Sample Paper

pdf

School

California State University, Long Beach *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

143

Subject

Sociology

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

pdf

Pages

Uploaded by MateSquidPerson1062

1 Sample Theory Paper Juvenile Delinquency Juvenile delinquency is a problem that is worthy of prevention since it will stop the criminalization of young people of color. Neighborhoods that are overly policed tend to have high rates of crime and arrests. Kids who grow up in these neighborhoods watch the over- policing of citizens and older community members get arrested constantly. It only takes years until those young kids are now being overly police and stereotyped by the same police department. The school to prison pip eline “refers to the school policies and practices (e.g., zero tolerance policies) that funnel students from schools into the juvenile and criminal justice systems” (Smokowski, Evans, Roderick Rose, and Bacallao, 2020, p. 566). Law enforcement and such policies have a negative impact on the schools where primarily young people of color attend. Because of the school to prison pipeline zero tolerance policy, the negative impacts are that “delinquents receive a juvenile court record and face a host of long-term negative consequences such as an increased likelihood of adult criminal and penal involvement, decreased access to education, difficulties obtaining later employment, enhanced sentencing for future convictions, and increased delinquency” (Smokowski, Evan s, Roderick Rose, and Bacallao, 2020, p. 566). The costs that juvenile delinquency brings to society affect families, communities, taxpayers, and even the criminal justice system. Juveniles are the future. If they take part in any delinquent acts, they are then victims of the criminal justice system. Though the problem of juvenile delinquents not only stems from a micro-level but from a macro level, the community, and surrounding areas.

2 First, there is a racial disparity and link when speaking about juvenile delinquents (Lowery & Burrow, 2019). Black and Brown bodies are criminalized in the United States. According to Lowery and Burrow (2019), black youth are incarcerated at a higher rate than white youth. This demonstrates the criminalization of Black and Brown bodies. This criminalization thus then affects communities when these juveniles are targeted and stereotyped as deviants, there is already a higher chance for entering the criminal justice and prison system. When imprisoned, juveniles are no longer able to take part in their own communities which ultimately does affect the community. With the disappearance of a community member, communities are unable to thrive and grow. To go moreover, the criminal justice system then has the problem through the court trial process. Decision-making in court is oft en influenced by people’s beliefs and knowledge. Thus, “criminal justice system actors may see the offending as ‘stereotype - consistent’ and generalize it to other members of the group as a negative attribution” (Lowery & Burrow, 2019, p. 333), and generally, race drives stereotype. For the criminal justice system, the incarceration of juveniles only makes numbers grow and as well, they must provide resources (such as school and mental health) since the population incarcerated are still growing people. The cost that negatively impacts juveniles is that they have a loss of education, access to families and community which can then influence trauma. As mentioned previously, Black and Brown bodies are criminalized in the United States. The incarceration of juveniles would limit their access to schooling and education, which is vital for kids in general (Lowery & Burrow, 2019). By taking away access to education, makes it harder for juveniles to grow and as well learn. After all, education could help steer away from crime, but the criminal justice system does not promote that. Furthermore, after being absent for a period from their communities, juveniles will have a hard problem re-entering, interacting, and taking part in their communities (Lowery

3 & Burrow, 2019). This affects juveniles because if they have a hard problem re-entering their communities, they are more vulnerable to committing wrongful acts/crimes since they don’t have a sense of belonging. To move on, there are theoretical perspectives that can explain as to why youth from these communities’ become targets of criminalization from the law and other institutions at such a young age. The problem does not start with the child but instead with their circumstances and environment around them. Theoretical Perspectives Two theoretical frameworks that I will be discussing throughout this research are labeling theory and strain theory. Labeling Theory As mentioned before, in juvenile delinquency, juveniles that commit such as shoplifting and spray painting a building. The juveniles mostly targeted or labeled as juvenile delinquents are Black and Brown kids who live in low socioeconomic areas. There are two mechanisms that apply to labeling theory. The first mechanism is delinquent labels direct youth's own self- conception, which can ultimately lead to them self-fulfilling as delinquent from outside factors (people labeling them as delinquent) (Liberman, Kirk, & Kim, 2014). Thus, when young Black and Latino kids are targeted and treated as delinquent by authoritative figures such as parents, teachers, or law enforcement, they consciously start acting like one. The second mechanism is focused “more on external processes involving social and societal responses to the label, including increased surveillance as well as reduced social opportunities and interactions” (Liberman, Kirk, & Kim, 2014, p. 347). This can involve how again; law enforcement interacts with a community which then affects the juveniles and others as well.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

4 To add on, juveniles who experience labeling from those around them, tend to act on it. Juveniles who are labeled by authority figures are often socially excluded which weakens their social bonds that are positive (Wiley, Slocum, & Esbensen, 2013). Black and Hispanic kids who attended school often were victims of labeling by law enforcement. Black kids represented 15% of the school population whereas Hispanic kids represented 40% and White kids 30% (Wiley, Slocum, & Esbensen, 2013). From those percentages, Black and Hispanic kids were often seen as having higher delinquent attitudes and were perceived as delinquents. This study also looks at whether these kids are involved in positive school activities that provided. Wiley, Slocum, & Esbensen (2013) found that kids who are involved in school often are less likely to become delinquents. When adolescents are involved in prosocial programs, they do not find ways to deviate because they are in a positive place and have positive interactions. Furthermore, there are various factors that apply to being labeled as a delinquent by society. Lee, Menard, and Bouffard (2014) introduce the interactional model which demonstrates how negative labeling, delinquent peer association, minimal family attachment, and general delinquency all align with delinquent values. This is defined as an interactional theory which “argues that theoretical variables and delinquency have reciprocal causal relationships” (Lee, Menard, & Bouffard, 2014, p. 1). Thus, it also relates to labeling theory. In regard to the interactional model, the labeling theory has an impact on factors that have been mentioned above. The labeling theory is consistent in defining how juveniles are of coursed labeled but in all ways, finds factors to help define what a delinquent is so others can base off that. General Strain Theory First, Jaggers, Tomek, Bolland, Church II, Hooper, and Bolland, (2014) state personal factors such as “[a]ssaults, parental rejection, poor school performance, and work problems all

5 contribute to personal strain that may result in crime” (p. 40). Thus, when something necessary is tak en from the juvenile’s life, it may lead them to engage in delinquent activities because they have no support. These are all personal strains that come from micro-level environments such as a kid’s home, environment, and school. As mentioned, environments are a factor in kids engaging in criminal acts. Along with that, youth who identify in racial minority groups tend to commit more delinquent acts compared to the majority group in the United States (Jaggers, Tomek, Bolland, Church II, Hooper, & Bolland, 2014). Kids who identify as a minority are more likely to engage in these delinquent/criminal acts because of the support system they have. These factors include coming from disadvantaged backgrounds (low socioeconomic status) and personal disadvantages such as discrimination, isolation, and social conditions within a person’s neighborhoods (Jaggers, Tomek, Bolland, Church II, Hooper, & Bolland, 2014). To add on, general strain can also be considered as already a personal issue/thing. As mentioned before there are factors that contribute to general strain theory. These factors are the removal of positive stimuli (family, community, emotions), and the addition of negative stimuli such as being surrounded by a negative environment and interacting/socializing in the said environment (Lilly, Cullen, & Ball, 2019). Agnew and Messner (2015) provide an example of general strain in negative stimuli in the scenario of a juvenile who has “low grades are more likely to lead to negative overall assessments among those who are pessimistic, who are low in self- efficacy, who are high in negative emotionality… [may] lack good coping skills and social support” (p. 576). Negative emotion/stimuli are particularly a huge factor when it comes to juveniles engaging in delinquent/criminal acts. Thus, the environment around a person has a higher probability of how a person may act in their own situations.

6 Moreover, association with delinquent friends is another huge main factor that influences other adolescents to engage in delinquent and criminal acts. It’s evident that kids will do anything to fit in with their peers to fit in and engage with others. Association with delinquent friends/peers is an attribute that influences other kids to engage in such acts. Adolescents who are associated with delinquent friends are more highly to be more likely to adopt characteristics and delinquent values from their associates, which is a coping strain (Spohn, 2012). Thus, adolescents are most likely to engage in these acts when their environment influences this. Their influences are already personal, such as home life (economically, parents), school, resources/opportunities, and their associations within a community. Policies In this section, the policies that will be brought up based on the theories of labeling and general strain are school-based teen courts and juvenile diversion programs. School-based teen courts are described as “a diversion program that diverts first -time offenders from the traditional juvenile justice system and holds them accountable for their transgressions through prosocial sanctions” (Smokowski, Evans, Roderick Rose, & Bacallao, 2020, p. 566). Compared to actual courts, adolescents who are deemed as delinquent are being tested by their fellow peers as a judge/jury rather than an actual judge. Juvenile diversion programs are programs that are an “intervention strategy that redirects youths away from formal processing in the juvenile justice system, while still holding them accountable for their actions” (Wilson, 2015). These two policy programs help youth by diversion and not being processed through the legal system that affects the person in other ways. School-Based Teen Courts

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

7 School-based teen courts are similar yet different from an actual court environment. Juvenile delinquents are viewed by their peers in a school/legal setting rather than an actual courtroom which can be intimidating. The goals for school- based teen courts are to “reintegrate offenders back into the community or school (depending upon where the court is held), rather than further ostracizing them with excessive punishment” (Smokowski, Evans, Roderick Rose, & Bacallao, 2020, p. 567). Methods used to not use punishment is to ‘sentence’ adolescents to do community service, which is a better alternative than being sent to a jail facility. Most of the cases that school-based teen courts review is mostly school-based but also juveniles who have been arrested by police officers. These teen courts give adolescents a second chance to redeem themselves because after all, there are other factors that may explain their actions but that does not mean they should be treated as a criminal or threat at a specific age. School- based teen courts can align with Robert Agnew’s general strain theory. Teen court's goal is to help adolescents to reintegrate into their communities in a less punishing way rather than to pull them away. To help better understand why adolescents deviate and end up committing crimes, Smokowski, Evans, Roderick Rose, and Bacallao (2020) investigated school cultures and aspects of what students are missing/experiencing in their time at school. They determine this by implementing School Success Profile Plus (SSP+). School success profile plus are surveys that are used as reports where youth/school kids answer questions based on topics such as friends, family, school, their communities. These determine whether a child is being impacted by positive or negative stimuli, which is an indicator of the reason if they deviate or not. The indicators for the school success profile plus are on which students reported on are school climate such as school danger, delinquent associations, violent behavior, and problems in school (Smokowski, Evans, Roderick Rose, & Bacallao, 2020,). Most kids at school indicated

8 many negative stimuli which cause a strain on a personal level. When being exposed to negative stimuli, adolescents adapt to what they can. Tying school-based teen courts and SPP+ with general strain clearly demonstrates that micro-level factors such as family and associations with a community have a tremendous effect on how an adolescent would act. SPP+ helps identify the problems of a student/community and school-based teen courts act as an intervention to prevent adolescents from being integrated into the criminal/legal system and given a less harsh punishment such as community services, to help them integrate into their communities in a positive manner (positive stimuli). Juvenile Diversion Programs Juvenile diversion programs have been established as an altern ative for ‘juvenile delinquents. Rather than juvenile delinquents being sentenced to jail, they are not punished harshly. The goals of juvenile diversion programs are to “[reduce] recidivism rates of juveniles who participated in diversion programming compared with juveniles who were formally processed in the justice system.” (Wilson, 2015). Thus, juvenile diversion programs already illustrate a negative impact that the criminal justice system will have on adolescents. Once already processed in the criminal justice system, adolescents will have criminal records that will affect their future lives when it comes to jobs, school, and how the general population views them. Therefore, this theory is associated with and tries to dismantle labeling theory. When speaking generally about juvenile diversion programs, there are two types of diversion programs. The first type is called caution and warning programs which is typically when youths are given warnings or cautions by police officers (Wilson, 2015). This method seems pretty easy and valid, although it is not ideal because thinking realistically, those often targeted by police officers are Black and Latino/x youth, and they are treated harshly and already

9 viewed as criminals. Whereas formal diversion programs “i nvolve some conditions youths must fulfill, including an admission of guilt and an agreement to participate in a diversion intervention… will generally result in no further judicial processing” (Wilson, 2015). This method seems more effective since it is more interactive with the adolescent. They get to learn and have that support system through a process rather than a slap on the hand. Labeling theory relates to juvenile diversion programs because these methods try to reduce the criminality amongst the youth and try to eliminate the labeling aspect, in which most adolescents, mostly those who are Black and Latino, are already being labeled in a certain way by criminal justice/law enforcement professionals. Adolescents who undergo the traditional criminal ju stice/legal system process have “negative impacts of formal system processing and empirical work on the risk/need/responsivity model also provide support for the use of diversion.” (Wilson, 2015). For this method to be successful, adolescents would have to be offered this program as an alternative to turning their life around in a positive manner. Conclusion In conclusion, adolescents who come from difficult and/or disadvantaged backgrounds often tomes are affected by labeling theory in terms of being labeled by society. When adolescents, in this term young male Black and Latino kids are being labeled as criminals, they have a higher chance to self-fulfill into that stereotype or persona they are being deemed at a young age. Thus, one theory that can explain why some adolescents may deviate is the general strain theory. The general strain theory adds to the idea that personal factors such as family, financial, and even relations can cause a person to deviate or not. Adolescents should not be labeled nor be blamed when they have no control of their environment. Therefore, policies that can be put in place to prevent juvenile delinquency in troubled neighborhoods are school-based

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

10 teen courts and juvenile diversion programs. These programs will deter adolescents from committing crimes and as well from being labeled as juvenile delinquents/criminals as it will give them other ways to be published (such as community work or programs) rather than being sent to prison/jail (punished). Adolescents should be given chances to learn from their mistakes by looking back on them and be given an opportunity to work on themselves rather than being labeled as criminals and being thrown into prison.

11 References Agnew, R., & Messner, S. F. (2015). General assessments and thresholds for chronic offending: An enriched paradigm for explaining crime. Criminology , 53(4), 571 – 596. https://doi- org.csulb.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12079 Jaggers, J., Tomek, S., Bolland, K. A., Church II, W. T., Hooper, L. M., & Bolland, J. M. (2014). Personal and anticipated strain among youth: A longitudinal analysis of delinquency. Journal of Juvenile Justice , 3(2), 38 – 54. King, Y. A., Fite, P. J., & Poquiz, J. L. (2018). Impact of neighborhood safety on the association between parental knowledge and delinquency. Journal of Child & Family Studies , 27(3), 885 – 894. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-017-0937-8 Lee, J., Menard, S., & Bouffard, L. (2014). Extending interactional theory: The labeling dimension. Deviant Behavior , 35(1), 1 – 19. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2013.822208 Liberman, A. M., Kirk, D. S., & Kim, K. (2014). Labeling effects of first juvenile arrests: Secondary deviance and secondary sanctioning . Criminology , 52(3), 345 – 370. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12039 Lilly, J. R., Cullen, F. T., & Ball, R. A. (2019). Criminological theory. Seventh Edition . SAGE . Retrieved from https://platform.virdocs.com/r/s/0/doc/495174/sp/226798744/mi/674787565?cfi=%2F4% 2F2%5Bs9781506387314.i937%5D%2F30%5Bs9781506387314.i958%5D%2F8%5Bs9 781506387314.i960%5D%2F4%2C%2F1%3A447%2C%2F1%3A447

12 Lowery, P. G., & Burrow, J. D. (2019). Concentrated disadvantage, racial disparities, and juvenile institutionalization within the context of attribution theory. Criminal Justice Studies , 32(4), 330 – 355. https://doi.org/10.1080/1478601X.2019.1660964 Smokowski, P. R., Evans, C. B. R., Rose, R., & Bacallao, M. (2020). A group randomized trial of school-based teen courts to address the school to prison pipeline, reduce aggression and violence, and enhance school safety in middle and high school students. Journal of School Violence , 19(4), 566 – 578. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2020.1780133 Spohn, R. E. (2012). Delinquent friends and reactions to strain: An examination of direct and indirect pathways. Western Criminology Review , 13(1), 16 – 36. Wiley, S. A., Slocum, L. A., & Esbensen, F. (2013). The Unintended Consequences of Being Stopped or Arrested: An Exploration of the Labeling Mechanisms Through Which Police Contact Leads to Subsequent Delinquency. Criminology , 51(4), 927 – 966. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12024 Wilson, H. (2015). Practice profile: Juvenile diversion programs. CrimeSolutions, National Institute of Justice . Retrieved December 12, 2021, from https://crimesolutions.ojp.gov/ratedpractices/37.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Sample Paper

Related Documents