Juvenile Delinquency: Summary
Thesis Statement
Although the criminal justice system should address the immediate consequences of juvenile misadventure, society must initiate a holistic approach premised on community-based systems to promote deterrence, early prevention, and support for at-risk populations.
Juvenile delinquency is activities or engagements among underage people and adolescents that border violation of the law and criminality. Delinquency is a social menace that involves adolescents engaging in antisocial behavior that could be criminal among adults. As such, delinquency among adolescents represents juvenile criminal behavior.
Delinquency among adolescents and young people is a social problem. Delinquency reflects the family dynamics and environmental factors that influence adolescents’ behavior, social relations, and self-consciousness (Xu et al., 2023). Young people influenced by their peers engage in antisocial activities such as truancy, tobacco use, alcohol misuse, violence, assault, vandalism, vagrancy, and even theft. According to Aazami et al. (2023), these status and delinquent vices contribute to social mayhem and challenges to individuals and the community. Essentially, delinquency among young people is an issue of concern because it reflects the challenges in the social, economic, and individual lives of society.
In addressing juvenile delinquency, the fundamental principles should be equality, fairness, and rehabilitation. Ideally, regardless of individual social background, young people should be treated equally. Currently, one issue that precipitates unequal representation in the juvenile justice system is the presence of systemic and systematic inequality. According to Dragomir and Tadros (2020), years of socioeconomic inequality have exacerbated the social condition of minorities to poverty and limited access to resources, which precipitate delinquent activities among these populations. As such, improving access to education, social amenities, a healthy environment, and employment opportunities is vital to empower young people to make better life choices. In addition, the juvenile justice system is overrepresented with people of color. According to the report by the Development Service Group (2022), racial minorities receive harsh judgment and are more likely to be subjected to implicit bias when handling their cases. Accordingly, there are fewer efforts to address the youth’s social problems in areas with high minority populations. As such, fairness should be upheld in handling young criminal cases to ensure they are accorded a fair hearing and sentencing and empowered to overcome these social ills. Therefore, rehabilitation, rather than incarceration, should be the main focus of the criminal justice system when handling juvenile delinquency to redeem juvenile offenders and eliminate existing inequalities.
In the U.S., nearly half a million young people are arrested annually for petty crimes. However, racial dynamics play a vital role in juvenile delinquency. According to Dragomir and Tadros (2020), youths of color are overrepresented in the juvenile justice system compared to white youth. Ideally, African American youth have a five times higher likelihood of being incarcerated than their white counterparts. According to Aazami et al. (2023), there is a high racial disparity in the trends of juvenile delinquency crimes committed in the U.S. For instance, among the more than 400,000 juveniles arrested in 2020 alone for various petty crimes, 68% were youths of color. In the end, many of these juveniles end up committing other crimes and reoffending, thus, more incarceration. Essentially, juvenile courts are more lenient and offer less severe punishment to white youth than people of color for the same offences (Dragomir & Tadros, 2020). As such, the youths are disproportionately affected with lifelong consequences that affect their academics and personal achievements and precipitate criminal engagement.
Empirical Research
Several studies have assessed juvenile delinquency as a social problem that requires amenable solutions. Xu et al. (2023) examined how juvenile delinquency emerges among young people to determine how it can be curbed or deterred early. The authors revealed that formation mechanisms are closely linked to young people’s self-consciousness, social relations, family factors, legal awareness, and beliefs on justice. As such, understanding these components could help predict the behavior of young people and help deter delinquent behaviors by promoting prosocial relations and self-consciousness.
The authors reveal that the propagation of delinquent behaviors among young people originates from the social and environmental issues that affect the personality of individuals. In particular, low-income family education at the child’s developmental stage results in low self-consciousness, which affects teenagers’ social relations and interpersonal interactions (Xu et al., 2023). As such, they propose that the prevention of adolescent delinquent activities should focus on identifying predictors of social and interpersonal alienation and the level of self-consciousness. Therefore, the study reveals the need for appropriate community-based systems to prevent delinquent behaviors among young people early.
Second, Aazami et al. (2023) conducted a systematic review to explore the most highlighted underlying issues that heighten or reduce youths’ risk of delinquent behaviors. The authors acknowledge that juvenile delinquency is a pertinent issue in the U.S. The study established that maltreatment, neglect, family dysfunction and conflicts were the major predictors of juvenile delinquency. Aazami et al. (2023) established that at the family level, adverse childhood experiences, harsh parenting, abuse, and family violence predisposed young people to deviant behaviors. Ideally, conflict among parents and within the family affects the socialization of children and influences them to adopt violent and antisocial behaviors that encourage delinquency.
Similar results were established by Garduno (2022), who established that harsh upbringing and ACEs contribute to anger management challenges. Ideally, when children are unable to manage their emotions at an early age, they are attracted to subservient activities such as vandalism, drug abuse, and theft due to lower self-esteem. In addition, in a meta-analysis, Yohros (2023) reviewed how adverse childhood experiences relate to reoffending and juvenile recidivism. They established that the extent of early adverse childhood experiences contributed significantly to the risk of reoffending and recidivism. Childhood trauma influences delinquency and also the possibility of reoffending after engaging with the criminal justice system. However, Yohros (2023) also established that variations existed in terms of ethnic, racial, and gender differences. Environmental and socioecological variations in family development accentuated these factors. Therefore, evidence points to a situation where family dysfunction breeds conflict, which affects the holistic growth of the children with significant psychosocial outcomes.
On the positive side, Aazami et al. (2023) also established mitigative factors that improved young people’s resilience. These were strong family relations, parental support, and academic performance. Ideally, quality social relations with parents and guardians positively related to lower delinquency cases among young people. In addition, those who had a positive school experience and performed well academically were less inclined to participate in delinquent activities (Aazami et al., 2023). According to Garduno (2022), these positive factors reduce ACEs’ outcomes and mitigate the chances of engaging in antisocial and potentially illegal activities. As such, there were positive individual and family factors that could influence the outcome of delinquency among at-risk adolescents. The study reveals that family and social education, self-efficacy, and strong family support promote prosocial behavior and limit delinquent activity encounters.
The authors also established that community-based interventions were the most potent measures for mitigating youth delinquency in society. At the individual family, Aazami et al. (2023) revealed that therapies such as multi-systemic family therapy that involves delinquent youth with their guardians and social workers were an effective community-based approach that facilitated lower chances of arrest, recidivism, and general delinquency. Similar outcomes were established by Anderson et al. (2021). Ideally, childhood development remains responsive to environmental stimuli. As such, positive community-based approaches encourage young people to reform more than punitive approaches. In essence, large communities establish mechanisms that involve the schools, the police, family members, and community-based organizations to monitor and address youth delinquency issues within the neighborhood. According to Cavanagh (2022), these community-based interventions support youth reentry into society and help address their inherent deficits rather than isolating them through incarceration. Therefore, the studies established that community-led interventions that supported adolescents were more amenable to positive outcomes that provided holistic recovery for affected and at-risk populations.
In another study, Jackson et al. (2023) explored the role of adverse childhood experiences on the emergence of delinquent behavior during adolescence and how it contributes to youth delinquent behavior. The authors established that early exposure to adverse events leads to the development of maladaptive behaviors that initiate social problems at an early age. In particular, depending on the level of exposure to ACEs, parental bonding, unstructured socializing, substance use, child property delinquency, and low self-control mediate the propagation of juvenile delinquency. Therefore, interventions should focus on early screening of ACEs to promote trauma-informed care and avert the onset of adolescent delinquency.
Childhood adversities affect a child’s development trajectory. Jackson et al. (2023) noted that cognitive and affective systems are impacted, and the severity of these adversities influences the likelihood of engaging in harmful and criminal activities in adolescence. Accordingly, the focus should be on improving self-control at an early age through family-based therapies. Therefore, beyond criminalizing juvenile behavior, measures should address the origin of the maladaptive practices.
Finally, in another study, Li et al. (2023) explored variations in parenting practices in the U.S. and China to determine how they affect juvenile delinquency. Ideally, parenting practices have been identified as a vital modifier of juvenile delinquency. For instance, Aanzami et al. (2023) and Xu et al. (2023) revealed that family dynamics, including parenting style, child-parent bonding, and social relations, affected children’s social and emotional development. Ideally, children from dysfunctional households, where parenting was ineffective, were more likely to be exposed to and engage in delinquent activities due to their maladaptive characteristics (Aazami et al., 2023; Jackson et al., 2023). Accordingly, Li et al. (2023) were based on the analogy that parenting approaches are culture-specific and the outcomes of one parenting style could have very diverse outcomes in two distinct cultures. Ideally, China and the U.S. are primarily polar opposites in their cultural orientation. The U.S. has an individualistic approach to social relations, whereas China has a collectivist-Confucianist approach.
The authors established that parental responsiveness was more highly perceived in the U.S. than in China. There was also an adverse relationship between parental monitoring and youth delinquency in the U.S. than in China (Li et al., 2023). Ideally, U.S. teenagers perceived parental monitoring negatively, whereas those in China took it positively as an important component of reducing juvenile misadventure. This is because, unlike China, where authoritarian parenting had positive outcomes on children’s behaviour, it had the opposite outcome in the U.S. (Li et al., 2023). The researchers conclude that considerations for cultural variations should be incorporated into delinquency mitigation programs. For instance, in community-based interventions, program administrators should encourage parental involvement in monitoring child behavior and have a decisive role in reducing their children’s delinquency risk. However, Li et al. (2023) note that such moves should be approached cautiously to avoid straining the programs that support a decrease in antisocial activity among children. Therefore, there should be a balance between what is acceptable as parental involvement so that children feel supported rather than curtailed.
In summary, the detailed literature review has revealed several facts about juvenile delinquency. The studies highlight that delinquency is a social menace that is perversive across the United States. First, the studies reveal that juvenile delinquency is rooted in the child’s family, social, and environmental context (Aazami et al., 2023; Jackson et al., 2023; Xu et al., 2023). Ideally, the social environment from the time of birth to going to school shapes the character and outcome of the child. As such, there are variations in delinquency based on gender, race, and socioeconomic levels of affected youths. At the family level, child upbringing, encounter with ACEs, and general family dysfunction are associated with adverse psychosocial outcomes for children (Aazami et al., 2023; Jackson et al., 2023). In particular, parental-child interaction, perceived social support, and general family relations affected child perceptions and the likelihood of joining delinquent groups (Aazami et al., 2023; Li et al., 2023). Therefore, the level of childhood adversities, parenting and family relationships, the neighbourhood environment, schooling, and access to role models determine the extent to which children are exposed to and influenced to engage in delinquent activities.
In terms of the management of delinquency, all studies point to non-punitive approaches as the most appropriate for at-risk and already-involved youths. Notably, community-based and family-centered interventions are the most probable preventive approaches to mitigating the effects and outcomes of delinquency (Aazami et al., 2023; Jackson et al., 2023; Li et al., 2023). In essence, family therapy involving guardians, the affected children, and program coordinators provides guidance for at-risk youth and supports parents in active roles in their children’s lives. This helps them detect and correct antisocial behaviors before they escalate. Interventions that incorporate families, schools, and law enforcement officers to challenge delinquency through community-based organizations were more appropriate at the community level. For instance, the family and school were the best places for child monitoring. In addition, they were the best place for preventive measures such as social education to promote prosocial behaviours and dissuade the proliferation of delinquency. As such, family and community-based interventions were established as the most potent solution to delinquency as they give at-risk youth and those involved in the criminal justice system a second chance at normal life rather than isolation through incarceration. Therefore, the studies revealed that although juvenile delinquency includes criminal behaviour, management should address the root cause of the problem, which can be traced back to the family and community levels.
Juvenile Delinquency: Resolution
The main solution to juvenile delinquency in society is early detection and prevention of juvenile engagement in antisocial activities. Although it is essential to address juvenile offences through normative criminal justice processes, there is a need to address the root cause of delinquency through preventive strategies. Ideally, addressing visible disruptive behavior through punitive measures without understanding its root remains ineffective in managing delinquency among young people. However, prevent approaches reduce the onset of antisocial behavior and empower young people to be resilient in the face of societal pressure to engage in delinquent activities.
The Three Branches of the Criminal Justice System
The resolution affects the three branches of the criminal justice system. First, law enforcement agencies such as the police are inherently in touch with these juveniles in the community where they operate. They have a vital role in identifying at-risk youth and initiating neighborhood and community-based interventions to reduce the arrest and incarceration of adolescents engaged in different social vices. According to El-Khatib et al. (2021), law enforcement in the community, such as schools, can promote a supportive, safe, and nurturing environment by intervening in drug use and violence issues among students before they become a major challenge. The police initiate community programs that enhance restorative justice and risk-aversion in at-risk populations. For instance, the basic form of police-led intervention is cautioning. Ideally, youths are warned formally in the presence of guardians over their behavior and are released without charges. The police carry out such policing initiatives to prevent the booking of minors for offences that are demeaned as less severe. However, the risk of discrimination and implicit bias in law enforcement could deter such efforts, especially in marginalized communities that perceive the police as aggressors.
The police engage in diversionary programs that channel young offenders to non-court agencies to support their rehabilitation. These include agencies for at-risk adolescents, treatment programs, and community support services. Ideally, police-led diversionary measures aim to reduce exposure of at-risk youth to peer groups in incarceration centers who may further influence and radicalize them into more antisocial activities. In some instances, police caution arrested youth and refer them to restorative support services. These structured services ensure that a police facilitator, through the help of community services, helps the minors involved in the illegal activity and the affected victim to amicably reach a solution. The solution helps the minor avoid incarceration and engage in recovery programs to promote behavior change. As such, whenever law enforcement agencies arrest youths for petty offences, they are likely to refer them to community support services, where the youths undergo counselling to address their delinquency.
On the other hand, the judicial system adjudicating juvenile cases is also required to provide holistic interventions that prioritize rehabilitation over incarceration. The judiciary should uphold impartiality and provide fair convictions to juvenile offenders irrespective of their social or ethnic predisposition. In addition, the judiciary works with the corrections system when handling juvenile offenders. In the past, there has been disproportionate access to rehabilitative programs, especially in underserved neighborhoods (Development Service Group, 2022). As such, differential treatment augmented by bias in resource allocation and access to services may affect the outcome of restorative and preventive approaches to juvenile delinquency. Therefore, the judicial and corrections systems should prioritize areas where youth need social support and community programs to improve their social condition.
Judicial service diversionary practices are premised on the analogy that diversion and decriminalization are amenable to child development. Ideally, judicially negotiated diversionary programs involve formal structures that incorporate the community and family members to amend antisocial behavior among adolescents as an alternative to incarceration (Development Service Group, 2022). Essentially, adequate utilization of these programs has been associated with reduced stigma that arises from incarceration and unnecessary social control.
In addition, these programs not only reduce public expenditure on prisons but also reduce youth crime and recidivism and lead to better psychosocial outcomes for the affected adolescents. As such, court-led diversionary programs avail social support services to at-risk youth that offer them an alternative empowerment opportunity to social isolation during incarceration. Significantly, incarceration increases the risk of criminal socializing, whereas prisons connect young people to hardened criminals (Development Service Group, 2022). Therefore, through diversionary options, young people can access mentorship programs, skills training, education, and discipline, which improves their socialization and engagement in prosocial activities.
Criminal and Social Justice Theories Related to Juvenile Delinquency
Criminal and social justice theories towards juvenile delinquency are diverse. The restorative justice theory is premised on holistically addressing the harm caused by antisocial activities or crime. According to Goldblum (2023), traditional disciplinary actions that lead to incarceration often fail to address the impact of the crime on offenders and the affected. However, restorative justice promotes rehabilitation and enhances the chances of deterrence of criminal behavior.
First, the General Strain Theory is based on the analogy that negative relations with other people breed delinquency. According to GST, the source of delinquency is a personal negative affective state such as stress, depression, anger, and frustration (Cho & Galehan, 2020). Ideally, these negative emotions are brought about by adverse stimuli, failure to achieve positive goals, and variations in expectations and reality. As such, individuals may attempt to meet these expectations and goals or eliminate the negative stimuli by engaging in antisocial and often illegal activities which constitute delinquency (Cho & Galehan, 2020). Based on this theory, the prevention of juvenile delinquency must be based on mechanisms that limit the experience of negative emotions or improve the resilience of young people when exposed to negative stimuli. Specifically, family-based and community-centered interventions such as school programs that train children and adolescents on anger management and problem-solving help adolescents to navigate difficult situations without resolving to violence.
The Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause in the U.S. Constitution provides that every citizen must be given access to the due process of law. The clause ensures that all alternative avenues of handling the matter are exhausted before any substantive ruling is made. The U.S. Supreme Court decision in the case of Re Gault (1967) established that even juveniles deserve due process to ensure the procedural process is followed to guarantee individual freedoms (Burruss et al., 2019). Due process is required because, just like any other person, a child should be the best representation regardless of their offence to ensure the outcome of the court does not violate the constitution. As such, although juveniles are treated differently from adults, they deserve due process in handling their criminal cases. Therefore, the law, mainly when applied to adolescents, should not be punitive but based on the principles of restorative justice to provide them a second chance to live and have psychosocial well-being.
Additionally, deterrence theory posits that the threat of criminal behavior consequences could help young people to rethink engaging in criminal behavior. Ideally, the criminal justice system has relied on punishment as the basis for deterring criminality. According to Motz et al. (2020), deterrence assumes humans are rational. As such, individuals who experience the loss of agency due to incarceration are less likely to engage in further delinquency. However, incarceration is associated with social stigma and labelling, which are often counterintuitive to punishment.
Adolescents exposed to the criminal justice system may be shunned by their peers and social groups, which impacts their recovery to lead positive lives. In addition, incarceration may have a negative influence on adolescents who find validation for their antisocial activities among fellow incarcerated peers (Motz et al., 2020). In essence, while incarceration is the preferred approach to addressing criminal behavior, other avenues should be sought to empower young people to discern the bad and the good and the underlying consequences. For instance, the Roper v. Simmons (2005) Supreme Court case noted that adolescents should not be subjected to the death penalty. The court noted that such punishment violates the Eighth Amendment, which prohibits unusual and cruel punishment of people. Therefore, these cases reveal the need to promote human rights and look for alternative means for addressing youth delinquency.
Equality and Fairness in Juvenile Delinquency Management by the Criminal Justice System.
The prevention efforts undertaken by the judiciary, corrections, and law enforcement systems support human rights, solidarity, and human rights among juvenile offenders. As the purveyor of justice, the judiciary promotes the rights of juvenile offenders through fair and impartial court proceedings. However, elements of implicit and racial bias limit the rights of the youth of colour to access equitable preventive and restorative services (Dragomir & Tadros, 2020). Further, correctional services that address juvenile offences through rehabilitative and community-based systems promote solidarity and human rights as they give young people a chance to lead a normal life beyond incarceration. Ideally, these programs focus on the accountability and empowerment of young people through training, education, and counseling. These programs, based on enhancing social equality among these populations, are premised on supporting adolescents to gain skills, engage in socially acceptable ways, learn to cope with challenges, and access gainful employment. Rather than incarceration, which violates their human rights for redemption and a second chance at life, rehabilitation promotes fairness and empowers youths to gain agency and self-efficacy in navigating social issues.
Finally, law enforcement has been on the brunt of perpetuating social inequality and violation of human rights. According to Dragomir and Tadros (2020) and Development Service Group (2022) report, police tend to over-police minority and low-income neighborhoods where many juveniles are exposed to arrests and bookings. The chances of young minority people, especially from low-income neighborhoods such as inner city blocks, getting engaged with the criminal justice system are higher than their counterparts in high-income neighborhood. The over-policing of low-income neighbourhoods, which are associated with high crime rates, implies adolescents face the brunt of the law as they are arrested frequently and find themselves committed to the juvenile justice system at an early age (Development Service Group, 2022). Such practices preclude unfairness and inhumane treatment that perpetuate disparities in policing and the over-representation of minority youth in the juvenile justice system. Therefore, each component of the criminal justice system compounds the promotion of social equality, human rights, and solidarity in handling juvenile delinquency.
Social and Cultural Variables in Juvenile Delinquency
Social and cultural variables significantly influence juvenile offenders in the criminal justice system. According to Xu et al. (2023), the human social environment impacts the formation, development, and outcome of behaviors among young people. First, poor socio-economic status is associated with angling into delinquent activities. As such, poverty is a significant contributor to juvenile delinquency. According to the Development Service Group (2022) report, limited access to education, social amenities, food, and neighborhood dynamics exacerbate delinquency among young people. In the U.S., poverty is intricately tied to racial disparities. According to Dragomir and Tadros (2020), systemic and systematic racial profiling and disenfranchisement of African Americans and Native Americans have a direct link to the current vices among the populations. Hoskins et al. (2020) established that low-income youths, especially from the racial minorities of African American and Hispanic descent, had more significant involvement with the juvenile justice system than their white non-Hispanic counterparts. Therefore, poverty, unemployment, and low-income status intersect with racial and ethnic factors to compound the experience of adolescents from minority and marginalized communities.
Years of racial segregation and disempowerment have contributed to less access to education, employment, and government support services, which hinders proactive response to juvenile delinquency. Children from low-income families reside in neighborhoods where crime is high; there are fewer role models, access to education is limited, and opportunities for upward mobility are scarce. Ideally, schools in such neighborhoods are under-resourced, which contributes to high drop-out rates. Consequently, limited such youths are more exposed to police scrutiny, harassment, and involvement with the juvenile judicial system. However, at the moment, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) is focused on addressing disparities embedded in legal frameworks to address racial and ethnic disparities in access to justice and preventive programs for young people (Development Service Group, 2022). There are more community-based support systems that have been established in high-risk environments to support adolescent rehabilitation and reduce the conviction and incarceration of youthful offenders. Such programs are tailored to support early detection and prevention of delinquency from the family set-up, school level, and neighborhood basis. Therefore, sociocultural variables influence the approach to mitigating juvenile delinquency.
Conclusion
Juvenile delinquency is a perversive social issue in the United States. Young people engage in illegal and socially undesirable activities for their age. These include violence, bullying, petty theft, vandalism, and misuse of alcohol and other drugs at an early age. These delinquent behaviors among adolescents reflect larger societal issues that should be considered. In particular, children from dysfunctional families and those from low-income communities are more predisposed to delinquent activities. Evidence points to racial disparity, poverty, family dynamics, and socio-environmental factors as the determinants of a child’s involvement in delinquency. Imperatively, the criminal justice system should address juvenile offences through rehabilitative and community-based systems to promote fairness and human rights and give young people a chance to lead a normal life beyond incarceration. These programs not only reduce public expenditure on prisons but also reduce youth crime and recidivism and lead to better psychosocial outcomes for the affected adolescents. As such, court-led diversionary programs avail social support services to at-risk youth that offer them an alternative empowerment opportunity to social isolation during incarceration. Therefore, although it is essential to address juvenile offences through normative criminal justice processes, preventive strategies must address the root cause of delinquency.
References
Aazami, A., Valek, R., Ponce, A. N., & Zare, H. (2023). Risk and Protective Factors and Interventions for Reducing Juvenile Delinquency: A Systematic Review. Social Sciences, 12(9), 474. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12090474
Anderson, V. R., Rubino, L. L., & McKenna, N. C. (2021). Family-based Intervention for Legal System-involved Girls: A Mixed Methods Evaluation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 67(1-2), 35–49. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajcp.12475
Burruss, G. W., Peck, J. H., & Cameron, A. L. (2019). Fifty years post Gault: A meta-analysis of the impact of attorney representation on delinquency outcomes. Journal of Criminal Justice, 66, 101634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2019.101634
Cavanagh, C. (2022). Healthy adolescent development and the juvenile justice system: Challenges and solutions. Child Development Perspectives, 16(3), 141–147. DOI: 10.1111/cdep.12461
Cho, S., & Galehan, J. (2020). Stressful life events and negative emotions on delinquency among Korean youth: An empirical test of general strain theory assessing longitudinal mediation analysis. International journal of offender therapy and comparative criminology, 64(1), 38-62. https://doi/pdf/10.1177/0306624X19873079
Development Services Group, Inc. 2022. “Racial and Ethnic Disparity (R/ED) in Juvenile Justice Processing.” Literature review. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/model-programs-guide/literature-reviews/racial-and-ethnic-disparity
Dragomir, R. R., & Tadros, E. (2020). Exploring the impacts of racial disparity within the American juvenile justice system. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 71(2), 61-73.
El-Khatib, Z., Herrera, C., Campello, G., Mattfeld, E., & Maalouf, W. (2021). The Role of Law Enforcement Officers/Police in Drug Prevention within Educational Settings—Study Protocol for the Development of a Guiding Document Based on Experts’ Opinions. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18052613
Garduno, L. S. (2022). How influential are adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) on youths?: Analyzing the immediate and lagged effect of ACEs on deviant behaviors. Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma, 15(3), 683-700. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40653-021-00423-4
Goldblum, A. (2023). Restorative justice from theory to practice. In Reframing Campus Conflict (pp. 209–227). Routledge.
Hoskins, D., Tahir, P., Cid, M. D., Perez-Gualdron, L., & Tolou-Shams, M. (2020). Ecological systems in relation to Latinx youth in the juvenile justice system: A narrative literature review. Children and Youth Services Review, 117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.104669
Jackson, D. B., Jones, M. S., Semenza, D. C., & Testa, A. (2023). Adverse Childhood Experiences and Adolescent Delinquency: A Theoretically Informed Investigation of Mediators during Middle Childhood. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20043202
Li, S. D., Liu, T. H., & Xia, Y. (2023). A comparative study of parenting practices and juvenile delinquency between China and the United States. Deviant Behavior, 44(4), 636-651. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2022.2081102
Motz, R. T., Barnes, J. C., Caspi, A., Arseneault, L., Cullen, F. T., Houts, R., Wertz, J., & Moffitt, T. E. (2020). Does contact with the justice system deter or promote future delinquency? Results from a longitudinal study of British adolescent twins. Criminology, 58(2), 307–335. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12236
Roper v. Simmons (2005). Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005). U.S. Supreme Court. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/543/551/
Xu, S., Yu, J., & Hu, Y. (2023). Formation mechanism and prediction model of juvenile delinquency. Frontiers in Psychology, 14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1087368
write