Juvenile delinquency in a diverse society 2nd edition pdf free

Research Paper

Juvenile Delinquency in a Diverse Society Second Edition

2

Dedication

To William and Christopher, my little delinquents —KB

To Bryce, Avary, Gavin, and Olivia —RS

3

Juvenile Delinquency in a Diverse Society Second Edition

Kristin A. Bates California State University, San Marcos

Richelle S. Swan California State University, San Marcos

4

FOR INFORMATION:

SAGE Publications, Inc.

2455 Teller Road

Thousand Oaks, California 91320

E-mail: order@sagepub.com

SAGE Publications Ltd.

1 Oliver’s Yard

55 City Road

London EC1Y 1SP

United Kingdom

SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ltd.

B 1/I 1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area

Mathura Road, New Delhi 110 044

India

SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Pte. Ltd.

3 Church Street

#10-04 Samsung Hub

Singapore 049483

Copyright © 2018 by SAGE Publications, Inc.

5

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.

Printed in Canada

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Bates, Kristin Ann, author. | Swan, Richelle S., author.

Title: Juvenile delinquency in a diverse society / Kristin A. Bates, Richelle S. Swan.

Description: Second edition. | Los Angeles : SAGE, [2018] | Includes bibliographical references and index.

Identifiers: LCCN 2016038632 | ISBN 978-1-5063-4749-3 (pbk. : alk. paper)

Subjects: LCSH: Juvenile delinquency. | Juvenile delinquents. | Juvenile justice, Administration of.

Classification: LCC HV9069 .B38 2017 | DDC 364.36—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2016038632

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Acquisitions Editor: Jessica Miller

eLearning Editor: Laura Kirkhuff

Editorial Assistant: Jennifer Rubio

Production Editor: David C. Felts

Copy Editor: Diana Breti

Typesetter: C&M Digitals (P) Ltd.

Proofreader: Victoria Reed-Castro

Indexer: Karen Wiley

Cover Designer: Scott Van Atta

Marketing Manager: Amy Lammers

6

https://lccn.loc.gov/2016038632
Brief Contents Preface Acknowledgments PART 1. UNDERSTANDING JUVENILE DELINQUENCY

CHAPTER 1: Thinking About Juvenile Delinquency in a Diverse Society CHAPTER 2: The Creation of Delinquency CHAPTER 3: Understanding Delinquency: Data, Correlates, and Trends

PART 2. THEORIES OF JUVENILE DELINQUENCY CHAPTER 4: Micro-Level Theories CHAPTER 5: Macro-Level Theories CHAPTER 6: Critical Theories

PART 3. THE SOCIAL CONTEXTS OF JUVENILE DELINQUENCY

CHAPTER 7: Families in Context CHAPTER 8: Schools in Context CHAPTER 9: Peers and Gangs in Context CHAPTER 10: Drugs in Context

PART 4. RESPONSES TO JUVENILE DELINQUENCY CHAPTER 11: Why a Separate Juvenile Justice System? CHAPTER 12: Policing and the Process of the Juvenile Court CHAPTER 13: Juvenile Corrections CHAPTER 14: Preventative, Rehabilitative, and Restorative Approaches to Delinquency

Glossary Notes Index About the Authors

7

Contents Preface Acknowledgments PART 1. UNDERSTANDING JUVENILE DELINQUENCY,

Chapter 1. Thinking About Juvenile Delinquency in a Diverse Society,

Chapter Objectives, Chapter Pretest, Defining Juvenile Delinquency,

The Special Case of the Juvenile, The Definition of Delinquency, • On the Media: Live Streaming Delinquency and Crime,

Conceptions of Juvenile Delinquency, Normative Conception of Delinquency, Social Constructionist Conception of Delinquency, Critical Conception of Delinquency,

The Well-Being of Children, • A Focus on Research: Samuel Phillips Day’s “Juvenile Crime: Its Cause, Character, and Cure,” Economic Circumstances, Physical Environment and Safety, Education, The Cradle-to-Prison Pipeline,

The United States as a Place Where Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality Are Important,

• From the Classroom to the Community: Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth, Individual Versus Institutional Racism, Classism, and Sexism, • In the News: The Income Gap, The Intersectionality of Race, Class, and Gender,

The Sociological Imagination, Your Sociological Imagination Put to the Test: Five Vignettes,

The Juvenile Justice System and Diversity, Philosophy and Organization of the Book,

8

Summary, Eye on Diversity Exercise: Social Construction and Media, Discussion Questions, Key Terms, Chapter Pretest Answers,

Chapter 2. The Creation of Delinquency, Chapter Objectives, Chapter Pretest, The Social Construction of Youth and Delinquency,

Ancient Times and the Middle Ages (776 BCE–1400 CE), The Colonial and Revolutionary Period (late 1400s– 1800), The “Child-Saving” Era, the Industrial Revolution, and the Creation of the Juvenile Court (1800s–early 1900s), • A Focus on Research: Chávez-García’s Intelligence Testing at Whittier State School, 1890–1920, Views of Youth and Delinquency in the Juvenile Court (1899–Present),

Popular Culture: A Target of Moral Panics About Delinquency,

• On the Media: Ahmed Mohamed and the Clock That Started a Panic, • On the Media: Award-Winning Perspectives on Juvenile Justice Issues, • From the Classroom to the Community: The Campaign for Youth Justice—“Because the Consequences Aren’t Minor,”

At the Crossroads: 21st-Century Social Constructions of Youth and Delinquency,

• In the News: The Deaths of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, and Tamir Rice,

Summary, Eye on Diversity Exercise: Delinquency and Dependence in 21st-Century Films, Discussion Questions, Key Terms, Chapter Pretest Answers,

Chapter 3. Understanding Delinquency: Data, Correlates, and

9

Trends, Chapter Objectives, Chapter Pretest, How to Lie With Statistics,

What Goes Into a Good Statistic?, • From the Classroom to the Community: The Children’s Defense Fund,

Qualitative Versus Quantitative Data, How Do We Know What We Know? What Data Sources Do We Use to Map Trends?,

Data Sources for Correlates and Trends in Delinquency, • On the Media: Podcast: Improving Youth Programming: The Role of Research, • In the News: A Tyranny of Small Numbers, or Is YouTube the Start of the Next Australian Girls’ Violence Epidemic?,

Correlates of Delinquency, Age, Gender, Race and Ethnicity, Class, • A Focus on Research: Sampson’s “Immigration and Homicide Trends,”

The Nature of Delinquency as Measured by the UCR, General Trends in Delinquency,

Trends Measured by the UCR, Trends Measured by the NCVS, Self-Report Data: Monitoring the Future,

Trends in Delinquency for Gender, Official Trends From the UCR, Gender Trends in Illicit Drug Use From Self-Reports, Comparisons of Gender and Delinquency Between the UCR, the NCVS, and Self-Report Data: The Girls Study Group,

Trends in Delinquency for Race/Ethnicity, Official Trends From the UCR, Race and Ethnicity Trends in Illicit Drug Use From Self-Reports, Comparisons of Race/Ethnicity and Delinquency

10

Between Official and Self-Report Data, Summary, Eye on Diversity Exercise: Juvenile Violent Crime Trend in City, Discussion Questions, Key Terms, Chapter Pretest Answers,

PART 2. THEORIES OF JUVENILE DELINQUENCY, Chapter 4. Micro-Level Theories,

Chapter Objectives, Chapter Pretest, Pre-Classical Ideas, Classical Theories, Biological, Psychological, and Biosocial Theories,

Early Biological Theories, Psychological Theories, • On the Media: The Viral Blog Post: I Am Adam Lanza’s Mother, Biosocial Theories,

Differential Association Theory, Differential Association Theory and Class, Gender, and Race,

Social Control Theory/Social Bonding Theory, Classical Social Control Theory, • In the News: The Flint Water Crisis, Life Course and Developmental Theories, • From the Classroom to the Community: Helping Kids Make Better Choices: Mujeres Organization, Social Control and Gender: The Example of Power- Control Theory, Techniques of Neutralization Model,

General Strain Theory, General Strain Theory and Race, General Strain Theory and Gender, • A Focus on Research: General Strain Theory and Delinquency: Extending a Popular Explanation to American Indian Youth,

Micro-Level Theories and Public Policy, Summary, Eye on Diversity: Antibullying Exercise Evaluating a

11

School’s Program, Discussion Questions, Key Terms, Chapter Pretest Answers,

Chapter 5. Macro-Level Theories, Chapter Objectives, Chapter Pretest, Social Structural Theories of Delinquency, Anomie Theories,

Durkheim’s Anomie Theory, Merton’s Strain Theory, Differential Opportunity Theory, Subcultural Theory of Delinquency, • From the Classroom to the Community: The “I Have a Dream” Foundation, Anomie Theories of Delinquency and Race, Class, and Gender Intersections,

Social Disorganization Theory, Park and Burgess’s Social Disorganization Theory, Shaw and McKay’s Social Disorganization and Delinquency Theory, Frazier’s Ecological Analysis of Delinquency Among Black Youth, Sampson and Groves’s Model of Social Disorganization, Collective Efficacy Model, Social Disorganization Theories of Delinquency and Race, Class, and Gender Intersections, • In the News: Voices of Youth Dealing With Crime and Delinquency, • A Focus on Research: Huang, Ryan, and Rhoden’s “Foster Care, Geographic Neighborhood Change, and the Risk of Delinquency,”

Social Structural Theories and Public Policy, Anomie, Social Disorganization, • On the Media: The Interrupters,

Summary, Eye on Diversity Exercise: A Look at Sexuality, Homeless Youth, and Delinquency,

12

Discussion Questions, Key Terms, Chapter Pretest Answers,

Chapter 6. Critical Theories, Chapter Objectives, Chapter Pretest, Critical Theories of Delinquency,

Labeling Theory, Origins of Labeling Theory, • In the News: Justice-Involved Youth, Development of Labeling Theory, Labeling, Self-Concept, and Gender, Labeling, Social Exclusion, Race, and Class, What About Positive Labeling?, Resistance to the Delinquent Label, • A Focus on Research: Holsinger and Hodge’s “The Experiences of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Girls in Juvenile Justice Systems,”

Conflict Theory: A Focus on Socioeconomic Class, The Origins of Conflict Theory, The Development of Conflict Theories of Crime, Conflict Theories of Delinquency, • On the Media: Online Analysis of Miscarriages of Youth Justice,

Feminist Theories: A Focus on Gender and Intersectionality,

• In the News: Teen Computer Hacker Arrested for Targeting U.S. Government Employees, The Origins of Feminist Theories, The Development of Feminist Theories of Crime and Delinquency, • From the Classroom to the Community: The Equity Project and Justice for LGBT Youth,

Critical Theories of Delinquency and Public Policy, Summary, Eye on Diversity Exercise: Are Critical Theories of Delinquency Being Put Into Action in Your Area?, Discussion Questions, Key Terms, Chapter Pretest Answers,

13

PART 3. THE SOCIAL CONTEXTS OF JUVENILE DELINQUENCY,

Chapter 7. Families in Context, Chapter Objectives, Chapter Pretest, Family Today,

Trends in the Family—Marriage, Divorce, and Unmarried Birth Rates, Trends in Family Structure/Composition, • On the Media: Podcasts, Parenting, and the LGBTQ Community,

Family and Delinquency, Family Structure and Delinquency, Family Process, • From the Classroom to the Community: Parent Responsibility Laws: Should the Parent Be Held Responsible for Youth Behavior?,

Diversity and the Family, Gender, Family, and Delinquency, Intersections of Gender, Class, Family, and Delinquency, • In the News: Mothers’ Job Curb Urged in Drive on Delinquency, Intersections of Race, Gender, Class, Family, and Delinquency,

Child Maltreatment, Child Maltreatment and Delinquency,

Girls, Abuse, Running Away, and Delinquency, Parents in Prison,

• A Focus on Research: Rosario, Schrimshaw, and Hunter’s Homelessness Among Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Youth, The Impact of an Incarcerated Parent,

Foster Care and Foster Youth, Summary, Eye on Diversity Exercise: Parenting in Prison, Discussion Questions, Key Terms, Chapter Pretest Answers,

Chapter 8. Schools in Context,

14

Chapter Objectives, Chapter Pretest, The Diverse School Experience,

Trends in Academic Achievement, International Comparisons,

The Budgeting of Education, School Failure, Dropping Out, and Delinquency,

School Failure, Dropping Out,

Disengagement and Delinquency, Crime and Delinquency in Schools,

Violence at School, • In the News: 9-Year-Old Tasered,

Bullying and Cyberbullying, • A Focus on Research: Leavy and Maloney’s American Reporting of School Violence and “People Like Us”: A Comparison of Newspaper Coverage of the Columbine and Red Lake School Shootings, Bullying, Cyberbullying, • On the Media: The New Trend: Cyberbullying Laws That Protect Teachers,

The Policy of Punishment in Schools: The School-to-Prison Pipeline,

• From the Classroom to the Community: The Dignity in Schools Campaign, Punishments in Schools: Corporal Punishment, Restraint, and Seclusion, Zero-Tolerance and Increased Social Control,

The School and Student Rights, Summary, Eye on Diversity Exercise: Examining School Data on Delinquency, Discussion Questions, Key Terms, Chapter Pretest Answers,

Chapter 9. Peers and Gangs in Context, Chapter Objectives, Chapter Pretest, Why Do Peers Matter to Delinquency?,

15

Friendship and Delinquency: How Gender Matters, The Kid in the Corner: The Impact of a Lack of Friendships,

• A Focus on Research: Jones’s “‘It’s About Being a Survivor’ . . .African American Girls, Gender, and the Context of Inner City Violence,”

Conventional Adolescence or New Forms of Delinquency? The Use of Technology as a Means of Peer Interaction,

Sexting, • In the News: Snapchat Leads to Burglary Arrest, Documenting Delinquency Online,

Gangs and Delinquency, What Is a Youth Gang?, How Common Is Youth Gang Activity?, What Ethnic and Racial Groups Have Been Represented in Youth Gang Formation in the United States?, Why Do Youth Gangs Form, and Why Does Gang Violence Occur? A Focus on Social Class, Race, Sexuality, and Social Inequality, Girls in Gangs, Responses to Youth Gangs, • On the Media: Portrayals of Gay and Transgender Youth in Gangs, • From the Classroom to the Community: Homeboy Industries,

Summary, Eye on Diversity Exercise: Gangs and Technology, Discussion Questions, Key Terms, Chapter Pretest Answers,

Chapter 10. Drugs in Context, Chapter Objectives, Chapter Pretest, Reasons for and Societal Understandings of Drug Use, The Role of Legal Products in Youth Substance Use, Youth Substance Use Patterns Today,

Gender, Race, Ethnicity, and General Drug Use Patterns, • A Focus on Research: Kopak’s Drug Use Among

16

Latino Youth: Two Popular Criminological Perspectives Infused With Latino Culture, Rates of Serious or Risky Youth Substance Use, The Repercussions of Serious Substance Use, • On the Media: Dope,

The Relationship of Substance Use to Delinquency, Gender, Race, Ethnicity, and Sexuality Factors, • From the Classroom to the Community: The Mind Body Awareness Project,

Responses to and Prevention of Youth Drug Use, Media Campaigns, Drug Abuse Resistance Education (D.A.R.E.), Drug Testing, Drug Courts, Drug Rehabilitation Programs, • In the News: The War on Drugs Is a War on Kids, Differing Policy Approaches: Drug Prohibition, Legalization, and Harm Reduction Strategies, Cultural Issues and Drug Prevention and Rehabilitation Programs,

Summary, Eye on Diversity Exercise: Finding Culturally Relevant Drug Prevention/Treatment Programs, Discussion Questions, Key Terms, Chapter Pretest Answers,

PART 4. RESPONSES TO JUVENILE DELINQUENCY, Chapter 11. Why a Separate Juvenile Justice System?,

Chapter Objectives, Chapter Pretest, What Is the Goal of the Juvenile Justice System?, Justifications for Punishment,

• From the Classroom to the Community: The Equal Justice Initiative,

Juvenile Justice and Specialized Terminology, Philosophical Shifts and the Legal Treatment of Juveniles,

The Due Process Revolution, The “Get Tough” Period: An Emphasis on Retribution, Incapacitation, and Deterrence, The Federal Response to the “Get Tough” Trend: The

17

Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, Turning Tides? The 2000s and the Reassertion of Youth Differences, • In the News: Why So Many Hawaiian, Samoan, and Filipino Youth in the Justice System?, • On the Media: Oyez!—Online Resources on U.S. Supreme Court Juvenile Justice Cases,

The Future of Juvenile Justice, • A Focus on Research: Dobbs’s Beautiful Brains: Scientific Discoveries about Adolescent Brain Development,

Summary, Eye on Diversity Exercise: A Look Abroad: The Treatment of Juvenile Delinquency in Iran, Discussion Questions, Key Terms, Chapter Pretest Answers,

Chapter 12. Policing and the Process of the Juvenile Court, Chapter Objectives, Chapter Pretest, Police and Juveniles,

Roles of the Police, Police-Juvenile Interactions,

An Overview of the Juvenile Justice Process, Jurisdiction: Transfer to the Criminal Court or Remain in the Juvenile Court?, • In the News: Charging Juveniles as Adults Not Unusual: Law Requires Prosecutors to Charge Many Teens as Adults for Specific Set of Crimes, Diversion, Preadjudication Stage, • From the Classroom to the Community: The Juvenile Collateral Consequences Project, Adjudication Stage, • On the Media: Juvenile Injustice: The “Cradle to Prison Pipeline” Zine Series, Disposition Stage,

The Juvenile Justice Process and Race, Class, and Gender, Race/Ethnicity and Unequal Treatment, Gender and Unequal Treatment,

18

Family Court, The Juvenile Dependency Process, Crossover Youth: From Dependency Court to the Juvenile Justice System, • A Focus on Research: Victory’s Structured Abuse: Life in a Group Home,

Summary, Eye on Diversity Exercise: Juvenile Intake Screening, Discussion Questions, Key Terms, Chapter Pretest Answers,

Chapter 13. Juvenile Corrections, Chapter Objectives, Chapter Pretest, Community Corrections,

Probation, Restitution, Home Confinement: Electronic Monitoring, Foster Homes/Group Homes/Halfway Houses,

Institutional Corrections, Detention Facilities: Preadjudication, • On the Media: They Call Us Monsters, Juvenile Correctional Institutions: Postadjudication, Boot Camps, • In the News: Hemorrhaging Florida Teen Dies in Custody Because Guards Think He Is Faking, Private Institutions, Jail/Prison, Reentry, • From the Classroom to the Community: The Juvenile Justice Information Exchange: Stop Solitary for Kids: A National Campaign for Change,

Corrections and Gender, Race, Undocumented Youth, and LGBTQ Intersections,

Corrections and Gender, Corrections and Race, Corrections and Undocumented Youth, Corrections and LGBTQ Youth, • A Focus on Research: Sharma’s Contesting Institutional Discourse to Create New Possibilities for

19

Understanding Lived Experience: Life Stories of Young Women in Detention, Rehabilitation, and Education,

Summary, Eye on Diversity Exercise: A Look at Juvenile Institutions and Policies, Discussion Questions, Key Terms, Chapter Pretest Answers,

Chapter 14. Preventative, Rehabilitative, and Restorative Approaches to Delinquency,

Chapter Objectives, Chapter Pretest, Prevention,

• In the News: Attorney Dismisses Injunction Against Two Oakland Gangs, Screening and Early Intervention, Nurse-Family Partnerships, Early Education, School- or Community-Based Education and Skill- Based Programs, After-School Programs, Mentoring Programs,

Rehabilitation, Therapeutic Approaches, Prevention and Rehabilitation: Race, Ethnicity, Gender, and LGBT Intersections, • A Focus on Research: Salisbury, Dabney, and Russell’s Diverting Victims of Commercial Sexual Exploitation From Juvenile Detention,

Restorative Justice Approaches, • On the Media: Online Tools to Expunge Juvenile Records, Victim-Offender Mediation, Family Group Conferencing, Restorative Justice Circles, Restorative Justice and Institutional Change, Juvenile Restorative Justice, and Race, Ethnicity, Class, and Gender Intersections,

A Comprehensive Approach: The Models for Change

20

Program, Models for Change, • From the Classroom to the Community: The Community Youth Center and Support Services for Asian and Pacific Islander Youth,

The Future of Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Restorative Justice Approaches to Delinquency, Summary, Eye on Diversity Exercise: Global Approaches to Delinquency, Discussion Questions, Key Terms, Chapter Pretest Answers,

Glossary, Notes, Index, About the Authors,

21

Preface

My husband and I joke a lot about our sons. One of our sons is easily influenced by the threat of punishment. He will pretty much do anything to not receive a time-out. He is our gentle giant. Our other son is unconcerned by punishment, and we refer to him as our mafia don. I have a sneaking suspicion we may be bailing him out of juvie one day. Or he will become the next Zen Master—it could go either way. I love to watch these two kids and wonder what their futures will hold. Will they be into theater? And sports? Will they love school, like I did? Or rather spend all day outside talking each other into jumping off the roof of the house like my husband and his brother did? Will we hit a rough patch where they won’t want to talk to us? Will they come out the other side of their teenage years happy and healthy, with a strong dose of empathy for their fellow citizens?

One of the things I wonder most about my kids is whether they will engage in delinquency—or actually, more to the point, whether they will be caught and end up in the juvenile justice system. As you will see (and as you know, if you have ever been a teenager), almost everyone engages in some form of juvenile delinquency, or status offense, or ends up being a victim of it. The reasons for this are many, but two of the largest are that, first, the term juvenile delinquency (in addition to status offense) covers such a large array of behaviors and, second, we are constantly redefining behaviors that in the past were not considered delinquency and making them so. As the mother of two amazing boys, this scares the heck out of me and at the same time makes me certain that the study of juvenile delinquency and our societal responses to it is one of the most important academic endeavors a sociologist, a criminologist, or you, an undergraduate student, faces. I have taught juvenile delinquency for almost two decades. I never tire of the opportunity to explore this topic with undergraduates, but I have always wished that there were a text more dedicated to diversity that made central discussions of race, class, gender, and sexuality issues (or, in many instances, an acknowledgment of the lack of research in these areas). Enter my colleague and friend, Richelle Swan.

The two of us wrote this book. And throughout the text you will see examples and stories that come from our lives and scenarios based on the

22

lives of others. At times, we have written these in the first person—some are from Kristin, some from Richelle—but all illustrate the importance of a critical understanding of juvenile delinquency in a diverse society. So why did we write this book? While teaching juvenile delinquency we have observed several things: (1) Most books take a mainstream approach to juvenile delinquency and fail to emphasize the social diversity that explains varying experiences and behavior; (2) many students have never been introduced to a systematic critical approach to evaluating social behavior and social institutions such as juvenile delinquency and the juvenile justice system; (3) students learn more from real-world examples (of both delinquency and public policy) than they do from purely theoretical discussions; and (4) after taking a juvenile delinquency course, students are often more inspired to “do more” or “get involved” than they are at the end of almost any other course in the area of criminology.

This textbook is written from a critical perspective. It offers several innovative features that set it apart from other textbooks on the market. First, it offers a systematic critical understanding of juvenile delinquency, focusing on issues of race, class, and gender. Second, it substantively links theories of delinquency, not only to existing public policies but to existing community programs that focus on a critical response to juvenile delinquency and social control. And, finally, it guides you, the student, to explore the diversity in your own community and what this means for juvenile delinquency and social control where you live.

What’s New? Preparing a new edition of a book is both a rewarding and scary prospect. Rewarding because it suggests that the previous editions have been well- received and students and colleagues see some merit in the book. However, if the previous editions have been well-received, it is scary to change what we and others have grown to love. We wish to emphasize again how great the reviewers of our earlier efforts were. They helped guide several new substantive directions and also helped us maintain the philosophy and heart of the book as one that explores juvenile delinquency in a diverse society:

We reorganized each chapter to remove the spotlight boxes and, where appropriate, incorporate this information into the body of the text.

23

This allowed us to add a new textbox, On the Media, to each chapter that explores the impact of social media and new technologies on our understanding of juvenile delinquency. Throughout the book, we updated the research and, where possible, included more extensive discussions of LGBTQ youth, American Indian youth, and Asian and Pacific Islander youth. We also added tables in the theory chapters of the book (Chapters 4, 5, and 6) that summarize the theories’ main points. In Chapter 1, we added a new section on the juvenile justice system and diversity to introduce the topics that are found in the last four chapters of the book. In Chapter 2, we expanded the discussion of media panics about delinquency to include more on gaming and delinquency and the Internet and delinquency. In Chapter 3, we updated all the tables and figures to include the new trends that have developed in official and self-reported data on juvenile delinquency. In Chapter 4, we included extensive discussions of pre-classical, classical, biological, biosocial, and psychological theories. In addition, we offer a current example of the Flint, Michigan water crisis in the context of these theories. In Chapter 5, we updated the research on macro-structural theories and added an analysis of social disorganization and mass incarceration. In Chapter 6, we added consideration of gendered pathways theory. In Chapter 7, we added a new section on foster care and foster youth. In Chapter 8, we added a section on the school and student rights with a discussion of Supreme Court cases. In Chapter 9, we significantly expanded the section on the use of technology as a means of peer interaction and updated the discussion of sexting. In Chapter 10, we incorporated information about family drug use and significantly updated data related to the use of legal products and youth substance use patterns. We also added an expanded analysis of the war on drugs and an analysis of the effects of marijuana legalization on youth. In Chapter 11, we added the most recent decisions on juvenile justice by the U.S. Supreme Court and updated the section on the future of juvenile justice. In Chapter 12, we included an extensive discussion of the police and

24

juveniles. In Chapter 13, we added to the discussion of life without parole and solitary confinement for juveniles. In Chapter 14, we revised the prevention section to have stronger emphasis on the structural factors needed for effective delinquency prevention, added a consideration of diverting victims of sexual exploitation from detention, and added a new section on restorative justice and LGBT youth. Finally, we created pretests with answers for each chapter.

Special Tools for Learning Our goals are made evident in each chapter and throughout the text through a variety of specific learning features:

Juvenile Delinquency Vignette: Each chapter opens with a vignette that illustrates the concepts of the chapter from a diverse or critical perspective. These vignettes are used throughout the chapters to illustrate chapter concepts. In the News: One of the most successful parts of our juvenile delinquency courses is making the concepts of juvenile delinquency come alive to students by linking them to current events. Each chapter offers an example of a current event (in box format) that links a main concept from that chapter to a “real world” example. From the Classroom to the Community: This box will focus on how social science can influence/shape public policy and community experiences. We highlight examples of collaborative learning and community action and/or specific public policies addressing juveniles and juvenile delinquency. A Focus on Research: Each chapter highlights an influential piece of research that focuses on the experiences of a diverse population with juvenile delinquency and/or social control. For example, we focus on research on foster children, runaways, LGBTQ youth, youth of color, poor youth, and girls (among other diverse populations). On the Media: Each chapter will include a consideration of how different forms of traditional or social media are used to convey ideas about delinquency or to publicize acts of delinquency. Eye on Diversity Exercise: While each chapter will have woven throughout its main text a sociological discussion of the relationship

25

between a diverse society and juvenile delinquency, each chapter will also end with a very specific class exercise or service learning example that can be used as either a starting point for class discussion or a class activity/assignment. Discussion Questions: Each chapter additionally has a set of thought- provoking questions that can be used as the basis of in-class or online discussions. These questions draw upon material from the entire chapter and serve as good review tools. Chapter Pretest: Each chapter starts with a True/False pretest that allows students to test their knowledge before reading the chapter, to help address misconceptions up front. The answers are found at the end of the chapter.

Digital Resources SAGE edge offers a robust online environment featuring an impressive array of tools and resources for review, study, and further exploration, keeping both instructors and students on the cutting edge of teaching and learning. SAGE edge content is open access and available on demand. Learning and teaching has never been easier!

edge.sagepub.com/bates2e

Instructor Teaching Site SAGE edge for Instructors supports teaching by making it easy to integrate quality content and create a rich learning environment for students.

These resources include an extensive test bank, chapter-specific PowerPoint presentations, lecture notes, sample syllabi for semester and quarter courses, SAGE journal articles with accompanying review questions, video links, and web resources.

Student Study Site SAGE edge for Students provides a personalized approach to help students accomplish their coursework goals in an easy-to-use learning

26

http://edge.sagepub.com/bates2e
environment.

This site includes mobile-friendly eFlashcards and web quizzes, SAGE journal articles with accompanying review questions, video links, and web resources.

In the end, what we wanted to write was a text that sparks your critical sociological imaginations; that helps you understand our diverse society and the connections between individual experiences, social institutions, and power; and that helps you see there are important questions (and continuing questions) about how we define and how we respond to juvenile delinquency. But, most importantly, we hope this text inspires you to wonder about the future of the children around you and inspires you to act for those children. As you will see, there is a lot to do.

However this text inspires you, we wish you the best in your explorations.

27

Acknowledgments

Our deepest appreciation to Jerry Westby at SAGE Publications. Jerry championed our vision with sincerity, warmth, and humor. Special thanks to Jerry’s team for help with our second edition: Jessica Miller, Laura Kirkhuff, Jennifer Rubio, David Felts, and Diana Breti. We also thank Theresa Accomazzo and Megan Krattli, MaryAnn Vail, Rachael Leblond, Laura Barrett, Melinda Masson, and Scott Van Atta for their help on the first edition of this book. The team at SAGE was devoted to creating a text that was true to our vision and that would speak to both instructors and students.

We want to especially thank the California State University, San Marcos Department of Sociology. Our colleagues are truly outstanding. They support our professional endeavors, but, even more important, they support us personally. Their open hearts and critical perspective enrich our lives in and outside of work. It is wonderful to be inspired and to learn from our colleagues and friends. Hard to believe we are lucky enough to build careers here! We would also like to thank all of our students—they know that we often run ideas for our books by them in class and we really appreciate their feedback. In addition, we would like to thank the student research assistants who helped us stay up to date on the latest findings related to juvenile delinquency: Lexus Criswell, Jennifer Seidlitz, Olivia Victory, Sharghi Jami, Miranda Mendez, Emely Yanagida, Claudia Caywood, and Xochitl Palacios. Big thanks to Jeff Henson and Allen Lanese for all the computing help they provided us during moments of desperation. We would also like to thank the individuals who contributed to our online resource sites: Dawn Lee, Olivia Victory, Robbin Brooks and Rachael Zeller, Rita Naranjo, Diego Avalos, and Leo Sanchez.

Kristin would like to thank her graduate school mentors and friends from the University of Washington Department of Sociology: Bob Crutchfield, George Bridges, Joe Weis, Michelle Inderbitzin, Randy Gainey, Charis Kubrin, Sara Steen, Rod Engen, Edie Simpson, Ed Day, Chris Bader, and Tim Wadsworth. I am told our time at the UW is not the usual graduate school experience—all I know is seeing you guys is like coming home to family. Speaking of family, a big sloppy kiss to my parents (Bill and Dee Ann) and sisters (Laurie and Julie) who taught me that a fierce love and a

28

great sense of humor are the best foundations for a happy life. I owe much of my sanity to the Friday night group: I hope when we are 80 we are still dedicated to a Friday night of carbs, good beer, and an ardent protection of the no-fun zone. Special thanks to Sharon Elise, Marisol Clark-Ibáñez, Kim Knowles-Yanez, Deirdre Lowell-Caldera, and Heather Craig, the women in my life who remind me to stop and breathe and take a little time with friends. And to Richelle Swan, my daytime partner: I understand how lucky I am to have a colleague (but, more important, a friend) who I can talk into crazy projects, to whom I feel comfortable reading my first drafts and unorganized thoughts, and who is so gentle with her critiques and lessons. I am not sure where I would be without you, and I know I wouldn’t have had half the fun getting there. Finally, all my love to Jeff, my nighttime partner: the yin to my yang, the type B to my type A, the up to my down. Thank you for making me laugh about doing all my work while crying.

Richelle would like to thank her mentors and professors from her two graduate programs at Arizona State University (Justice Studies) and the University of California at Irvine (Criminology, Law and Society) who sparked her interest in issues of law, delinquency, and social justice: John Dombrink, Kitty Calavita, Valerie Jenness, and Diego Vigil. In particular, I would like to thank Peg Bortner as the inspiration for much of the writing about youth that I am doing today. In addition, I’d like to express an enormous amount of appreciation and gratitude to Kristin Bates, my research and writing partner. I am so lucky to have met such a generous and intelligent friend and mentor. I am very thankful for all of your ingenious ideas and plans that you share with me and know there will be many more to come! I would also like to thank my parents, Sharon and Richard, for their unbelievable generosity and support through this and every other project I’ve ever pursued. Similarly, I’d like to thank my sister, Alicia, and all the other members of my family for the encouragement they gave me throughout the process. In particular, I’d like to thank Chendo for always being there for me, for his patience with my work schedule, and for the laughter he provided when I needed it the most. The valuable support of Maricela Chaídez, Marisol Clark-Ibáñez, Mercedes Ibáñez, Fay McGrew, Theresa Suarez, and Sharon Elise also helped me during both stages of this project. Thanks to all of you!

We are particularly grateful to the reviewers who provided valuable feedback on the manuscript.

29

Reviewers for the Second Edition Margie Ballard-Mack, South Carolina State University Amanda Barrientez, University of Colorado Boulder James Blair, South Texas College Michael D. Collins, William Penn University Brandi Copenhaver, Somerset Community College Nancy A. Horton, Kaplan University James M. Stewart, Calhoun Community College

Reviewers for the First Edition Kathryn Branch, University of Tampa–Tampa Robbin Brooks, Arizona State University–Downtown Phoenix Adam Langsam, Northwestern Oklahoma State University–Enid Shanell Sanchez-Smith, University of Nebraska–Lincoln Miyuki Tedor, Cleveland State University–Cleveland Shela Van Ness, University of Tennessee–Chattanooga Elizabeth Legerski, University of North Dakota School of Law– Grand Forks Gregory Lindsteadt, Missouri Western State College–Saint Joseph Tamara Lynn, Fort Hays State University–Hays Mónica Herrera Pérez, Holyoke Community College—Holyoke Edward Powers, University of Central Arkansas–Conway Martine Wehr, Saddleback College–Mission Viejo Justin Pickett, State University of New York–Albany Verna Jones, Jackson State University–Jackson Jeri Kirby, West Virginia University–Morgantown Lisa Kort-Butler, University of Nebraska–Lincoln Lois Presser, University of Tennessee–Knoxville Victor Shaw, California State University–Northridge Julie White, University of Massachusetts–Boston Kareem Jordan, University of Central Florida–Orlando Keith Durkin, Ohio Northern University–Ada Kristen DeVall, University of North Carolina–Wilmington Nadine Connell, University of Texas at Dallas–Richardson

30

31

Part 1: Understanding Juvenile Delinquency

©iStockphoto.com/Craig Dingle; U.S. National Archives and Records Administration; ©iStockphoto.com/olaser

Chapter 1: Thinking About Juvenile Delinquency in a Diverse Society 2 Chapter 2: The Creation of Delinquency 32 Chapter 3: Understanding Delinquency: Data, Correlates, and Trends 58

32

Chapter 1 Thinking About Juvenile Delinquency in a Diverse Society

©iStockphoto.com/Craig Dingle

Chapter Objectives After reading this chapter, you should be able to

Describe why juveniles are treated differently than adults Explain the difference between juvenile delinquency and status offenses Summarize the three conceptions of delinquency and how they relate to our responses to juvenile delinquency Identify the social context in which juveniles are living and its effect on the well-being of children Compare and contrast the concepts of individual and institutional racism, classism, and sexism Explain why intersectionality is important

33

Describe the role of the sociological imagination in explaining the societal response to juvenile delinquency

Chapter Pretest

Test your knowledge of this chapter’s material by determining whether the following statements are true or false. Be sure to compare your answers with the answers on page 30.

1. The definition of juvenile changes with time and geography. 2. Status offenses are low-level crimes that are more often

committed by juveniles than adults. 3. The normative conception of delinquency argues the definition of

delinquency is an objective fact with which everyone agrees. 4. The cradle-to-prison pipeline refers to the structural and social

issues that make it more likely some juveniles will go to prison than others.

5. The sociological imagination argues we must ignore as much of the outside forces as we can in order to focus on the juvenile if we want to understand delinquency.

6. The juvenile justice system was created under the same philosophy of personal responsibility and deterrence that the adult system was created under.

7. The formalization of the juvenile justice system means that juveniles are now treated equally and fairly in the system.

Michael was in trouble, again, for stealing cigarettes from the store (this was the sixth time he had been caught). He was only 10 years old, and it was suspected that his father had made Michael steal. He had been referred to juvenile court. Michael was a quiet child, with a younger sister at home. He lived part-time with his father and part-time with his mother and qualified for a pilot program of the juvenile court that provided transportation to his court hearings because his mother had no means of taking him herself. He met with his probation officer and attended his hearings, but never really participated in the court activities. Michael did not appear remorseful for his actions. In fact, he did not appear to care about much except his younger sister. One day his probation officer bought him a hamburger, but the boy wouldn’t eat it in the car. The probation officer thought he was worried about getting the car dirty, but the boy said he was saving it to share with his sister.

34

The next time the probation officer met with Michael, he asked him how he and his sister had liked the burger. Michael told him that the little girl had dropped her half in the dirt, so Michael had given her his half of the burger and eaten nothing himself. So yesterday, Michael was picked up a sixth time for stealing cigarettes at the corner store. What should happen to Michael?

Anthony had never been in trouble. He was also 10 years old. He was caught yesterday beating a neighborhood boy with a large stick. He broke the boy’s nose and his arm and chipped a tooth. Anthony claimed that the boy started it by always calling him names and bullying him and his friend. Anthony says that while he was walking home alone the boy started to call him names again and throw rocks at him. Anthony did have multiple bruises, but no one could tell if these bruises came from the rocks or the boy defending himself from Anthony’s attack. When the police approached Anthony, he immediately started to cry and say he was sorry. He asked for his parents, whom the police called. Anthony had never mentioned the bullying to his parents, or any other adults in his life, but both his parents said that since school started this year, Anthony had been a bit more withdrawn about school. What should happen to Anthony?

One of these stories is true. The other is made up. But both stories represent the experiences of children in the United States. It is rarely the case that deciding the future for a juvenile is easy, yet we do it every day through our school policies, the community programs we choose to or not to support, the juvenile justice legislation we vote for, and the philosophies we hold about agency and responsibility, social forces, and social structure.

So we ask you: What should happen to Michael and Anthony? Are they delinquent? Is one more delinquent than the other? Is either of them “savable”? What should we do with them? Ignore their behavior? Get them help? Charge them with crimes and punish them? And, more important, do you think you and your classmates will agree on an answer?

In this introductory chapter, we will equip you to begin answering such questions. In order to help you embark on your exploration of juvenile delinquency we will first explain a bit about historical approaches to juvenile delinquency in the United States, and place the study of juvenile delinquency in its bigger context. We will look at the state of children’s lives in contemporary U.S. society, and the social dynamics that impact youth and their families and peers today. In addition, we

35

will introduce you to different ways of defining juvenile delinquency and to concepts central to the critical lens we will be using in our analysis of delinquency in this book. This chapter asks you to actively engage in the analysis of several delinquency vignettes as well, in an effort to get you brainstorming about the many controversies inherent in the study of juvenile delinquency.

Defining Juvenile Delinquency This is a book about juvenile delinquency—how we define it, how we measure it, how we explain it, and how we try to control it. But when we say juvenile delinquency we are really talking about two things: juveniles and delinquency. So, at its core, this book is about the experiences of juveniles and the behavior that society has decided is unacceptable. Both need defining.

The Special Case of the Juvenile Defining children and childhood has not always been easy. The definition has been dependent on the historical period. Prior to the late 1800s in the United States, children were seen as an excellent source of cheap and dutiful labor; because of this, they were not seen that differently than adults in the eyes of institutions (government, family, or legal). With changes in labor laws, children gained some legal rights and, with those rights, began to establish an identity that was more distinct from that of adults. With these distinctions came new protections, new expectations, and new definitions for the juvenile.

Most simply, as of 2015, juveniles can be defined as those individuals who are under a certain age: 41 states and Washington, D.C., consider those under 18 to be juveniles, 7 states consider those under 17 to be juveniles, and 2 states (New York and North Carolina) consider those under the age of 16 to be juveniles.1 But there is more to being a juvenile than just age. In general, society believes that juveniles have several different attributes than adults. The first is that the young may not be as responsible for their behavior as adults. In other words, if both an 11-year-old and a 21-year-old engaged in the same bad behavior (say, hitting someone), it is likely we would cut the 11-year-old more slack than we would the 21-year-old. This is because juveniles are less mature than adults, and we often see this lack

36

of maturity as a reason for their bad behavior. Closely related to this, we believe that juveniles can still be “saved.” In other words, we can rehabilitate them and teach them how to follow the rules and treat each other fairly. Ironically, this means that we have often treated them more harshly than adults in an attempt to teach them how to be better adults. We are less inclined to talk about saving adults. Finally, we believe that juveniles are innocent and in need of our protection. This includes protection from both outside forces (other adults, dangerous events, and other juveniles) and themselves.

In addition to different attributes, juveniles are mired in a different set of experiences than adults. First, juveniles claim a different position in society than adults. It is more likely that juveniles are being cared for by an adult and are not solely responsible for the care of others. In addition, juveniles hold less power in society than adults. Juveniles cannot vote, and they do not have the political power, or the relational power, of adults. In fact, some argue that childhood is the most oppressed time of an individual’s life.2 We demand obedience from children, we treat them in a way we would rarely treat adults (yelling at them in public, yelling at them in private, spanking them, giving them time-outs), and in many instances (far more than adults) we abuse them. They have far less say in the decisions about their life experiences than any other group. Finally, juveniles have the unique experience of school as their primary focus until they reach adulthood.

The Definition of Delinquency Even the definition of delinquency is a bit complicated. The truth is that the definition of delinquency has also been dependent on both the historical period and the geographic region. For example, delinquency is not uniformly defined throughout all states or even across counties. What is accepted in one region as “mischief” in another is defined as a crime. For example, a friend told us his story of growing up in Idaho and blowing up tree stumps with small sticks of dynamite with his friends. He lived in a small town with a lot of open space, a small population, and norms that were conducive to owning dynamite. The first time he told these stories, we were shocked at the fact he “got away” with using dynamite. Coming from an urban setting, with little open space, a large population, and norms that say that owning dynamite is dangerous and illegal, we couldn’t

37

believe that he was allowed to do this. In contrast, he never thought his behavior was delinquent, he didn’t hide it from the adults around him, and, when he looks back on these memories, he does so fondly, as an example of time spent outdoors with his friends. Had he tried to blow up a tree stump in our hometowns in the 1980s (when we were growing up), he would have been considered delinquent and arrested. If he tried to blow up a stump in our hometowns today, his act might even be defined as terrorism.

The definition of juvenile delinquency, then, is dependent on both our definition of the juvenile, and the time and place we are in. In the simplest terms, today, the definition of delinquency is an act committed by an individual under the age of 18 that violates the penal code of the region in which the act is committed. However, even this legal definition is in flux. In some states, acts committed by those under 18 can be considered crimes and the individual treated as an adult if the state has defined that behavior as too serious to treat the juvenile as a child. For example, in California, legislation was approved in 2000 that allows for juveniles who engage in many violent or serious crimes, or who are alleged gang members engaging in a wider range of crimes, to be defined as adults and moved to the adult criminal justice system.

In addition to delinquent acts, juveniles are subject to a second class of behaviors for which they can get into trouble. These acts are called status offenses. Status offenses are acts that are not considered crimes and for which adults cannot get in trouble, but that society does not want juveniles doing. These include running away from home (most often defined as an unauthorized absence from the home for 24 hours or more), school truancy (systematic absence from school), drinking alcoholic beverages or smoking cigarettes, and incorrigibility (repeated disobedient behavior in the home). Technically, juveniles should not be treated as delinquents for engaging in status offenses. In other words, the general policy is that juveniles should not be arrested or formally treated by the juvenile court for behavior that falls in this category. But, in reality, sometimes they are, especially if they are considered “chronic status offenders.” Chronic status offenders are those who engage in repeated and systematic behavior even after the behavior has been addressed by school, family, or a social service agency.

Status offenses: Acts that are considered problematic because of the

38

age of the person carrying them out (e.g., truancy and curfew violations).

on the Media: Live Streaming Delinquency and Crime

The social media landscape is ever changing, and it isn’t just those who grew up before home computers that have a hard time keeping up sometimes. Live streaming apps such as Periscope and Facebook Live can offer some fairly entertaining moments as individuals accidentally walk naked in front of phones and computers they do not know are live streaming. But recently, such apps have also been used to record crimes.

A high school student was recently arrested for live streaming her 17- year-old friend’s rape. Although she said that she initially recorded the rape to preserve evidence, the prosecutor alleges that over the course of the 10-minute video she got “caught up in the likes” and focused on the live stream rather than trying to help her friend.

This begs the question of the impact of such rapidly changing social media on juveniles’ (and adults’) understanding of how the world works and the place of each of us to act in that social world, rather than just offering it up as observations for “likes” and “shares.”

Discussion Questions 1. Describe all the ways that youth use social media in their

everyday lives. How are these experiences with social media similar to interactions that might have occurred before social media existed? How are these experiences different?

2. Give an example of how social media might be used to encourage delinquency. Give an example of how it might be used to discourage delinquency.

Source: Adapted from McPhate, M. (2016, April 18). Teenager Is Accused of Live-Streaming a Friend’s Rape on Periscope. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/19/us/periscope-rape-case-columbus- ohio-video-livestreaming.html?_r=0

Conceptions of Juvenile Delinquency

39

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/19/us/periscope-rape-case-columbus-ohio-video-livestreaming.html?_r=0
Normative Conception of Delinquency How we define juvenile delinquency is also dependent on our general conceptions of misbehavior and deviance. Many believe that juvenile delinquency is a social construct, and even those who believe in a more normative conception of delinquency acknowledge that race, class, and gender (among other such concepts as age, sexual orientation, nationality, and ability) are somehow connected to delinquency.

It is more likely deviance textbooks than delinquency textbooks that discuss conceptions of deviance and delinquency, but it is important to understand that our definitions of delinquency are not black-and-white. They are based on conceptual orientations about how definitions are created. Rubington and Weinberg argue that there are generally two ways of conceptualizing deviance and delinquency as either “objectively given” or “subjectively problematic.”3 Clinard and Meier also suggest two general conceptions, the reactionist or relativist conception and the normative conception.4 Thio argues that we can view deviance from a positivist perspective or a constructionist perspective.5

Normative conception of delinquency: A conception that assumes that there is a general set of norms of behavior, conduct, and conditions with which we can agree.

While none of these authors are using the same language, they are defining similar ways of conceptualizing “misbehavior.” The first conception—that of an “objectively given,” normative, or positivist conception of deviance —assumes that there is a general set of norms of behavior, conduct, and conditions with which we can all agree. Norms are rules of behavior that guide people’s actions. W. G. Sumner broke norms down into three categories: folkways, mores, and laws. Folkways are everyday norms that do not generate much uproar if they are violated.6 Think of them as behaviors that might be considered rude if engaged in—like standing too close to someone while speaking or picking one’s nose. Mores are “moral” norms that may generate more outrage if broken. In a capitalist society, homelessness and unemployment can elicit outrage if the person is considered unworthy of sympathy. Similarly, drinking too much or alcoholism may be seen as a lapse in moral judgment. Finally, the third type of norm is the law, which is considered the strongest norm because it

40

is backed by official sanctions (or a formal response). In this conception, then, deviance and delinquency becomes a violation of a rule understood by the majority of the group. This rule may be minor, in which case the individual is seen as fairly harmless, or the rule may be major, in which case the individual is seen as “criminal.” The obvious problem with this conceptualization goes back to the earlier example of Michael and Anthony. It is unlikely you and your classmates agree on the definition of delinquency and crime in those two cases. This leads to the second conception.

41

Many behaviors that are not considered crimes for adults are still considered wrong for juveniles. These acts are called status offenses.

©iStockphoto.com/Lena Rostunova

Social Constructionist Conception of Delinquency

42

The second conception of delinquency—the “subjectively problematic,” reactionist/relativist, social constructionist conception—assumes that the definition of deviance and delinquency is constructed based on the interactions of those in society. According to this conception, behaviors or conditions are not inherently deviant; they become so when the definition of deviance is applied to them. The study of deviance is not about why certain individuals violate norms, but instead about how those norms are constructed. Social constructionists believe that our understanding of the world is in constant negotiation between actors. Those who have a relativist conception define deviance and delinquency as those behaviors that elicit a definition or label of deviance:

Social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction constitutes deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labeling them as outsiders. For this point of view, deviance is not a quality of the act the person commits but rather a consequence of the application by others of rules and sanctions to an “offender.” The deviant is one to whom that label has successfully been applied; deviant behavior is behavior that people so label.7

This is a fruitful conceptualization, but is also problematic. What about very serious violations of norms that are never known or reacted to? Some strict reactionists/relativists would argue that these acts (beliefs or attitudes) are not deviant. Most of us would agree that killing someone and making it look like he simply skipped the country is deviant; however, there may be no reaction.

Folkways: Everyday norms that do not generate much uproar if they are violated.

Mores: “Moral” norms that may generate more outrage if broken.

Laws: The strongest norms because they are backed by official sanctions.

43

Social constructions of delinquency: Popular ideas about delinquency that are created and influenced by social, political, and economic factors and that change over time.

Critical Conception of Delinquency A third conception of deviance and delinquency that has not been advanced in many textbooks is a critical conception.8 Those working from a critical conception argue that the normative understanding of deviance and delinquency is established by those in power to maintain and enhance their power. It suggests that explorations of both have focused on a white, male, middle- to upper-class understanding of society that implies that people of color, girls, and youth from working poor neighborhoods are, by definition, delinquent. Instead of focusing on individual types of deviance or delinquency, this conception critiques the social system that exists that creates such norms in the first place. This too is a useful approach, but, frankly, there are many things that the vast majority of society agrees are immoral, unethical, and deviant and should be illegal, and the system actually serves to protect society’s interests. This book adopts a critical approach to crime and delinquency, but offers a discussion of the theories that fall under both the normative conception and the social constructionist conception of delinquency (see Table 1.1).

The Well-Being of Children In order to better understand juvenile behavior (delinquent and nondelinquent) in the United States, it is important to understand the social context in which juveniles are living. Since 1994, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has partnered with several other federal agencies to track the well-being of children in the United States. Its priorities were to foster better collection of data and communication between agencies and the community on the state of children and childhood. Part of this effort is a yearly report, America’s Children in Brief: Key National Indicators of Well-Being.9 The report tracks seven key areas of well-being, including family and social environment, economic circumstances, health care, physical environment and safety, behavior, education, and health.

44

The most recent study reports that there were 73.6 million children (ages 0–17) in the United States in 2014. These numbers are projected to increase over the next 30 years. Approximately one third of those children fall in the age range of 12–17 (25 million, 2014 numbers). While the overall number of children has been increasing in recent years (and the increase is projected to continue), the proportion of children to adults has been decreasing, down from 36% in 1964 to 23.1% in 2014. This decrease in proportion of the entire population is due largely to the decrease in the mortality rate (i.e., people are living longer).

Racial and ethnic diversity is also increasing among children. In 2014, 51.9% of children were white (non-Hispanic), 24.4% were Hispanic, 13.8% were black, 4.8% were Asian, 0.9% were American Indian or Alaskan Native, 0.2% were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and 4.1% were two or more races.12 It is projected that by 2050, Latino children will be 32% of children, with white children making up 39% of the child population.

Critical conception of delinquency: A conception that critiques the existing social system that creates norms of oppression.

A Focus on Research: Samuel Phillips Day’s “Juvenile Crime: Its Cause, Character, and Cure”

45

In 1858, Samuel Phillips Day wrote an article on juvenile delinquents, titled “Juvenile Crime: Its Cause, Character, and Cure.” Day argued that examining juvenile crime is even more important that examining adult crime, because the juvenile is the embodiment of the future and the past. Day listed the causes of delinquency as “pauperism, compulsion, evil example, temptation, and hereditary predisposition; incommodious dwellings and low lodging-houses; ignorance, intemperance, minor theatres, penny gaffs, dancing and singing saloons, gaming and betting.”10

As to the cure for delinquency, Day lamented the misdirection of “current” programs and policies, the waste of resources put toward these misguided programs, and the indifference he felt that much of society had for saving children. “There is more wisdom, more care, more knowledge applied in England, if not elsewhere, to the origin and growth of animals than to human beings; the latter owe their origin and growth to fortuitous circumstances, the former to intelligent care and scientific foresight. It is to this unpardonable neglect and stultified apathy that are due the horrible crimes and miseries set forth.”11

Day concluded that while the “old” are beyond training, society should focus on the young because the young can still be saved from bad families and bad social training.

Discussion Question As you read the chapters in this book, think about Day’s characterization of juveniles and the causes of juvenile delinquency. Do we still characterize juveniles and juvenile delinquency this way?

Economic Circumstances The report offers several indicators of the economic well-being of children. The percentage of children living in poverty has increased in the last decade from its low in 2000 and 2001 of 16% to 20% in 2013. But what is most striking is the link between race and ethnicity and the likelihood of living in poverty. In 2013, 39% of black, non-Hispanic children; 30% of Hispanic children; and 11% of white, non-Hispanic children lived in poverty. This means that the poverty rate was 3.5 times

46

higher for black than for white youth and almost 3 times higher for Latino children than for white children. And as for a statistic that might be an indicator of the growing gap between those at the bottom and those at the top, both the percentage of children living in extreme poverty and the percentage of those living in households with very high incomes increased (extreme poverty increased from 7% to 9% between 2000 and 2013, and very high-income households increased from 7% to 13% between 1991 and 2013). In addition, 21% of children (15.8 million) lived in a household that was considered food insecure in 2013. Food insecurity is defined as reduced food intake; difficulty obtaining food, including a poor-quality diet because food cannot be obtained; and anxiety about obtaining food. While some food-insecure households managed to keep the effects from the children in the household (the adults reported they went without food so that the children did not have to), a majority of the households reported that children’s eating patterns and diets were affected, too.

Physical Environment and Safety Although the percentage of children living in polluted conditions has decreased, in 2013, approximately 50% of all children still lived in an area where at least one air pollutant was above the allowable levels. Water pollutants have also decreased since these reports were first created. The percentage of children who lived in areas where the community drinking water did not meet health-based standards decreased from 18% in 1993 to 6% in 2013 (although it has fluctuated between 5% and 11% over the past 15 years). Although air and water pollutants have been decreasing, inadequate housing has been increasing for children. Inadequate housing is measured by crowding, physical inadequateness, and cost burden (greater than 30% of family income). Forty percent of households with children suffer from at least one of these housing problems. In addition, “during 2009, an estimated 346,000 children utilized homeless shelters or transitional housing services, a rate of 4.6 per 1,000 children.”13 And, an estimated 138,000 children, or 2 per 1,000 children, were found to be homeless during at least one night in 2013.

47

One of the most troubling conditions in the United States is the number of children living in poverty. Almost 1 in 4 children live below the poverty level, with proportionally more youth of color than white youth living in poverty.

Spencer Platt/Getty Images News/Getty Images

Education Educational attainment has also been increasing for juveniles. The percentage of children graduating with a diploma or GED increased from 84% to 92% between 1980 and 2013. But these levels were not the same for all children. White children increased their graduation rate from 87% in 1980 to 94% in 2013, while black children increased their rate from 75% in 1980 to 92% in 2013. Latino children had the greatest percentage increase, but they had consistently lower graduation rates than either white or black children: 57% in 1980 and 85% in 2013.

In addition to high school graduation rates, the percentage of those who enroll in college right after high school has increased (although it has

48

fluctuated) from 49% in 1980 to 66% in 2013. These percentages have also been dependent on race and ethnicity. White youth are more likely to immediately enroll in college (67%) compared to black (57%) and Latino (66%) youth. Gender also influences this likelihood. In 2013, 64% of males, but 68% of females, immediately enrolled in college. Although the percentages by gender fluctuate significantly, for many years there was no statistical difference in the likelihood to enroll by gender. It is interesting to note that the likelihood to enroll in college decreased for all groups (except Latinos) between 2009 and 2013, perhaps due to the impact of the economic challenges in the United States and their effect on the affordability of college.

The Cradle-to-Prison Pipeline

A black boy born in 2001 has a 1 in 3 chance of going to prison in his lifetime; a Latino boy a 1 in 6 chance; and a white boy a 1 in 17 chance. A black girl born in 2001 has a 1 in 17 chance of going to prison in her lifetime; a Latina girl a 1 in 45 chance; and a white girl a 1 in 111 chance.14

49

While many well-being indicators for youth are decreasing, educational attainment is increasing; however, compared to other countries (see Chapter 8, on schools and delinquency), the United States still lags behind.

©iStockphoto.com/Christopher Futcher

The Children’s Defense Fund, a nonprofit organization, has identified a phenomenon it refers to as the cradle-to-prison pipeline (see Figure 1.1; in Chapter 8 you will learn about the school-to-prison pipeline). The cradle- to-prison pipeline refers to the many issues for children that make it more likely they will become incarcerated at some stage in their lives. These issues include pervasive poverty, inadequate access to health coverage, gaps in early childhood development, disparate educational opportunities, intolerable abuse and neglect, unmet mental and emotional problems, substance abuse, and overburdened, ineffective educational and juvenile justice systems that focus on zero tolerance and other suppression policies.15

What do these indicators tell us about the overall health and well-being of juveniles in this country? For the most part, indicators tell us that children are doing better in many ways now than they were 40 years ago—children are less likely to be living in a polluted area and more likely to have clean drinking water, more likely to graduate from high school, and more likely to enroll immediately in college. However, there are several things of which to be cautious. First, even though conditions are getting better for youth in some arenas, economic conditions are actually worse for children; more youth live in economic uncertainty now, insecure about both shelter and food. And both the gains and the losses made for children are dependent on race and ethnicity, gender, and class. In other words, whether a juvenile is black, Latino, white, Native American, or Asian, and whether the juvenile is male or female, or from a working poor or well-off family, impacts his or her experiences in the United States.

The United States as a Place Where Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality Are Important What does it mean when we say that in the United States race, class, and gender still matter? It means that in the United States we have different experiences based on our race/ethnicity, class, and gender (we also have

50

different experiences based on our age, sexual orientation, nationality, and abilities). One of the reasons we have these different experiences is because in the United States we define, describe, and distinguish people based on these different categories. This process is called social differentiation.16 Some categories are ascribed, meaning you are born into them and cannot change them; your race is an example of this. Some categories are achieved, meaning that they are more flexible, or that you have a better chance of changing them if you wish (or you can try to change them); your social class and religion are examples of these. Social differentiation leads to ranking; in other words, as we differentiate between people based on certain categories, we tend to rank the levels of these categories. For example, is it better to be rich or poor, educated or not educated, an adult or a child? These rankings are what form social inequality. Once the levels of a category such as age, race, gender, or class have had values placed on them (i.e., they have been ranked), we have placed “judgments of inequalities” on them.17 We have implicitly or explicitly decided it is better to be one value in that category than another. These value judgments may be more implicit than explicit, but that doesn’t mean they don’t exist. For example, no one comes right out and says it is better to be an adult than a child, and, in fact, some who have an idealized sense of childhood may argue that being a child is better. But when you examine the level of power that is conferred on adulthood and childhood, it is easy to see that juveniles have much less power than adults have. They are more oppressed and rely on the “kindness of strangers” more than adults.

Figure 1.1 The Cradle-to-Prison Pipeline

51

52

Source: Created using piktochart.com.

From the Classroom to the Community: Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth

The Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth is a project at the Northwestern University School of Law that investigates convictions of youth who have some credible basis for a claim of innocence. It is the only innocence project in the country that focuses on juveniles (instead of adults). The center believes that age may be a contributing factor to a wrongful conviction.

Among the leading contributors to wrongful convictions are false confessions. While it seems unlikely to many of us that we would ever falsely confess to a serious crime we did not commit, this has happened in numerous cases. Youth are overrepresented in false confession wrongful convictions. There are several reasons this is the case. First, law enforcement interrogation tactics are designed to be unbearable; police emphasize that the individual is already caught, and there is little to no hope that the accused will go free. In addition, the techniques include long periods of interrogation and, oftentimes, false information about the state of the case. These tactics are allowed to be used on juveniles. Second, youth are socialized to respect authority and authority figures such as the police. The combination of harsh tactics and youth who often trust and want to please the police means that false confessions can be likely. Youth who made false confessions and were finally exonerated report that they thought if they told the police what they wanted to hear they would be able to go home to their families.

In addition, juveniles are unsophisticated and are, therefore, less aware of their rights and less likely to be able to understand the long-term consequences of their confessions. Even when read their Miranda rights juveniles often do not understand the intricacies of those rights (for example, that they are allowed to actually remain silent and not answer police questions). The combination of not understanding their rights and failing to recognize the long-term consequences of confessing means that youth will falsely confess in hopes of getting out of the interrogation room. As of 2016, more than 100 individuals convicted as youth have had their cases overturned as wrongful convictions, and some of these individuals spent more than 20 years in prison before

53

they were exonerated.

Discussion Questions 1. What are the reasons that youth might offer a false confession to a

crime they did not commit? How is it that juveniles might be more susceptible to these confessions than adults?

2. What safeguards could be put in place to ensure that juveniles do not engage in false confessions?

Source: Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth. (2009). Northwestern University School of Law. Retrieved from http://cwcy.org/Default.aspx

Social differentiation: The process by which we define, describe, and distinguish people based on different categories.

Ascribed category: A category that an individual is born into and cannot change.

Individual Versus Institutional Racism, Classism, and Sexism Individual racism, classism, or sexism occur when individuals hold personal attitudes of prejudice based on race, class, or gender and act on these attitudes in a discriminatory fashion.18 This prejudice and discrimination can appear as the stereotyping of individuals based on their race, class, or gender. An example of this is the stereotype that girls are more delicate and prone to crying and hysteria than boys so they should not be trusted to do certain jobs or be in charge of important events. Sometimes individual racism, classism, and sexism are most evident in a person’s speech; especially among young people they might manifest themselves in name-calling and bullying. But individual acts of racism, classism, and sexism can have a strong impact on the juvenile experience beyond bullying. For example, a teacher who assumes that most young, Latino men are in gangs has made a racist assumption that might impact the education that young Latinos receive in his classroom. A police officer who has classist beliefs about who is most likely to use drugs (she believes

54

http://cwcy.org/Default.aspx
that working-class juveniles use drugs more than wealthy juveniles) might focus her policing in poor neighborhoods or handle teens from rich neighborhoods informally by taking them home to their parents if they get in trouble, while handling poorer teens formally and arresting them for their bad behavior.

Although racism, sexism, and classism were more overt in the past (e.g., schools—and other institutions—were segregated), there are still many examples of race, class, and gender impacting individual experiences in the United States. How might the experiences of these children differ over time?

©iStockphoto.com/Christopher Futcher

Achieved category: A flexible category that individuals may be able to move in and out of.

Social inequality: Unequal distribution of resources, services, and positions.

Individual classism: Prejudice or discrimination based solely on

55

someone’s class.

Individual racism: The belief in the inferiority of certain racial or ethnic groups, often accompanied by discrimination.

Individual sexism: Prejudice or discrimination based solely on someone’s sex.

Institutional classism: Classism that occurs when individuals are disadvantaged or oppressed because of their class because of the routine workings of social institutions.

Institutional racism: Racism that occurs when individuals are disadvantaged or oppressed because of their race because of the routine workings of social institutions.

In the News: The Income Gap

A lot has been heard in the news lately about the income gap in the United States and the world. The United States ranks worse than most of Europe and Asia, including India and China, and large parts of Africa. While no country has income equality, the gap has been increasing significantly in the United States over the last 30 years. The average household income (adjusted for inflation) has not changed over the last three decades while the average household income for the top 1% has almost quadrupled (see Figure 1.2). The gap is puzzling to some economists who see industrialized countries as the least likely to experience an income gap. The idea is that a gap forms and exists for a while with a transition from one economic system, say agrarian to industrialized, but eventually those at the bottom start to catch up as everyone moves into better-paying jobs. However, this has not happened this time. One of the speculations is that education is not affordable for all households in the United States, so those in the bottom percentiles do not have the resources and therefore the opportunity to advance, while those at the top continue to accumulate wealth. We expect this will have a detrimental effect on juveniles in the United States if education remains out of reach for a portion of them.

Figure 1.2 The Income Gap in the United States, 1970–2014

56

Source: Gilson and Perot (2011).

Discussion Question 1. In addition to a lack of education, what might be other reasons

that the income gap in the United States is increasing instead of decreasing? When coming up with your answers, determine whether you are focusing on characteristics of those in the upper or lower economic groups or on broader, macro concerns, such as institutional characteristics.

Individual racism, classism, and sexism are important aspects of the juvenile experience in the United States, but institutional racism, classism, and sexism probably have a far greater impact on the juvenile experience. Institutional racism, classism, and/or sexism occur when individuals are disadvantaged because of their race, class, or gender because of the routine workings of institutions in the United States.19 Institutions refer to organizational structures such as the political system, the legal system, media, and education. For the purposes of this book, we are most concerned with institutional racism, classism, and sexism that might exist in the criminal and juvenile justice systems and the educational system.

For example, the adult criminal justice system is still a very classist system of justice. How so? In its simplest terms, individuals will have a very different experience in the system based on how much money they have. Requiring bail means that those who can afford to pay will spend their time before trial at home, while those who cannot pay will spend their time

57

before trial in a jail. Don’t ever underestimate the benefit of living at home, instead of jail, while waiting for trial. Those who are at home can participate in their legal defense in a way that those in jail cannot. Those at home have the benefit of friends and family around them in a way that those in jail do not. Those at home arrive at their trial in street clothes, better fed, better rested, and better prepared in a way than those in jail. All else being equal between the individual who can pay bail and the one who cannot, the ability to make bail affects the experience of each individual.

Institutional sexism: Sexism that occurs when individuals are disadvantaged or oppressed because of their sex or gender because of the routine workings of social institutions.

The Intersectionality of Race, Class, and Gender In addition to race, class, and gender in their individual constructs having an important impact on the experiences of individuals in the United States, many argue that the intersection of these constructs has an important and exponential impact. What does this mean? At its most simple, this means that on many occasions we are impacted by racism, classism, and sexism (as well as heterosexism and ableism) all at the same time. Kimberlé Crenshaw explains intersectionality like this:

It grew out of trying to conceptualize the way the law responded to issues where both race and gender discrimination were involved. What happened was like an accident, a collision. Intersectionality simply came from the idea that if you’re standing in the path of multiple forms of exclusion, you are likely to get hit by both. These women are injured, but when the race ambulance and the gender ambulance arrive at the scene, they see these women of color lying in the intersection and they say, “Well, we can’t figure out if this was just race or just sex discrimination. And unless they can show us which one it was, we can’t help them.”20

58

59

People will come to different conclusions about what the roots of a given act of delinquency (such as shoplifting) are, depending on what theoretical lens they use to examine it.

© Camera Press Ltd / Alamy Stock Photo

While Crenshaw is specifically examining the differential experience that one might have with the law, the idea of intersectionality can be applied in many more instances than just this. One of the central considerations of intersectionality is that a power hierarchy exists in social relations. In other words, a system of power exists in which some hold more power than others based on the social groups they identify with. Hill Collins calls this power hierarchy a “matrix of domination.”21 The farther down the matrix an individual is situated, the more inequality that individual experiences. These experiences are not additive but exponential.22 For example, if we examine the illustration by Crenshaw above, it isn’t just that being black and a woman means that you are discriminated against based upon your race and gender. It can also mean that the system does not know how to alleviate those multiple oppressions and often compounds them.

In addition to the fact that intersectionalities can reinforce inequality, Hill Collins and Burgess-Proctor argue that these intersectionalities can mean that individuals experience both oppression and privilege.23 They argue that no individual or group can be entirely oppressed or privileged and that the social location on this matrix of domination means that at times individuals and groups can be either oppressed or privileged over one another.

The Sociological Imagination As you begin your investigation of juvenile delinquency in this book, it is important for you to turn on your “sociological imagination.” This idea comes from the work of C. Wright Mills, who argued that the only way to truly understand the experiences of the individual is to first understand the societal, institutional, historical conditions that individual is living under. In other words, Mills believed that no man, woman, or child is an island. Below are excerpts from his profound book.

60

Men do not usually define the troubles they endure in terms of historical change and institutional contradiction. The well-being they enjoy, they do not usually impute to the big ups and downs of the societies in which they live. Seldom aware of the intricate connection between the patterns of their own lives and the course of world history, ordinary men do not usually know what this connection means for the kinds of men they are becoming and for the kinds of history-making in which they might take part. They do not possess the quality of mind essential to grasp the interplay of man and society, of biography and history, of self and world. They cannot cope with their personal troubles in such ways as to control the structural transformations that usually lie behind them.

The sociological imagination enables its possessor to understand the larger historical scene in terms of its meaning for the inner life and the external career of a variety of individuals. It enables him to take into account how individuals, in the welter of their daily experience, often become falsely conscious of their social positions. With that welter, the framework of modern society is sought, and within that framework the psychologies of a variety of men and women are formulated. By such means the personal uneasiness of individuals is focused upon explicit troubles and the indifference of publics is transformed into involvement with public issues.

The first fruit of this imagination—and the first lesson of the social science that embodies it—is the idea that the individual can understand his own experience and gauge his own fate only by locating himself within his period, that he can know his own chances in life only by becoming aware of those of all individuals in his circumstances. In many ways it is a terrible lesson; in many ways a magnificent one.

In these terms, consider unemployment. When, in a city of 100,000, only one man is unemployed, that is his personal trouble, and for its relief we properly look to the character of the man, his skills, and his immediate opportunities. But when in a nation of 50 million employees, 15 million men are unemployed, that is an issue, and we may not hope to find its solution within the range of opportunities open to any one individual. The very structure of opportunities has collapsed. Both the correct statement of the problem and the range of

61

possible solutions require us to consider the economic and political institutions of the society, and not merely the personal situation and character of a scatter of individuals.

What we experience in various and specific milieu, I have noted, is often caused by structural changes. Accordingly, to understand the changes of many personal milieu we are required to look beyond them. And the number and variety of such structural changes increase as the institutions within connected with one another. To be aware of the idea of social structure and to use it with sensibility is to be capable of tracing such linkages among a great variety of milieu. To be able to do that is to possess the sociological imagination.24

We have an example that might help explain the importance of a sociological imagination that should resonate with college students. In the United States, one of the persistent philosophies is individualism and personal responsibility. Under this philosophy, individuals are assumed to be solely responsible for their successes and failures. This philosophy relies heavily on the notion that individuals are rational actors who weigh the cost and benefit of their actions, can see the consequences of their behavior, and have perfect information. This example helps individuals who rely heavily on this conception of the individual to see the importance of social structure to individual behavior.

As a college student, you are often reminded that you are responsible for your own work and your own grades. As professors we expect that you come to class, study at least 2 hours a week outside of class for each unit you are taking, start your papers for class early in the semester, don’t plagiarize, and stay awake in class. We expect you to pick a major in your sophomore year, that you know what general education courses you need to take, and that you make appointments with your advisor when you have questions. If you put in this effort, ask for extra help when needed, come to office hours, and study hard, we expect you will graduate in a timely manner with a degree in your intended major. But is this always the case?

During hard economic times when state and federal budgets are uncertain, your experience as a college student is different than when economic times are better. As university budgets become tighter, it may be harder to get the major you want. Even if you do get the major you want, the courses to

62

complete that major are fewer and farther between, and class sizes increase, which means it is harder to get one-on-one time with your professor. All of a sudden the degree that you expected to earn in four years (if you are going full time) takes six years because you cannot get classes, and because tuition has increased and you need to go part time so that you may work more hours to pay that tuition. The economy has an impact on the educational system and through this has a very real and personal impact on you. This impact will not be uniform across populations or categories of people. For example, working-class students may be impacted sooner or more strongly by some of the economic forces than wealthier students.

Your Sociological Imagination Put to the Test: Five Vignettes It may be easy as a college student to see how a stagnant economy affects your experiences as you earn your degree, but now we turn to the experiences of juveniles, their behavior, and the juvenile justice system. How do social forces and the social structure affect individual juveniles?

Vignette 1: The Problem of Jesse

Jesse is 6 years old. He is in the first grade at a public elementary school in a medium-sized city. While in kindergarten and now the first grade, Jesse has gotten into a fair amount of trouble. His mother and father have been called more than once to come get him from school. Most of Jesse’s behavior can be considered “youthful”: While in kindergarten, he hid under the table while other children were doing their work; he was disruptive in the classroom, laughing and running around when he should have been working; he hugged kids on the playground “enthusiastically”; and on occasion he would play “war” with other little boys, and he would hit or kick them during the game. He does not listen well to his teachers. But some of his behavior is a bit more troublesome. He is openly defiant with his teacher and the playground supervisor. If he is told to stop doing something, he often takes this as a challenge to go further. His rough behavior has hurt several kids on the playground (nothing serious, but both children started to cry).

63

The school that Jesse attends is an excellent one in the district. It receives Title I money, which means that a large percentage of its children qualify for free lunches, it earns very good test scores, and it can count on heavy participation from the parents and PTA. However, the budget has suffered a series of blows for the whole district. Teachers have been threatened with layoffs. The music teacher, PE teacher, and librarian have been laid off. The class size has increased every year over the past 5 years. This year, Jesse’s class has 32 children in it, with one teacher, no aides, and intermittent help from parents.

Jesse’s teacher admits that she has a problem with Jesse. She says that she cannot teach the other 31 children if she has to focus so much attention on him. She estimates that about 10%–15% of every day is spent somehow dealing with Jesse. She is frustrated with the situation, feeling pressure from the school to keep up with her coursework and achieve good test scores, and frustrated with the number of children in the classroom.

Jesse’s most recent run-in happened when he drew a stick figure of a man who looked like he might be naked. Jesse’s mom was called and asked to come to the principal’s office. The principal showed the picture to Jesse’s mom and explained that the school had a zero-tolerance policy for such things and that if Jesse drew any more pictures ever of stick figures whose “private parts” were showing he would be suspended from the school.

Can this situation be resolved? If so, how should it be resolved? What are the main problems you see in the scenario? What factors are contributing to these problems? How might these problems be resolved?

What did you define as the problems in this scenario? Did you focus on Jesse’s behavior? Admittedly, Jesse is disruptive. He clearly does not know how to interact with the children around him in a manner that the school expects. And his openly defiant behavior with his teacher disrupts the learning environment, making her job harder and taking away from the educational time she has with the rest of the class. Besides, let’s face it, it is really irritating to be around a child who is disruptive and defiant.

But is this all that is going on? Using your sociological imagination, what might be contributing to the focus on Jesse’s behavior?

64

The first issue is the budgetary problems for the school. The school has had to lay off the librarian, the PE teacher, and the music teacher. This means that those activities, PE, music, and visiting the library, fall to the teacher to organize and supervise. In other words, the teacher is being asked to do her job, and the job of three other professionals. In addition, she is being told to do her job with more students in the classroom (32 this year) with no increase in professional help (no additional aide). Instead, the teacher must rely on the help of her students’ parents. In this context, Jesse’s behavior is even more disruptive. If the teacher had an aide or fewer children (for example, in California there was a program to maintain class size for grades K–3 at 20 students, which has been scrapped in many districts because of the budget problems), she might be able to work with Jesse and help him understand how to change his disruptive behavior.

The second issue is the school’s zero-tolerance policy. This policy often catches incidents that no one would expect would lead to suspension. In the case of the picture that Jesse drew, a stick figure was determined to be naked, and though that may or may not have been Jesse’s intention, a zero- tolerance policy does not leave room for discretion in many of these instances. Instead, if someone defines the juvenile’s behavior as wrong, the child automatically receives the punishment. It probably would not help Jesse and his behavior to be suspended over the drawing of a stick figure.

Vignette 2: Theories of Delinquency—Normative, Social Constructionist, and Critical

Jessica and Alicia are 13-year-old twins starting the eighth grade at Parkside Elementary. They live with their mother, Andrea, in a house several blocks from the school. They moved into the house about a year ago, and Andrea works extra shifts and overtime whenever she gets the chance so that they can make the house payments. Prior to moving into the house, they had lived across town in a school district that was underfunded and dangerous. The street they lived on had experienced repeated violence. Even though Andrea must work extra shifts, she is less worried about her kids in this neighborhood than the one they were in previously.

But because of the increased house payment, Jessica and Alicia often come home to an empty house. Recently, they have met a

65

young girl, Laurie. Laurie shoplifts candy from the convenience store near their house, sticks sugar in the gas tanks of cars she doesn’t like (she particularly does not like Acuras because her mother drives one), and has been known to torture small animals.

Recently, Jessica and Alicia were caught stealing Butterfingers from the convenience store (Laurie had left the store about five minutes earlier and was not caught taking anything). The police were called, and they called Andrea. She came and picked the girls up and took them home. The next afternoon, Jessica, Alicia, and Laurie went back to the store. They were told that they were not allowed back in because they had been caught stealing the day before. Jessica and Alicia were very embarrassed, and Laurie was very mad about being denied entry. Laurie suggested they put sugar in the convenience store clerk’s gas tank. Neither Jessica nor Alicia wanted to and had started to walk away, but Laurie pulled sugar out of her backpack and was prying open the gas tank when the same police officer pulled up to the back of the convenience store. She stopped Laurie and detained all three girls for attempted vandalizing.

What are the problems that you see in this scenario? What might be the solutions that could address these problems?

If you focus on the shoplifting behavior of Jessica and Alicia, and the vandalizing and torturous treatment that Laurie engages in, you have approached this scenario from a certain conceptualization, normative. What might be the reasons for Jessica, Alicia, and Laurie’s behavior? Some may suggest that because Jessica and Alicia are left alone at home, they are not getting supervised as well as they should be, while some might argue this is because they come from a single-parent household. Others might point to Jessica and Alicia’s new friendship with Laurie. They might argue that Jessica and Alicia are learning this delinquent behavior from their new friend. Finally, those who focused on Laurie’s delinquency might argue that she seems to have very few good coping mechanisms for strain in her life; she clearly has a strained relationship with her mother, and being denied entrance to the convenience store pushed her to vandalize the convenience store clerk’s car.

Those of you who identified the major problem in this scenario as the fact that Jessica and Alicia have just been arrested for an act they did not

66

engage in, vandalizing the car, may be approaching this scenario from a social constructionist’s conceptualization. Social constructionists may argue that Jessica and Alicia have been labeled because of their past behavior and their friendship with Laurie. Given that the police officer had just interacted with Jessica and Alicia the day before, it is likely that she may expect that they were involved in the vandalization, too. Even though Jessica and Alicia did not vandalize the car, the expectation of the police officer is that they were a part of the act. This expectation impacts the interaction that the police officer has with them and the treatment (getting arrested) that Jessica and Alicia experience.

Finally, a few of you might have identified the main problem of the scenario as the fact that Andrea had to move her children to a whole new neighborhood in order to help them receive a good education with a decreased likelihood they would be hurt while walking home from school or playing in their yard. Those of you who focused on this are taking a critical conceptualization. Instead of focusing on the minor delinquency, this conceptualization focuses on the structure of the system that requires that an individual actually move in order to remain safe and get a decent education. Those following this conception would also critique a system that had required that an individual work two jobs in order to make rent and support her family. This conception would be less interested in the behavior in which each girl engaged.

Vignette 3: The Problem of Appropriate Policies

The members of the South State Legislature have come close to finishing their proposed budget for the fiscal year. However, they find themselves with something of a predicament. For the first time in 30 years they do not have enough programs to spend money on. For this reason, they find they have $25 million (which is a lot less than you think it is) that they can allocate to a special program or project. The drawback is that this money may only be available this one time—there is no guarantee that future budgets could provide continued support. There has been a proposal that this money be used on the children of South State to show a renewed commitment to the next generation at the turn of the century. Two proposals have been put forth for the one-time allotment of funds.

Rebecca Hanlin has suggested that the money be used to increase

67

the bed size at two South State detention centers. This would include building or adding on to several buildings in each facility, and supplying the needed infrastructure, such as beds, bedding, and food, for the increase in inmates. The existing facilities are well made, but nearing their maximum capacities, and Hanlin has made an argument that it is likely, given the demographics of the area and a predicted increase in teenagers in the area in the next 10 years, that there will also be an increase in delinquency rates. She wants to be ready with larger detention facilities.

Richard Harring has suggested that the money be used to create five new community facilities in underserved areas that would include small libraries as well as sports equipment. These facilities would be open after school and on weekends for children under the age of 18 to use. The five areas he has suggested have little available for juveniles at the present time.

Both proposals have been reviewed by the South State Legislature and have been determined to be within the proposed budget of $25 million. It is your job to decide which of the above proposals should be sponsored and receive the $25 million. The money can be spent on only one project. Spend a moment deciding which one you would choose. What are your reasons for making this choice?

These two proposals come from fundamentally different philosophies about how to approach juveniles and juvenile delinquency (which we will discuss further in the last section of the book). If you chose Rebecca Hanlin’s proposal, it might be argued that you are supporting a deterrent or punishment philosophy, in which you expect that delinquency will increase and that the only way to combat delinquency is to be ready to punish those who have engaged in it. Over the last 30 years, this philosophy has been argued for and supported (with increased funds) in many jurisdictions in the United States. We have increased our budgets for the criminal justice system, increased our laws that address juvenile misbehavior, and increased our policies that socially control juveniles.

In contrast, if you chose Richard Harring’s proposal, it could be argued that you are supporting a preventative philosophy toward juvenile delinquency. This philosophy focuses on offering resources and support to juveniles before they engage in misbehavior and are picked up by the police. Prevention can focus on areas or juveniles who society suspects

68

might be more likely to engage in delinquency (or who have less personal resources) such as Richard Harring’s proposal, which focuses on underserved communities. Or prevention programs can focus on the juvenile population as a whole (such as California’s push to lower class sizes to a manageable 20 students per classroom; while this program’s first intent was to support better performance in the classroom, a secondary outcome might be less delinquency as juveniles get more rewards out of their educational experiences).

Vignette 4: Unequal Enforcement—Class

Lillyburg has had an increasing homeless problem, especially homeless youth. In order to curb this problem, a new law has just been suggested in Lillyburg, making it a misdemeanor to sit on public sidewalks or in nondesignated sitting areas, between the hours of 9 a.m. and 9 p.m. Opponents of this proposal point out that this law may be differentially enforced because Lillyburg is a large tourist town and often tourists can be found sitting on sidewalks and in nondesignated sitting areas. Proponents of the bill insist it will solve the homeless youth problem and that because it is only a misdemeanor, the law is not meant to be overly punitive. Most individuals will only be fined for breaking the law by sitting on sidewalks between 9 a.m. and 9 p.m. Should this proposal be made into a law? What are the ramifications of such a law? Who is most likely to be affected by a law like this?

Randall Kennedy discussed the impact of unequal enforcement in his book Race, Crime, and the Law.25 While he focused his attention on the detrimental effects of unequal enforcement of the law on communities of color, his ideas can be applied in this example, too. Unequal enforcement is the idea either that the law is written in a manner that focuses attention on one group disproportionately over another, or that supposedly neutral laws are applied in a manner that oppresses one group more than another. The law in Lillyburg can be used as an example. In its language, this law is class, race, and gender neutral. It merely stipulates that it is illegal to sit on the sidewalk between 9 a.m. and 9 p.m. However, the discourse around this law shows that it was written for a less neutral purpose. Homeless youth are the target of this law. And it is likely in the application of this

69

law (who it is used against) that homeless juveniles will more likely be arrested. It is unlikely that a tourist family with a couple of kids will be arrested for sitting in a nondesignated sitting area.

Loitering and public nuisance laws are rarely uniformly applied. What is considered loitering, and what is considered the proper use of a public park bench?

©iStockphoto.com/Juanmonino;

In addition, while the punishment (sentence) attached to this law is minimal in the eyes of most individuals (someone arrested for sitting would be fined), given that the law is aimed at homeless youth (by definition, juveniles who have so little resources they are living on the street), even a small fine can mean jail time because they will have no way of paying. Finally, a policy such as this, focused on individuals who will probably habitually break it (in other words, homeless youth have very few choices about where they can go; it is likely they will still live on the streets and sit on the sidewalks), will likely mean that the homeless youth will be considered chronic offenders, and, as we will see, chronic juvenile offenders are treated differently in the juvenile justice system than nonchronic offenders.

70

Vignette 5: Unequal Enforcement—Race and Gender

Maria is a 16-year-old Latina who has just gotten in trouble with the police. She was with her cousin in their neighborhood (a working-poor, Latino neighborhood near Tempe, Arizona) while he was holding 10 ounces of methamphetamine (meth), which is the minimum amount to be charged with selling drugs (instead of possession of meth). Maria claims she did not know her cousin had the drugs and he was not selling at the time they were caught. Because it is Maria’s first offense, she was charged with possession (because she was with her cousin), but charged in the juvenile court. The court adjudicated her true (found her guilty of drug possession) and gave her a disposition (sentence) of three days in detention. Upon completing her disposition, Maria received probation and must comply with a list of rules in order to remain out of trouble. Included on this list is that Maria must improve her grades in school, comply with a 7 p.m. curfew, and have no contact with her boyfriend (whom her probation officer has decided, because of several conversations with Maria’s mother, is a bad influence on her).

Last week Maria came home at 7:15 p.m. and her mom called her probation officer, telling him that Maria had been late home and that she suspected Maria had been out with her boyfriend. Maria does not dispute that she came home 15 minutes late, but says she was late because the bus she takes from work did not show up, so she had to start to walk home, and catch a later bus that finally happened by. She could not call her mom to tell her because her mom took away her cell phone when she got in trouble in the first place.

The probation officer considers this to be a violation of her probation, and Maria is now back in court for this violation. The court has no evidence that Maria saw her boyfriend, but they do have Maria’s admission that she was 15 minutes late coming home. The judge hearing the case admonishes Maria for violating her curfew and not listening to her mother about who she should date and gives her 30 days of detention for the violation.

What are the main problems you see in the scenario? What factors are contributing to these problems? How might these problems be resolved?

71

This case might be considered harsh and unlikely, but it was a real case witnessed by the authors. In this case, Maria has found herself in trouble. She is hanging out with individuals who are getting in trouble with the police and dragging her into that trouble. But what does our sociological imagination and a critical perspective help us observe about her experiences? First, Maria and her cousin live in Arizona in a predominantly Latino community. It is likely that this community experiences a stronger police presence than other communities in Tempe because of the strong, declared focus on immigration in Arizona. In other words, had Maria and her cousin been from a different neighborhood her cousin may not have been caught (which is a whole separate discussion, but given that Maria was unaware of her cousin’s possession of meth, it certainly would have benefitted her to not get caught).

Now that Maria has been caught up in the juvenile justice system, she must contend with a new issue. While status offenses should not be used to arrest a juvenile, once a juvenile has been arrested and brought into the system, behaviors that are considered status offenses are often listed on probation agreements. The dating and sexual behavior of girls is often managed and controlled through these agreements,26 as it is for Maria. Over the years, the juvenile justice system has focused more attention on the sexual behavior of girls than that of boys.27 In this instance, with very little concrete proof of interaction between Maria and her boyfriend, it appears the judge has taken this into consideration when deciding on the disposition that Maria will serve for violating her curfew.

This case can be used as an example of the importance of the intersections of race and gender for the experiences of many juveniles in the juvenile justice system. It could be argued that Maria has more likely been caught up in the system in the first place because of the community she was in when arrested, and certainly her experiences once in the system are somewhat dependent on her gender.

These vignettes are examples of the issues that this book will explore. They represent our focus on theory and contextual concerns such as family and school. They illustrate the importance of thinking beyond personal responsibility and agency to include an understanding of social forces and social structure when examining juvenile delinquency and the societal responses to it. And, they illustrate the importance of examining juvenile delinquency through an intersectional lens, which highlights the effects of

72

race, class, and gender and other social variables on juvenile delinquency and the societal responses to it.

The Juvenile Justice System and Diversity This chapter, so far, has explored the importance of diversity in the United States and the impact that such characteristics as race, gender, or sexual orientation may have on juveniles. We see that it can impact their educational experiences or their likelihood to be in poverty. We also see from the vignettes above that race, gender, class, and other characteristics, such as sexual orientation and age, can impact the experiences that juveniles have as they go through the juvenile justice system.

Figure 1.3 illustrates the stages of the juvenile justice system in comparison to the adult system. We spend a significant amount of time in Chapters 2, 11, 12, 13, and 14 discussing the history, stages, and philosophy of the system from policing to corrections, but we want to spend the next several paragraphs introducing the system and emphasizing the importance of diversity and inequality for juvenile experiences in this system. As you will learn in Chapters 2 and 11, the juvenile system was created under a different philosophy than the adult system. While the adult system focuses on punishment, the juvenile system was created under a philosophy that children are savable and thus rehabilitation, not punishment, should be the focus. This meant that the system for many years operated with a lack of formal legal procedures (in other words, the system did not follow a systematic set of rules, but instead relied on “informal” justice) and judicial discretion.28 This informality and discretion was based on the idea that the system needed to pay attention to the child as an individual and offer what was best for each child’s circumstances. The problem with that system was that often the treatment looked very much like punishment (children were kept for long periods of time with little focus on rehabilitation), and the discretion meant that children were vulnerable to the decision-making practices of individual workers in the system.29 And certain children were found to be even more vulnerable than children in general. For example, girls who were suspected of sexual behavior were kept in detention facilities until a marriageable age, while boys who were found to be engaging in sexual behavior were not held in detention.

73

In the 1960s and 1970s, the Supreme Court made several changes as a result of the realizations that discretion in the system and a lack of formal protections for youth meant that youth were vulnerable to unequal treatment. These changes instituted formal rules, the most important of which were that juveniles had the right to an attorney, a notice of the charges against them, to confront their accuser, and to not incriminate themselves. If these rights sound familiar, it is because they are from the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Juveniles were not afforded these constitutional rights until 1967. The introduction of these rules is known as the due process era because juveniles were given many of the same due process rights as adults. In order to assure these rights, though, the juvenile justice system had to create formal procedures (e.g., creating the role of prosecuting and defense attorney for all court cases).

The irony is that with the formalization of the system came a similarity to the adult system. Remember that the juvenile justice system was created to be different from the adult system, and yet, with the introduction of these constitutional rights, the juvenile system became more similar to the adult system.30 Now both systems follow similar legal rules, and often their outcomes (punishments) look very similar, too. So similar that some researchers argue that maybe it is time for a single criminal justice system for both juveniles and adults.31

Figure 1.3 Comparing the Juvenile and Adult Justice Systems

Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics. (1997). Criminal Justice System Flowchart. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/content/largechart.cfm

74

A second irony of this formalization is that it did not protect juveniles from being treated differently based on their personal characteristics. The adult and juvenile justice systems both experienced an increased focus on rules and guidelines meant, in part, to decrease the discrimination that was found to exist when judicial discretion (the practice of having judges make the decisions about how long an individual should be sentenced) was in play. However, many researchers found that when judicial discretion was limited through such practices as sentencing guidelines, the discretion did not disappear but merely moved to an early stage.32 For example, prosecutorial discretion became much more influential because the decision of how to charge an individual was now more important.

Figure 1.3 illustrates the five main stages of both the adult and juvenile systems: (1) entry into the system, (2) prosecution and pretrial services, (3) adjudication, (4) sentencing and sanctions, and (5) corrections. Both the juvenile and adult systems have these five general stages, but as the figure illustrates, within these five general stages there are slight differences. The top two lines of the figure show the adult process for felony and misdemeanor arrests; the bottom line shows the juvenile process through the system. While much of the experience is becoming more similar between the systems, on its surface this figure shows one of the bigger differences that stems from the initial philosophy of the juvenile system at its creation. The system was created with the belief that juveniles could be saved, so instead of punishment the system should focus on treatment. This meant that the system was created using different language that did not represent the punishment language of the adult system. For example, where the adult system refers to a trial, the juvenile system says hearing; where the adult system says sentence, the juvenile system refers to a disposition. We will go into much more detail in Chapters 12 and 13 about the stages of the juvenile justice system.

Philosophy and Organization of the Book This book is an introduction to the study of juvenile delinquency written from a critical perspective. It offers a critical understanding of juvenile delinquency, focusing on issues of race, class, and gender. The book is organized into four sections. The first section focuses on how we define and measure delinquency, paying special attention to the historical progression of juvenile delinquency and the role that media play in our

75

contemporary understanding of delinquency. In these chapters we will focus on how the concept of juvenile delinquency was first used to control communities of color, girls, and the working poor, and we will compare this to current processes that may be similar. We will examine the trends in delinquency since the 1980s, paying special attention to the relationship between race and ethnicity and delinquency and gender and delinquency. And we will ask ourselves, “Does the type of data we use impact our understanding of delinquency and these relationships?”

Our second and third sections of the book focus on the contexts of delinquency and theoretical explanations of delinquency. We will start by offering three theoretical chapters on micro-level theories, macro-level theories, and critical theories that either help predict the likelihood than an individual might engage in delinquency; help explain changing trends in delinquency, or delinquency rates for neighborhoods and communities; and explain why certain laws are created, certain communities are focused on, or certain groups are targeted as delinquent. In section three, we will examine the relationship between family, schools, peers and gangs, and drugs and our understanding and beliefs about delinquency. What are the contexts in which juvenile delinquency seems more prevalent? Do our societal beliefs about family, school, peers and gangs, or drugs impact our beliefs about delinquency? And do juveniles’ social location, as youth of color, boys or girls, and/or youth with or without resources, affect the contexts of delinquency?

Our fourth section of the book examines societal responses to delinquency. We will examine why we have a separate juvenile justice system, the process of the system, the correctional stage, and prevention, rehabilitation, and restorative approaches to delinquency. In these chapters we will focus on the impact of race, class, and gender and other social variables on both the creation and maintenance of these various policies and programs, and the impact that race, class, and gender have on the experiences of youth in these arenas.

When finished with this book, you should be better prepared to apply your sociological imagination to the connections between juveniles, their behaviors, and the world in which they live.

Summary

76

The study of delinquency is more complex than you might think at the outset. Not only must we understand the context in which youth exist, but we must understand the changing societal definitions of acceptable and unacceptable behavior. We think this makes this area exciting and full of possibilities for advancing the understanding of youth behavior. As you start your exploration of juvenile delinquency, we will end this chapter with a final story to illustrate the complexity of youth behavior. One of us has a son who has an anxiety disorder. He is almost paralyzed with worry that he is violating the rules. I have found that allowing him to swear gives him a bit of power over his anxiety. And, let me tell you, the only people better at swearing are truck drivers and his mother. So yes, when he gets anxious, I hear him whisper the F word under his breath (and yes, he is still in elementary school). So the questions are this: should parents OK epic swearing for elementary school children? Is he more likely to engage in delinquency because his parents allow him to break the norms on swearing for young children? How do I manage his anxiousness and swearing outside the household? If he engages in delinquent behavior down the road, is it my fault because I allowed the swearing? If I told you that much of his anxiousness stems from being bullied at school, would it change your answers above? In the long run, if he turns out to be a rule-following adult, does any of his youth behavior matter?

We are not sure that this book will answer all of these questions for you, or that the book is even meant to, but we hope that it helps you prepare yourself to think critically about these questions and stand behind whatever answer you arrive at.

Eye on Diversity Exercise: Social Construction and Media

Two of the themes in this chapter are the characterization of the juvenile and the social construction of juvenile delinquency. In this activity, try your hand at investigating how the media portray juveniles and juvenile delinquency.

1. Search the Internet for media pieces on juveniles and/or juvenile delinquency. Is there a difference in how print media presents these topics compared to television news?

2. Using LexisNexis, find five articles on juvenile delinquency. What are the behaviors that are being described in these articles? Do the articles suggest a reason for the delinquent behavior being reported? What are the conceptions of delinquency that the media reports are using? Is one conception used more than others? If so,

77

why might this be the case? 3. Finally, what are the characteristics (categories) of the youth who

are being portrayed as delinquent in these articles? Are certain categories overrepresented in the news articles?

Discussion Questions 1. Explain the conceptions of delinquency. Using each conception of

delinquency, explain juvenile gangs and the societal reaction to them. 2. Explain the current well-being of children. What is their economic,

physical, and educational well-being? Are they currently better off than they were a decade or two ago?

3. What is the difference between individual and institutional racism, classism, and sexism? Give an example of each.

4. How are intersectionality and the matrix of domination important to our understanding of the impact of race, class, and gender on the experiences of juveniles?

5. What is the sociological imagination? How might it be used to help understand juvenile delinquency?

Key Terms Achieved category 13 Ascribed category 12 Critical conception of delinquency 8 Folkways 7 Individual classism 14 Individual racism 14 Individual sexism 14 Institutional classism 14 Institutional racism 14 Institutional sexism 14 Laws 7 Mores 7 Normative conception of delinquency 6 Social constructionist conception of delinquency 7 Social differentiation 13

78

Social inequality 13 Status offenses 5

Chapter Pretest Answers 1. True 2. False 3. True 4. True 5. False 6. False 7. False

Student Study Site

edge.sagepub.com/bates2e

Sharpen your skills with SAGE edge!

SAGE edge for students provides a personalized approach to help you accomplish your coursework goals in an easy-to-use learning environment. You’ll find action plans, mobile-friendly eFlashcards, and quizzes, as well as videos, web resources, and links to SAGE journal articles to support and expand on the concepts presented in this chapter. Check out the website for original videos of former offenders discussing their experiences as juveniles.

79

http://edge.sagepub.com/bates2e
Chapter 2 The Creation of Delinquency

80

U.S. National Archives and Records Administration

Chapter Objectives After reading this chapter, you should be able to

Describe how the concept of juvenile delinquency developed over the course of U.S. history before culminating in the creation of the first juvenile justice system Explain how different forms of popular culture have been the focus of moral panics about delinquency Analyze the connections between social constructions of youth and mainstream ideas about juvenile misbehavior Compare and contrast ideas about youth and juvenile delinquency related to one’s race, ethnicity, social class, gender, and sexuality

Chapter Pretest

81

Test your knowledge of this chapter’s material by determining whether the following statements are true or false. Be sure to compare your answers with the answers on page 56.

1. The primary vision of delinquency that developed in Western societies resulted in the similar labeling of youth across all social statuses.

2. In ancient times and during the Middle Ages, there was no formal concept known as juvenile delinquency.

3. The age at which youth were thought to be capable of having a “guilty mind” has changed over time.

4. Houses of Refuge and other institutions housed children in need of care along with those labeled delinquent or predelinquent in an effort to “save” them.

5. The creation of the first juvenile court was based on the philosophy of retribution.

6. In the 21st century, it is clear that moral panics about violent music, websites, and films as causes of delinquency are justified by scientific research.

7. Youth of color, particularly boys, are often portrayed by the media as people to fear, rather than people to protect.

To Hon. Caleb S. Woodhull, Mayor of the City of New York (1849)

I deem it to be my duty to call the attention of your honor to a deplorable and growing evil which exists amid this community, and which is spread over the principal business parts of the city. It is an evil and a reproach to our municipality, for which the laws and ordinances afford no adequate remedy.

I allude to the constantly increasing numbers of vagrant, idle and vicious children of both sexes, who infest our public thoroughfares, hotels, docks, &c. Children who are growing up in ignorance and profligacy, only destined to a life of misery, shame and crime, and ultimately to a felon’s doom. Their numbers are almost incredible, and to those whose business and habits do not permit them a searching scrutiny, the degrading and disgusting practices of these almost infants in the schools of vice, prostitution and rowdyism, would certainly be beyond belief. The offspring of always careless, generally intemperate, and oftentimes immoral and dishonest parents, they never see the inside of a school-room. . . . Left, in many instances to roam day and night wherever their inclination leads them, a large proportion of these

82

juvenile vagrants are in the daily practice of pilfering wherever opportunity offers, and begging where they cannot steal. In addition to which, the female portion of the youngest class, those who have only seen some eight or twelve summers, are addicted to immoralities of the most loathsome description. Each year makes fearful additions to the ranks of these prospective recruits of infamy and sin, and from this corrupt and festering fountain flows on a ceaseless stream to our lowest brothels—to the Penitentiary and the State Prison.

In presenting these disagreeable facts for the consideration of Your Honor, I trust that I may be pardoned for the suggestion, in conclusion, that in my opinion some method by which these children could be compelled to attend our schools regularly, or be apprenticed to some suitable occupation, would tend in time more to improve the morals of the community, prevent crime, and relieve the City from its onerous burden of expenses for the Alms-House and Penitentiary.

—Respectfully submitted, Geo. W. Matsell, [NYC] Chief of Police1

In 2010, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg indicated that he was concerned about the numbers of young people being detained in juvenile institutions and the fact that they were often placed far from their homes and families.2 He noted that juveniles placed in institutions tend to recommit acts of delinquency after release and to return to those same institutions, which is, ultimately, an unproductive cycle. Bloomberg stated that it would be best for young people who engage in nonviolent delinquency to be treated under a rehabilitative model and to have access to services within their own communities.3 As a result, Mayor Bloomberg eliminated the Department of Juvenile Justice in December 2010 and subsumed it within the Administration for Children’s Services in order to break the cycle of delinquency and treat juvenile misbehavior, first and foremost, as a child welfare issue.4

The Social Construction of Youth and Delinquency As the opening writings about juvenile delinquency in New York City written over a century apart demonstrate, social constructions of youth and delinquency or mainstream ideas about youth and misbehavior, and what to do about youth and misbehavior, change over time. In order to understand how the concept of juvenile delinquency developed and

83

culminated in the creation of the juvenile justice system, it is important to consider how differing ideas about youth have emerged over the course of history. These ideas about youth are difficult to generalize about because they are socially constructed differently in different places and cultures around the world.5 Although in Western countries we tend to automatically think of teenagers when we think about juvenile delinquency, this concept is not recognized in a similar way in all cultures of the world, nor do Western countries themselves frame the years of adolescence in exactly the same way. As we will discuss in this chapter, the very notion of adolescence did not always exist—it was created in light of social and economic changes that necessitated a new, more extended, experience of childhood.

The concept of juvenile delinquency emerged out of a particular Western vision of what it is to be a child or a young adult, and entire systems of justice were developed to address the special needs of youth labeled as “juvenile delinquents.” And, even within a given Western society, we can observe that the labeling of youth as juvenile delinquents occurs much more in certain segments of our communities than in others. As Mennel explains, “When considered a violation of mores, juvenile delinquency becomes less a fixed concept and more a description of certain kinds of behavior by certain kids living in certain places.”6 Popular ideas about youth and their behaviors have been shaped by raced, classed, and gendered biases and concerns. In this chapter we will highlight the historical ideas about juveniles and their behavior that eventually led to the creation of the first juvenile court in the United States in 1899. In addition, we will consider the role of popular culture (music, films, books, games, etc.) in moral panics about delinquency both preceding and following the creation of state juvenile justice systems in the United States.

Social constructions of youth and delinquency: Popular ideas about delinquency that are created and influenced by social, political, and economic factors and that change over time.

Ancient Times and the Middle Ages (776 BCE– 1400 CE) Young people certainly acted up or misbehaved prior to being labeled

84

juvenile delinquents by society. Consider this description of an event experienced by one young man named Ariston (estimated to be 17–19 years of age) at the hands of another young man, Ktesias, and his father, Kronon, in Ancient Greece (4th century BCE):

First they tore my cloak off of me, and then, tripping me up and pushing me into the mud, they struck me so violently that they split my lip and caused my eye to close up. They left me in this sorry condition, so that I could neither get up or utter a word. While I was lying there, I heard them making a number of abusive comments, much of which was so offensive that I would shrink from repeating some of it in your presence. . . . After this I was picked up naked by some passers-by, for my assailants had carried off my cloak.7

As explained by Garland, although this act involved violence of one youth against another (with the help of his father, something we generally do not see too much of today), it would not have been labeled as delinquency because such behaviors were not seen as related to age at that point in history.8 The acts committed were fueled by the consumption of alcohol on the part of both Ktesias and his father, and they took place within the context of military service. Based upon the historical data available, it appears as though Greek society at that time encouraged misbehavior among male youth and that this example was not an isolated one. There was even a law at that time that stated that young men should not beat their parents, which indicates that parental beating by children must have raised the concern of at least a few lawmakers. There are limited sources of data for scholars to explore specifically related to juvenile misbehavior in ancient cultures, but data related to other social practices of the time indicate that youth were often treated and punished in ways that were comparable to those of their adult counterparts.9 Youth were treated as the property of their fathers, corporal punishment was common, and youth were often beaten harshly.

If we skip ahead in history to examine a period on which scholars have had more luck finding information, the Middle Ages (5th century CE–15th century) in Europe, we can see that still very little distinction was made between human beings based upon age.10 At that time and place in history, society was heavily interdependent, living and working together in large

85

groups. This was because the economy was agricultural, and lots of bodies, young and old, were needed to prepare and work the crops. Because of this, the biggest age-based distinction that played a role in the process was whether a child had mastered the basic physiological and emotional functions needed in order to work in the fields. Usually, once children turned 7 years of age, they were for all intents and purposes considered adults. Seven-year-olds could usually speak well (they had no need to know how to read because there was not yet any printed material), and their oral communication skills were considered sufficient preparation for many of the daily tasks of the adult world.

Although young people engaged in behaviors that we would label as delinquent today, they were not labeled as such in ancient times.

©iStockphoto.com/Pekic

Life was not easy for children of this period, and they were often subjected to practices of abuse and neglect that resulted in short life spans.11 Those who did survive engaged in many of the same activities as adults, including drinking alcohol, gambling, and engaging in sexual behavior. These behaviors were accepted among youth, and adults did not see any need to shelter their children from what are seen today as adult behaviors; extended families and communities lived very closely together, and there

86

was very little privacy to be had, even if it was desired. Everyone had an eye on one another, and this informal social control kept a lot of young people from misbehaving.

The Colonial and Revolutionary Period (late 1400s–1800) As the Europeans began to colonize North America, the ideas about childhood that they employed in the “New World” were similar to those that they employed prior to the Colonial period. Youth were seen as developing over time, but there still was not a tradition that emphasized age in the manner that we have today. There was a notable labor shortage during this period, so the tradition of youth working at a young age was especially helpful to adults. Gender-based distinctions developed further at this time, and boys were encouraged to develop their skill sets as apprentices in the working world, while girls were encouraged to learn to serve and care for others by becoming domestic servants or wives.12 The raising of children and young adults remained a group project, as the people for whom the youth worked or apprenticed had a large role in their upbringing. There was no sense of the nuclear family in the manner that is emphasized today, but extended families were seen as the primary source for disciplining and educating youth.

In the Middle Ages and in most of the Colonial era, legal assumptions were made about young people that mirrored the idea that young people were not that different from adults. The English common law tradition that was employed focused upon whether youth were capable of mens rea, or having the guilty mind needed to preplan an act of wrongdoing. Once again, the 7-year mark was seen as an important one. Generally speaking, individuals under 7 years of age were seen as too young to be able to rationally plan an act of harm in advance. But once people turned 7, their capacities for such forethought and planning were debated. This held true for all individuals between 7 and 14 years of age; they were assumed not to have the capability to plan a crime, but exceptions were made to that assumption on a case-by-case basis. (An age within this period that was considered important was 10.5 years of age—before that it was deemed less likely that a youth would be a rational planner, but after that it was seen as more likely.) After individuals turned 14, they were considered to be basically adults and were held to have the same abilities to reason and

87

make decisions, and to have a brain mature enough to harbor a guilty mind.13 There were no medical technologies available at that time to measure physiological development accurately, so that assumption went largely unquestioned. Over the course of this time in history, juries were very wary of convicting white youth and sending them to jail with adults, because the jurors believed they would simply be dooming these youth to lives of crime. One critic of this approach in the early 1800s, John Pintard, embodied this common sentiment in his description of prisons as a place where “little Devils are instructed to become great ones and at the expiration of their terms turn out accomplished villains.”14 As we will demonstrate later in this chapter, youth of color were not treated with the same concern by juries.15

As society began shifting from an agrarian to an industrial economy, a shift in ideas about youth followed. The development and spread of the printing press inspired a major transformation in the idea of what it meant to be a child or an adult, which gradually established a stronghold between the 16th and 18th centuries.16 Once the printing press was put into use, an assortment of books, newspapers, and other materials were printed. The mainstream of society suddenly had access to a wealth of ideas, but people’s access to these ideas depended on their ability to read. It takes time to learn to read, and thus adults began to recognize that young people needed a period of time to do so. Parents who were literate began teaching their children at home, or enlisting the help of neighbors to teach their children. The initial efforts to create schools in which children received a more formalized education began during this period, but at that point schools did not separate students into different classes by age; they were all included in the same classroom. Children generally did not attend school consistently because they had to balance school and work. Yet, a shift away from seeing children as mini-adults early on in their lives was clearly under way because of the perceived need for formalized education. In addition, the loosening of informal controls that came from urbanization and industrialization changed the habits of working-class youth in ways that were visible and that garnered attention by the media. For example, a newspaper article from 1791 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, noted,

Mens rea: A Latin term meaning “guilty mind.”

88

The custom of permitting boys to ramble about the streets at night, is productive of the most serious and alarming consequences to their morals. Assembled in corners, and concealed from every eye, they can securely indulge themselves in mischief of every kind.17

As more youth from the lower social ranks began spending time on the streets, adults from privileged social classes became concerned about the number of youth who appeared to be without adult protection. The concept of juvenile delinquency began to take a particular shape at this time. As Mennel (1973) explains, “Thus, during the eighteenth century, juvenile delinquency slowly ceased to mean a form of misbehavior common to all children and became instead a euphemism for the crimes and conditions of poor children.”18

The development of the printing press brought about a major shift in many societies’ ideas about childhood and the needs of young people.