ATTENTION:
BEFORE
YOU READ THE CHAPTER ONE OF THE PROJECT TOPIC BELOW, PLEASE READ THE
INFORMATION BELOW.THANK YOU!
INFORMATION:
YOU CAN
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT OF THE TOPIC BELOW. THE FULL PROJECT COSTS N5,000
ONLY. THE FULL INFORMATION ON HOW TO PAY AND GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT IS AT THE
BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE. OR YOU CAN CALL: 08068231953, 08168759420
THE EFFECT
OF FAMILY STRUCTURE ON RATES OF VIOLENT JUVENILE DELINQUENCY
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the study
Juvenile
delinquency is becoming very prevalent in today’s society. In 2008 there were
6,318 arrests for every 100,000 youths age 10 to 17 in the resident population
(Law Enforcement and Juvenile Crime, 2008). In 2009 The Boys Remand Home Oregun
,lagos state handled an estimated 20,000 cases that involved juveniles charged
with criminal law violations (Law Enforcement and Juvenile Crime, 2008).
Moreover, delinquency is more prevalent today than in the past, as juvenile courts
handled 30% more cases in 2009 than in 1985 (Knoll & Sickmund, 2012). While
it may be that adolescents are being processed through the system more today
rather than actually committing more forms of crime and delinquency
(Puzzanchera, Adams, & Sickmund, 2010), adolescents are nonetheless
experiencing increased involvement with the criminal justice system creating
problems for parents, schools, communities, and other children who are in the
presence of juvenile delinquents. In 1960 approximately 1,100 delinquency cases
were processed daily. In 2007 juvenile courts handled about 4,600 delinquency
cases per day (Puzzanchera et al., 2010). Two of the main factors influencing
juvenile delinquency are the family structure that a child is exposed to (Apel &
Kaukinen, 2008; Price & Kunz, 2003) and the relationships adolescents have
with parents (Leiber, Mack, & Featherstone, 2009; Petts, 2009). As with
patterns of juvenile delinquency, family structure in the United States has
also changed dramatically over the last century, becoming very diverse in
today’s society (Kierkus, Johnson, & Hewitt, 2010). Adolescents of all ages
are living in many various types of homes, such as with single, married, and
cohabiting parents. The families that children grow up in and the social
environment in which they live can have major effects on their well-being
(Wallman, 2010). In general, children living in non-traditional households are
at a greater risk for a wide variety of negative outcomes including involvement
in delinquency (Price & Kunz, 2003) compared to those from married
households (Demuth & Brown, 2004). Children in different family structures
also experience many forms of monitoring, supervision, involvement, and
attachment they receive from their parents (Hoeve, 2009). These factors may
also play a role in determining why adolescents turn to juvenile delinquency.
This study uses data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health
(Add Health) to examine if there is a difference in delinquency by family structure.
It also assesses if monitoring, supervision, involvement, and attachment
account for differences in delinquency by family structure. While previous
research has examined how family processes may explain differences in the
relationship between family structure and delinquency (Demuth & Brown,
2004; Price & Kunz, 2003), a major contribution of this study is the
exploration of the extent to which cohabitating families differ from
two-biological-parent and other family types. Families are one of the strongest
socializing forces in life. They teach
children to control unacceptable behavior, to delay gratification, and to
respect the rights of others.
Conversely, families can teach children aggressive, antisocial, and
violent behavior (Wright & Wright 1994).
This statement alone could easily explain how the juvenile may end up
becoming a delinquent. Wright and Wright
(1994) suggest positive parenting practices during the early years and later in
adolescence appear to act as buffers preventing delinquent behavior and
assisting adolescents involved in such behavior to desist from delinquency.
Adolescence is a time of expanding vulnerabilities and opportunities that
accompany the widening social and geographic exposure to life beyond school or
family, but it starts with the family.
Research indicates that various exposures to violence are important
sources of early adolescent role exits, which means that not only can a
juvenile witness violence within the family but on the outside as well (Hagan
& Foster 2001). If violence
encompasses all emotionally environmental aspects of the juvenile’s life, he or
she is more likely to engage in delinquent activities. A substantial number of
children engage in delinquency.
Antisocial and/or aggressive behaviors may begin as early as preschool
or in the first few grades of elementary school. Such childhood misconduct tends to be
resistant to change; for example, the parents disciplining more harshly, often
predicts continuing problems during adolescence, as well as adult criminality
(Prochnow& DeFronzo 1997). In the realm of family functioning there is a
theory known as the coercion theory, which suggests that family environment
influences an adolescent’s interpersonal style, which in turn influences peer
group selection (Cashwell & Vacc 1996).
Peers with a more coercive interpersonal style tend to become involved
with each other, and this relationship is assumed to increase the likelihood of
being involved in delinquent behavior.
Thus understanding the nature of relationships within the family, to
include family adaptability, cohesion, and satisfaction, provides more
information for understanding youth (Cashwell & Vacc 1996). The cohesiveness of the family successfully
predicted the frequency of delinquent acts for non-traditional families
(Matherne &Thomas 2001). Family
behaviors, particularly parental monitoring and disciplining, seem to influence
association with deviant peers throughout the adolescent period (Cashwell &
Vacc 1994). Among social circumstances which have a hand in
determining the future of the individual it is enough for our present purpose
to recognize that family is central (Wright & Wright 1994). Referring back
to the issue of monitoring, a lack of monitoring is reflected in the parent
often not knowing where the child is, whom the child is with, what the child is
doing or when the child will be home.
Monitoring becomes increasingly important as children move into
adolescence and spend less time under the direct supervision of parents or
other adults and more time with peers.
Previous research found that coercive parenting and lack of parental
monitoring contributes not only directly to boys’ antisocial behaviors, but
also indirectly as seen in the contribution to their increased opportunity to
associate with deviant peers, which is predictive of higher levels of
delinquent acts (Kim, et al. 1999). Communication also plays a big role in how
the family functions. Clark and Shields
(1997) state that the importance of positive communication for optimal family
functioning has major implications for delinquent behavior. They also discovered that communication is
indeed related to the commission of delinquent behavior and differences are
shown within categories of age, sex, and family marital status.Gorman-Smith and
Tolan (1998) found that parental conflict and parental aggressiveness predicted
violent offending; whereas, lack of maternal affection and paternal criminality
predicted involvement in property crimes.
Familial characteristics suggesting familial antisocial behavior or
values such as family history of criminal behavior, harsh parental discipline,
and family conflict have been among the most consistently linked. In another study conducted by Gorman-Smith and
her colleagues, data show that children are more likely to resort to violence
if there is violence within relationships that they may share with their family
(Gorman-Smith, et al. 2001) For family disruption and delinquency, the
composition of families is one aspect of family life that is consistently
associated with delinquency. Children
who live in homes with only one parent or in which marital relationships have
been disrupted by divorce or separation are more likely to display a range of
behavioral problems including delinquency, than children who are from two
parent families (Thornberry, et al. 1999).
Children who witness marital discord are at greater risk of becoming
delinquents. Previous research has demonstrated
associations between exposure to parental divorce and marital discord while
growing up and children’s psychological distress in adulthood (Amato &
Sobolewski 2001). Social learning theory
argues that aggressive behavior is learned; as parents display aggressive
behavior, children learn to imitate it as an acceptable means of achieving
goals (Wright& Wright 1994). Juby and Farrington (2001) claim that there
are three major classes that explain the relationship between disrupted
families and delinquency; trauma theories, life course theories, and selection
theories. The trauma theories suggest
that the loss of a parent has a damaging effect on children, most commonly
because of the effect on attachment to the parent. Life course theories focus on separation as a
long drawn out process rather than a discrete event, and on the effects of
multiple stressors typically associated with separation. Selections theories argue that disrupted
families are associated with delinquency because of pre-existing differences in
family income or child rearing methods, for example (Juby& Farrington
2001). The third major area within juvenile delinquency and families is single
parent households versus two parent households.
Klein and Forehand (1997) suggest that the prediction of juvenile
delinquency in early childhood depends on the type of maternal parenting skills
that are imposed upon the child during early adolescence. Muehlenberg (2002) poses the question of how
do children from single parent family homes fare educationally compared to
children from intact two parent families? A number of studies have been
undertaken which show a very real connection between delinquent and /or
criminal behavior, and single parent families. Wright and Wright’s (1994)
research shows that single parent families, and in particular mother-only
families, produce more delinquent children than two parent families. Indeed the very absence of intact families
makes gang membership more appealing (Muehlenberg 2002). Sometimes the focus is
taken off the mother and shifted towards the father. The lack of emphasis on the role of fathering
in childhood conduct problems is especially unfortunate given that there are
several reasons why fathers can be expected to be particularly significant in
the initiation and persistence of offspring offending. For example, fathers are particularly likely
to be involved with sons who are at higher risk than daughters of delinquent
behavior (Flouri& Buchannan 2002).
Popenoe (1997) states that fatherlessness is a major force behind many
disturbing US social problems. The
institution of marriage acts as culture’s chief vehicle to bind men to their
children. The absence of fathers from
children’s lives is one of the most important causes related to children’s well
being such as increasing rates of juvenile crime, depression and eating disorders,
teen suicide, and substance abuse. Two
parent households provide increased supervision and surveillance of property,
while single parenthood increases likelihood of delinquency and victimization
simply by the fact that there is one less person to supervise adolescent
behavior (Wright & Wright 1994). Which one of these three major factors
contributes to juvenile delinquency the most? They all seem to play a very big
role in the life of the child. Family is
very important in creating a law-abiding child.
Separating the influence of these three main categories is a challenge
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Adolescent
crime (delinquency) in Nigeria is a major social problem which affects the
whole society and constitutes a serious impediment to development (Osgood,
2014). However, Osgood further stated that young people in contemporary Nigeria
are typically involved in stealing, cultism, kidnapping, drug abuse and other
felonious activities. According to Sampson (2015) young people were most
involved in illicit drug use and the consequences of this disease and other
minor crimes such as examination dereliction, alcoholism, phony, rape etc in
Nigeria social youth violence, stealing, mental disorders, lack of esteem for
elders and the many other social ills (Sampson, 2015). In light of the foul
problems of juvenile delinquency in Nigeria, researchers and concerned citizens
have attributed the threat to countless issues or some factors such as;
paucity, aristocrat pressure, family structure, substance abuse, etc. While
acknowledging these other causes, this study strive for the effect of family
structure on the rate of violent juvenile delinquency among young people in
Lagos since “the family has a vital role to play in the development of a
consistent offender or personality (Kim, 2013). According to Alfred, (2012)
resulting from inadequate supervision family structure appears to be associated
with juvenile delinquency. It has been observed that children in single-parent
families tend to receive lower levels of supervision. Alfred also stated that
inadequate parental supervision tends to increase the likelihood of juvenile
delinquency. Klein (2011) says that when there is a single parent living in the
home instead of two, it is more difficult to supervise children at all times
and that daily activities such as shopping and the work must be completed by
the single parent who leaves no parent at home, because of that children in
single-parent families tend to receive lower levels of supervision (Klein,
2011).The lack of parental supervision not only directly contributes to
antisocial behavior of children, but also indirectly because it helps expose
them to associate with deviant peers, which predicts higher levels of deviant
acts (Rex, 2011). From observation, it seems that parents and caregivers do not
do much in monitoring their children in Nigeria because of their many economic
and social commitments. However, it was also observed that adolescents from
broken homes are more likely to run away from their families as children who
come from more stable families (Karla, 2011). Karla also explained that a
broken home is an imbalance and therefore is detrimental to the socialization
and personality of the adjustment of a child. The resulting effect is that the
child may be more vulnerable to negative peer pressure and may eventually
commit crimes not committed by teenagers from unwavering or stable families
where there is a well-adjusted structure of the parents who act as good models
in the acquisition of appropriate roles of the child. Children who grow up in
unstable families are at greater risk of experiencing a variety of problems in
behavior and education, including smoking, drug abuse, vandalism, violence and
crime which children from stable families and changes in the family can affect
self-control levels in children.
1.3 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
The
objectives of the study are;
1. To find out the effect of family structure
on juvenile delinquency among school adolescent test in secondary schools
2. To ascertain the extent to which the
teaching and learning of social studies education in secondary schools can cube
juvenile delinquency
3. To find out the impact of other personal
characteristics in the promotion of delinquency behavior to lead to low
academic performance
4. To find out workable measures to minimizing
the problem of juvenile delinquency in secondary schools
1.4 RESEARCH
HYPOTHESES
For the
successful completion of the study, the following research hypotheses were
formulated by the researcher;
H0: there is no effect of family structure on
juvenile delinquency among school adolescent test in secondary schools.
H1: there is
effect of family structure on juvenile delinquency among school adolescent test
in secondary schools.
H02: there
is no impact of other personal characteristics in the promotion of delinquency
behavior to lead to low academic performance
H2: there is
impact of other personal characteristics in the promotion of delinquency
behavior to lead to low academic performance
1.5
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
This study,
which is primarily aimed at explaining the effect of effect of family structure
on rate of violence juvenile delinquency, will provide an insight into the
problems associated with family structure on rate of juvenile delinquency. This
report would be of great benefit for families and schools, to expose them to
violence juvenile delinquency. The findings will be useful for researchers to
further generate knowledge in the field
1.6 SCOPE
AND LIMITATION OF THE STUDY
The scope of
the study covers the effect of family structure on rate of violence juvenile
delinquency. The researcher encounters some constrain which limited the scope
of the study;
a) AVAILABILITY OF RESEARCH MATERIAL: The
research material available to the researcher is insufficient, thereby limiting
the study
b) TIME: The
time frame allocated to the study does not enhance wider coverage as the
researcher has to combine other academic activities and examinations with the
study.
c)
Organizational privacy: Limited Access to the selected auditing firm makes it
difficult to get all the necessary and required information concerning the
activities.
1.7
DEFINITION OF TERMS
For the ease
of comprehension of the study, it is necessary for the following
JUVENILE: A juvenile is an individual that has not
yet reached its adult form, sexual maturity or size. Juveniles sometimes look
very different from the adult form.
FAMILY
STRUCTURE: The family structure is considered a family support system involving
two married individuals providing care and stability for their biological
offspring. However, this two-parent, nuclear family has become less prevalent,
and alternative family forms have become more common. The family is created at
birth and establishes ties across generations. Those generations, the extended
family of aunts, uncles, grandparents, and cousins, can hold significant
emotional and economic roles for the nuclear family.
Delinquent:
It is a person who deviates from or violated the stipulated law that guides
code of conduct of a particular country or society.
Juvenile
Delinquency: Andy (1960:30) defined it as any social deviation by a youth from
the societal norms which results in his contact with law enforcement agents. It
is an act committed by a young person who violated the stipulated law of that
country or society.
Burglary: It
is defined as a crime of entering a building illegally and stealing things from
it.
Robbery: It
is defined as a crime of stealing money or goods from a bank, shop/store,
person etc especially using violence or threat. 8
Rape: This
is simply a crime of forcing somebody to have sex with him/her especially using
threat or violence.
Homicide:
This simply means a crime of killing somebody deliberately.
Stealing:
This means an act of taking something from a person’s shop/store, etc. without
permission and without intending to return it or pay for it.
Truancy:
This simply means a practice of staying away from school without permission. It
is a crime to juvenile.
Disobedience:
This is defined as a failure or refusing to do what a person, law, order etc.
tells.
Kleptomanism:
It is simply a mental illness in which somebody has a strong desire, which they
cannot control in stealing things. It is common among juvenile
1.8
ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY
This
research work is organized in five chapters, for easy understanding, as follows
Chapter one
is concern with the introduction, which consist of the (overview, of the
study), historical background, statement of problem, objectives of the study,
research hypotheses, significance of the study, scope and limitation of the
study, definition of terms and historical background of the study. Chapter two
highlights the theoretical framework on which the study is based, thus the
review of related literature. Chapter three deals on the research design and
methodology adopted in the study. Chapter four concentrate on the data
collection and analysis and presentation of finding. Chapter five gives summary, conclusion, and
recommendations made of the study
HOW TO GET THE FULL PROJECT WORK
PLEASE, print the following
instructions and information if you will like to order/buy our complete written
material(s).
HOW TO RECEIVE PROJECT MATERIAL(S)
After paying the appropriate amount
(#5,000) into our bank Account below, send the following information to
08068231953 or 08168759420
(1) Your project
topics
(2) Email
Address
(3) Payment
Name
(4) Teller Number
We will send your material(s) after
we receive bank alert
BANK ACCOUNTS
Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account Number: 0046579864
Bank: GTBank.
OR
Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account Number: 2023350498
Bank: UBA.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CALL:
08068231953 or 08168759420
AFFILIATE
Comments
Post a Comment