Critical Analysis: Theories of Young Offending and Youth Protection

This essay provides a critical analysis of various theories related to juvenile offending, including strain theory, social disorganization theory, subculture theory, and family influence. It explores the nature, demographics, and potential for community and youth protection associated with these theories. The paper also evaluates the effectiveness of the criminal justice system, particularly in its interactions with Aboriginal youth in Australia, highlighting concerns about systemic biases and disproportionate incarceration rates. The essay concludes by emphasizing the importance of addressing the root causes of juvenile offending through targeted programs and interventions, rather than solely focusing on punitive measures. Desklib provides students access to similar essays and study resources.

Running Head: YOUTH JUSTICE
Youth Justice
Name
Institution

YOUTH JUSTICE 2
Youth Justice
Table of Contents
Table of Contents.............................................................................................................................2
Introduction......................................................................................................................................3
Critical Analysis of Theories of Young Offending.........................................................................3
Strain/Institutional Anomie Theory.............................................................................................4
Social Disorganization Theory.....................................................................................................5
Subculture Theory........................................................................................................................5
Family Influence..........................................................................................................................6
Effectiveness of the Criminal Justice and Aboriginals....................................................................7
Conclusions......................................................................................................................................8
References........................................................................................................................................9

YOUTH JUSTICE 3
Introduction
For the last three decades, there has been increasing concern regarding criminal acts
committed by young persons. This criminal system has been seen as ineffective since it impacts
the way young individuals perceive the system making them to engage in crime activities
because they view the authorities as not doing anything to assist them tackle life. News accounts
of grave crimes performed by children, as well as adolescents and criminologists’ cautions of an
impending storm of violent juveniles, have promoted the conviction that young persons are
increasingly becoming violent and unmanageable. Many are more concerned about the juvenile
justice system that has been inadequate in addressing crime among young offenders (Bouchard,
Wang & Beauregard, 2012). Young offending or juvenile delinquency has attracted huge
attention from theorists attempting to explain the causes, demographics and the nature of crimes
among young offenders. Some theorists have linked juvenile offending to factors, like race,
poverty, gender, and socioeconomic status. Peer group influence has too offered a huge surface
area for juvenile offending to thrive (Liqun, Ruohui, Ling, & Zhao, 2009)). The paper will
critically examine the theories of young offending to investigate the nature, demographics and
the potential for community/youth protection.
Critical Analysis of Theories of Young Offending
The word young offending or juvenile delinquency has been a debatable issue between
criminologists, sociologists, and psychologists. Many individuals have contrasting plus
concurring views have explained theories on young offending utilizing diverse arguments that
range from classical to contemporary theories. Several philosophers have developed diverse

YOUTH JUSTICE 4
explanations seeking to investigate these tendencies in juvenile crime. There are different social-
based theories, which describe young offending together in traditional and contemporary or
advanced viewpoint. These theories will comprise strain theory, feminist theory, and social
disorganization theory, sub-cultural and family influence theories (Krohn & Ward, 2015).
Strain/Institutional Anomie Theory
The strain theory was developed by Robert Merton during the 1940s. Strain theory is as
well called the social class or Mertonian Anomie theory. This theory elucidates that juvenile
offending happens since young people do not have adequate resources that will make themselves
happy. Their needs are not attained within the legal means; therefore, these young persons will
explore unlawful means to achieve their goals. Thus, the society has witnessed an enormous drop
from educational institutions by the susceptible youths with several mentioning this is a way to
allow them to attain what was anticipated of them by the society, employing substitute
techniques via criminal acts (Maimon & Browning, 2010).
The strain theory stresses that the majority of the young persons have the same values,
goals, and aspirations; however, several juveniles do not have the same capacity to accomplish
these goals, like an economic or social achievement. The variation amid what individuals need
plus their restricted prospects to attain them will fashion dissatisfaction. Since opportunities are
more open to upper and middle-class persons, those in lower socioeconomic class experiences
the frustration the most resulting in different delinquent behaviors through general strain theory
(Kim, Akers, & Yun, 2013). Strain as the demonstration of pessimistic stimuli, like child abuse,
as well as neglect, physical reprimand, family along with peer disagreement, traumatic life
situations along with criminal victimization resulting in young offending (McNeeley, 2014).

YOUTH JUSTICE 5
Social Disorganization Theory
Social disorganization theory was created by Clifford and Mckay Henry, which is
intimately related to the juvenile crime to social disorganization of the community dictated by
the environmental elements that surround the society. Social disorganization is the incapability
of the specific society to organize itself in a more communally suitable way, which perpetuates
unity and the universal wellbeing of the society due to environmental modifications. The theory
explains that the social disorganization will result in new social classifications in the society with
low-income populations findings in one neighbourhood and vice versa (Maimon & Browning,
2010). These people normally show a greater populace turnover resulting in overcrowding and
ultimately resulting in deprivation of their economic empowerment.
Additionally, higher populace heterogeneity makes it complex for these societies to unite
plus develop informal social organizations. This will imply that there is the lack of homogeny in
the society, which dictates that a homogenous society that may communally embrace good
ethical norms remain deceptive. The youthful adults in this status would normally indulge in
crimes so easily because the socioeconomic standing does not stop the youths to indulge in
crimes. In addition, the peer influence is the primary vector, which spreads such unwanted
behaviours amongst the adolescents living in these neighbourhoods since individuals of the
similar age interact, as well as learn from one another quicker and more easily made to suppose
their peers more simply again increasing juvenile criminal behaviour (Higgins, Jennings,
Marcum, Ricketts & Mahoney, 2011).
Subculture Theory

YOUTH JUSTICE 6
The subculture theory is founded from the reality that contemporary societies have shown
a culture of division in which discrete groups of individuals have disjointed from the society and
developed own values. These disparity associations in the society have created a culture of
learning antisocial behaviours, which are apparently described by criminal researches as a crime.
Researches have demonstrated that the most susceptible cluster is the youth who primarily find it
hard to cope with the customary ways of livelihood. This will result in the formation of cults that
develop their own ways of living plus governance. These crimes have been reported in many
societies in Australia among the Aboriginals because of the socioeconomic status. Because of
the youth are the most influenced, juvenile crime have amplified in places in which the
behaviour is left to thrive and young persons learn crime more easily (Kim et al., 2013).
Family Influence
This is one of the modern theories on juvenile offending that has been recognized by
many researchers. Many theorists believe that this theory is more probable to impact the manner
the parents raise them either negatively or positively relying on the current family values that the
family practices. Family influence has been found to have negative trends with studies
demonstrating that family influence is more powerful than peer group influence. The youth with
modern family establishments, like single parents along with reconstituted families commit more
juvenile crimes as compared to young children do from traditional households. Since a child
from customary family benefit from close family association with both patents who become
mentors, as well as role models. This is founded on the fact that parents can to commit more
energy plus time to their kids that will influence positively their behaviours (Hoeve et al., 2012).

YOUTH JUSTICE 7
On the other side, the modern households fail to offer the same, where the children in
these households are more possible to commit crime at the young age when they will seek to
make up that they do not have. The contemporary society is facing a rapid increase in non-
customary family establishments with several individuals choosing single parenthood,
particularly females to evade family commitments, which develop with one being a spouse.
Thus, just as excellent parenting can have a positive impact on raising honourably upright
children, the contrary leads to the poor nurtured youngster, who is more prone to dropping out of
school and engage in crime (Akers, 2009).
Effectiveness of the Criminal Justice and Aboriginals
The criminal justice system has been blamed for the growing numbers of young offenders
that continue to increase. The criminal justice system is expected to reduce the number of young
people committing crimes, but this has not been the case in Australia as the number of young
offenders continues to receive large number of criminals. Young people perceive the criminal
system as against their aspirations and they tend to engage in crimes. In addition, the system has
been observed to undermine the rights of the Aboriginals and other minorities in Australia. The
justice system has been found to jail more young Aboriginals on flimsy grounds. The system has
linked the Aboriginals with criminal activities and will jail them whenever they are presented in
court. These crimes have been reported in many societies in Australia among the Aboriginals
because of the socioeconomic status. Because of the youth are the most influenced, juvenile
crime have amplified in places in which the behaviour is left to thrive and young persons learn
crime more easily.

YOUTH JUSTICE 8
Conclusions
Juvenile offending may be easily addressed when intercepted at its point of origin. Young
people are involved in crimes are influenced by socioeconomic status and family influence.
Perceptions cultivated amongst diverse groups of individuals are more detrimental to minorities,
especially the Aboriginals in Australia when they are negative. Family influence is a modern
theory that has been accepted by main theorists because it is believed that it is the main cause of
young offending because of the nature of families in the societies that influence the manner the
children are raised (Maimon & Browning, 2010). The environment, especially low
socioeconomic status is likely to commit crime because of poverty that makes them to commit
crimes to make ends meet. Therefore, the government should address juvenile offending by
targeting programs to address the root cause of the problem rather than symptoms.

YOUTH JUSTICE 9
References
Akers, R. L. (2009). Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime and
deviance. New Brunswick [N.J.: Transaction Publishers.
Botchkovar, E., Marshall, I. H., Rocque, M., & Posick, C. (2015). The Importance of Parenting
in the Development of Self-Control in Boys and Girls: Results from a Multinational
Study of Youth. Journal of Criminal Justice, 43(2), 133-141.
Bouchard, M., Wang, W., & Beauregard, E. (2012). Social Capital, Opportunity, and
SchoolBased Victimization. Violence and Victims, 27(5), 656-673.
Higgins, G. E., Jennings, W. G., Marcum, C. D., Ricketts, M. L., & Mahoney, M. (2011).
Developmental trajectories of nonsocial reinforcement and offending in adolescence and
young adulthood: An exploratory study of an understudied part of social learning theory.
Journal of Criminal Justice, 39(1), 60-66.
Hoeve, M., Stams, G. J., Van der Put, C. E., Dubas, J. S., Van der Laan, P. H., & Gerris, J. R.
(2012). A Meta-analysis of Attachment to Parents and Delinquency. Journal of Abnormal
Child Psychology, 40(5), 771-785.
Kim, E., Akers, R. L., & Yun, M. (2013). A Cross-Cultural Test of Social Structure and Social
Learning: Alcohol Use among South Korean Adolescents. Deviant Behavior, 34(11),
895-915.

YOUTH JUSTICE
10
Krohn, M., & Ward, J. T. (2015). Integrating Criminological Theories. In the Handbook of
Criminological Theory (pp. 318-335). John Wiley & Sons.
Liqun C., Ruohui Z., Ling R & Zhao, J. S. (2009). Social Support and Anomie: A Multilevel
Analysis of Anomie in Europe and North America. International Journal of Offender
Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 54(4), 625-639.
Maimon, D., & Browning, C. R. (2010). Unstructured socializing, collective efficacy, and
violent behavior among urban youth. Criminology, 48(2), 443-474.
McNeeley, S. (2014). Lifestyle-Routine Activities and Crime Events. Journal of Contemporary
Criminal Justice, 31(1), 30-52.