Peer Pressure And Juvenile Delinquency Essay Sample

Free Articles

Introduction: A Definition of Juvenile Delinquency

Juvenile delinquency. as defined by Regoli and Hewitt ( 2006 ) . refers to the condemnable Acts of the Apostless and position discourtesies performed by juveniles. or those that are non of legal age. Since they are still bush leagues. most legal systems require specific processs ( such as the proviso of particular detainment centres ) in covering with the juveniles.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

In the United States of America. a juvenile delinquent. aside from a individual non holding reached the legal age. is besides a individual whose behaviour has been labeled “delinquent” by a tribunal. Harmonizing to Regoli and Hewitt. ( 2006 ) . the demands differ from one province to another. However. the federal authorities came up with a statute law to guarantee that the handling of juvenile delinquents is the same for all the instances in all provinces. This statute law is known as the Juvenile Justice Delinquency Act of 1975.

The followers are the factors which more frequently than non. push adolescents to execute delinquent Acts of the Apostless. as cited by the article Juvenile Delinquency – Prevention – Care and Cure ( n. d. ) :

This paper shall look into juvenile delinquency as a societal job. the sociological theories that explain its causes and eventually. the relationship between juvenile delinquency and equal force per unit area.

Juvenile Delinquency as a Social Problem and the Theories that Explain its Causes

In the mid 1990s. juvenile delinquency and adolescent self-destruction increased at an dismaying rate. It is because of this. that bulk of the people are now impeaching immature people as a beginning of societal job. Recently. many people perceive immature people as a group of easily-agitated mobsters. equipped with the possible ability and desire to interrupt the present societal order ( Young People as A Social Problem. 2002 ) .

With the aforesaid state of affairss. the article entitled Young People as a Social Problem ( 2002 ) asks the inquiry on whether it is right in faulting the young person for the atrociousnesss they commit that in one manner or another cause the debasement of the society? Or are they merely victims of the societal upset which cause them to execute delinquent Acts of the Apostless? The statistics on juvenile delinquency references that most of the delinquents say that equal force per unit area and solitariness are normally the grounds why they commit discourtesies to the society. More frequently than non. those who engage in these Acts of the Apostless are those young persons who have been enduring from unsolved emotional perturbations ( Youth as a Social Problem. 2002 ) .

This paper would turn out that the deficiency of parental attention. caused by the concern of parents contributes so much to the prevalence of juvenile delinquency. The deficiency of attending received from the latter would merely turn out that their kids could non pass on decently with them. Alternatively. they adolescents would turn to their friends to make full in the attention that they have wanted to have from their parents. At the same clip. the parents besides fail to admit the demands of their kids.

As this state of affairs continues on. the parent and the kid Begin to doubt each other and the spread between them widens. Conflicts could easy originate between them and as a consequence. causes the adolescent to arise against the adult ( Youth as a Social Problem. 2002 ) which is seen to be the youth’s rebellion against the societal order that has been created for them.

Aside from this. harmonizing to the article entitled Youth as a Social Problem ( 2002 ) . their exposure to peer force per unit area is considered as another factor in the perceptual experience of many that they adolescents are so. a societal job. They would normally turn to their friends when they could no longer happen the senses of security and conformance inside their places or in school. More frequently than non. these equal groups do non merely supply common emotional and academic support to one another. Alternatively. they had been infiltrated by misbehaved young person that use these groups to enjoin others to take part in delinquent Acts of the Apostless ( such as the pickings of drugs ) .

The job of juvenile delinquency is one of the societal jobs that the United States of America is presently sing. Harmonizing to Zappen ( n. d. ) . there are assorted factors which contribute to the apprehension of why person engages in delinquent behaviour. Although biological and psychological factors contribute so much to the apprehension of this job. societal factors could outdo describe and explicate the prevalence of juvenile delinquency in the society.

In explicating juvenile delinquency. one must see the difference between offense and delinquency. Crime is normally an act that breaks the condemnable codification which is created by the society through written jurisprudence. On the other manus. delinquency frequently involves act or acts that merely interrupt the alleged cultural Torahs and norms. Likewise. it is frequently related with breakage of Torahs as a consequence of the absence of positive societal ties or bonds ( Zappen. n. d. ) . The undermentioned paragraphs would discourse the different theories that explain the causes of juvenile delinquency as perceived by sociologists and criminologists.

Rational Choice Theory

The Rational Choice theory is supported by those who view that juvenile delinquency from a position that is single based. Calhoun. Light and Keller ( 1989 ) references that psychologists who support the rational theory believe that juvenile delinquency is committed by the people who do non cognize what they are making. In fact. aberrance is normally a merchandise of high rational computation of hazard and awards. More frequently than non. they consider the opportunities of acquiring caught before they engage in an action ( Calhoun. Light & A ; Keller. 1989 ) .

In malice of this. nevertheless. these juveniles do non take the actions that are rational. The values of juveniles. harmonizing to Zappen ( n. d. ) are normally different from that of the grownups as the former are known to move without believing. Their actions normally result from moving against an authorization or arising against the cultural norms and ends.


Harmonizing to Robert K. Merton. as cited in Tomovic ( 1979 ) .the first measure in the logic of functional approach… is to set up certain functional demands of the beings or ( societal systems ) … demands which must be satisfied if the being ( or societal system ) is to last. or to run with some grade of effectivity.Associating functionalism to juvenile delinquency. the protagonists of this theory sees offense and delinquency as a map or creative activity of a society that serves a intent ( Zappen. n. d. ) .

By and large. functionalists argue that offenses and other delinquencies lead to societal alteration as non all aberrances negatively affect the society. There are certain events considered as aberrance to the societal norms at a certain clip in history which have really affected the society in a good manner. An illustration of which is the radical wars in Great Britain and the United States of America. Although they were considered as Acts of the Apostless of lese majesty. these events lead to the period in the history of world which is of great importance and influence to the modern times. the Enlightenment. as mentioned by Zappen ( n. d. ) .

As a consequence. the construction of the society could besides lend so much to the prevalence of delinquency on their society. At the same clip. it could besides ensue from a struggle in the society. as the Conflict Theory suggests.

Social Learning Theory or the Differential Association Theory

This peculiar theory provinces that offense is learned behavior. Harmonizing to Leighninger ( 1996 ) .people learn condemnable behaviour through the groups with which they associate. If a individual associates with more groups that define condemnable behaviour as acceptable than groups that define condemnable behaviour as unacceptable. the individual will likely prosecute in condemnable behaviour.On the other manus. Calhoun. Light and Keller ( 1989 ) . describes juvenile delinquency as a merchandise of socialisation in the same manner as their conformity to the norms are besides produced by socialisation. This merely goes to demo that a aberrant behaviour of a certain juvenile is normally leaned from the people around him or her. such as the members of his/her household. equals. classmates or any other individual that this juvenile interacts with. As a consequence. the household members and the equals are considered to be one of the most powerful agents in socialisation. Therefore. if a certain minor grew about delinquent equals. one can besides larn the activities of their equals and be much more prone to prosecuting in condemnable activity ( Zappen. n. d. ) .

Social Factors that Play really Important Functions in Influencing Juvenile Delinquency

Zappen ( n. d. ) and Shader ( n. d. ) cite the undermentioned social factors or units within the society that are applicable within the theories that were mentioned. In relation with the treatment on the Social Learning theory. households. equals. schools and socioeconomic position are the societal factors that should be considered in analyzing the societal job being discussed by this paper.

Poor rearing accomplishments. household size. place strife. the ill-treatment of kids and parents who are antisocial are the household features that Zappen ( n. d. ) and Shader ( n. d. ) associate with juvenile delinquency. Shader ( n. d. ) cites the survey conducted by McCord ( 1979 ) as an illustration. The survey included 250 male childs. Of the respondents. 10 were involved in violent discourtesies as influenced by the undermentioned factors: hapless parental supervising. parental struggle. and parental aggression. which include harsh and punitory subject. In the same mode. the survey of McCord. Widom and Crowell ( 2001 ) as besides stated by Shader ( n. d. ) . references that the kids being raised by individual parents are most likely to be delinquents. At the same clip. socioeconomic conditions and the figure of kids are besides factors that contribute to the prevalence of juvenile delinquency instances.

Shader ( n. d. ) and Zappen ( n. d. ) besides mentions that there are many surveies which examine the relationship between the engagement of a individual in a delinquent equal group and delinquent behaviour. Harmonizing to another survey mentioned by Shader ( n. d. ) . that conducted by Lipsey and Derzon ( 1998 ) . one of the variables that contribute so much to juvenile delinquency is the presence of their antisocial friends. On the other manus. McCord. et. Al ( 2001 ) . as one time once more cited in Shader ( n. d. ) . references that:factors such as equal delinquent behaviour. equal blessing of delinquent behaviour. fond regard or commitment to equals. clip spent with equals and peer force per unit area for aberrance have all been associated with adolescent antisocial behaviour.

Maladaptive behavior. harmonizing to Naqvi ( 2006 ) . are largely learned under equal force per unit area. It is from his or her equals that a kid aquires a vocabulary of opprobrious linguistic communication. His or her behaviour in category are normally supported or encouraged by his equal groups every bit good. These behaviours are non normally present when a kid is non with his equal group as he would ne’er prosecute himself into these sorts of misbehaviours when he is entirely.

Furthermore. the clip spent with equals who disapprove behaviour that are delinquent may forestall adolescents from perpetrating behaviour that are considered delinquent. Shader ( n. d. ) besides cites the consequences of the survey conducted by Steinberg in 1987:The influence of equals and their credence of delinquent behaviour are important. and this relationship is magnified when young person have small interaction with their parents.

The Social Learning Theory of the Differential Association Theory is considered the best theory in explicating the relationship between equal force per unit area and juvenile delinquency as it explains the function of the people around a delinquent in act uponing him or her to move in a certain manner.

Some people have seen peer force per unit area as a approval because of the fact the socialisation is non possible unless a kid is interacting with Mesosystem of his environment ( Naqvi. 2006 ) . The writer knows that the development of kids in isolation is unhealthy. The development of a kid in isolation would non merely impair his or her ability to interact efficaciously with other but at the same clip. impact her mental abilities as good.

Naqvi ( 2006 ) besides sees peer force per unit area as an of import facet which contributes to the self-awareness of a individual. It is through the force per unit area that he or she experiences from his or her equals that his or her consciousness of his or her ain individualism is made known. The kid so begins to understand and cognize him or herself together with the perceptual experience of the society sing these behaviours.


Juvenile delinquency. escapades. and jurisprudence breakage acts harmonizing to Naqvi ( 2006 are more normally performed in the presence of equal groups instead than when a adolescent is entirely. Harmonizing to Naqvi ( 2006 ) . the adolescents perform these delinquent Acts of the Apostless for the interest of escapade. be aftering them after acquiring inspired with supense narratives or thriller films. In such instances one biologically delinquent single incite four non-delinquents and do them existent menace for the peace of society. Psychologically when 1 is supported by some others his capableness to take hazard begets dual and he can make miracles that can ne’er be expected when he was entirely.Naqvi ( 2006 ) provinces.

Without a uncertainty. the group of friends to which one individual belongs to plays a really of import function in act uponing their lives. As a affair of fact. their privation to belong and suit in the group becomes necessary for them to allow themselves be influenced or pressured by their friends. This contributes so much to the susceptibleness of adolescents to peer force per unit area. However. Mullens ( 2004 ) suggests another factor which contributes to the exposure of adolescents to peer force per unit area.

Juvenile Delinquency. harmonizing to Mullens ( 2004 ) and as established by the old subdivisions of this paper is affected by the household construction of a certain adolescent. An integral place. or those that are being run by two parents ( one male. one female ) is one of the most influential establishments on kids. The loss of one parent. either through decease. divorce. separation or abandonment. causes it to be classified as broken ( Mullens. 2004 ) . Generally. a complete household besides serves as a natural support system and a barrier against outside forces trying to negatively act upon kids. as mentioned by Stern. et Al. ( 1984 ) Thus. an integral household construction has found to act upon a child’s susceptibleness to peer force per unit area. lend the development of these kids to the development and version in the society and eventually. cut down the inclination of the kids to acquire involved with delinquency issues. Mullens ( 2004 ) besides suggests that the susceptibleness to negative equal force per unit area leads a adolescent to perpetrate Acts of the Apostless of delinquency which is one time once more. a consequence of a broken household.

Although integral. the failure of the parents to watch over their kids contributes so much to the engagement of the latter in delinquent activities. It is advisable that parents watch over their kids and go good acquainted with the latter’s friends and at the same clip. cognize what they are up to every clip they go out together. For adolescents do things in groups that they will non make separately. This is of class. really true in the instance of teens in groups where equal force per unit area and the feeling of desiring to belong becomes really strong. Therefore. parent supervising becomes really of import. They should besides be able to put guidelines for kids and look into them one time in awhile to guarantee that they do non acquire involved in activities which are illegal. Usually adolescents tell their parents that they will remain over at a friend’s house when they would really pass the dark someplace else. This is what normally happens. as cited by the Logan County’s article on Juvenile Delinquency. As the parents do non cognize that their adolescents are involved in activities that are considered delinquent. they are normally surprised when they learn about this.

Therefore. in order to forestall juvenile delinquency. parents are enjoined to look after their adolescents. particularly the activities that they portion with their group of friends. It is in making this that they would be assured that their kids are non up to something illegal. In the same mode. they should besides put guidelines for their kids to follow so as to forestall them from perpetrating delinquent Acts of the Apostless.

The rejection one felt from his or her equals could besides do a adolescent to acquire engaged in aberrant Acts of the Apostless. Normally. the jilted kid associates himself or himself with aberrant equal groups and packs. Harmonizing to Loeber. Farrington and Petechuk ( 2003 ) . gang rank provides a ready beginning of co-offenders for juvenile delinquency and reflects the greatest grade of pervert equal influence on offending.

Matza ( 2004 ) does non hold with the act that subcultures of delinquency maintain and independent set of values and beliefs than the moral civilization. These delinquents do see the values and the ends of their society but they do non desire to portion these with their equals in fright of being frowned upon. Matza ( 1964 ) says thatthese feelings remain unconscious. or subterraneous. because delinquents fear showing such beliefs to their equals.

Naqvi ( 2006 ) besides states that the informations obtained from the United States of America sing aggression. assault and delinquency are frequently consequences of peer force per unit area. Friends are normally the 1s who are supportive off one another with respect to showing wrath. sexual activities. etc. Harmonizing to Naqvi ( 2006 ) . the US informations for larceny and pick-pocketers besides reveal that they started such Acts of the Apostless because the members of their equal groups are besides making it.


Gilber ( 1993 ) claims that personality type frequently determines the response of a certain individual to peer force per unit area as shown by the consequences obtained from a survey of 300 institutionalised delinquent male childs. The respondents of the survey were trained in schools which make usage of positive equal civilization plans which make usage of equal force per unit area ( sometimes as a negative force ) to bring forth positive group and single behaviour ( Gilbert. 1993 ) . However. the research workers from the University of Nebraska who were involved with this survey said that non all male childs responded to peer force per unit area every bit.

Harmonizing to the survey that has been mentioned in the article of Gilber ( 1993 ) . the delinquents who were characterized as secure. surpassing and sympathetic were the 1s who responded best to peer force per unit area. They were the 1s who responded really good to the liberty and duty that the research workers gave them. In contrast. those who were insecure. dying and down were the 1s who responded to counsellors and instructors who were more friendly and lovingness.

Harmonizing to the research workers who were involved in this survey. one of the biggest job that they have encountered in this survey is the perceptual experience of the respondents that everyone else were as violent. terrorization. committed to delinquent Acts of the Apostless than they were. As a consequence. the male childs being studied felt obligated to hold the same image as the other 1s.

Decision: The Effectss of Peer Pressure on Juvenile Delinquency

The delinquent commit Acts of the Apostless for two of import grounds as Matza ( 1964 ) provinces. One is from the alleged sounding from members of his equal group. Sounding is frequently perceived as an abuse. or an imputation of negative features. as defined by Ryan ( 1999 ) . Offense normally happens when the 1 on the receiving side takes it earnestly. However. sounding is non ever negative. It could besides intend a individual is bad or down with it. as one time once more defined by Matza ( 1964 ) . Nonetheless. sounding pushes a juvenile to acquire engaged in delinquent Acts of the Apostless.

A juvenile delinquent is said to hold a difficult clip in commanding the fortunes that surround their Acts of the Apostless and the apparent result of such. However. he or she may still take to prosecute in these Acts of the Apostless. as Matza ( 1964 ) makes clear. In malice of this. the delinquent may still take to prosecute in these Acts of the Apostless which lead them to go against the societal norms. The juvenile so seeks support from his or her ain equals but will non be able to happen it. merely seeing force per unit area to perpetrate the act despite the sensed negative consequences. More frequently than non. the delinquent commits these Acts of the Apostless because of his or her privation to come in another phase of his life. maturity.

By and large. adolescents commit delinquent because they would desire to delight their equals and at the same clip. prevent rejection. More frequently than non. it is related with the privation and demand to belong although there are times. as stated by Matza ( 1964 ) and Ryan ( 1999 ) . perpetrating such Acts of the Apostless allows a individual to travel on to the following phase of his or her life. maturity.

Peer force per unit area ever has two sorts of effects: negative and positive. There are times when it allows for the find of his or her individuality through the find of what behaviour is by and large acceptable or unacceptable based on their interaction with their equals. However. these interactions could besides force them in perpetrating delinquent Acts of the Apostless to forestall rejection and to experience the sense of conformance and security that they do non frequently find at place.

Adolescents turn to their friends and equal groups due to the fact that their households are no longer integral. that they could non pass on with their parents any longer and that they could no longer have support from them. Their equal groups now become the footing of their individuality which so leads them to perpetrating delinquent Acts of the Apostless when they allow themselves to be influenced in a negative manner.


Calhoun. C. . Light. D. . and Keller. S. ( 1989 ) . Sociology ( 5th. erectile dysfunction. ) . New York: Alfred A. Knopf

Gilbert. D. ( 1993 ) . Personality Type determine responses to Peer Pressure.

University Record.Retrieved March 3. 2008 from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. ur. umich. edu/9293/Mar29_93/25. htm

Juvenile Delinquency – Prevention –Care and Cure ( n. d. ) Retrieved March 1. 2008 from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. articlesgratuits. com

Leighninger. L. . & A ; Popple. P. R. ( 1996 ) . Social Work. Social Welfare. and American Society ( 3rd. erectile dysfunction. ) . Allyn and Bacon: Needham Heights. MA.

Logan County ( n. d. ) . Working with Juveniles. Retrieved March 4. 2008 from

hypertext transfer protocol: //www. co. Logan. oh. us/prosecutor/juvenile. htm

Matza. D. ( 1996 ) . Delinquency and Drift. New York: John Wiley & A ; Sons. Inc.

Retrieved March 2. 2008 from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. rf-institute. com/chaos- crm/006deliquency. htm

Mullens. A. D. ( 2004 ) . The Relationship between Juvenile Delinquency and Family Structure. United states: Marshall University.

Naqvi. Z. ( 2006 ) . Peer Pressure: A curse or a approval? Retrieved March 4. 2008 from

hypertext transfer protocol: //zahranaqvi. wordpress. com

Ryan. J. ( 1999 ) . Juvenile Delinquency. Chaos Theory and Discourse Analysis:

Developing Conceptual Tools for Critical Inquiry.

Shader. M. ( n. d. ) . Hazard Factors for Delinquency: An Overview. Retrieved:

March 2. 2008 from: hypertext transfer protocol: //www. ncjrs. gov/html/ojjdp/jjjournal_2003_2

Steinberg. L. ( 1987 ) . Individual parents. stepparent. and the susceptibleness of adolescence to Antisocial equal force per unit area.Child Development. 58.269-275

Stern. M. . Northman. J. E. . & A ; Van Slyck. M. R. ( 1984 ) . Father absence and stripling “problem behaviors” : intoxicant ingestion. drug usage and sexual activity.Adolescence. 19 ( 74 ) .301-312.

Tomovic. V. A. ( 1979 ) . Definitions in Sociology: Convergence. Conflict and Alternative Vocabularies. Ontario: Diliton Publications. Inc. St. Catherines.

Young Peoples As A Social Problem.Got Essays?Retrieved March 4. 2008. from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. gotessays. com/essays/1412/index. php

Zappen. M. ( n. d. ) Causal Theories of Juvenile Delinquency: Social Perspectives. Retrieved March 4. 2008 from hypertext transfer protocol: //www. skidmore. edu/academics/english/courses/en205d/student7/ tud7prj2. hypertext markup language

Post a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *



I'm Katy

Would you like to get such a paper? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out