Relationship Between Police Intervention And Juvenile Delinquency

Results found support Neutralization theory; he found that the institutionalized delinquents scored higher on the neutralization inventory than the high school boys. Furthermore, those high school boys who reported having a court appearance(s) scored higher on the neutralization inventory than those who reported never having been to court; those who self-reported delinquency scored higher on the inventory than those who reported no delinquent activities. Ball stated that this analysis found general support for neutralization theory, “delinquents tend to accept more excused for variety of offenses than do non

Most people have preconceived notions regarding the relationship between social class and delinquency. A common assumption is that lower-class juveniles are more likely to engage in delinquent behavior than their higher-class counterparts. Criminologists have performed a large number of studies examining the socio-demographic characteristics of delinquents, which often yielded contradictory results. When analyzing the extent and trend of juvenile delinquency in the United States conclusions can be drawn from estimates derived from arrest records, self-reports, and victimization data. Arrest estimates, self-reported information, and victimization data provide different estimates of the extent of delinquency in the United States (Maxfield et

Based on the social disorganization theory; Shaw and McKay account for high crime begins with poverty, low socioeconomic status and the inability to “control the teenage population,” (Sampson, 2016). Shaw and McKay also knew that within the community, delinquency was a trait that was picked-up by and from other delinquents. Furthermore, if the ability to control young

Labeling theory makes no attempt to understand why an individual initially engaged in primary deviance and committed a crime before they were labeled; this then limits the scope of the theory’s explanations and suggests the theory may not provide a better account for crime. Labeling theory emphasizes the negative effects of labeling, which gives the offender a victim status. Also, the same likelihood exists for developing a criminal career regardless of deviance being primary or secondary. Furthermore, labeling theorists are only interested in understanding the aftermath of an individual getting caught committing crime and society attaching a label to the offender. This differs from the view of social learning theory, which seeks to explain the first and subsequent criminal acts. Many critics also argue that the racial, social, and economic statuses of an individual create labels, as opposed to criminal acts; this theory then fails to acknowledge that those statuses may factor into the labeling process. As a result, the above suggests that labeling theory does not provide a good account for crime and appropriately has little empirical support. Moreover, in terms of policy implications, labeling theory implies a policy of radical non-intervention, where minor offenses

Retribution has been associated with increased punishment, decreased treatment, but not with reduced recidivism (Andrews et al., 1990). Not only has there been no reduction in recidivism, there has also been no increase in deterrence through the use of punitive measures (Cullen & Gendreau, 2000). Deterrence-oriented interventions have actually been shown to increase recidivism by 12%, as demonstrated by Lipsey’s (1992) meta-analysis (as referenced by Cullen & Gendreau, 2000).

Focuses mainly on interactionist theory but uses labeling theory as a type of interaction that affects delinquency. Labeling specifically in relation to gender, used to explain the gender gap in juvenile delinquency. Used data from the 1976 National Youth Survey, a longitudinal study, uses a multistage cluster sampling, sample includes 1,725 11-17 year-olds, using the first three annual waves of data. Used personal interviews to collect self-report of delinquency, parents ' appraisals of their children, and youths ' reflected appraisals of themselves from the standpoint of parents, friends, and teachers. Labeling theory implies that males are more likely than females to be labeled delinquent, in part because they engage in more objective acts of rule violation, and in part because common stereotypes portray delinquency as a male phenomenon. Except status offenses, which are more often reported for and enforced on females rather than males. Believed that females may be more relationship-oriented, making them more sensitive to public opinion. The labeling process is more consequential for females than for males is also unsupported.

When a juvenile commits a crime, it is not considered a crime, however it is considered juvenile delinquency. A massive problem throughout the US is juvenile delinquent acts. Juveniles acting out in a delinquent manner can be caused by many things. However, there is not just one reason why a juvenile may commit these acts. Instead there are many reasons that could lead up to delinquency. In this essay, I will be discussing a few theories as well as ways juveniles may receive treatment.

Menna, W. (2007, September 15). Evaluating Labeling Theory of Juvenile Delinquency. Retrieved from Science 360: http://

In modern America, a primary goal of the criminal justice system is to prevent crime as a means to protect and safeguard the rights of the general public. It is important to note that crime prevention consists of many objectives, including the deterrence and reduction of crime. Nowadays, a plethora of criminal justice agencies have worked to establish strategies, through the agency of public policy, to avert crime. Certainly, some tactics have proven to be more effective than others. In particular, early intervention is extremely efficient and effective in targeting distinct risk factors that may lead to felonious behavior. Therefore, the criminal justice system should principally operate through early intervention tactics because such programs

The fourth article that I reviewed, focused on labeling theory. In this article, Labeling Effects of First Juvenile Arrests authors Liberman, Kirk, and Kim focused on how the first arrest increases the likelihood of reoffending for juveniles. The idea of labels triggers “secondary sanctioning” processes. Labeling is a powerful mechanism that can lead to crime.

Juvenile offenders are increasing day by day regardless of the efforts to control the youth crime. It is important to understand the fact that even though the offenders fall in the young age bracket, they are still a part of human species. Human nature responds to violent actions with violent reactions. Violent reactions cause an increase in the violent actions instead of controlling them. However violent reactions may cause a temporary stop in the violent actions which may lead the authorities to believe that they have contained the crime. However, that doesn't stand true as a temporary stop does not result in a permanent solution.

The traditional view of crime has sometimes been that if a government is tougher on crime, the crime rates will go down. There are theories that suggest the state interventions can reduce the crime rates and are key to solving areas of high crime. However, labeling theory challenges all of this. This theory suggests that state intervention can actually increase crime rates. By assigning labels to “criminals” and “felons”, the state is deepening the problems that are getting people to turn to crime in the first place. Labeling theory states that the state

The current climate in the world of criminal offending has taken a remarkable turn when compared to previous generations. The ability to understand the reasoning or rationale behind delinquency has been a topic of public concern. I have questioned on many occasions the factors that influenced my decisions growing up and if I had the ability to take a different path in life. Enrolling in the Criminal Justice Degree has help enlighten many factors, and it has given me a different understanding of why I was so delinquent. I have become a father and a mentor to my child and these theories have equipped me with tools to carry out these functions effectively.

The National Institute Justice states that juvenile crime rates have fallen over 55% than its peak in 1994, but it still a cause for public concern. Actual reasons for this decline are elusive, but there is debate over the facilitation of jail time, or long-term therapy sessions as punishment for the juveniles for their crimes. According to an executive summary by Alex Piquiero and Laurence Steinberg, “Rehabilitation Versus Incarceration of Juvenile Offenders: Public Preferences in Four Models for Change States”, the public has expressed more favor for rehabilitation efforts. Piquiero and Steinberg, who are professors in criminal justice and psychology, surveyed a random sample with questions that pertained to

Characteristically, juvenile delinquency follows a similar path just like normal adolescent development and children tend to follow delinquent and criminal behavior rather than engaging in it randomly. Research has shown that there are two types of delinquents, those in whom the onset of severe antisocial behavior begins in early childhood, and those in whom this onset coincides with entry into adolescence. With either type, these developmental paths give families, communities, and systems the opportunity to intervene and prevent the onset of antisocial behaviors and justice system involvement (APA, 2017).