Poverty, Health, and Family Causes of Juvenile Delinquency

Introduction

Juvenile delinquency and its causes have been studied extensively. Many factors that put adolescents at risk of becoming delinquent have been identified. The majority of youth who enter the child welfare system, and many of the youth who are caught up in the juvenile justice system, have experienced abuse and neglect, dysfunctional home environments, destructive and inconsistent parenting practices, poverty, emotional and behavioral disorders, poor mental and physical health care, poor family-school relationships, and exposure to deviant peers, as well as community and societal problems that have contributed to their entry into the child welfare and juvenile justice systems (Miller, Davies & Greenwald, 5–6).

The Role of Poverty in Juvenile Delinquency

The increasing depth of poverty for American children is shown not only in raw numbers but also in dramatic changes in the nature of poverty itself. Children in poverty are increasingly concentrated in impoverished and underclass neighborhoods (Greenwood, 91–95). Concern about the number of children living in poverty arises from our knowledge of the problems they face as a result. Since the 1960s, developmental research has examined the effects of poverty on IQ, social adjustment, self-esteem, depression, and other types of maladaptive behaviors as mediated by such factors as parenting, home environment, family structure, immediate resources, and more recently, school, child care, and neighborhood (Huston et al., 275). In each case, poverty has been shown to have detrimental effects.

Whether we find evidence that poverty is related to delinquency depends on the type of research employed. Ethnographic studies link poverty to delinquency and crime, along with such factors as persistent unemployment, marital disruption, female-headed households, and teenage pregnancy. However, ethnographic research tends to focus on a relatively small group within a relatively limited context, and is therefore unable to convincingly rule out rival hypotheses for a poverty–delinquency relationship. Empirical research at the aggregate level has also amassed evidence that chronic and persistent poverty leads to crime (Fauth, Roth & Brooks-Gunn, 761). The results of aggregate-level studies, however, are not always taken as convincing evidence of a causal relationship, nor are they easily used to explain the nature of that relationship: when a connection is found using aggregated data, the etiology, characteristics, and behaviors associated with it cannot be specifically detailed or easily understood.

The most convincing evidence that poverty causes delinquency would therefore necessarily be based on individual-level quantitative analyses. Yet such investigations provide the least support for a relationship between poverty and crime. It has been found that children from disadvantaged families are more likely to engage in delinquent behaviors, and at the same time are more likely to be neglected and abused. In general, such research efforts have led to the conclusion that poverty accounts for little of the variation in delinquent involvement (Fauth, Roth & Brooks-Gunn, 763). Individual-level quantitative analyses have been the least effective of the three approaches at identifying the group which criminological theory suggests is most important — individuals who grew up in conditions of persistent poverty (Farnworth et al., 32–35). Among the types of research examining this association, ethnographic research provides the most consistent evidence linking poverty to delinquency and serves as a rich source of information on the processes through which that link operates.

In particular, ethnographic studies offer insight into the factors that mediate the effect of poverty on delinquency, and many of those processes support the theoretical positions of strain and subcultural theories. For example, Sánchez Jankowski (1995) described four key motives for delinquent involvement among people living in poverty:

First, for many people living in poverty, crime is seen as the only opportunity for achieving a higher socioeconomic status. Second, some turn to crime as a means of survival, maintaining at minimum their current economic position. Third, many people living in poverty — especially adolescents — resort to delinquency to enhance their financial ability to have fun. Finally, for those living in poverty, respect and honor become cherished "possessions" in the absence of material ones, and individuals are often prepared to take whatever means are necessary to protect them — an argument consistent with the theoretical discussions of Fauth, Roth & Brooks-Gunn (2007).

More generally, a number of ethnographic studies have contributed to our understanding of how living in poverty creates persistent problems that may mediate its effect and have been related to delinquent activity (Thornberry et al., 213). A fairly common theme in these studies is the disruption of the family and the absence of the father — factors which are central to Miller's subcultural theory. Haynie (2001) attributes the prevalence of female-headed households to structural constraints in legitimate opportunities for men and the existence of a "ghetto-specific" male role that values sexual exploits, toughness, the ability to command respect, and concern for personal appearance. Kierkus and Hewitt (2009) describe the peer support that can encourage the creation of situations in which the mother is head of the household and the father is absent. Whether viewed as a separate culture independent from the dominant culture, or as an adaptation of dominant cultural values to structural conditions, these studies view the lower-class community as distinct from the middle class in ways that contribute to social problems such as crime and delinquency.

Poverty is clearly not the only cause of delinquency, nor should its impact be viewed as deterministic. If anything, poverty is important to the extent that it represents a context in which behavior occurs. Growing up poor means there is less likely to be appropriate levels of cognitive stimulation in the home. Children raised in poverty are less likely to perform well academically, are more likely to report lower levels of self-confidence, and are less likely to be supervised effectively by parents (Fauth, Roth & Brooks-Gunn, 760). They are also more likely to grow up in families that lack the resources or skills their children need. These intervening mechanisms contribute to a higher likelihood of delinquent participation.

There is also evidence that the direct impact of poverty is necessarily limited given the many factors that mediate its effect on delinquency (Jarjoura and Triplett, 763). Combining these results with those from aggregate-level and ethnographic analyses suggests that the poverty–delinquency relationship is substantively important, particularly in the way poverty shapes experiences that lead to delinquency.

Physical and Mental Health Problems

Another major cause of juvenile delinquency is the physical and mental health of the young person involved — a cause that is often overlooked by the juvenile justice system. Especially because of poverty, many families cannot afford to address the health issues their children have. Because of expensive health care, a young person without financial means may see theft as the only available solution to his or her problem. However, health-related causes of delinquency are not limited to those associated with poverty.

One contributing factor is physical disability or impairment — for example, impaired bodily functioning, deafness, muteness, or blindness. These conditions do not directly cause delinquency; rather, they operate indirectly through the response of the surrounding environment. Parents or others may not treat the child or adolescent normally, which creates the main problem by producing aggressive and antisocial behavior. The child may retaliate through irritable behavior, aggression, or outbursts, which can result in delinquency (Miri & Ashtiani, 121). In some families, parents may not even be aware that their child has a physical or mental impairment.

Another reason some young people commit crimes is mental instability — that is, a psychological condition of which they and their parents are often unaware (Lynam et al., 563). Such conditions may be inherited, may develop during birth, or may emerge during the early years of childhood. Because these issues frequently go unidentified and untreated, they can manifest as behavioral problems that bring young people into contact with the justice system.

Conclusion

Factors that put adolescents at risk of becoming delinquent have been identified, including poverty, mental and physical health problems, and family issues such as lack of parental monitoring, physical abuse and neglect, and association with delinquent peers. However, such risk factors have been identified predominantly for males. One of the most robust findings in the crime and delinquency literature is that juvenile delinquency is significantly and substantively related to poverty, health, and family problems.

The concentration of poverty, family dysfunction, and health problems contributes to higher levels of juvenile delinquency. Individual-level analyses of the effect of poverty on delinquency have provided far less consistent results than those uncovered by aggregate-level and ethnographic research. Inconsistent findings persist even when researchers attempt to distinguish between different levels of poverty.

It has also been found that young people raised in broken or unstable families are more likely to be aggressive and to engage in law-breaking than those from stable homes. Other family-related causes of juvenile delinquency include health problems within the family, low income, physical abuse by parents, parental conflict, and persistent clashes among family members. All of these factors — and more — contribute to juvenile delinquency by affecting young people emotionally and psychologically, producing aggressive and sometimes vengeful behavior.

Apel, R., & Kaukinen, C. On the relationship between family structure and antisocial behavior: Parental cohabitation and blended households. Criminology, (2008). 46, 35–70.

Demuth, S., & Brown, S. Family structure, family processes, and adolescent delinquency: The significance of parental absence vs. parental gender. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, (2004). 41, 58–81.

Farnworth, M., Thornberry, T., Krohn, M., and Lizotte, A. Measurement in the study of class and delinquency: Integrating theory and research. J. Res. Crime Delinq. (1994). 31: 32–61.

Fauth, R.C., Roth, J.L., & Brooks-Gunn, J. Does the neighborhood context alter the link between youth's after-school time activities and developmental outcomes? A multilevel analysis. Developmental Psychology, (2007). 43, 760–777.

Greenwood, P. Juvenile crime and juvenile justice. In Wilson, J.Q., and Petersilia, J. (eds.), Crime, ICS Press, San Francisco, (1995). pp. 91–117.

Haynie, D.L. Delinquent peers revisited: Does network structure matter? American Journal of Sociology, (2001). 106, 1013–1057.

Huston, A.C., McLoyd, V.C., and Garcia Coll, C. Children and poverty: Issues in contemporary research. Child Dev. (1994). 65: 275–282.

Jarjoura, G.R., and Triplett, R.A. Delinquency and class: A test of the proximity principle. Just. Q. (1997). 14: 763–792.

Kierkus, C.A., & Hewitt, J.D. The contextual nature of the family structure/delinquency relationship. Journal of Criminal Justice, (2009). 37, 123–132.

Lynam, D.R., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T.E., Wikström, P.-O., Loeber, R., & Novak, S. The interaction between impulsivity and neighborhood context on offending: The effects of impulsivity are stronger in poorer neighborhoods. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, (2000). 109, 563–574.

Mersky, J., & Reynolds, A. Child maltreatment and violent delinquency: Disentangling main effects and subgroup effects. Child Maltreatment, (2007). 12, 246–258.

Meshkani, Mohammadreza and Meshkani, Zahrasadat. Measuring the family internal and external factors effective on juvenile delinquency. Iran's Sociology Magazine, (2002), vol. 4, No. 2, pg. 156–159.

Miller, L., Davies, M., & Greenwald, S. Religiosity and substance use and abuse among adolescents in the National Comorbidity Survey. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, (2000). 39, 1190–1197.

Miller, W. Lower class culture as a generating milieu of gang delinquency. J. Soc. Iss. (1958). 14: 5–19.

Miri Ashtiani, Elham. An Introduction to the Pathology of Social Problems in Iran. Tehran: Farhang. (2003), pg. 121–129.

O'Neil, R., Parke, R.D., & McDowell, D.J. Objective and subjective features of children's neighborhoods: Relations to parental regulatory strategies and children's social competence. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 22, (2001). 135–155.

Sánchez Jankowski, M. Ethnography, inequality, and crime in the low-income community. In Hagan, J., and Peterson, R.D. (eds.), Crime and Inequality, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA, (1995). pp. 80–94.

Thornberry, T.P., Huizinga, D., and Loeber, R. The prevention of serious delinquency and violence: Implications from the Program of Research on the Causes and Correlates of Delinquency. In Howell, J.C., Krisberg, B., Hawkins, J.D., and Wilson, J.J. (eds.), Sourcebook on Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, (1995). pp. 213–237.