Search results

We test the proposition that criminal sentiments, which we define as a negative and potent view of a juvenile delinquent (JD), moderate the effect of a delinquency adjudication on self-sentiments. We expect criminal sentiments to reduce self-evaluation and increase self-potency among juvenile delinquents but have no effect on self-sentiments among non-delinquents. We also examine the construct validity of our measure of criminal sentiments by assessing its relationship to beliefs that most people devalue, discriminate against, and fear JDs.

We test these hypotheses with self-administered survey data from two samples of college students and one sample of youths in an aftercare program for delinquent youths. We use endogenous treatment-regression models to identify and reduce the effects of endogeneity between delinquency status and self-sentiments.

Our construct validity assessment shows, as expected, that criminal sentiments are positively related to beliefs that most people devalue, discriminate against, and fear JDs. Our focal analyses support our self-evaluation predictions but not our self-potency predictions.

Our findings suggest that the negative effect of a delinquency label on JDs’ self-esteem depends on the youths’ view of the delinquency label.

This study is the first to test a modified labeling theory proposition on juvenile delinquents.

In Chapter 2, the author will develop the theoretical framework of the sociological analysis of youth delinquency in SEA. The author will introduce the control theory (both self-control and social control), in order to understand under what circumstances youths are more and less likely to behave in a deviant manner. The author will, then, mention the general strain theory, to draw the relationships between the encounters of negative life events, the development of strain, and the disposition to perform delinquency. The author will also, address the cultural deviance and social learning theories that help justify the expression of juvenile delinquency from a sociocultural perspective, alongside pathing the way to explaining how social costs of youth delinquency can be raised by policy amendments in order to mitigate adolescents’ exercises of smoking, drinking and sexual misconduct behaviours. In this chapter, the author will highlight how poverty, the availability of delinquent opportunities, peer influence and pressure, a lack of parental and school socialisation, and deviant social and cultural norms are all risk factors for youth delinquency.

How delinquent, dependent/neglected, and abused children are treated by criminal justice agencies is a concern that crosses geographical boundaries. Do the courts sentence juveniles too leniently or, conversely, too harshly? Around the world some of the most serious questions involve the placement of juveniles in penal institutions. There are some clearly recognized problems. First, many countries still house delinquents and non-delinquent children in the same institutions, despite nation-wide reforms or legislation specifically prohibiting such practices. Second, many juveniles, regardless of their status, are held in jails and detention facilities built or administered for adult populations that greatly outnumber the younger inmates. Third, efforts at reform, while ambitious, have been ineffective in changing objectionable practices and/or aiding children in need. Fourth, left unresolved is the question as to whether the problems noted above in developed countries are present to a greater or lesser degree in developing countries.

The Dutch juvenile justice system locks up an increasing number of adolescent boys and girls at a cost of approximately €250,000 for each inmate annually (Boone & Moerings, 2007; Tonry, 2005). Questions have been raised, however, about the cost‐effectiveness of treatment in closed institutions. This study, with a sample of 49 adolescents residing in a Dutch youth prison, examined the role of group climate in establishing and maintaining treatment effects. Results show that an open group climate, with group workers paying more attention to the psychological needs of the adolescents and giving them ‘space’ to experiment, led to inmates feeling that they were ‘being understood by the group workers’. This perception of being understood was associated with greater treatment motivation and higher internal locus of control. Positive prison workers in the living group turned out to be a key factor in building an open group climate and subsequently higher internal locus of control and greater treatment motivation.

Delinquency as well as juvenile recidivism cuts across all nations in the world with its negative consequences on individuals, social and economic phases of life. Despite various interventions, strategies, the rate of recidivism has been on the increase. This calls for concern and a need to find a solution to the menace. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the nexus between early release of inmates and juvenile recidivism using Barnawa Borstal Training Institute, Kaduna, as case study and to identify other pre-disposing factors that contribute to juvenile recidivism in the society.

The study adopted a survey research design and used the questionnaire as the main instrument of data collection. The sample for the study consisted of 210 juvenile inmates from the Institute. Simple percentile and frequency distribution were used to analyze the data collected from the juvenile, while χ² was used to test the only hypothesis formulated for the study. The χ² result ( χ c 2 =1.409; df=3; α level=0.05; χ t 2 =7.815) showed that there is no significant relationship between early release and juvenile recidivism, and rather lack of proper reformation, stigmatization and lack of parental care are some of the important factors causing juvenile recidivism in Nigeria.

Based on the findings, it was recommended that government should, through the Borstal homes all over the country, ensure proper and adequate rehabilitation of inmates and provide adequate public enlightment for the safe and total re-absorption of inmates without stigmatization.

The major limitation of the work is the fact that the Borstal Institute in Kaduna has only male inmates, so there is no opportunity to consider the effect of gender on juvenile recidivism.

The practical implications is that the result of this study can be added to the field of criminal justice in Nigeria. The result also bring to the fore the fact that rehabilitation and success rate of re-integration of juvenile delinquents back into the society is everybody’s business.

The social implication of the study is that the study will go a long way in assisting policy makers in government and the prison authority to design and implement policies that will bring about proper reformation and rehabilitation of inmates.

The research was carried out among juvenile delinquents, some of who have been in and out of the Borstal home many times. So the researchers were able to collect first-hand information from the delinquents that serve as the respondents for this research. Moreover, the research setting was located in the northern part of Nigeria, whereas some of the earlier studies were carried out in the southern part of the country.

In this chapter, I examine the juvenile justice system and incarceration practices in Turkey. The study focuses on the basic agents and the legislation of the juvenile justice system and the current status of juvenile incarceration. This study also reveals the problems of the functionality of the system. I conclude with policy recommendations for successful implementation of the juvenile justice system and prevention of recidivism.

I discuss concepts in the juvenile justice system of Turkey and highlight the function and problems of each agent of the system. I focus on problems of the juvenile justice system and its reflection on high rates of recidivism of juveniles.

Overall, the leniency of the juvenile justice system is associated with high rates of juvenile recidivism in Turkey. Infrastructure insufficiencies have limited the standardization of services and practices. The delayed response and perceived leniency of the justice system promoted juveniles’ continuation on a crime trajectory.

Few scholars have examined the functionality of the juvenile justice system, its problems, and its reflection on high rates of juvenile recidivism in the Turkish case.

Using data from 2009–2016 across 31 states and union territories, this paper investigates determinants of juvenile delinquency in India as well as explores the nature of the complex relationship between economic variables and crime rate.

The paper employs a panel corrected standard error model due to the presence of heteroskedasticity and contemporaneous correlation. Additionally, due to possible feedback effect from independent variables resulting in endogeneity, a two-step generalized method of moments (GMM) is utilized to estimate a system of equations.

Estimation results indicate that macroeconomic factors – GSDP per capita and adult unemployment rate – are significant in explaining the juvenile crime rate in India. Higher poverty rate and percentage of slums were found to increase juvenile crime. This paper also demonstrates the harmful effects that domestic violence has on juvenile delinquency. Finally, education has a deterring impact on crimes relating to juveniles but deterrence factors do not.

While some implications are consistent with those found in previous studies of crime in developed and developing countries, the analysis in this paper also reveals unique results. For example, the adult unemployment rate was negatively correlated with juvenile crime, and an increase in police density exhibits a positive association with the juvenile crime rate. Further analysis of crimes by type (property and violent) reveals additional insights. In addition to that, contrary to hypothesis, by employing GMM estimation, the paper finds no evidence of a negative impact of juvenile delinquency on economic growth.

The purpose of this paper is to examine and explain the recidivism outcomes of a large cohort of juvenile homicide offenders three years following their release from institutional confinement.

Retrospective data were utilized to examine demographic, background, and institutional behavior variables on post-release recidivism of 247 juvenile homicide offenders. Analyses distinguish between capital and non-capital juvenile homicide offenders.

Descriptive analyses demonstrated a 50 percent recidivism rate among the sample of juvenile homicide offenders. Bivariate analyses revealed few significant differences between capital and non-capital homicide offending juveniles. Logistic regression analyses revealed that youth who were neglected prior to state institutionalization were significantly more likely to recidivate. Logistic regression also revealed that longer lengths of incarceration were associated with decreased odds of recidivism, while participating in assaultive behaviors against peers while confined aggravated the odds of recidivism.

Implications related to the role that previous neglect, incarceration time, and institutional behavior can inform policymakers and practitioners on issues related to the treatment of juvenile homicide offenders while confined, and the impact that incarceration time and institutional behavior mean for post-release recidivism risk.

Little research has assessed the recidivism outcomes of juvenile homicide offenders, especially with a larger sample size. None have examined the differences between capital and non-capital homicide offending juveniles. As juvenile jurisdictions continue to retain more homicide offending juveniles (as opposed to their removal to adult systems), there is value to the research to inform policy and practice with such an enriched and problematic groups of offenders.

This article reviews the international literature of the last two decades on self‐injurious behaviour in prisons and jails and introduces the risk factors associated with this behaviour. Studies from a variety of countries investigated different samples (e.g. in jails or prisons; female or male inmates). We only chose those studies using a control group of inmates without self‐injurious behaviour. The findings on potential risk factors for self‐injurious behaviour are largely contradictory because of the differences in sample selection and dependent variables (deliberate self‐harm without suicidal intent vs. suicide attempts). We also discuss some methodological problems in predicting self‐injurious behaviour.