towards how other people feel and may lead to finding ways to vent out the frustration and anger which might not be good for society as he is not under healthy supervision or he may start to seek validations too much from a person who he thinks is gives him any importance and he starts to follow him blindly which when met with bad association lead to children committing such acts which constitute a crime just for the sake of validation from the person influencing him.
• Peer pressure – teenagers may feel the need to conform to what their peers are doing, even if it means breaking the law. The influence of peer groups can push juveniles to engage in risky and criminal behaviour, seeking acceptance or social status. In many cases, juveniles who engage in criminal activities do so because of peer influence. They may feel like the only way to fit in with their peers is to participate in illegal activities, even if they know it’s wrong. They may also feel pressure to impress their peers or gain their approval, leading them to engage in delinquent behaviour. Furthermore, peer pressure can discourage juveniles from reporting or seeking help for their delinquent behaviour. They may fear that their peers will ostracize them for “snitching,” which can lead to continued delinquent behaviour and lack of intervention. It is important for parents, teachers, and mentors to be aware of the risks and dangers of peer pressure and work towards educating juveniles on how to resist negative influences. Building positive relationships, emphasizing the importance of character, and promoting healthy decision-making can all help prevent juvenile delinquency caused by peer pressure.
• Mental health issues – some juveniles may struggle with mental health problems such as depression, anxiety, or ADHD, which can lead to delinquent behaviours. Many research studies have shown that children with mental health problems are more likely to become involved in criminal activities than those without mental health problems. Moreover, children with mental health issues often face stigmatization, bullying, and rejection by society, which exacerbates their distress and can contribute to delinquent behaviour. Thus, it is crucial to identify and address mental health problems in youth offenders to reduce the risk of recidivism and improve their well-being. Interventions such as cognitive-behavioural therapy, family therapy, and psychotropic medication treatments have demonstrated efficacy in managing behavioural problems and improving mental health outcomes in juvenile offenders. In addition, early diagnosis and treatment of mental health problems in children can significantly reduce the likelihood of delinquent behaviour later in life.
• Poverty – growing up in poverty can lead to a lack of resources, opportunities, and stable living conditions, which can increase the likelihood of delinquency. There is a strong relationship between poverty and juvenile delinquency. Children from low-income families are more likely to get involved in delinquent activities compared to their counterparts from well-off backgrounds. Some of the underlying factors contributing to poverty-related juvenile delinquency include:
• Lack of resources: Low-income families find it difficult to acquire basic necessities such as food, healthcare, and education. Children from such households may resort to theft, drug abuse or prostitution as a means of survival.
• Family instability: Unstable family structures, poor parenting, and domestic violence can contribute to delinquency. Children may become socially isolated and end up associating with their peers who engage in criminal activities.
• Poor education: Children from low-income families often attend underfunded schools, which can lead to poor academic performance. Academic failure can result in frustration and a lack of opportunities, leaving the youth vulnerable to delinquent behaviours.
• Lack of positive role models: Many children from low-income families lack positive role models, which can lead to low self-esteem and exposure to negative influences such as gangs.
• Substance abuse – teens who use drugs and alcohol may be more likely to engage in delinquent behaviour.

There is a well-established link between substance abuse and juvenile delinquency. Studies have shown that a significant number of juveniles who engage in delinquent behaviour have also used drugs or alcohol.

Substance abuse can increase the likelihood of juvenile delinquency in several ways. For one, drug and alcohol use can impair judgment, leading juveniles to engage in risky and illegal activities. Additionally, substance abuse can lead to increased aggression and violence, which can also result in delinquent behaviour.

Furthermore, substance abuse can often co-occur with other risk factors for delinquency, such as poverty, family dysfunction, and mental health issues. These risk factors can create a perfect storm of circumstances that increase the likelihood of juvenile delinquency.

Preventing and addressing substance abuse among juveniles is an important component in reducing delinquent behaviour. This can involve early intervention programs, substance abuse education, and counselling and treatment for juveniles who have already developed substance abuse problems. By addressing substance abuse, we can reduce the risk of delinquency and improve the overall well-being of young people.

• Neighbourhood environment – living in a high-crime area can expose juveniles to criminal activity and increase their risk of involvement in delinquent behaviour. (Trinidad, 2018)

The neighbourhood environment can also play a significant role in juvenile delinquency. Research has shown that youth who live in disadvantaged neighbourhoods with high rates of poverty, unemployment, and crime are more likely to engage in delinquent behaviour than youth living in more affluent and stable neighbourhoods.

Several factors within the neighbourhood environment can contribute to juvenile delinquency. For example, high rates of crime and violence can create a sense of fear and instability, leading youth to turn to delinquent behaviour as a means of protection or as a way to gain respect and status within their peer groups. Additionally, neighbourhoods with limited access to positive recreational opportunities or community programs may leave youth with few constructive outlets for their energy and creativity, increasing the likelihood of delinquent behaviour.

Other neighbourhood factors that may contribute to juvenile delinquency include poor quality housing, inadequate educational resources, and limited access to healthcare and social services. These factors can create significant stress and hardship for families and youth, increasing the risk of delinquent behaviour. Addressing neighborhood-level factors that contribute to juvenile delinquency can involve a range of interventions, such as community policing efforts, neighbourhood revitalization initiatives, and increased access to social and educational services. By creating more stable and supportive neighbourhood environments, we can reduce the risk of juvenile delinquency and promote positive outcomes for youth.

Charges of Sexual Offences against a Minor

Offenses against minors, including sexual offenses, are taken very seriously by society. While it is commonly perceived that such crimes are predominantly committed by adult men against women and children, it is important to recognize that this is not always the case. In recent years, there have been instances where minors themselves have been involved in committing these offenses.

Since the late 1980s, there has been growing concern about crimes committed by young people. Serious crimes carried out by children and adolescents have drawn the attention of criminologists, leading to an increased focus on understanding and addressing juvenile delinquency. It is worth noting that the country has indeed seen high rates of reported incidents of rape. Various factors, including patriarchal societal norms, a skewed sex ratio, and systemic issues, can contribute to the prevalence of such crimes. Efforts have been made to address these issues through legal reforms, awareness campaigns, and initiatives aimed at empowering women and creating a safer environment for all individuals.

It is crucial to approach these matters with sensitivity, acknowledging that anyone, regardless of age or gender, can be involved in committing sexual offenses. It is important to promote education, prevention, and appropriate legal measures to ensure the safety and well-being of minors and society as a whole.

A. Victim Compensation: Offences Against Women

Rape is one of the most heinous crimes against mankind. The impact it has on both the individual victim and society as a whole. The Supreme Court of India has recognized rape as not only a crime against the individual woman but also a crime against the entire society, as it violates the victim’s fundamental rights and has far-reaching psychological and social consequences.

To address the inadequacy in laws related to sexual offenses against women and children, the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 was enacted, which led to the establishment of the Nirbhaya Fund. The Nirbhaya Fund was created to support initiatives aimed at enhancing the safety and well-being of women and children. Additionally, the Central Victim Compensation Fund Scheme was set up by the Central Government in 2015 to provide compensation to victims of sexual offenses.

However, it is concerning that a significant portion of the Nirbhaya Fund remained unutilized after seven years, and a large number of minor rape victims did not receive any compensation. This highlights the challenges and bureaucratic issues in effectively implementing and disbursing funds.

In response to the need for victim compensation, the Supreme Court directed the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) to establish a committee to develop Model Rules for Victim Compensation for sexual offenses and acid attacks. The committee finalized the Compensation Scheme for Women Victims/Survivors of Sexual Assault/other Crimes in 2018, which sets out the minimum and maximum compensation amounts for different types of offenses.

According to the scheme, victims of gang rape are eligible for a minimum compensation of Rs 5 lakhs and up to a maximum of Rs 10 lakhs.

In cases of rape and unnatural sexual assault, the minimum compensation is set at Rs 4 lakhs, with a maximum of Rs 7 lakhs. For victims of acid attacks resulting in disfigurement of the face, the minimum compensation is Rs 7 lakhs, and the maximum is Rs 8 lakhs.

The Supreme Court has accepted this scheme as applicable nationwide, establishing it as the prevailing law in India regarding victim compensation for sexual offenses.

It is crucial to ensure that such compensation schemes are effectively implemented and that victims of sexual offenses receive the support and justice they deserve. Efforts should also be made to address the bureaucratic challenges to streamline the disbursal of funds and provide timely and adequate compensation to the victims. (Hassant, 2021)

B. Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012

The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) is an important legislation enacted by the Indian Parliament to protect children from sexual offenses. It was passed on May 22, 2012, and came into force on November 14, 2012. The primary objective of the POCSO Act is to safeguard children from various forms of sexual abuse, including sexual assault, sexual harassment, and child pornography. It applies to individuals below the age of 18 years, as they are considered children under the law.

The act emphasizes the need for prompt action and relief to the victims. It establishes special procedures for reporting, recording, and investigating complaints of sexual offenses against children. It aims to ensure that the legal process is child-friendly and minimizes the trauma experienced by the victims during the investigation and trial. Under the POCSO Act, not only committing an offense but also aiding, abetting, or facilitating the sexual abuse of a child is considered a punishable offense. This extends the scope of liability to those who assist or support the perpetrators in carrying out the abuse. To facilitate efficient and swift disposal of cases, the act mandates that the trial should be conducted in special children’s courts. These courts are designated specifically for handling cases under the POCSO Act and are equipped with child-friendly facilities and personnel trained to handle such sensitive matters. Special measures are in place to ensure that child victims are protected during the trial and do not come face-to-face with the accused while testifying. Despite the importance and necessity of the provisions and regulations outlined in the POCSO Act, it is true that awareness and implementation of the law remain areas of concern. Efforts should be made to raise awareness about the act among the general public, ensure effective implementation, and provide necessary support and rehabilitation to the victims of child sexual offenses.

Juvenile Justice Board: Introduction and Functions

The Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) is a specialized court in India that deals with cases involving juveniles. The board is established under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which is the primary legislation governing juvenile justice in India. (Admin, Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, n.d.)

The JJB is responsible for hearing cases involving juveniles who are alleged to have committed offenses. The board consists of a magistrate and two social workers or child welfare experts, one of whom must be a woman. The board is responsible for ensuring that the juvenile’s rights are protected during the legal process, and for making decisions regarding the juvenile’s care and rehabilitation. Composition of Bench under Juvenile Justice Act, 2015

• Metropolitan Magistrate or Judicial Magistrate First Class (Principal Magistrate herein) [not being Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or Chief Judicial Magistrate] -Experience Required: 3 years
• Two social workers (one being a woman)
• Experience Required: Active involvement for 7 years in health, education or welfare activities pertaining to children; OR
• A practicing professional with a degree in child psychology, psychiatry, sociology or law.

The JJB has the authority to conduct a preliminary assessment of a juvenile who is accused of a heinous offense, which is an offense punishable by death or imprisonment for seven years or more. The assessment is designed to determine whether the juvenile had the mental and emotional maturity to understand the consequences of their actions. If the JJB determines that the juvenile had the capacity to understand the nature and consequences of the offense, they may order the juvenile to be tried as an adult.

In cases where a juvenile is found guilty of an offense, the JJB is responsible for deciding on an appropriate sentence or rehabilitation plan. The board may order the juvenile to be placed in a special home, where they can receive education, counselling, and vocational training.

A. Treatment of a Juvenile as an Adult in certain circumstances

According to Indian laws, a juvenile can be treated as an adult in certain circumstances. Section 4 of the Act provides for the constitution of Juvenile Justice Board for the inquiry and hearing the case of a juvenile in conflict of the law. The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 allows for juveniles between the ages of 16 and 18 to be tried as adults if they have committed a heinous offense, which is defined as an offense punishable by death or imprisonment for seven years or more. (Paicker, 2019)

If a juvenile is accused of a heinous offense, the Juvenile Justice Board, which is responsible for hearing cases involving juveniles, may conduct a preliminary assessment to determine whether the offense was committed in a “child-like manner” or whether the juvenile had the mental and emotional maturity to understand the consequences of their actions. If the Board determines that the juvenile had the capacity to understand the nature and consequences of the offense, they may order the juvenile to be tried as an adult.

Treating juveniles as adults is a controversial issue, with some experts arguing that juveniles have not yet fully developed the cognitive and emotional capacities needed to fully understand the consequences of their actions. As such, the decision to treat a juvenile as an adult should be made carefully and based on a thorough assessment of the individual’s mental and emotional maturity.

B. General Procedure of Juvenile Justice Board

The Juvenile Justice Board in India follows a rehabilitative approach towards juvenile delinquency, with the focus on reforming and rehabilitating the juvenile rather than punishing them. (Admin, Juvenile Justice And Its Procedure In India, 2020)

General procedure of the Juvenile Justice Board of India:

• The police or any person can bring a juvenile in conflict with the law to the notice of the JJB.
• The JJB conducts a preliminary inquiry to determine if the juvenile has committed an offense or not. If the JJB finds that the offense committed is serious in nature, then the case is transferred to the Children’s Court.
• If the JJB decides to take up the case, it conducts a social investigation report which includes information about the juvenile, their family, and other related circumstances.
• Based on the social investigation report, the JJB determines the appropriate course of action for the juvenile. The options include diversion, counselling, probation, or sending the juvenile to a special home for rehabilitation
• If the JJB decides to send the juvenile to a special home, it conducts a detailed inquiry into the case and passes a final order.
• The JJB ensures that the juvenile is given proper care and protection during the course of the trial.
• If the juvenile is found to have committed the offense, the JJB decides the appropriate punishment, which is not supposed to be punitive but rather reformative and rehabilitative.
• The JJB also ensures that the rights of the juvenile are protected throughout the trial.

C. Powers and Functions of Juvenile Justice Board

Conducting preliminary inquiries: The JJB is responsible for conducting a preliminary inquiry to determine if a juvenile has committed an offense or not. If the offense is serious in nature, the case may be transferred to the Children’s Court. (WADHWANI, 2020)

Conducting social investigations: The JJB conducts a social investigation report to gather information about the juvenile, their family, and other related circumstances to determine the appropriate course of action.

Diversion of cases: The JJB has the power to divert cases away from the formal justice system and towards alternative dispute resolution mechanisms such as counseling, mediation, and probation.

Sending juveniles to special homes: The JJB can send a juvenile to a special home for rehabilitation and reformative purposes.

Ordering medical and psychiatric evaluations: The JJB can order medical and psychiatric evaluations of the juvenile to assess their mental and physical health.

Providing care and protection: The JJB ensures that the juvenile is provided with proper care and protection during the course of the trial.

Adjudicating cases: If the JJB determines that the juvenile has committed an offense, it decides the appropriate punishment or sentence, which is not supposed to be punitive but rather reformative and rehabilitative.

Protecting the rights of the juvenile: The JJB ensures that the rights of the juvenile are protected throughout the trial. (Dave, 2020)

Borstals system

Borstals are a type of correctional institution for young offenders in some countries, including the United Kingdom, India, and some Commonwealth nations. The term “borstal” originated from the Borstal Prison, which was opened in 1902 in England. (Pranjape, 2022)

Borstals are designed to provide a strict, structured, and disciplined environment for young offenders who have been found guilty of committing crimes. The aim of borstal institutions is to reform and rehabilitate young offenders through education, vocational training, and discipline, with a focus on preventing them from reoffending in the future. (J, 2018)

In borstal institutions, young offenders are provided with basic education, life skills training, and vocational training in fields such as carpentry, metalwork, and agriculture. They are also subjected to strict discipline, with a focus on instilling self-discipline, obedience, and a sense of responsibility. In addition, young offenders in borstals are usually required to participate in physical exercise and sports activities. Borstals were introduced as an alternative to prisons for young offenders, with a focus on rehabilitation and reform rather than punishment. (Tripathi, 2020)

The Borstal System was introduced in India during the British colonial era, with the opening of the first Borstal School in 1911 in the city of Bangalore. The Borstal System was established as an alternative to the traditional punitive approach to dealing with juvenile delinquency and was based on the principles of education, training, and rehabilitation. (Ahuja, 2020)

Under this Act, Borstal Schools have been established in various parts of the country to provide education, vocational training, and counselling to young offenders aged between 16 and 21 years. The Borstal Schools in India offer a range of vocational training programs, including carpentry, tailoring, welding, and agriculture, among others. However, there have been criticisms of the Borstal System in India, with some arguing that the schools are overcrowded and understaffed, and that the training programs offered are inadequate. As a result, there have been calls to reform and improve the Borstal System in India to make it more effective in achieving its objectives.

In conclusion, juvenile delinquency is a serious problem that affects many young people and communities. It refers to the unlawful behaviour of minors, usually below the age of 18, who violate the law or engage in activities that are considered harmful to themselves or others. Juvenile delinquency can have a wide range of causes, including poverty, family dysfunction, peer pressure, lack of education and opportunities, substance abuse, mental health issues, and exposure to violence and trauma.

To address juvenile delinquency, it is important to adopt a comprehensive approach that focuses on prevention, early intervention, and rehabilitation. This includes investing in education and vocational training programs, providing counselling and mental health services, promoting positive family and community relationships, and implementing restorative justice practices.

The juvenile justice system should also be reformed to ensure that it is fair, effective, and rehabilitation-focused. This includes promoting diversion programs, providing alternatives to incarceration, and ensuring that young people are treated with dignity and respect throughout the process.

Overall, it is important for society to recognize that juvenile delinquency is a complex and multifaceted problem that requires a collaborative effort to address. By investing in prevention and rehabilitation, we can help young people overcome the challenges they face and become productive members of society.

This article is written and submitted by Suryansh Sharan during his course of internship at B&B Associates LLP. Suryansh is a B.B.A. LLB 5th year student at ICFAI University Dehradun.

Related Articles

‘Revenge Porn’ In India

November 30, 2018 | Reading Time - 2 minutes

Overview: Technology has affected every sphere of our lives, and personal relationships aren’t untouched from it. With the increasing number of ‘revenge porn’ cases coming to light, it is, therefore, important for every person to be aware of the laws surrounding the same. Revenge porn is defined as the publication of private sexual images or […]

Extortion – The Relevant Provisions Under IPC

May 25, 2018 | Reading Time - 6 minutes

Overview The laws related to Extortion have been entailed in Section 383- 389 of IPC. The definition of ‘Extortion’ is given under Section 383 of IPC. Section 384 IPC contains the penalty for extortion whereas Section 385 of IPC entails the punishment for an attempt to commit extortion. It must be noted that Section 386 […]

Dowry Demand in India

November 7, 2017 | Reading Time - 3 minutes

In India, the demand of dowry is a curse which is practiced for decades by society. It is a social evil in which the family of husband demands dowry from the bride’s family which could be in the form of money or property at the time of marriage and sometimes it is demanded even after […]

Corruption Cases in India

November 7, 2017 | Reading Time - 5 minutes

India is a large country with a population of 125 crores. It is the second-most populous country after China. After independence in the year 1947, India has developed a lot. Despite the development, the challenges like illiteracy, poverty, casteism, corruption, etc. loom over its horizon. Out of all the problems, corruption is the biggest challenge […]

November 7, 2017 | Reading Time - 2 minutes

Against the personal choices and beliefs, there have been some restrictions which have followed to the modern society of today came with the advent of marriage institution. Which meant union of man and woman to the exclusion of all others. This was taken in more serious sense qua women and therefore a wife to someone […]

From Ambiguity To Clarity: Unpacking The Enigma Of Gender And Rape In India

December 15, 2023 | Reading Time - 5 minutes

Introduction On 1st December, the Supreme Court of India raised doubts on whether a woman could be charged for the offence of rape under section 375 and for gang rape under Section 376D of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.[1] The legal framework under the Indian Penal Code provides that only a man may be punished […]

All You Need To Know About Salman Khan Hit and Run Case

September 8, 2021 | Reading Time - 3 minutes

Here is the list of events that happened in the most controversial and mysterious hit and run case of Salman Khan September 28, 2002 – Salman Khan was arrested for running over five homeless people on Mumbai street, leaving one killed and four injured. October 2002 – Charged with culpable homicide not amounting to murder. […]

Dowry Death

August 28, 2019 | Reading Time - 2 minutes

Introduction Dowry death has been one of the most alarming issues in Indian society. We come across huge cases of dowry deaths being filed every day. Dowry death implies the death of a woman due to being constantly harassed for dowry by the husband and his family. Due to patriarchal setup, it is believed in […]

Anti-Suit Injunction Against Foreign Divorce Proceedings

February 22, 2022 | Reading Time - 7 minutes

Divorce is already an exhaustive process. But a parallel adjudication of parties’ matrimonial disputes in Courts simultaneously in India and abroad makes it more complex, not just for the husband and wife but for the courts too. This can create conflict among authorities of courts. Here comes the significance of an anti-suit injunction against foreign […]

• Advertising & Media Law
• Arbitration Law
• Banking Law
• Constitutional & Writ Law
• Consumer Law
• Contract Law
• Corporate Trade Law
• Court Marriage Registration
• Crime Against Women
• Criminal Law
• Divorce Law
• Education Law
• Environmental Law
• Human Rights Law
• Immigration Law
• Industrial Projects & Infrastructure Law
• Industrial/ Factory Law
• Information Technology and Cyber Law
• Intellectual Property Law
• International Law
• International Trade Law
• Land/ Property Law
• Law of Torts
• Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) Law
• Service/ Employment Law
• Taxation Law

Recent Landmark Judgements

• Joseph Shine Vs Union of India
• Smt. Sowmithri Vishnu Vs Union of India & Anr
• Sri Sankari Prasad Singh Deo Vs. Union of India and State of Bihar(and Other Cases).
• I.R. Coelho (Dead)by Lrs. Vs The State of Tamil Nadu
• Vineeta Sharma Vs. Rakesh Sharma & Ors.

Recent News

• Marriage is Considered Invalid if Important Ceremonies are Missed
• New Advertising Rules Set after Patanjali’s Misleading Advertisement Case.
• Downloading Certain Images on Your Phone Might Not Get You Into Trouble
• Woman Directed to Pay Husband Maintenance
• Third Party Donors can Help Couples Conceive through IVF

Recent Bare Acts

• The Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts (Amendment) Act, 2018
• The Commercial Courts Act, 2015
• The Mental Healthcare Act, 2017
• The U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act 1955
• Kerala Land Reforms Act 1963

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Peer assumption: an illusory consensus hidden in the criminal responsibility of juvenile offender—evidence from psychology.

• 1 Kaiyuan Law School, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China
• 2 Law School, Law School of Jiangsu Normal University, Xuzhou, China
• 3 Legal Education and Research Center for Minors, Jiangsu Normal University, Xuzhou, China
• 4 Institute of Criminal Law, Jiangsu Normal University, Xuzhou, China
• 5 Shandong Mental Health Center, Ji’nan, China
• 6 The First Branch of Zhangdian Tax Bureau, Zibo, China
• 7 Xuzhou People's Procuratorate, Xuzhou, China
• 8 Huai 'an People's Procuratorate, Huai'an, China
• 9 School of Law and Economics, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy

Introduction: There is a consensus hidden in the criminal legislation of many countries that the criminal responsibility capacity of juvenile offenders is not significantly different from that of their peers. The purpose of this paper was to test this hypothesis. The research objects of this paper were 187 juvenile offenders in J Province, China, who are under detention measures, and 2,449 students from junior high school, senior high school and university in S Province as comparison objects. We subjected the gathered materials to independent-samples t -tests and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA).

Results: (1) The self-control ability (109.30, 123.59) and empathy ability (63.86, 72.45) of juvenile offenders were significantly different from those of ordinary minors, but the difference of dialectical thinking ability was not statistically significant; (2) Except for the influence of mother’s education level and family income on dialectical thinking ability, the other variables had no statistical significance on the three kinds of ability. Therefore, it was suggested that the correction plan and means for juvenile offenders should focus on the improvement of self-control ability and empathy ability.

Introduction

In 2006, a book named “Shocking Call - Yulin Juvenile Crime Warning Record” was published in Shaanxi, China, although it did not attract much attention at the beginning of publication. However, decades later, this book became one of her representative works. This book recorded a series of disturbing and frightening phenomenons of juvenile delinquency in northern Shaanxi at that time that teenagers, ranging in age from 13 to 22, committed murder, rape and robbery in groups of two or three in Yulin, Shaanxi, motivated by so-called “friendship,” “self-realization” or simply “courage exercise.” Almost all of the perpetrators, who were insensitive at the time of their actions, appeared extremely depressed and remorseful when faced with trial, many of them even refusing to seek a defense ( Gao and Gao, 2006 ). On the one hand, from the perspective of culpability theory, criminal condemnation of juvenile offenders is ethically justified because of the more or less cognition or such possibility of most behaviors that violate basic moral culture ( Loewy, 1987 ; Arenella, 1991 ; Smith, 2009 ). On the other hand, because of functions of brain still in the proven stage of growth, compared with adults, “adolescents as a class operate under a comparatively reduced capacity when it comes to higher executive function, including autonomous choice, risk perception, self-management, and calculation and comprehension of future consequences” ( Carroll, 2015 ). Thus, it is generally not suggested to impose exactly the equal penalty on a minor as an adult in the same circumstance, such as death penalty ( American Psychological Association, 2004 ). In addition, research from the psychological and neurological literature suggests that because of the transient nature of this stage of development, dmany of the irrational behaviors that adolescents exhibit during adolescence do not usually carry over into adulthood ( Scott et al., 2016 ). Therefore, their criminal treatment is necessarily different from that of persons born with intellectual disabilities ( Carroll, 2015 ). Its no doubt, therefore, that “Few issues challenge a society’s ideas about both the nature of human development and the nature of justice as much as serious juvenile crime” ( Steinberg, 2017 ).

Although it is recognized that the psychological state of adolescents is different from that of adults, national legislation reflects different positions on whether this difference should be recognized at the level of criminal responsibility. The first type of criminal legislation is the criminal legislation that takes discrimination as the basis for the perpetrator to bear criminal responsibility, such as France ( Zhu, 2016 ) and Switzerland ( Xu, 1998 ). The second type of criminal legislation based on age as the basis of criminal responsibility can be divided into several cases. (1) Countries that adopt dichotomous age of criminal responsibility legislation, such as Spain adopting the age standard of 18 years old ( Pan, 2004 ), the United States adopting the age standard of 16 years old in the Model Criminal Code ( Liu and Wang, 2005 ), Norway adopting the age standard of 15 years old ( Ma, 2005 ), and Germany ( He and Lin, 2017 ), South Korea ( Kim, 1996 ), Italy ( Huang, 2007 ), and Japan ( Chen, 2016 ) adopted the age standard of 14 years. (2) Countries that adopt a trichotomous age of criminal responsibility legislation, such as Albania. It sets 12 to 14 years of age as the restricted age of criminal responsibility, bearing criminal responsibility for specific types of crime, and set the age of full criminal responsibility above 14 years old and assume criminal responsibility for all crimes (Compilation Office of The General Office of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, 1956 ). What’s more, the criminal legislation of Bulgaria establishes the age of limited criminal responsibility between 14 and 18 years old, and the age of full criminal responsibility above 18 years old ( Institute of Law of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 1963 ). (3) Countries that adopt the age of criminal responsibility legislation with multiple methods divide the age of criminal responsibility of juvenile offenders into several stages. At a lower age stage, juvenile offenders bear criminal responsibility only for specific types of crimes. And at a higher age stage, they bear criminal responsibility for all crimes, but enjoy the legal preference of mitigating punishment. The criminal codes of Russia ( Huang D, et al., 1996 ), Poland ( Chen Z, 2009 ), Thailand ( Wu G, 2004 ) and Chinese Mainland ( Criminal Law, 2019 ) all adopt this legislative model. The third type of criminal legislation is the criminal legislation that adopts both age standards and discrimination standards. The criminal legislation of the Netherlands ( Yan and Ge, 2008 ), the United Kingdom, some states in the United States and Hong Kong, China ( Tan and Di, 2022 ) adopts this model, which defines a certain higher age level as the age of full criminal responsibility. And delimit a lower age range to determine the imposition of criminal responsibility according to the discerning power of juvenile offenders. These laws reflect the extensive attention and continuous self-examination on the issue of juvenile criminal responsibility capacity worldwidely.

These laws reflected the extensive attention and continuous reflection of countries around the world on the issue of juvenile criminal responsibility capacity.

Indeed, in order to explore the differences between juveniles and adults on the basis of punishment, jurists in various countries have made a lot of efforts. Recently, it is also commendable to introduce the research results of brain science and neurology into criminal justice ( Casey et al., 2008 ). Furtherly, not only is there a lot of consensus among neuroscientists, but this consensus has indeed begun to have an impact on judicial determination. Unfortunately, however, such efforts remain inadequate. As some scholars have realized, at the legislative level, the legislation of all countries mainly focuses on the criminal responsibility of adults, except for the criminal responsibility of juveniles. Under established logical assumptions, human beings always use the responsibility capacity of adults as a frame of reference to conceive the differences that juveniles may have ( Carroll, 2015 ). In the judicial field, practitioners may first conceive the possible differences between ordinary juveniles (juveniles who are not ready to commit or have committed crimes) and ordinary adults (adults who are not ready to commit or have committed crimes), and then determine whether to reduce the responsibility and exempt the criminal responsibility of the criminal juveniles. In other words, we equate ordinary juveniles with criminal juveniles, ordinary adults with criminal adults, punishing or even reforming juvenile offenders according to this plausible materialistic assumption. The introduction of neurological results is based on this logical assumption, and our normative construction of juvenile criminal responsibility capacity is also based on this assumption.

However, this hypothesis may be specious. First of all, if we are sure that A and B have some differences worthy of criminal law’s attention, why can we draw the conclusion that Class A subject should be treated criminally leniently based on the reference to their own circumstances?

Certainly, “Justice is to give everyone he deserves part of the firm and enduring desire,” the normative requirements for juveniles must not be as strict as those for adults, yet, simultaneously, neither can the normative requirements for juveniles be taken as a reference with that for adults.

Secondly, there might also be the deviation in perception if we simply take the research results of brain science as the basis for the identification of criminal responsibility capacity. If the standard of brain health is taken as the standard to measure criminal responsibility and impose penalty simply, illegal people who have violent epilepsy due to brain damage are not responsible and cannot be evaluated according to the standard evaluation standards of ordinary people (Moir and Jessel, 1999). Similarly, criminal of conviction who have long been dominated by external thoughts cannot be measured entirely by the standards of ordinary people, because their mental state does not always seem to be in a normal state neither ( Jakobs, 1997 ). However, no matter how controversial the academic circles of various countries are, these viewpoints have not been stipulated in criminal legislation as a consensus. The capability of responsibility for juvenile offenders can not be generalized, because their psychology is always in a very unstable state. Thus, every time the scope of identification of brain science and neurology is advanced, the evaluation of responsibility capacity in criminal law can only take a step back, and normative evaluation is “shivering” under the shadow of determinism ( Ryuichi, 2015 ). Finally, it does not seem to make sense in theory for us to equate the responsible capacity of criminal individuals with that of non-criminal individuals. In the criminal theories of Germany, Japan and other countries or regions, there exists the basic idea of the possibility of expectation. It advocates that a wrongful actor should be reduced or even excluded the situation of criminal condemnation if can hardly freely carry out legal acts ( Liszt, 2006 ; Noriyuki, 2007 ; Huang, 2009 ). In the United States and other countries, the defence be claimed that “But everyone does it!” (BEDT) is also popular ( Snyder et al., 1983 ). Although this defense has been rejected in a number of cases, based on the interpretation of the Model Criminal Code Sec. 2.02 (2) (d), when an ordinary person in the context of the perpetrator usually violates the duty of reasonable care created by the specific provisions, he or she cannot at least be held criminally liable for negligence. Therefore, in the adult context, not all offenders have the same capacity to comply with the norms of duty as others, let alone in the context of juveniles.

In short, based on the theoretical of criminal responsibility, when investigating the criminal condemnation of juvenile offenders, we should investigate the potential differences between juvenile offenders and ordinary adolescents, laying a foundation for the discussion of criminal treatment. At present, the criminal legislation of various countries implicitly assumes that although the criminal responsibility capacity of juvenile offenders is relatively low, it is not necessarily compared with their peers. When they fail to resist the temptation of the outside world and carry out deviant behavior, they should be entirely responsible for themselves in the perspective of juvenile. But does this hypothesis be true? To wit:

H1 : illegal behaviors are irelevant with adolescent psychological development; The identification and control ability of juvenile offenders is not different from that of their peers.

The main purpose of this study was to test the validity of the underlying hypotheses by quantitative methods. According to the basis of juvenile criminal responsibility (capacity for identification and control), the juveniles’ capacity for criminal responsibility is quantified by three psychological indicators. (1) Indicators of ability of dialectical thinking. The development of capacity for dialectical thinking enables adolescents to understand the world objectively, look upon things comprehensively and deal with problems rationally ( Inhelder and Piaget, 1958 ; Nisbett et al., 2001 ; Cheng, 2009 ; Boucher, 2011 ). Studies have found that there is a negative correlation between the degree of development of capacity for dialectical thinking of adolescents and the frequency of crime risk (Crick and Dodge, 1994; Zhang et al., 2011). (2) Indicators of self-control ability. Self-control refers to the ability to suppress inappropriate emotions and behaviors and replace them with appropriate behaviors ( Casey, 2015 ). Low self-control often predicts the emergence of many bad behaviors, especially participation in antisocial and criminal behaviors ( Walters, 2016 ). The immaturity of the prefrontal cortex provides the physiological basis for the lack of self-control in adolescents ( Yurgelun-Todd, 2007 ; Bell and McBride, 2010 ). Simultane, due to the direct influence from social and environmental factors ( Somerville, 2013 ; Blakemore and Mills, 2014 ), especially the peers ( Guyer et al., 2012 ), and the indirect influence of dopamine-rich regions in the ventral striatum of the brain ( Chein et al., 2011 ), the development of self-control in adolescents presents a bi-directional feature.

Psychological research has also found that the development of empathy will have an impact on juvenile delinquency ( Narvey et al., 2021 ). Empathy refers to the cognitive ability to experience and understand the emotions of others ( Jolliffe and Farrington, 2004 ). Low empathy is frequently associated with aggressive behavior and crime, and is a psychological characteristic that increases the likelihood of crime, especially violent behavior ( Harpur et al., 1988 ; Jolliffe and Farrington, 2004 , 2006a , b ); High empathy is associated with reduced violence and aggressive behavior ( Broidy et al., 2003 ). Therefore, in addition to the indicator of dialectical thinking ability (1) and self-control ability (2), this study also regards the indicator of empathy ability (3) as a measure of the level of juvenile criminal responsibility ability. The H1 we were going to demonstrate before can be modified to H2:

H2 : illegal behaviors are irelevant with adolescent psychological development; Compared with juvenile offenders, ordinary adolescents' dialectical thinking, self-control and empathy ability may not be higher, and their empathy ability development level (or stable level), dialectical thinking and self-control development level is also the same.

The current study

Juveniles’ criminal responsibility capacity is the core of its criminal condemnability evaluation, but as mentioned above, many countries in the world regard age as the main indicator of a juvenile’s capacity for responsibility. However, this view not only has invalid foundation, unclear connotation and logical circular argumentation in the level of criminal law, but also exists doubts in the level of criminal law practice. In 2022, an empirical study on 3,208 junior high school, senior high school and freshman students in S Province of the People’s Republic of China showed that although age variables have significant effects on dialectical thinking ability, self-control ability and empathy ability, only empathy ability has a trend of strengthening with the increase of age. However, recognition ability and control ability were negatively correlated with age variables ( Shang et al., 2022 ). Therefore, it is impossible to understand the overall development of juvenile ability of responsibility solely through the growth of age. More attention should be paid to the comparative research on the level of criminal responsibility ability between juvenile offenders and ordinary adolescents. The quantitative analysis method was continued in this study. First, on the basis of the above studies, the scores of questionnaires of the dialectical thinking ability, the self-control ability and the empathy ability, which measures the tendency of violent crime, were compared between ordinary adolescents and juvenile offenders. Secondly, under the premise of controlling the demographic variables such as academic achievement, parental occupation and socioeconomic status, the relationship between the three abilities and the age of juvenile offenders is analyzed. Ultimately, this study attempts to address the following questions:

• Do juvenile offenders differ from their peers in their ability to think dialectically, self-control and empathize?

• If so, in what ways is this difference reflected? What are the reasons for the differences? How do they influence their criminal behavior? Can the existing criminal justice system improve their criminal psychology?

• If not, how to trace the actual conditions and causes of juvenile delinquency? What measures should be taken to reform and eliminate the environmental and family factors that stimulate them to commit crimes?

• What aspects should the existing juvenile criminal justice mechanism be improved to meet the realistic needs of juvenile offenders’ reform?

The samples selected for the first time in this study were juvenile offenders in several cities in J Province of the People’s Republic of China. J Province is located in the east of China, and its economic status is at the forefront of the country (J Province per capita disposable income [PCDIS] = [¥52,674] in 2023, national per capita disposable income [PCDIS] = [¥39,218] in 2023). Teenagers in this province can have access to more cutting-edge and advanced educational resources and educational concepts, and deviant teenagers who receive education and management in the province can also feel relatively enlightened and advanced correction concepts. In order to respect the cultural characteristics and regional differences of J Province, this research group selected juvenile delinquents in SZ and ZJ in southern area of J Province, TZ and NT in midland of J Province, and XZ, HA and SY in Northern area of J Province as research samples. However, in accordance with the purpose of Chinese criminal law and the policy of “education, reform and rescue” for juveniles, many illegal acts of juveniles have not entered the criminal trial procedure or have not been sentenced to imprisonment due to various subjective and objective circumstances. The number of juvenile offenders is small. Moreover, due to the differences in administrative divisions and the understanding and application of juvenile judicial policies in different regions, the number of juvenile offenders in custody in each province and city is also unevenly distributed. The same is true of J Province. At the same time, considering that once juvenile offenders enter the society, not only can they not get in touch with them, but also cannot clearly highlight the difference between juvenile offenders and ordinary juveniles, this research group selected juvenile offenders under control in the above cities and counties of J Province as the data source. Moreover, we chose incarcerated minors in relevant cities and counties of J Province as the survey objects, because their data samples can better reflect the difference between juvenile offenders and ordinary minors. As the result, we collected a total of 200 people’s data samples, including 41 in SZ, 30 in ZJ, 5 in TZ, 6 in HM and 38 in HZ. 10 in SY and 70 in XZ. After that, we excluded 9 data samples from 19-year-olds, 3 samples from 20-year-olds and 1 sample from 21-year-olds, and leaved a total of 187 data samples were taken as research objects.

In addition, this research topic also selected a group of ordinary teenagers as a comparative investigation object. This data came from the empirical study of the age growth of teenagers’ three capacity for criminal responsibility conducted by Professor Shang Y’s team of Shandong Normal University. After a preliminary overall selection and two supplementary selections, the study involved students from junior to senior three in S County, as well as some first-year students from S University, S Province, China, finally selecting a sample of 3,208 people ( Shang et al., 2022 ). Then, we excluded 759 samples of students over the age of 18, remaining 2,449 samples for our research.

This research was approved and supported by the relevant departments from the cities and counties mentioned above, and the opinions of participants were solicited in advance for the issuance and filling of the questionnaire, among which all personal information related to the privacy of juveniles was hidden or not recorded. In order to comply with the policy requirements for the prevention and control of the novel coronavirus epidemic, researchers could not personally enter the juvenile offenders’ correctional center to issue questionnaires and fill out guidance. However, the questionnaire was contacted by prosecutors, issued by specialized personnel of the juvenile correction department and filled in with guidance throughout the process, which could guarantee the legitimacy and validity of the experimental data sources to a certain extent. According to the collected data, the basic situation of the sample is as follows, except for the two optional items of “crime committed” (missing 21) and “principal punishment declared” (missing 91).

Brief-dialectical self scale (B-DSS)

In 2016, Spencer-Rodgers and colleagues developed a self-report questionnaire called the Dialectical Self Scale (DSS) ( Spencer-Rodgers et al., 2004 ). The scale has been translated into many languages. We adopted the brief Chinese version (B-DSS), α = 0.71, with 14 items. The scale contains a 7-point scoring system from “very different” to “very much agree,” and encompasses the three dimensions of conflict tolerance, cognitive change, and behavioral change, thereby reflecting people’s dialectical thinking level. The higher the scale score, the higher the dialectical thinking level.

Self-control ability of middle school students questionnaire (SAMSSQ)

This questionnaire was developed by Wang Hongjiao and Lu Jiamei, scholars of the PRC. Adolescents’ capacity for self-control is mainly reflected in three dimensions: emotional self-control, behavioral self-control, and thinking self-control. The split-half reliability is 0.856 ( Wang and Lu, 2004 ). The questionnaire has a total of 36 items, including 10 forward-scoring questions and 26 reverse-scoring questions. Each item uses a 5-point scoring system, ranging from “totally disagree” to “totally agree.” The higher the score, the stronger the self-control.

Basic empathy scale (BES)

There are many tools for measuring empathy, such as the widely used Interpersonal Response Indicator (IRI) in the PRC, but these scales have been questioned for confusing empathy with sympathy. Hence, for this study, we used the BES (Darrick & David, 2006). The BES is divided into two dimensions: emotional and cognitive empathy. The scale contains 20 items, including 8 items for negative scoring and 12 items for positive scoring; the higher the score, the greater the respondent’s empathy. Li et al. (2011) tested the structure of theoretical factors and the reliability and validity of the BES in the youth population of the PRC. They found that the BES met the relevant requirements of psychometrics (α = 0.777).

Demographic variables. We collected and coded the participants’ demographic information and filled in missing values. For grade variables (e.g., parents’ education level, family income), we used the average to fill in missing values. For disordered categorical variables (e.g., gender, family location), we used the mode to fill in missing values.

Plan of analysis

We employed SPSS 23.0 to analyze the results. Before doing so, we calculated the scores of the B-DSS, SAMSSQ and BES (this score is the total score of each item on the scale). The missing values in the scores are filled in by the mean of the scores in the sample’s age group ( Yu and Jin, 2015 ). After completing the above preparatory work. Firstly, the differences in B-DSS scores, self-control ability scores and BES scores between the sample data of 187 juvenile offenders and the sample data of 2,449 ordinary juveniles to be compared were investigated by independent sample T test. Secondly, one-way ANOVA was used to measure the impact of demographic variables on Dialectical thinking, self-control and empathy. Then the demographic variables were controlled as covariates to observe the development trend of dialectical thinking ability, self-control ability and empathy ability with age. Thirdly, using two-variable correlation analysis, we explored whether it was necessary to carry out multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) on each dimension of the B-DSS, SAMSSQ and BES.

This section is divided into two parts. The first part intends to present the differences between ordinary juveniles and juvenile offenders in capacity for dialectical thinking, self-control and empathy. Among them, the independent sample T -test for ordinary teenagers was based on part of the data collected by the Shang’s team mentioned above. The results for juvenile offenders are based on 187 sample data from Province J. Since the two studies adopted exactly the same standards of responsibility competence strategies, and the age and family conditions of the respondents were basically the same, the two could be compared at a certain level (see Table 1 ).

Table 1 . Sample basic information ( N  = 187).

Independent sample T test

According to the data in Table 2 , (1) In terms of the BES score, Levene test of homogeneity of the variance of the two populations is performed. In this example, the test statistic value F  = 66.797 and its accompanying probability value p  = 0.0.000, with a p value less than 0.01, indicate homogeneity of variances and the two population mean values are tested according to the data of equal variances. Thus, the test statistic value t  = 19.849, the adjoint probability value p  = 0.000, and the p value is less than 0.01, so the 95% confidence interval of the simultaneous difference is (7.739, 9.443), indicating that the difference between the two is extremely significant. (2) In terms of SAMSSQ score, the Levene test of homogeneity of two population variances. In this example, the statistical value F  = 46.287 is accompanied by a probability value p = 0.000, and the p value is less than 0.05, indicating that the variances are not homogeneous, and the two population mean values are tested according to the data with unequal variances. Thus, the test statistic value t  = 12.920, the adjoint probability value p  = 0.000, and the p value is less than 0.01, so the 95% confidence interval of the difference at the same time is (12.105, 16.460), indicating that the difference between the two is extremely significant. (3) In terms of B-DSS score, according to Levene test, the test statistic value of this example is F  = 0.123, its accompanying probability value p  = 0.726, and the p value is greater than 0.05, indicating that the variances are homogeneous, and the two population means are tested according to the data of equal variances. Thus, the test statistic value t = 1.043, the adjoint probability value p  = 0.297, and the p value is greater than 0.05: the 95% confidence interval of the difference at the same time is (−0.476, 1.559), indicating that the difference between the two is not statistically significant. Therefore, combined with the mean analysis of the two groups of data, the self-control ability of juvenile offenders (S juvenile offenders  = 109.30, S ordinary juveniles  = 123.59) and empathy ability (B juvenile offenders  = 63.86, B ordinary juveniles  = 72.45) were much lower than those of ordinary juveniles.

Table 2 . Difference analysis of three kinds of abilities between ordinary juveniles and juvenile offenders.

The second part tries to present the relationship between age and the three abilities. Since the sample number of 13, 14 years old was very small to use (3 samples), the sample number utilized was 184 from juvenile offenders from 15 to 18 years old.

Covariance analysis

Table 3 showed the difference analysis of demographic information, which mainly used independent sample T test and single factor ANOVA analysis. Independent sample T-test (including gender and family location) was used for binary variables, and univariate ANOVA analysis was used for three or more variables (including age, father’s educational level, mother’s educational level, and family income). According to the data in Table 3 , except for the influence of mother’s educational level and family income on B-DSS score, the influence of other variables on B-DSS, self-control ability and BES score was not statistically significant.

Table 3 . Difference analysis between demographic variables and the three ability scores.

Table 4 shows the scores of dialectical thinking ability, self-control ability and empathy ability at each age after controlling the variables of mother’s education level and family income. According to the results of covariance analysis, after controlling for maternal literacy and household income, the differences between age and B-DSS scores ( F  = 1.992, p  = 0.226), SAMSSQ scores ( F  = 1.544, p  = 0.205), and BES scores ( F  = 0.354, p  = 0.786) were no longer statistically significant.

Table 4 . Descriptive analysis of age variables and three ability scores.

Discussion of results

The research mentioned above analyzed the development of juvenile offenders’ dialectical thinking ability, control ability and empathy ability from horizontal and vertical perspectives, respectively, separately. Combined with the results of independent sample T test, the self-control ability and empathy ability of juvenile offenders were significantly different from that of ordinary juveniles, while the difference in dialectical thinking ability between juvenile offenders and ordinary juveniles was not statistically significant. According to the results of covariance analysis, except for mother’s education level and family income variables that had an impact on the score of B-DSS, other variables had no statistical significance on B-DSS, SAMSSQ and BES scores. In addition, there was no significant difference between age and B-DSS, SAMSSQ and BES scores.

Dialectical thinking ability

Dialectical thinking, as it’s called, is a form of mental organization presented as an open system model that “interacting with, changing, and potentially becoming integrated with each other over time, provided a greater degree of equilibrium than closed-system modeling taken by itself.” “This greater equilibrium could explain movements from formal to dialectical thinking in adults as they encountered limitations of or contradictions among closed system models, as well as offering a more adequate foundation for systematic inquiry” ( Basseches, 1984 ). After controlling the variables of mother’s education level and family income, this study found that there was no significant difference between juvenile offenders’ dialectical thinking ability and that of ordinary minors at least between the ages of 15 and 18. In other words, juvenile offenders’ cognition and understanding of behavior deviance were at the same level as that of their peers as a whole. Then, a previous empirical study on middle school students showed that there were two important age turning points in adolescents’ dialectical thinking ability: it increased continuously before the age of 15, declined slightly between the ages of 15 and 18, and continued to increase after the age of 18 ( Zhang, 2014 ). Although Zhang’s study mentioned that there is a downward trend in the dialectical thinking ability of middle school students between the ages of 15 and 18, and yet it did not mention that there is a significant difference in the dialectical thinking ability of middle school students between the ages of 15 and 18. Therefore, it could also be considered that this opinion indirectly supports the views of this paper.

Self-control ability

It has become a consensus that the significant increase in the risk of deviance and lawlessness is positively correlated with the immaturity of the self-control mechanism of juveniles during adolescence. A long-term follow-up survey of people who had participated in the delayed gratification task recovered that self-control has an individualized character, which reflects the importance of genes and the quality of social individuals’ resistance to stimuli in the development of high self-control ( Casey and Caudle, 2013 ). Besides, studies have shown that parental behavior monitoring, parental self-control and adolescent self-control are significantly positively correlated. And there is a significant negative correlation between parental psychological monitoring and adolescents’ self-control ability ( Deng et al., 2018 ). Therefore, the self-control ability of juvenile offenders is lower than that of their peers, which may be the result of individual, family and environmental factors.

Empathy ability

According to the horizontal and vertical observations, the BES scores of juvenile offenders not only differ greatly from those of ordinary adolescents, but also do not change with age. This is basically consistent with the dual processing model theory of empathic lifelong development, that is, the intensity of individual empathy ability remains relatively stable between adolescence and adulthood, and then gradually increases ( Huang and Su, 2010 ). Empathy ability is the ability of juvenile offenders to accurately perceive and infer (empathic accuracy) the stable traits and attributes of others ( Zaki and Ochsner, 2011 ; Hodges and Wise, 2016 ). The accuracy of empathy depends on the interaction of empathic object factors (willingness and ability to transmit information, channels to transmit information), empathic factors (information processing ability, willingness to empathize and immediate state), and social and cultural factors ( Pan et al., 2022 ). Considering that an individual’s information processing capacity increases during adolescence (14–17 years) and peaks in early adulthood (25–35 years) ( Richter et al., 2011 ), juvenile offenders should be no different from ordinary minors. The long-term neglect of empathic intention and the poor information transmission channel may be the important factors leading to their low empathic ability. In addition, it is considered that the brain regions related to emotion regulation and anxiety overlapped with the cognitive empathy system in the prefrontal cortex ( Decety and Jackson, 2004 ). Glucocorticoids associated with anxiety can cross the blood–brain barrier and affect cognitive activities related to areas such as the amygdala, hippocampus, and prefrontal cortex ( Lupien et al., 2007 ), and physiological factors of juvenile offenders may also play a role.

Psychological reflection on juvenile delinquent’s ability of criminal responsibility

Although the criminal legislation of some countries insists on using the single standard of age of criminal responsibility to judge the responsibility capacity of minors, this standard is only an irrefutable presumption of responsibility capacity, rather than a confirmation of criminal responsibility capacity. In addition, in order to logically straighten out the relationship between the age system of criminal responsibility and the determination of criminal responsibility capacity, scholars in these countries began to seek for a substantial route to understand the criminal responsibility of juvenile offenders. They declared that the deviant behavior of a minor could also constitute a crime, except that those who did not reach the age of criminal responsibility were not subject to criminal punishment because of specific provisions of the criminal law. This study hoped to further focus people’s attention on the ability of criminal responsibility itself. In other words, the reason why juvenile criminals get “preferential criminal treatment” is not only because they are “less mature” than adults, but also because their ability of criminal responsibility is lower than that of their peers, and they cannot be expected to take full responsibility for this result. To be specific:

(1) Low self-control ability. As mentioned above, the self-control ability of juvenile delinquents in China is significantly lower than that of their peers, which is the result of the combined effects of their families, evil contacts and individuals themselves. However, these factors are not superimposed, but both influence each other and jointly cause this result. It may be arbitrary to completely deny the possibility of free choice for juvenile offenders, but it is unfair to ignore the influence of family and living environment on them. And even if there are three factors functioning at the same time, their effects are not necessarily in proportion. The self-control ability of parents and the monitoring behavior of children have a direct impact on the self-control ability of minors. According to the basic information of the sample, 63.6% of the respondents are from rural areas, and 4.3% of their fathers have a College education or above, and 3.2% of their mothers. Of course, we will not support the unfounded correlation between region, parental education level and children’s self-control ability. However, there are inevitably individuals who cannot develop self-control ability due to the lack of family discipline or unscientific discipline methods among these minors. At the same time, because of the homogeneity and consensus of social communication, they often make friends with peers who also lack such family discipline. Then, they develop traits and personalities that lack self-control and influence each other in long-term personality development. Similar phenomena have long been noted in the field of criminology in the United States ( Adler et al., 2006 ).

(2) Low empathy ability. Similar to self-control ability, the lack of empathy ability of juvenile offenders can not ignore the role of family and environment. Some studies have shown that there is a significant negative correlation between childhood trauma and empathy ( r  = −0.076), and physical neglect ( r  = −0.095) and emotional neglect ( r  = −0.128) are both negatively correlated with empathy. In cognitive empathy, childhood trauma was significantly negatively correlated with perspective-taking ( r  = −0.127), but not with fantasy ( r  = −0.044). In affective empathy, childhood trauma was significantly negatively correlated with empathic attention ( r  = −0.148) and positively correlated with personal pain ( r  = 0.153) ( Meng et al., 2019 ). I am afraid that most of these traumas are derived from acquired traumas in the family or living environment. In addition, from the perspective of experience, most of the empathic objects with minors are their family members, peers or elders with more contacts, and their long-term lack of empathy is inevitably significantly related to family and environment.

(3) The development of juvenile delinquent’s criminal responsibility capacity. Objectively speaking, although the dichotomous or multipartite of criminal age standard reflects the recognition of the difference between juvenile and adult offenders, it fail to reflect the difference in the criminal responsibility capacity of minors of different ages, because none of the three capacities showed a statistical difference with age. At the same time, the legislation is not consistent with the accepted idea of a State’s capacity to judge criminal responsibility. In order to reflect the difference between juvenile offenders and adult offenders, thus, only a minimum age of criminal responsibility standard can be created. For carrying out the difference between different juvenile offenders, thus, it is necessary to investigate the essence of criminal responsibility ability, so as to clarify the legitimacy of different individuals’ responsibility for specific crimes. Furthermore, since we have not effectively improved the criminal responsibility ability of juvenile offenders, we can hardly guarantee the effective suppression of the criminal motive, and we cannot focus merely on the protection of the rights of juvenile offenders. How to cultivate the social soil to promote juvenile delinquents to return to normal life is also the key through the joint efforts of the system among multiple subjects.

Limitation and future studies

Although this study had drawn some conclusions in comparing the responsibility ability of ordinary juveniles and juvenile offenders, we would also face up to some limitations of this study.

Firstly, we conducted this study in the field in the PRC, and the development of juveniles varies greatly from country to country due to differences in history, culture, level of economic development and geography, so our conclusions cannot be universally applied to all nations. Each state should choose a minimum age of criminal responsibility according to the developmental situation of its juveniles and use the “malicious complementary age” as the configuration system to be applied.

Secondly, we used a questionnaire research method, which is somewhat subjective, and the relevant results depend heavily on how carefully the subjects filled out the questionnaire. In addition, there is a more objective, scientific research method—brain science research—which can be used in the future to explore the relationship between age and criminal responsibility more effectively.

Thirdly, there were limitations of subjects in this study. The small number of juvenile offenders in this study was due to the conservative approach that Chinese judicial authorities have to take due to concerns about the privacy and other rights of minors. The data of juvenile offenders in this study were sampled in Province J, and the data of ordinary minors were sampled in Province S. Although a large part of the data of juvenile offenders came from northern Jiangsu Province, this region was very close to S Province in geographical location, and they were connected in cultural origin for a long time, which can basically ensure the pertinence of the data comparison. However, after all, there were still part of the survey samples from southern Jiangsu and Central Jiangsu, and the follow-up study would further supplement the data of ordinary minors in this region to enrich the regional investigation of this comparative study. In addition, there are more Han residents in S and J provinces, so this research would not be with strong representative for sample of Yunnan, Xinjiang, Tibet and other areas inhabited by ethnic minorities. The PRC has a democratic centralized system, and the laws enacted by the National People’s Congress are valid nationwide. Therefore, subsequent studies should sample from populations nationwide to explore whether there are differences in dialectical thinking, self-control and empathy among adolescents from different regions and ethnic groups.

There is no doubt that a great deal of effort has been made to address and reduce juvenile delinquency, but the impact of these efforts is still limited, especially in countries that are obsessed with the age of criminal responsibility. Nowadays, mankind has formulated a large number of criminal entities and procedural norms only to give juvenile offenders special criminal treatment. The purpose is nothing more than to let them feel the humanistic care of the state system through the tolerant treatment encountered in the criminal department, so that they will no longer breed or increase hatred against the legal order and the state system. Or, let them try to avoid so much social and cultural isolation that they lose the ability or willingness to consider themselves law-abiding and independent citizens. We highly affirms the value concept embodied in this approach, but also has to say that only we have opened half of the road. It’s suggested that the particularity of criminal treatment for juvenile should not only be reflected in the criminal punishment, but also in the criminal correction and assistant, that is, “both protection and correction.” The so-called “protection” is to protect the substantive and procedural rights and interests of minors to the maximum extent, to obtain favorable treatment for them in criminal proceedings according to law, and to create institutional conditions for their education and reform. The so-called “correction” is to strengthen the discipline and help of juvenile offenders, so as to promote their eventual recovery of physical and mental health, correction of character defects, cultivation of survival ability and return to normal life.

According to the specific circumstances of the crimes committed by juvenile offenders, there is no dispute about imposing different penalty measures and adopting different correction plans. If we affirm that juvenile delinquency comes from a series of distinct and complicated cause systems, the thinking on juvenile delinquency and social correction in this subject must also follow this idea. As far as juvenile offenders’ criminal treatment is concerned, the most realistic problem is how to give them preferential policies such as immunity from arrest, immunity from prosecution, acquittal, separate application of fine or suspension of execution within the normative framework. As far as the criminal punishment is concerned, because it mainly focuses on the discipline and punishment of juvenile offenders, it should be examined by the severity of their crimes and the possibility of their correction should be measured. Among them, the possibility of correction is based on the realistic possibility of improving the self-control ability and empathy ability of juvenile offenders, which has to consider the realistic reasons of juvenile offenders and the severity of subject reprehensibility. (a) When a minor commits or participates in the commission of an act that directly results in significant damage to the person, property or human dignity of another person, he or she shall be sentenced to substantial punishment, unless he or she is lured, deceived or coerced into committing the crime. (b) When a minor commits or participates in the commission of an act which has the consequence of causing serious damage to the person, property or human dignity of another person, the actual punishment shall be imposed on his or her reckless or deliberate subjective state, unless he or she is solely induced, deceived or coerced into committing the crime. (c) When a minor commits or participates in an act with slightly danger, he may not be sentenced to actual punishment, except for those who organize, instil or coerce others to commit it, and those who intentionally commit it repeatedly.

In the treatment of juvenile offenders, both the closed treatment in juvenile reformatory and the socialized treatment under community correction, emphasis should be placed on the strengthening of individual self-control ability and the recovery of empathy ability. In order to improve the self-control ability of juvenile offenders, no matter the closed correction in juvenile correctional centers or the socialized correction in community correction centers, the cultural skills or vocational skills training of minors should be strengthened. Most juvenile offenders are at or about to reach adolescence, and their pursuit of self-worth and sense of honor is no less than that of ordinary teenagers. Moreover, their world view has formed an early form, and it is difficult to change it by simply preaching, so we can only guide them to pursue self-realization methods acceptable to mainstream social concepts as much as possible, and make them emulate and internalize with relatively long-term individual incentives and group influence. In order to achieve this, an agreement can be reached between juvenile correctional centers and relevant enterprises based on the management experience of some places in China. During the period of correction, the former will organize juvenile offenders to contribute free labor to the design and production of the former’s products, while the latter will provide free literary and artistic skills, vocational and technical training for juvenile offenders who are subject to correction. And pay a certain remuneration to the former; In addition, juvenile offenders with outstanding performance can be given a series of institutional incentives such as family visits, meetings, and certificate awards by the former in accordance with regulations. On the other hand, in order to enhance the empathy ability of juvenile offenders, it is necessary to reshape and repair the relationship between juvenile offenders and family members, victims and the community, so as to reduce the probability of juvenile offenders joining illegal gangs again. This requires the joint efforts of juvenile correctional institutions, judicial organs, family organizations or groups, as well as schools and educational institutions. Juvenile correctional institutions or community correction institutions shall, on the premise of in-depth investigation of the basic situation of juvenile offenders, make suggestions to their family members through judicial organs, police organs, etc., and assist in promoting the restoration of the relationship between juvenile offenders and relevant subjects; If the guardian or close relatives of the minor offender are found to have bad behavior, they should be urged to correct it in time, and randomly follow up on the family information of the minor offender registered by the official.

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/ Supplementary material , further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Ethics statement

The studies involving humans were approved by the Academic Board of Shandong Normal University. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study. Written informed consent for participation in this study was provided by the participants' legal guardians/next of kin for minors under age 18.

Author contributions

SL: Data curation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. YS: Data curation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. FY: Data curation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. HL: Data curation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. DX: Data curation, Writing – review & editing. MZ: Data curation, Writing – review & editing. WJ: Data curation, Methodology, Writing – review & editing.

The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1321870/full#supplementary-material

Adler, F., Mueller, G. O. W., and Laufer, W. S. (2006). Restraining crime: Crime problems and criminology research in contemporary America . Beijing: China Democratic and Legal Press.

Google Scholar

American Psychological Association. (2004). Amicus curiae brief in Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 Available at: http://www.apa.org/psyclaw/roper-v-simmons.pdf

Arenella, P. (1991). Convicting the morally blameless: reassessing the relationship between legal and moral accountability. UClA Rev. 39:1511. doi: 10.2307/1289580

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Basseches, M. (1984). Dialectical thinking . Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Bell, C. C., and McBride, D. F. (2010). Affect regulation and prevention of risky behaviors. JAMA 304, 565–566. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.1058

Blakemore, S. J., and Mills, K. L. (2014). Is adolescence a sensitive period for sociocultural processing? Annu. Rev. Psychol. 65, 187–207. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115202

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Boucher, H. C. (2011). The dialectical self-concept II: cross-role and within-role consistency, well-being, self-certainty, and authenticity. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 42, 1251–1271. doi: 10.1177/0022022110383316

Broidy, L., Cauffman, E., Espelage, D. L., Mazerolle, P., and Piquero, A. (2003). Sex differences in empathy and its relation to juvenile offending. Violence Vict. 18, 503–516. doi: 10.1891/vivi.2003.18.5.503

Carroll, J. E. (2015). Brain science and the theory of juvenile mens Rea. NCL Rev. 94:539,

Casey, B. J. (2015). Beyond simple models of self-control to circuit-based accounts of adolescent behavior. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 66, 295–319. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015156

Casey, B. J., and Caudle, K. (2013). The teenage brain: self control. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 22, 82–87. doi: 10.1177/0963721413480170

Casey, B. J., Jones, R. M., and Hare, T. A. (2008). The adolescent brain. Ann NY Acad. Sci. 111:122. doi: 10.1196/annals.1440.010

Chein, J., Albert, D., O’Brien, L., Uckert, K., and Steinberg, L. (2011). Peers increase adolescent risk taking by enhancing activity in the brain’s reward circuitry. Dev. Sci. 14, F1–10.

Chen, Z. (2009). Polish penal code . Beijing: Chinese People's Public Security University Press.

Chen, Z. (2016). Japanese Penal Code . Taibei: Yuan Zhao Publishing Co.

Cheng, C. (2009). Dialectical thinking and coping flexibility: a multimethod approach. J. Pers. 77, 471–494. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00555.x

Criminal Law (2019). Criminal Jurisprudence . Beijing: Higher Education Press.

Decety, J., and Jackson, P. L. (2004). The functional architecture of human empathy. Behav. Cogn. Neurosci. Rev. 3, 71–100. doi: 10.1177/1534582304267187

Deng, L., Liu, D., and XU, J. (2018). Parental monitoring and adolescent self-control: an analysis of the moderating role of paternal self-control. Chin. Special Educ. 11, 83–91. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-3728.2018.11.014

Gao, Y., and Gao, H. (2006). Shocking call Yulin juvenile delinquency warning record . Xi’an: Shaanxi People's Publishing House.

Guyer, A. E., Choate, V. R., Pine, D. S., and Nelson, E. E. (2012). Neural circuitry underlying affective response to peer feedback in adolescence. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 7, 81–92. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsr043

Harpur, T. J., Hakstian, A. R., and Hare, R. D. (1988). Factor structure of the psychopathy checklist. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 56, 741–747. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.56.5.741

He, L., and Lin, Y. (2017). German Criminal Code . Taibei: Yuan Zhao Publishing Co.

Hodges, S. D., and Wise, A. A. (2016). The social psychology of perceiving others accurately: interpersonal accuracy: real and perceived links to prosocial behavior . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Huang, F. (2007). Latest Italian penal code . Beijing: Law Press.

Huang, R. (2009). Basic criminal law . Beijing: China Renmin University Press.

Huang, L., and Su, Y. (2010). Cognitive regulation and emotion sharing processes in empathy and their relationship. J. Southw. Univ. Soc. Edn. 6, 13–19. doi: 10.13718/j.cnki.xdsk.2010.06.027

Huang, D., Ma, G., Zhang, G., and Li, G. (1996). Penal code of the Russian Federation . Beijing: China Legal Publishing House.

Inhelder, B., and Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence: An essay on the construction of formal operational structures , vol. 22: London: Psychology Press.

Institute of Law of Chinese Academy of Sciences (1963). Criminal code of the People's Republic of Bulgaria . Beijing: Law Press.

Jakobs, G. (1997). Behavior, responsibility, functional description of criminal law . Beijing: China University of Political Science and Law Press.

Jolliffe, D., and Farrington, D. P. (2004). Empathy and offending: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Aggress. Violent Behav. 9, 441–476. doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2003.03.001

Jolliffe, D., and Farrington, D. P. (2006a). Development and validation of the basic empathy scale. J. Adolesc. 29, 589–611. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2005.08.010

Jolliffe, D., and Farrington, D. P. (2006b). Examining the relationship between low empathy and bullying. Aggress. Behav. 32, 540–550. doi: 10.1002/ab.20154

Kim, Y. (1996). Korean criminal code and individual criminal code . Beijing: China Renmin University Press.

Li, C., Yue, L., Jie, L., and Jie, Z. (2011). Initial revision of the basic empathy scale in a Chinese adolescent population. Chin. J. Clin. Psychol. 19, 163–166. doi: 10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2011.02.003

Liszt,. (2006). Xu, J., German criminal law textbook . Beijing: China Law Press.

Liu, R., and Wang, Y. (2005). The model criminal code of the United States and its commentaries . Beijing: Law Press.

Loewy, A. H. (1987). Culpability, dangerousness, and harm: balancing the factors on which our criminal law is predicated. NCL Rev. 66:283.

Lupien, S. J., Maheu, F., Tu, M., Fiocco, A., and Schramek, T. E. (2007). The effects of stress and stress hormones on human cognition: implications for the field of brain and cognition. Brain Cogn. 65, 209–237. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2007.02.007

Ma, S. (2005). Norwegian criminal code for general citizens . Beijing: Peking University Press.

Meng, X., Yu, D., Chen, Y., Zhang, L., and Fu, X. (2023). The relationship between childhood trauma and empathy: a three-level meta-analysis. Acta Psychol. Sin. 55, 1285–1303.

Narvey, C., Yang, J., Wolff, K. T., Baglivio, M., and Piquero, A. R. (2021). The interrelationship between empathy and adverse childhood experiences and their impact on juvenile recidivism. Youth Violence Juvenile Justice 19, 45–67. doi: 10.1177/1541204020939647

Nisbett, R. E., Peng, K., Choi, I., and Norenzayan, A. (2001). Culture and systems of thought: holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychol. Rev. 108, 291–310. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.108.2.291

Noriyuki, N. (2007). General Japanese criminal law . Beijing: China Renmin University Press.

Pan, D. (2004). Spanish penal code . Beijing: China University of Political Science and Law Press.

Pan, H., Guo, Y., Gao, Q., Xu, N., Chen, Z., Wu, J., et al. (2022). 30 years of research on the accuracy of empathy: review and Prospect. Appl. Psychol. 28, 255–269.

Richter, D., Dietzel, C., and Kunzmann, U. (2011). Age differences in emotion recognition: the task matters. J. Gerontol. 66, 48–55. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbq068

Ryuichi, H., (2015). Li, H., The basis of criminal law . Beijing: China University of Political Science and Law Press.

Scott, E. S., Bonnie, R. J., and Steinberg, L. (2016). Young adulthood as a transitional legal category: science, social change, and justice policy. Fordham L. Rev. 85:641.

Shang, Y., Fu, Y., Ma, B., Wang, L., and Wang, D. (2022). Psychometric challenges in the measurement of constructs underlying criminal responsibility in children and young adults: a cross-sectional study. Front. Psychol. 12:781669. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.781669

Smith, S. F. (2009). Proportional Mens Rea, 46 AM. Social Science Electronic Publishing . 46, 127–155. doi: 10.1017/S147474560999022X

Snyder, C. R., Higgins, R. L., and Stucky, R. J. (1983). Excuses: Masquerades in search of grace . New York: Wiley.

Somerville, L. H. (2013). The teenage brain: sensitivity to social evaluation. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 22, 121–127. doi: 10.1177/0963721413476512

Spencer-Rodgers, J., Peng, K., Wang, L., and Hou, Y. (2004). Dialectical self-esteem and east-west differences in psychological well-being. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 30, 1416–1432. doi: 10.1177/0146167204264243

Steinberg, L. (2017). Adolescent brain science and juvenile justice policymaking. Psychol. Public Policy Law 23, 410–420. doi: 10.1037/law0000128

Tan, J., and Di, X. (2022). Reflection and reshaping: localization of the "maliciously replenishing age" rule. Academic Forum. 45, 67–80. doi: 10.16524/j.45-1002.2022.02.004

The General Office of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (1956). Criminal code of the People's Republic of Albania . Beijing: Law Press.

Walters, G. D. (2016). Are behavioral measures of self-control and the Grasmick self-control scale measuring the same construct? A meta-analysis. Am. J. Crim. Justice 41, 151–167. doi: 10.1007/s12103-015-9317-3

Wang, H., and Lu, J. (2004). Development of a self-control questionnaire for secondary school students and its investigation. Psychology , 198–203. doi: 10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.2004.06.055

Wu, G. (2004). Thai Penal Code . Beijing: Chinese People's Public Security University Press.

Xu, J. (1998). Swiss federal criminal code . Beijing: China Legal Publishing House.

Yan, J., and Ge, Y. (2008). Dutch criminal code . Beijing: Peking University Press.

Yu, L., and Jin, Y. (2015). Responses to missing data in U.S. longitudinal surveys and implications for China. Mod. Manag. 9, 33–35. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-368X.2015.09.011

Yurgelun-Todd, D. (2007). Emotional and cognitive changes during adolescence. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 17, 251–257. doi: 10.1016/j.conb.2007.03.009

Zaki, J., and Ochsner, K. (2011). Reintegrating the study of accuracy into social cognition research. Psychol. Inq. 22, 159–182. doi: 10.1080/1047840X.2011.551743

Zhang, P. (2014). A study on the correlation between thinking styles and coping styles and mental health of secondary school students. Master’s thesis . Chongqing: Chongqing Normal University.

Zhu, L. (2016). Latest French penal code . Beijing: Law Press.

Keywords: juvenile delinquent, criminal responsibility, dialectical thinking, self-control, empathy

Citation: Liu S, Su Y, Fu Y, Li H, Xu D, Zhou M and Jian W (2024) Peer assumption: an illusory consensus hidden in the criminal responsibility of juvenile offender—evidence from psychology. Front. Psychol . 15:1321870. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1321870

Received: 15 October 2023; Accepted: 22 April 2024; Published: 09 May 2024.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2024 Liu, Su, Fu, Li, Xu, Zhou and Jian. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Haifeng Li, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.