Get documents about "Child Delinquency: Early Intervention and Prevention
Description
OJJDP, May 2003, NCJ 186162. (20 pages).
Document Sample
U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
B u l l e t i n S e r i e s
J. Robert Flores, Administrator May 2003
Child Delinquency: Early
Intervention and Prevention
Rolf Loeber, David P. Farrington, and David Petechuk
Juvenile courts are being challenged
by an increase in the number of child Sparked by high-profile cases involving programs and approaches that work to
delinquents coming before them. In children who commit violent crimes, pub- prevent the development of delinquent
1997 alone, juvenile courts handled lic concerns regarding child delinquents behavior by focusing on risk and protec-
more than 180,000 juvenile offenders have escalated. Compared with juveniles tive factors.
younger than 13 years old. These who first become involved in delinquency
child delinquents account for 1 in 3 in their teens, child delinquents (offenders
juvenile arrests for arson, 1 in 5 juve-
nile arrests for sex offenses, and 1 in
younger than age 13) face a much greater Some Key Findings
risk of becoming serious, violent, and The number of child delinquents1 (ju-
12 juvenile arrests for violent crime.
chronic juvenile offenders. OJJDP formed veniles between the ages of 7 and 12)
Because youth referred to juvenile the Study Group on Very Young Offenders handled in the nation’s juvenile courts
court before the age of 13 are far to explore what is known about the prev- has increased 33 percent over the last
more likely to become chronic juve- alence and frequency of very young decade (Snyder, 2001). This develop-
nile offenders than youth whose offending, investigate how very young
initial contact occurs at a later age,
ment is cause for concern not only
offenders are handled by various systems because offense patterns reflect more
there is reason for concern about the
(e.g., juvenile justice, mental health, and serious crimes among these youngsters,
growing number of child delinquents.
social services), and determine effective but also because these very young of-
This Bulletin summarizes the final methods for preventing very young of- fenders are more likely to continue their
report of OJJDP’s Study Group on fending. The Study Group identified par- involvement in crime. Child delinquents
Very Young Offenders, Child Delin- ticular risk and protective factors that are are two to three times more likely to
quents: Development, Intervention, crucial to developing early intervention
and Service Needs. The report draws
become serious, violent, and chronic
and protection programs for very young offenders2 than adolescents whose
on hundreds of studies to describe
offenders. delinquent behavior begins in their
the developmental course of child
delinquency and delineate key risk
and protective factors. It also identi-
This Bulletin, the first in OJJDP’s Child
fies effective and promising preven- Delinquency Series, offers valuable infor- 1
Child delinquents are not legally defined in the
same way across the United States (Snyder and
tion and intervention programs that mation on the nature of child delinquency
Sickmund, 1999; Wiig, 2001). For example, the mini-
help reduce the incidence of delin- and describes early intervention and pre- mum age of criminal responsibility varies from age 6
quency while offering significant vention programs that effectively reduce in North Carolina to age 10 in Arkansas and Colorado.
In addition, many states do not have a legally defined
cost savings to society. delinquent behavior. Subsequent Bulletins
age of criminal responsibility. In this Bulletin, child
will present the latest information about delinquents are defined as juveniles between the
The information provided by the
findings of the Study Group on Very
child delinquency, including analyses of ages of 7 and 12, inclusive, who have committed a
delinquent act according to criminal law—an act
Young Offenders demonstrates the child delinquency statistics, insights into
that would be a crime if committed by an adult.
need to invest in effective early pre- the early origins of very young offending, 2
Chronic offenders are defined here as those with at
vention and intervention efforts with and descriptions of early intervention least four referrals to juvenile court.
such children.
Access OJJDP publications online at ojjdp.ncjrs.org
teens. Recent high-profile media cases of
violence committed by children age 12 Figure 1: Proportion of Delinquency Careers That Eventually Had Four
or younger also have drawn attention to or More Delinquency Referrals, by Age at First Referral
the potential for child delinquents to
inflict deadly harm. For these reasons 40
alone, child delinquents represent a
Percentage of Careers With
Four or More Referrals
significant concern for both society
and the juvenile justice system. 30
The arrest rate of child delinquents
changed between 1988 and 1997: arrests 20
for violent crimes increased by 45 per-
cent (paralleling the increase in vio-
lence for all juveniles) and drug abuse 10
violations increased by 156 percent. In
contrast, arrests for property crimes
decreased by 17 percent (Snyder, 2001). 0
The Denver Youth Survey, which is a 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
followup study of more than 1,500 high- Age at First Referral
risk youth, showed that at ages 11–12,
about 10 percent of boys and girls had
Note: The proportion of careers with four or more referrals is likely to be underestimated for the
a police contact because of delinquency first bar in this graph. Coding errors in the birth dates of a small number of youth first referred at
(Espiritu et al., 2001). age 17 caused them to be misclassified with an onset age of 7.
Source: Snyder, 2001.
The total volume of child delinquency
cases handled in the juvenile courts
is large. In 1997, an estimated 181,300
delinquents were less than 13 years old Figure 2: Very Young Offenders Have a Greater Percentage of
at the time of court intake (Butts and Serious, Violent, and Chronic Careers Than Older Onset
Snyder, 1997; Snyder, 2001). Youth re- Delinquents
ferred to court for a delinquency of-
fense for the first time before the age
of 13 were far more likely to become Child Delinquents Older Onset
chronic juvenile offenders than youth Delinquents
first referred to court at an older age
(see figure 1). It is important to note Serious
that because the upper age of juvenile Serious
court jurisdiction generally is 17, older Chronic Chronic
first-time delinquents have fewer years Violent
of opportunity to develop into chronic Violent
juvenile offenders.
Figure 2 shows the overlap between
juvenile offenders and serious, violent,
and chronic offenders for two groups:
child delinquents and older onset Source: Snyder, 2001.
delinquents. A larger proportion of
child delinquents, compared with later
onset delinquents, become serious, one-third of all juvenile arrests for arson, This Bulletin summarizes the final re-
violent, and chronic offenders. Also, a one-fifth of juvenile arrests for sex port of the Office of Juvenile Justice
higher proportion of the violent child offenses and vandalism, one-eighth of and Delinquency Prevention’s (OJJDP’s)
delinquents become chronic offenders. juvenile arrests for burglary and forc- Study Group on Very Young Offenders
ible rape, and one-twelfth of juvenile (the Study Group). See the box on
Child delinquents have their own typi- arrests for violent crime (Snyder, 2001). page 3 for more information on the Study
cal offense profile. They account for
2
OJJDP’s Study Group on Very Young Offenders
Historically, delinquency studies have Consisting of 16 primary study group review of preventive and remedial inter-
focused on later adolescence, the time members and 23 coauthors who are ex- ventions relevant to child delinquency.
when delinquency usually peaks. During perts on criminology, child delinquency,
The Child Delinquency Bulletin Series
the 1990s, numerous studies examined psychopathology, and the law, the Study
draws from the Study Group’s final
chronic juvenile offenders, a group Group on Very Young Offenders re-
report, which was completed in 2001
responsible for a disproportionately viewed hundreds of studies, undertook
under grant number 95–JD–FX–0018
large number of crimes (especially seri- many special analyses, and received
and subsequently published by Sage
ous crimes). However, OJJDP’s Study valuable input from a survey of more
Publications as Child Delinquents:
Group on Serious and Violent Juvenile than 100 practitioners in the field. The
Development, Intervention, and Serv-
Offenders—whose work was inspired by Study Group concentrated on the delin-
ice Needs (edited by Rolf Loeber and
OJJDP’s Comprehensive Strategy for quent behavior of children ages 7 to 12
David P. Farrington). OJJDP encourages
Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile and on children’s persistently disruptive
parents, educators, and the juvenile jus-
Offenders (Wilson and Howell, 1993)— and precociously deviant behavior from
tice community to use this information
reported in 1998 that youth who are the toddler years up to adolescence.
to address the needs of young offenders
referred to juvenile court for their first
This concerted effort produced valuable by planning and implementing more
delinquency offense before age 13 are far
insights into the nature of child delin- effective interventions.
more likely to become chronic offenders
quency. The Study Group found evi-
than youth first referred to court at a later
dence that some young children engage Study Group Members
age. Specifically, this Study Group found
in very serious antisocial behavior and The Study Group on Very Young Offend-
that the onset of problem behaviors in
that, in some cases, this behavior fore- ers was chaired by Rolf Loeber and
male children starts, on average, much
shadows early delinquency. The Study David P. Farrington. The initial members
earlier than the average age of first court
Group also identified several important of the Study Group were Barbara J.
contact for Crime Index offenses.1 The
risk factors that, when combined, may Burns, John D. Coie, Darnell F. Hawkins,
discovery that minor problem behavior
be related to the onset of early offend- J. David Hawkins, James C. Howell,
leading to delinquency often begins at a
ing. To better understand the early ori- David Huizinga, Kate Keenan, David R.
very young age was a major impetus for
gins of child delinquency, the Study Offord, Howard N. Snyder, Terence P.
OJJDP to develop a new initiative, the
Group emphasizes that research should Thornberry, and Gail A. Wasserman.
Study Group on Very Young Offenders,
focus on the preschool and elementary Leena K. Augimeri, Brandon C. Welsh,
which began its work in 1998. This coop-
years, a time during which early inter- and Janet K. Wiig later joined these
erative 2-year-long venture was under-
ventions can be implemented, before the members. Over the years, many addi-
taken to analyze existing data and to
accumulation of multiple offenses and tional practitioners from the field have
address key issues that had not previ-
the commission of serious offenses. The contributed to this effort.
ously been studied in the literature.
Study Group report concluded with a
1 Index offenses include murder, robbery, rape, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, auto theft, and arson.
Group. The report, Child Delinquents: more research and the efforts of a ● Serious child delinquents who have
Development, Intervention, and Service broader community to be fully under- committed one or more of the follow-
Needs (Loeber and Farrington, 2001), is stood and addressed. The work summa- ing acts: homicide, aggravated assault,
the first volume published that pre- rized in this Bulletin helps to advance robbery, rape, or serious arson.
sents empirical information on child knowledge about child delinquents and
● Other child delinquents (excluding
delinquents from hundreds of studies, about fair and effective ways to deal
serious delinquents).
including data from several studies with them.
that were newly analyzed for the report. ● Children showing persistent disrup-
It summarizes knowledge concerning the tive behavior (including truancy and
nature of child delinquency, its develop- Defining the Scope of incorrigibility), who are at risk of
mental course, key risk and protective
factors, and effective interventions.
Very Young Offenders offending.
Child delinquency is an enduring and The Study Group was concerned with Generations of studies in criminology
troubling phenomenon that requires three categories of children: show that the best predictor of future
3
behavior is past behavior. Children period may have important implications ● Many important developmental skills
showing persistent disruptive behavior for understanding and preventing very (such as language development) be-
are likely to become child delinquents young offending: gin during this period, and difficul-
and, in turn, child delinquents are likely ties in developing these skills may
● Disruptive problem behavior, includ-
to become serious, violent, or chronic weaken the foundation of learning
ing serious aggression and chronic
juvenile offenders. Figure 3 summarizes and contribute to later disruptive
violation of the rights and property
the relationship between the three cate- behavior and child delinquency
of others, is the most common
gories of youth behavior that are of (Keenan, 2001).
source of referral to mental health
greatest concern.
services for preschool children ● Understanding the early emergence
In more than 20 studies they reviewed, (Keenan and Wakschlag, 2000). of problem behaviors may help in the
the Study Group found a significant creation of earlier, effective interven-
● Studies have documented a predic-
relationship between an early onset of tions for the prevention of child delin-
tive relationship between problem
delinquency and later crime and delin- quency (Kazdin and Kendall, 1998).
behaviors in preschool and later con-
quency. Child delinquents, compared duct disorder and child delinquency Behaviors that place a child at risk for
with juveniles with a later onset of (Silva, 1990). an early career of disruptive behavior
delinquency, are at greater risk of be-
coming serious, violent, and chronic
offenders and have longer delinquency
careers (Espiritu et al., 2001; Farrington, Figure 3: Relationship Between Risk/Protective Factors, Development
Lambert, and West, 1998; Krohn et al., of Child Problem Behavior, and Interventions
2001; Loeber, 1982, 1988; Loeber and
Farrington, 1998b; Moffitt, 1993). Risk/protective factors in the individual, family, peer group, school,
neighborhood, and media
Not all disruptive children will become
child delinquents, and not all child delin-
quents will become serious, violent, or
Persistent Child Serious and
chronic juvenile offenders. However, the violent juvenile
disruptive delinquency
majority of the eventual serious, violent, behavior offending
and chronic juvenile offenders have a
history of problem behaviors that goes
back to the childhood years. Research
Prevention Prevention Prevention
shows that the antisocial careers of male
juvenile offenders start, on average, at
age 7, much earlier than the average Remediation Remediation Remediation
age of first court contact for Crime
Source: Loeber and Farrington, 2001.
Index offenses, which is age 14.5 (see
table 1). Because it is not yet possible
to accurately predict which children
will progress from serious problem Table 1: Average Age of Onset of Problem Behaviors and Delinquency in
behaviors to delinquency, it is better to Male Juveniles
tackle problem behaviors before they
become more serious and ingrained. Moderately First Court
Minor Problem Serious Serious Contact for
Behavior Problem Behavior Delinquency Index Offenses*
Early Disruptive Age 7.0 9.5 11.9 14.5
Behavior
The preschool period is critical in setting Note: The table shows the average age of onset of problem behaviors and delinquency for males
who had their first contact with the juvenile court for an Index offense. Data are based on the state-
a foundation for preventing the develop- ments of the oldest sample in the Pittsburgh Youth Study and on statements made by their mothers.
ment of disruptive behavior and, eventu- *Index offenses include murder, robbery, rape, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, auto theft,
ally, child delinquency. There are four and arson.
primary reasons why the preschool Source: Loeber and Farrington, 1998b.
4
and child delinquency may be present understanding the nature of social rela- increased by 33 percent to a total of
as young as 2 years of age (Keenan, tions (Landy and Peters, 1992; Kuczynski 181,300 cases in 1997, far more than the
2001). Although the majority of child and Kochanska, 1990; Achenbach and corresponding increase in child arrests
delinquents have a history of disruptive Edelbrock, 1981). Another issue is (Snyder, 2001). These data indicate that
behavior—such as aggressive, inatten- whether young children are able to com- law enforcement agencies referred a
tive, or sensation-seeking behavior in mit willful acts of aggression. A number larger percentage of the child delin-
the preschool period—the majority of of developmental researchers have quents they arrested to juvenile court
preschoolers with such behavior prob- demonstrated that preschool children in 1997 than they had in 1988, probably
lems do not go on to become young do have a basic understanding of the because the offenses committed be-
offenders. The following factors may impact of their behavior on others and came relatively more violent. The racial
affect the development of pro- and anti- can control their behavior based on breakdown of juvenile court referrals
social behavior during preschool and internalized social norms (Kochanska, also changed during this 10-year period,
beyond: Murray, and Coy, 1997). Overall, the with court cases of child delinquents
Study Group found sufficient evidence increasing by 41 percent for nonwhite
● Language is the primary means by
to conclude that some preschool chil- youth and 28 percent for white youth.
which parents and others affect chil-
dren can engage in very serious antiso- In addition, a greater proportion of
dren’s behavior. Delayed language
cial behavior and that, in some but not the 1997 nonwhite cases (45 percent
development may increase a child’s
all cases, preschool behavior problems nonwhite cases versus 37 percent
stress level, impede normal social-
foreshadow early delinquency. white cases) were placed on the court
ization, and be associated with later
docket for an adjudicatory hearing
criminality up to age 30 (Stattin and
(Snyder, 2001).
Klackenberg-Larsson, 1993). Child Delinquency—
Overall, from 1988 to 1997, the juvenile
● Temperamental characteristics are Official Records courts experienced a substantial change
individual predispositions for certain
According to the Federal Bureau of in both the number and types of child
behavior characteristics that can be
Investigation’s (FBI’s) Uniform Crime delinquents sent to them for processing:
modified by environmental influ-
Reports, in 1997 law enforcement agen- child delinquents in 1997 were signifi-
ences (Goldsmith et al., 1987). Diffi-
cies made an estimated 253,000 arrests cantly more likely than their predeces-
cult temperament (predominance of
of children age 12 or younger, and these sors from a decade earlier to have been
negative moods such as anger and
made up 9 percent of all juvenile arrests charged with a violent offense. In turn,
difficulty in controlling behaviors
(i.e., arrests of persons under age 18). juvenile courts significantly intervened
and emotions) early in life may be a
Of these arrests of children, 17 percent in the lives of a growing number of child
marker for the early antecedents of
(about 43,000) involved persons under delinquents; the number of cases that
antisocial behavior and behavior
the age of 10. Only 10 percent of these
problems (Earls and Jung, 1987;
arrests were for status offenses (e.g.,
Prior et al., 1993; Guerin, Gottfried,
running away from home, curfew viola-
and Thomas, 1997).
tions, and liquor law violations).
● Low attachment to caregivers, as in
the early mother-infant bond, plays Interestingly, between 1988 and 1997, the
an important role in later behavior total number of child arrests increased
and delinquency problems (Egeland by only 6 percent, as compared with a
and Farber, 1984; Adams, Hillman, and 35-percent increase for all juveniles,
Gaydos, 1994). The closer a child is and child arrests for property crimes
to the mother, the less likely a child dropped by 17 percent. However, during
is to be at risk for delinquency. this same period, child arrests for vio-
lent crimes increased by 45 percent.
Understandably, one of the difficulties Overall, child delinquents arrested in
in dealing with preschool children is 1997 were relatively more likely to be
the use of inappropriate labels such as charged with a violent crime, a weapons
“disruptive” for behaviors that may be offense, or a drug law violation than a
developmentally normal. For example, property offense (Snyder, 2001).
aggression, noncompliance, and lying
are common behaviors in the second From 1988 to 1997, the number of cases
year of life and are part of the develop- disposed by juvenile courts involving
ment of self-identity, self-control, and child delinquents (age 12 or younger)
5
resulted in formal court-ordered proba- status offenses, and less than one- other hand, prosocial behavior rated
tion increased 73 percent and place- tenth reported burglary or arson. by kindergarten teachers is a protective
ments to residential facilities increased (Denver Youth Survey and Pitts- factor against delinquency.
49 percent. Based on data from the burgh Youth Study data.)
1997 Census of Juveniles in Residential Six longitudinal studies conducted in
● Self-report rates for major forms of
Placement—which consisted of a roster five countries (Canada, England, New
delinquency were practically the Zealand, Sweden, and the United States)
of all juveniles in all residential facilities
same in 1976 and 1998; for example, on three continents confirmed that
on 1 day—about 19 of every 100,000
16–17 percent of children ages 11–12 childhood antisocial behavior tends
youth ages 10–12 were being held in a
reported felony assault in 1976, com- to be the best predictor of early-onset
juvenile facility on a typical day in the
pared with 14 percent in 1998. (Na- delinquency for boys. For example, an
United States (Snyder, 2001).
tional Youth Survey and National Oregon study found that antisocial be-
Longitudinal Survey of Youth data.) havior (such as aggression), as rated
Self-Reports of by parents, teachers, peers, and the
children themselves, was the best pre-
Delinquency Risk Factors and dictor of age at first arrest, compared
Official statistics reflect the delinquent Predictors with other factors such as family dis-
behavior of youth that is both known advantage, parental monitoring, and
Many of the risk factors and predictors
to and recorded by authorities. Self- parental discipline (Patterson, Crosby,
(and possibly causes) of child delin-
reports of delinquency are more com- and Vuchinich, 1992).
quency tend to be somewhat different
prehensive in that they include those
from those of offending by older juve-
behaviors not reported, or not otherwise Research findings consistently have
niles. Risk factors for offending at a
known, to the authorities. Research indi- shown that the onset of many conduct
young age are more likely to be biolog-
cates that young people are willing to problems usually predates the onset of
ical, individual, and family factors.
report accurate information about their serious delinquency by several years
minor and serious delinquent acts (Far-
The causal status of known risk factors
rington et al., 1996). Another advantage
remains to be clarified, and no single
of self-report research (and research
risk factor can explain child delinquency. Homicide
using parent and teacher reports) is that
Rather, the greater the number of risk
it focuses on misbehaviors (e.g., disobe- Recent instances of children commit-
factors (e.g., poor parental supervision
dience, defiance, aggression, and con- ting homicides have come to national
coupled with poor academic perfor-
duct disorder) that are not in themselves attention and have attracted intense
mance) or the greater the number of
delinquent but may serve as precursors media scrutiny. Despite the nationwide
risk factor domains (e.g., risk in the
to some children’s later involvement in outrage in response to some of these
family and the school), the greater the
delinquency. The Study Group’s review cases, the number of juveniles age 12
likelihood of early-onset offending
of previous and current self-reported or younger who are involved in mur-
(Loeber and Farrington, 1998b;
delinquency studies revealed the follow- der is relatively small. Between 1980
Stouthamer-Loeber et al., 2002).
ing (Espiritu et al., 2001): and 1997, about 2 percent (or 600
●
cases) of murders involved such child
Although the vast majority of youth
age 12 or younger (85 percent of
Early Risk Factors offenders, and the annual number of
During the preschool years, the most these murders was relatively stable,
boys, 77 percent of girls) reported
important risk factors stem from the averaging about 30 per year. Accord-
involvement in some form of aggres-
individual and family. Particular pre- ing to the FBI’s Supplementary Homi-
sion or violence, only about 5 per-
dictors, such as aggressiveness and cide Reports (Snyder, 2001):
cent of children (9 percent of boys,
3 percent of girls) were involved in a child’s level of impulsivity or sensa- ● The large majority (84 percent) of
serious violence, that is, violence tion seeking, result from numerous children who murdered were male.
considered to be a delinquent/ influences—from genetics to the child’s
● Seventy percent of the murder vic-
criminal offense. (Denver Youth environment—over a period of years.
Aggression appears to be the best pre- tims of child delinquents were male
Survey and Pittsburgh Youth Study
dictor of delinquency up to age 12. For and likely to be acquaintances or
data.)
example, physical aggression rated by family members.
● Roughly one-third of children age kindergarten teachers is the best pre- ● More than one-half (54 percent) of
12 or younger reported property dictor of later self-reported violent the murder victims of child delin-
offenses, one-quarter reported delinquency (Haapasalo and Tremblay, quents were killed with a firearm.
property damage, one-fifth reported 1994; Tremblay et al., 1994). On the
6
(Loeber and Stouthamer-Loeber, 1998) offending may be the result of a com- A more recent issue is peer rejection as
(see table 1, page 4). Loeber (1988) pos- bination of the following factors: a risk factor for antisocial behavior. In
tulated that juveniles who eventually the Oregon Youth Study, investigators
● Antisocial tendencies of children
engage in both property offenses and found, after controlling for earlier anti-
with persistent early disruptive
violence show the following behaviors: social behavior, that peer rejection in
behaviors.
the fourth grade predicted antisocial
● Onset of conduct problems in the
● Associations with peers who already behavior 2 years later (Patterson and
preschool years.
show deviant behavior. Bank, 1989). Another study that followed
● Aggressive and covert problem be- children from first through fourth grade
● Negative consequences of peer
haviors, such as lying and shoplifting. found that aggressive behavior and
rejection. rejection by peers in the first grade pre-
● Hyperactive/impulsive behavior at dicted later self-reported delinquency.
a young age. As children get older, attend school, This indicates that first-grade rejection
and become integrated into their com- may be a useful marker for the early
In addition to early antisocial behavior, munity, the array of risk factors for starter pathway to antisocial behavior
family characteristics are important pre- child delinquency expands (see table 2, (Miller-Johnson et al., 1997).
dictors of early-onset offending. The page 9). Many studies show a relation
number of family risk factors to which between deviant peer associations and Peer rejection may also influence child
a child is exposed and the child’s length juvenile offending (Elliott and Menard, and adolescent delinquency by inducing
of exposure to these stressors also are 1996). A major issue is whether “birds of the rejected child to associate with
important (Williams et al., 1990). Some a feather flock together” or “bad compa- deviant peer groups and gangs (Patter-
family characteristics that may contri- ny corrupts.” Most hypotheses suggest son, Capaldi, and Bank, 1991). Gang
bute to early-onset child delinquency that deviant peers can lead some youth membership provides a ready source of
include the following: with no previous history of delinquent co-offenders for juvenile delinquency
behavior to initiate delinquent acts and and reflects the greatest degree of
● Antisocial parents.
may influence already delinquent youth deviant peer influence on offending.
● Substance-abusing parents. to increase their delinquency. Youth Also, youth tend to join gangs at younger
who associate with deviant peers are ages than in the past, which leads to an
● Parental psychopathology likely to be arrested earlier than youth increased number of youthful offenders
(e.g., Lahey et al., 1988). who do not associate with such peers (Howell, 1998). The importance of hav-
● Poor parenting practices, such as (Coie et al., 1995). In addition, studies ing accomplices cannot be overstressed
lack of monitoring (Patterson, emphasize that a delinquent sibling can in child delinquency. For example, a
Crosby, and Vuchinich, 1992) and/ greatly encourage a child to become recent study found that less than 5 per-
or a lack of positive reinforcement delinquent, especially when the siblings cent of offenders who committed their
(Bor et al., 1997). are close in age and have a close rela- first offense at age 12 or younger acted
tionship (Reiss and Farrington, 1991; alone (McCord and Conway, 2002). Gang
● The prevalence of physical abuse. Rowe and Gulley, 1992). membership has a strong relationship
● A history of family violence.
● Large family size.
Many of the family risk factors interact
with other social systems, such as
peers and the community environment.
Nevertheless, a recent study found that
the strongest predictors of early-onset
violence included large family size, poor
parenting skills, and antisocial parents
(Derzon and Lipsey, 2000).
Peers
Although much more research is need-
ed, the Study Group believes that an
accelerated path toward child delin-
quency and subsequent more serious
7
and Hawkins, 1996). In addition, disor-
How Early Can We Tell? ganized neighborhoods with weak social
controls (i.e., attempts by adults to con-
A critical question from a scientific and policy standpoint concerning child delin- trol the behavior of youth) allow delin-
quency is, “How early can we tell?” It is difficult, however, to obtain a clear answer quent activity to go unmonitored and
to this question. For example, many children engage in problem behaviors of a rela- even unnoticed (Sampson, Raudenbush,
tively minor nature, but only for a short period. Few tools are available to distinguish and Earls, 1997). At the extreme end of
those youth who will continue with behaviors that may lead them to become child the spectrum, some neighborhoods may
delinquents. Although the foundations for both prosocial and disruptive behaviors even provide opportunities for anti-
are laid in the first 5 years of life (Keenan, 2001), it is important to point out that social behavior. For example, youth
the majority of preschoolers with behavior problems do not go on to become child living in high-crime neighborhoods may
delinquents. be at high risk for offending because
The Study Group has identified several important warning signs of later problems: they are exposed to more norms favor-
able to crime (Developmental Research
● Disruptive behavior that is either much more frequent or more severe than what and Programs, 1996).
other children in the same age group display.
● Disruptive behavior, such as temper tantrums and aggression, that persists
beyond the “terrible twos and threes.”
Race and Gender
The intersection of race, gender, and
● A history of aggressive, inattentive, or sensation-seeking behavior in the early childhood offending is a largely
preschool years. unexplored terrain. Too often, policy-
makers, law enforcement agents, and
social services agencies rely on stereo-
to violent delinquency, even when asso- School organization and process also types and assumptions concerning race
ciations with delinquent peers, family may play a role as risk factors. Schools and gender when dealing with juveniles.
poverty, poor parental supervision, low with fewer teachers and higher student
commitment to school, negative life enrollment had higher levels of teacher Youth of color—particularly African
events, and prior involvement in vio- victimization, and poor rule enforce- American males—are overrepresented
lence are controlled for (Battin et al., ment within schools was associated in arrest rates (especially arrests for
2000; Battin-Pearson et al., 1998). with higher levels of student victimi- serious or violent offenses) in relation
zation (Gottfredson and Gottfredson, to their proportion in the population
1985). Although research on the rela- (Kempf-Leonard, Chesney-Lind, and
School and Community tionship between school processes and Hawkins, 2001). Conversely, in relation
Risk factors for child delinquency with- offending is sparse, evidence suggests to their proportion in the population,
in the school and community have that many school characteristics, in- females are underrepresented in arrests
not been as well documented as individ- cluding the following, may be linked to for serious or violent offenses but over-
ual, family, and peer risk factors (see antisocial behavior in children (Herren- represented in arrests for status offens-
table 2). The Study Group hypothesized kohl et al., 2001): es and child welfare cases. However,
that children who developed strong rates of court referrals are rising faster
● Low levels of teacher satisfaction.
bonds to school (high commitment) for females than for males. When self-
would conform to the norms and values ● Little cooperation among teachers. report data are considered, the race
that schools promote, thereby reducing and gender gaps apparent in official
their probability of antisocial behavior. ● Poor student-teacher relations.
records are less pronounced.
● The prevalence of norms and values
Studies addressing school influences The Study Group recommends that race
that support antisocial behavior.
on antisocial behavior have consistently and gender comparisons be routinely
shown that poor academic performance ● Poorly defined rules and expecta- conducted in research on child delin-
is related to child behavior problems tions for conduct. quency. For example, in the Pittsburgh
and to the prevalence, onset, and seri- Youth Study, researchers found no race
● Inadequate rule enforcement.
ousness of delinquency (Brewer et al., differences in offending once adequate
1995; Maguin and Loeber, 1996). Weak controls were included for “underclass”
Several community factors, such as a
bonds to school (low commitment), low status of neighborhoods (Peeples and
high level of poverty in the neighbor-
educational aspirations, and poor moti- Loeber, 1994). The Study Group also
hood, are important in the development
vation place children at risk for offend- reanalyzed the 1958 Philadelphia birth
of child antisocial behavior (Catalano
ing (Hawkins et al., 1987; Hawkins et al.,
1998).
8
cohort data to investigate race and gen-
Table 2: Approximate Developmental Ordering of Risk Factors Associated der associations with child delinquency
With Disruptive and Delinquent Behavior (Kempf-Leonard, Chesney-Lind, and
Hawkins, 2001). The analyses showed
Risk Factors Emerging During Pregnancy and From Infancy Onward that, regardless of race and gender, seri-
Child Pregnancy and delivery complications ous and chronic delinquency were more
Neurological insult prevalent among early-onset offenders.
Exposure to neurotoxins after birth More of this type of information is need-
Difficult temperament ed to identify and understand race and
Hyperactivity/impulsivity/attention problems
gender differences in developmental
Low intelligence
Male gender pathways leading to child delinquency.
Family Maternal smoking/alcohol consumption/drug use during pregnancy
Teenage mother
High turnover of caretakers Interventions
Poorly educated parent Most juvenile justice, child welfare, and
Maternal depression
school resources currently focus on
Parental substance abuse/antisocial or criminal behavior
Poor parent-child communication adolescent juvenile offenders and prob-
Poverty/low socioeconomic status lem children whose behaviors are al-
Serious marital discord ready persistent or on education and
Large family size behavior management programs for
Risk Factors Emerging From the Toddler Years Onward youth in middle and high schools rather
than on children in elementary schools
Child Aggressive/disruptive behavior
Persistent lying or preschools. Interventions usually
Risk taking and sensation seeking seek to remediate disruptive behavior,
Lack of guilt, lack of empathy child delinquency, and serious and vio-
Family Harsh and/or erratic discipline practices lent offending after these behaviors
Maltreatment or neglect have emerged.
Community Television violence
The Study Group concluded that pre-
Risk Factors Emerging From Midchildhood Onward
vention is a better approach. Of all
Child Stealing and general delinquency
known interventions to reduce juvenile
Early onset of other disruptive behaviors
Early onset of substance use and sexual activity delinquency, preventive interventions
Depressed mood that focus on child delinquency will
Withdrawn behavior probably take the largest “bite” out of
Positive attitude toward problem behavior crime. Specifically, these efforts should
Victimization and exposure to violence be directed first at the prevention of
Family Poor parental supervision persistent disruptive behavior in chil-
School Poor academic achievement dren in general; second, at the preven-
Repeating grade(s) tion of child delinquency, particularly
Truancy among disruptive children; and third, at
Negative attitude toward school
the prevention of serious and violent
Poorly organized and functioning schools
juvenile offending, particularly among
Peer Peer rejection
Association with deviant peers/siblings child delinquents. “The earlier the bet-
ter” is a key theme in establishing inter-
Community Residence in a disadvantaged neighborhood
Residence in a disorganized neighborhood ventions to prevent child delinquency,
Availability of weapons whether these interventions focus on
the individual child, the home and fami-
Risk Factors Emerging From Midadolescence Onward
ly, or the school and community.
Child Weapon carrying
Drug dealing
Support for prevention and early inter-
Unemployment
vention was generally endorsed by
School School dropout
practitioners. An opinion survey of
Peer Gang membership
practitioners conducted by the Study
Source: Adapted from Loeber and Farrington, 1998a. Group found that nearly three-quarters
(71 percent) thought that effective
9
methods were available to deal with
child delinquents to reduce their risk
of future offending. On the other hand,
only 3–6 percent of the practitioners
thought that current juvenile justice,
mental health, or child welfare programs
were effective in achieving this goal
(Farrington, Loeber, and Kalb, 2001).
Following a public health approach to
intervention, the Study Group recom-
mended preventive and remedial inter-
ventions that focus on known risk
factors and on knowledge of the behav-
ior development of juveniles (see figure
3, page 4). However, the Study Group
cautions that there is no single magic
bullet for preventing or correcting
child delinquency. Investigation of inter- ● Bullying prevention. developed a comprehensive and success-
ventions for child delinquency clearly ful training program for parents of Head
demonstrates that multiple risk factors, ● Afterschool recreation programs.
Start children that includes a focus on
their relationships with one another, ● Mentoring programs. social skills and prosocial behavior.
and their complexity pose important
challenges for implementing interven- ● School organization programs. The Study Group’s analyses of three re-
tions. Comprehensive public health cent service delivery studies—the Great
● Comprehensive community
interventions should focus on changing Smoky Mountains Study of youth in
interventions.
both the conditions and institutions North Carolina, the Patterns of Care
that influence offending in the commu- program in San Diego, CA, and the
Several unique programs have demon-
nity (Farrington, 1994, 2000). southwestern Pennsylvania Costs of
strated that interventions with young
children can reduce later delinquency. Services in Medicaid Study (Burns et al.,
In addition, mental health, welfare, and 2001)—strongly indicate that the first
The High/Scope Perry Preschool Project
juvenile justice interventions for child step toward obtaining effective treat-
focuses on 3- and 4-year-olds at risk for
delinquency must deal with the multiple ment is to provide families with access
school failure. In this program, treat-
problems stemming from dysfunctional to mental health and other services.
ment group participants, when com-
families. While the very early detection of emo-
pared with control group participants,
showed a number of benefits across a tional and behavior problems is a pub-
lic health goal, results have not been
Promising Interventions range of prosocial functioning indica-
tors, including fewer than half the life- encouraging. The delay between symp-
The most promising school and com- tom onset and help seeking is apparent,
time arrests (Schweinhart, Barnes, and
munity prevention programs for child and the rates of mental health interven-
Weikart, 1993). The Elmira Prenatal/
delinquency focus on several risk do- tions in juvenile justice are extremely
Early Infancy Project sent nurses to the
mains (Herrenkohl et al., 2001). The low. Clearly, a mechanism for obtaining
homes of pregnant, unmarried women
Study Group recommends integrating timely, specialized help is imperative.
in households with low socioeconomic
the following types of school and com- Such help could also alleviate the high
status. These visits began during preg-
munity prevention programs: cost of care—both psychiatric and gen-
nancy and continued to the end of the
● Classroom and behavior manage- second year after the child’s birth. By eral medical—for youth with the diag-
ment programs. the time the children were 15 years old, nosis of conduct disorder.
the positive impact of the visits was
● Multicomponent classroom-based It is extremely important to communi-
reflected in a decrease in children’s
programs. cate to mental health and other serv-
reports of arrests, convictions, violation
ices what treatments are effective. For
● Social competence promotion of probation, consumption of alcohol,
example, many juvenile offender inter-
curriculums. sexual activity, and running away from
vention programs, such as Multisys-
home (Olds et al., 1998). As another
● Conflict resolution and violence temic Therapy (MST) (Henggeler,
example, Webster-Stratton (1998) has
prevention curriculums. Pickrel, and Brondino, 1999), have had
10
a significant impact on reducing the
rates of felonies. Currently, OJJDP is Child Delinquents, Incarceration, and Legal Sanctions
testing the ability to disseminate MST
in a large, three-city study, with the The Study Group found no studies showing that incarceration of serious child delin-
goals of identifying effective methods quents results in a substantial reduction in recidivism or the prevention of later seri-
for dissemination, retraining clinicians, ous and violent offending. In addition, victimization by older, serious delinquent
and developing approaches to ensure offenders in correctional facilities may fuel criminal propensities in child delin-
quality implementation. quents. Likewise, the Study Group does not advocate increased legal sanctions for
nonserious child delinquents. Instead, more programs that specifically target child
delinquents are needed, including specific procedures on how to deal with child
Juvenile Justice Programs delinquents when there is an absolute need for their detention. Nonserious child
Because children are malleable, adoles- delinquents can best be dealt with in the mental health and the child welfare sys-
cence has generally been recognized tems, with a focus on interventions involving the children’s parents.
as “a stage of developmental immaturity
that rendered youths’ transgressions
less blameworthy than those of adults mental health services. These programs ● Sacramento County Community
and required a special legal response” have yet to be evaluated, and their long- Intervention Program. This program
(Grisso, 1996). Traditionally, juvenile term success may depend on receiving provides services coordinated by a
courts do not adjudicate very young, consistent funding from year to year. community intervention specialist
first-time offenders and step in only Several of the most promising programs who conducts an indepth, strength-
when such institutions as families, are listed below: based family assessment, including
social and child protective services, physical and mental health, sub-
● Michigan Early Offender Program. stance abuse, economic strengths/
and schools fail in their efforts with
children. This program provides specialized, needs, vocational strengths/needs,
intensive, in-home interventions to family functioning, and social func-
Unfortunately, the juvenile court has youth who are age 13 or younger at tioning (Brooks and Pettit, 1997).
long served as a dumping ground for a the time of first adjudication and
wide variety of problem behaviors of who have two or more prior police All multisystemic programs designed
children that other institutions (e.g., contacts (Howitt and Moore, 1991). to deal with child delinquency rely on
social, mental health, and child protec- particular approaches and programs
● Minnesota Delinquents Under 10
tive services) fail to serve adequately targeting the child, the family, peers,
Program. This program includes
(Kupperstein, 1971; Office of Juvenile the school, and the community. Many
interventions such as sending par-
Justice and Delinquency Prevention, programs either have proven to be ef-
ents an admonishment letter from
1995). Although collaboration between fective or hold promise within these
the county attorney, referring delin-
juvenile justice and child and adoles- domains, such as Parent Management
quents to child protective services
cent social services was once consid- Training (Patterson, Reid, and Dishion,
and other agencies, identifying diver-
ered the cornerstone of a comprehensive 1992), Functional Family Therapy
sion programs, identifying children
childcare system, the two systems are (Sexton and Alexander, 2000), and MST
in need of protection or services
severely fragmented. The deinstitutional- (Henggeler, Pickrel, and Brondino,
petitions, and targeting early inter-
ization and diversion policies of the past 1999). In terms of peer interventions,
vention for high-risk children (see,
25 years have turned child delinquents care must be taken when delinquent or
e.g., Stevens, Owen, and Lahti-
away from juvenile courts, resulting in highly disruptive children are brought
Johnson, 1999).
sparse program development for these together for group therapy because of
children. ● Toronto Under 12 Outreach Project. the potential contaminating effects
This fully developed Canadian pro- (Dishion, McCord, and Poulin, 1999).
Although few programs in the juvenile gram emphasizes a multisystemic Peer interventions are best undertaken
justice system are explicitly designed for approach combining interventions in conjunction with other programs
child delinquents, new models are being that target children, parents, schools, (Coie and Miller-Johnson, 2001). School
developed. Currently, only a few well- and communities. It includes a cen- programs (e.g., the Good Behavior Game
organized, integrated programs for child tralized police protocol to expedite and the FastTrack Program [Herrenkohl
delinquents exist in North America services for children who engage et al., 2001]) and community programs
(Howell, 2001). Most of them involve in delinquent activity (Hrynkiw- (e.g., Communities That Care [Hawkins
coordinated efforts among police, the Augimeri, Pepler, and Goldberg, 1993). and Catalano, 1992]) may help alleviate
public, prosecutors, judges, schools, and risk factors for child delinquency.
11
A community policing program has ● A mechanism to ensure interagency
also demonstrated some success in coordination and collaboration in the
Key Research Priorities
working with child delinquents. The delivery of services in the postadjudi- There are many gaps in current knowl-
OJJDP-funded New Haven Child cation phase, such as wraparound edge about the development of child
Development–Community Policing services that can be applied to chil- delinquency, the risk and protective fac-
Program (Marans and Berkman, 1997) dren and families in a flexible and tors associated with it, and appropriate
brings police officers and mental health individualized manner (Duchnowski prevention/intervention methods. In
professionals together to provide each and Kutash, 1996). addition to reanalysis of existing data
other with training, consultation, and and collection of additional data in
support and to provide direct inter- ongoing studies, new research projects
disciplinary intervention to children Legal Issues that focus specifically on child delin-
who are victims of, witnesses to, or quents are needed. This is especially
In addition to overall policy and re-
perpetrators of violent crimes. true for very serious young offenders,
search issues, many important legal
who represent a small group about
issues concerning child delinquents
which little systematic knowledge has
must be resolved, including the follow-
Interagency Mechanism ing (Wiig, 2001):
been gathered. The Study Group recom-
mends that additional research should
Because child delinquents often have
● Jurisdiction. States differ greatly in focus on the following areas:
many concurrent problems, including
their minimum age for delinquency
antisocial behavior, learning difficulties, ● Child delinquent development and
jurisdiction and their enactment of
mood problems, and exposure to child epidemiology, based on self-reports
alternative grounds for court jurisdic-
abuse and neglect, a number of agen- and official records of offending.
tion (such as dependency and chil-
cies have typically provided services
dren in need of protective services). ● The relation between child delin-
to this group. Practitioners almost
unanimously agree that more coordi- quency and co-occurring problem
● Competency. The competency of
nation among the juvenile justice sys- behaviors.
most child delinquents is debatable
tem, schools, child welfare agencies, in terms of their ability to under- ● Escalation from child delinquency
and mental health agencies is needed stand the severity of charges, court to serious and violent offending.
to deal with very young offenders proceedings, and the implications of
(Farrington, Loeber, and Kalb, 2001). ● Risk and protective factors that influ-
sentences.
However, such integrated programs are ence continuity and escalation in
● Counsel. The right to counsel and the severity of delinquency after its
extremely rare, and their effectiveness
remains to be evaluated. The Study other constitutional rights are of childhood onset.
Group suggests that one of the follow- importance to all juvenile delin-
● Longitudinal studies to investigate
ing three mechanisms may be needed quents but are complicated for
children because of their inability questions about development, risk
to coordinate and fully integrate a con-
to understand rights (e.g., the and protective factors, and risk
tinuum of care and sanctions for child
Miranda warning or the privilege assessment.
delinquents:
against self-incrimination). ● The major service agencies’ methods
● A governing body or interagency
● Parental responsibility. The value for dealing with child delinquents.
council that, at minimum, includes
representatives from all juvenile both of making parents more legally ● Cost-benefit analyses of prevention/
justice-related human services orga- responsible for their children’s delin- intervention programs.
nizations and agencies and has the quency and of followup sanctions for
parents needs to be investigated. ● Studies with experimental and con-
authority to convene these agencies
trol groups and random assignment
to develop a comprehensive strategy ● Alternatives to court jurisdiction. of participants to investigate
for dealing with child delinquents. Alternatives for handling child prevention/intervention strategies.
● A front-end mechanism within the delinquents outside the courts
juvenile justice system that can make (e.g., either informally by the police
comprehensive assessments of re- or through a voluntary referral to a Costs and Benefits
ferred child delinquents, such as child-serving agency) may represent
Although literature reviews of early
Community Assessment Centers an important and promising approach
interventions to prevent the develop-
that provide a single point of entry to deflecting children from future
ment of criminal potential demonstrate
(Dembo and Brown, 1994; Oldenettel delinquency.
that this approach is promising for
and Wordes, 1999).
12
reducing delinquency and later offend- outcomes in educational achievement, buffered the effect of risk domains in
ing (see Zigler, Taussig, and Black, 1992; health, and parent-child relationships. the Pittsburgh Youth Study. Using a
Farrington and Welsh, 1999), there has A cost-benefit analysis of the Elmira total score of protective and risk do-
been little discussion of economic costs Prenatal/Early Infancy Project in New mains for each participant, the study
and benefits. The potential benefits of York, NY, for example, showed a reduc- found that children whose balance
prevention programs targeting delin- tion in welfare and health costs and a between protective and risk domains
quents or high-risk youth are indicated higher tax base because of increased favored one or more risk domains had
by estimates that a typical, single crimi- employment (Karoly et al., 1998). an elevenfold increase in the likelihood
nal career encompassing the juvenile of becoming persistent serious delin-
and adult years costs society between Although many programs claim cost quents in adolescence, compared with
$1.7 and $2.3 million in 1997 dollars savings based on overall effectiveness, children who had an overall balance of
(Cohen, 1998). more economic evaluation is needed to fewer risk domains and more protective
assess the monetary value of programs domains.
Although cost-benefit studies are rela- and to help answer important questions
tively rare, a few studies have provided facing policymakers. There is a real risk that some children
important evidence on the economic will become serious offenders. However,
efficiency of early developmental delin- this danger is not general public knowl-
quency prevention programs. For exam- Conclusions and Policy edge and, consequently, is rarely ad-
ple, the High/Scope Perry Preschool dressed to prevent the development of
Project—founded in 1962 in Michigan—
Recommendations serious, violent, and chronic juvenile
focused on preschool programs to help Child delinquents constitute a popula- offending.
children (ages 3–4) in poverty make tion not usually recognized as needing
a better start in their transition from services to prevent them from becom- Information about child delinquency
home to school and community, includ- ing tomorrow’s serious, violent, and is inadequate. Society does not have
ing setting them on paths to becoming chronic juvenile offenders. The Study the information about child delinquents
economically self-sufficient and socially Group’s work has clear implications that is necessary to reduce this perva-
responsible adults (Schweinhart, Barnes, for policymakers at the federal, state, sive social problem. Such knowledge is
and Weikart, 1993; Parks, 2000). The county, and municipal levels who can crucial for planning services for child
most recent followup data, collected influence the day-to-day and long-term offenders at an early stage in their delin-
when these children were 27, revealed operation of agencies and/or their fund- quency careers. Child delinquents need
several differences in outcomes between ing to maintain, improve, or create new to be included in national, regional, and
the children who received treatment and programs. Indirectly, the Study Group citywide surveys of offenders and vic-
those who did not (the controls). Among also addresses the frontline workers tims to address important questions
children who received treatment, there who deal every day with child delin- such as how common serious child
was less delinquency, a lower rate of quents and children with persistent delinquency is and whether serious
absenteeism from school, less need for disruptive behavior, whose voices child delinquents are qualitatively or
remedial and supportive school services, and concerns should be heard by quantitatively different from other
and less likelihood of aggressive, pre- policymakers. child delinquents.
delinquent behavior. A cost-benefit
analysis of the High/Scope Perry Pre- Policymakers should be concerned The Study Group noted the absence of
school Project (Barnett, 1993) found about child delinquents and children annual surveys focusing on the prev-
that for every dollar spent on the proj- with persistent disruptive behavior for alence of persistent disruptive children
ect, taxpayers and crime victims were the key reasons discussed below in elementary schools. In addition, there
saved more than $7. The total costs of (Farrington, Loeber, and Kalb, 2001). appears to be no consistent tracking of
the program were estimated at $12,356 the number of referrals child welfare
Child delinquents constitute a signifi- offices receive from police for children
per participant; total benefits, when
cant problem for society. Child delin- age 12 or younger who have committed
adjusted for inflation and a 3-percent
quents, compared with later onset delinquent acts. Annual police reports
discount rate, were estimated at $88,433
offenders, are two to three times more of juvenile delinquency are available.
per participant (Welsh, 2001).
likely to become tomorrow’s serious However, jurisdictional differences in
In addition to showing promise as eco- offenders. Part of this likelihood de- the minimum age of criminal responsi-
nomically efficient approaches to reduc- pends on the presence of risk and bility and possible differences in police
ing delinquency, several intervention protective factors. Stouthamer-Loeber practices for recording delinquent acts
programs have revealed other impor- and colleagues (2002) examined the committed by children call into question
tant spinoff benefits, such as improved degree to which protective domains
13
the accuracy and comprehensiveness of Early intervention with child delin- more communities, system profession-
the information collected on child delin- quents is essential. Currently, a whole als and policymakers realize that the
quents. Policymakers need to step for- array of effective interventions is avail- increase in the number of child delin-
ward and insist on informing society, in able to reduce persistent disruptive quents (and disruptive youth) is too
a timely fashion, about the prevalence child behavior and early-onset delin- large a problem to be ignored and that
of child delinquents and their persistent quency. Also, well-tested interventions special programs are needed.
disruptive behaviors; the proportion of exist to prevent delinquent juveniles
such children who do or do not receive from escalating to serious, violent, and
services for their problem behaviors; chronic juvenile offending. However, for Summary
the number of risk factors for these child delinquents known to the juvenile Often, neither parents nor the various
children, who are routinely targeted for justice system, special programs, such professionals who work with children
intervention; and the dissemination of as the previously mentioned ones in know which problematic children will
effective and replicated interventions. Toronto and Minneapolis (Howell, 2001), cease their disruptive or delinquent
need to be further evaluated and tested behaviors and which ones will continue
Child delinquents are expensive to tax- in other jurisdictions. or worsen their behavior over time.
payers and society. Child delinquents Nevertheless, because most of the nec-
tend to be expensive to society because Rather than intervening to prevent high- essary conditions for later serious and
of the numerous interventions they re- risk children from becoming tomorrow’s violent juvenile offending begin in child-
ceive from different agencies, including incarcerated offenders, policymakers hood, the Study Group on Very Young
special school services, child welfare tend to fund the more plentiful pro- Offenders strongly urges that efforts to
and social services, mental health agen- grams for older adolescent delinquents reduce serious forms of delinquency
cies, and family counseling services. and programs that confine serious ado- should shift from a focus on adolescent
Child delinquents are likely to receive lescent offenders in costly institutions. delinquents and more serious chronic
services from the majority of agencies This is not to suggest that all the atten- juvenile offenders to a focus on child
dealing with children. Although not all tion and funds should be given to child delinquents. To help with this task,
of these children are engaged by all of delinquents and that adolescent delin- the Study Group has presented some
these services simultaneously, many of quents should be ignored. However, a important new information on child
the young problematic children require more effective balance of resources delinquency, including analyses of
the attention and intervention of a suc- should be developed so that the roots epidemiological data, risk and protec-
cession of several agencies. of serious adolescent delinquency can tive factors, early prediction, interven-
be better addressed in childhood. tions for disruptive and delinquent
Given the barriers that often exist be-
children, and juvenile justice system
tween different agencies and their poor Unfortunately, many policymakers
issues. This information will benefit
data sharing, it is highly likely that as- are unaware of the efficacy and cost-
future studies and interventions that
sessments are duplicated. Also, many effectiveness of alternative interven-
attempt to prevent offending among the
practitioners complain about the lack tions and often choose not to fund early
very young and to change the behavior
of an integrated and coordinated ap- prevention methods that can benefit
of those children who are already
proach among the agencies trying to juveniles in general and taxpayers and
involved in offending.
deal with the multiple problems of child citizens in particular. Yet no policymaker
delinquents. Unintegrated services may would argue that the optimal public
be less effective than integrated servic- health strategy to deal with nicotine References
es, especially when integrated services addiction is the removal of cancerous
are well planned and evaluated. lungs in large numbers of affected smok- Achenbach, T.M., and Edelbrock, C.S.
ers. Instead, risk-based smoking preven- 1981. Behavioral problems and compe-
Many child delinquents become chronic tion strategies have been developed tencies reported by parents of normal
offenders (Blumstein, Farrington, and and are now widely endorsed and im- and disturbed children aged 4 through
Moitra, 1985). As previously mentioned, plemented. The same rationale used for 16. Monographs of the Society for Re-
the cost to society of a single criminal public health risks should be applied to search in Child Development 46(1):1–78.
career ranges from $1.7 to $2.3 million preventing serious and violent juvenile
in 1997 dollars (Cohen, 1998). Given that Adams, C.D., Hillman, N., and Gaydos,
delinquency. The focus should be on
many of these high-rate offenders start G.R. 1994. Behavioral difficulties in tod-
targeting early risk factors associated
their delinquent careers early in life, it is dlers: Impact of sociocultural and bio-
with child delinquency and persistent
safe to assume that the cost to society logical risk factors. Journal of Clinical
disruptive child behavior. In more and
of child delinquents is considerable. Child Psychology 23:373–381.
14
Barnett, W.S. 1993. Cost-benefit analysis. Brooks, T.R., and Pettit, M. 1997. Early Derzon, J.H., and Lipsey, M.W. 2000. The
In Significant Benefits: The High/Scope Intervention: Crafting a Community correspondence of family features with
Perry Preschool Study Through Age 27, Response to Child Abuse and Violence. problem, aggressive, criminal and vio-
edited by L.J. Schweinhart, H.V. Barnes, Washington, DC: Child Welfare League lent behavior. Unpublished manuscript.
and D.P. Weikart. Ypsilanti, MI: High/ of America. Nashville, TN: Institute for Public Policy
Scope Press, pp. 142–173. Studies, Vanderbilt University.
Burns, B.J., Landsverk, J., Kelleher, K.,
Battin, S.R., Hawkins, J.D., Thornberry, Faw, L., Hazen, A., and Keeler, G. 2001. Developmental Research and Programs.
T.P., and Krohn, M.D. 2000. Contribution Mental health, education, child welfare, 1996. Promising Approaches To Prevent
of Gang Membership to Delinquency Be- and juvenile justice service use. In Child Adolescent Problem Behaviors. Seattle,
yond the Influence of Delinquent Peers. Delinquents: Development, Intervention, WA: Developmental Research and
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of and Service Needs, edited by R. Loeber Programs.
Justice, Office of Justice Programs, and D.P. Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delin- Sage Publications, Inc., pp. 273–303. Dishion, T.J., McCord, J., and Poulin, F.
quency Prevention. 1999. When interventions harm: Peer
Butts, J.A., and Snyder, H.N. 1997. The groups and problem behavior. American
Battin-Pearson, S.R., Thornberry, T.P., Youngest Delinquents: Offenders Under Psychologist 54(9):755–764.
Hawkins, J.D., and Krohn, M.D. 1998. Age 15. Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S.
Gang Membership, Delinquent Peers, and Department of Justice, Office of Justice Duchnowski, A.J., and Kutash, K. 1996.
Delinquent Behavior. Bulletin. Wash- Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and A mental health perspective. In Compre-
ington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Delinquency Prevention. hensive and Collaborative Systems That
Office of Justice Programs, Office of Work for Troubled Youth: A National
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Catalano, R.F., and Hawkins, J.D. 1996. Agenda, edited by C.M. Nelson, R.B.
Prevention. The social development model: A theo- Rutherford, and B.I. Wolford. Richmond,
ry of antisocial behavior. In Delinquency KY: Eastern Kentucky University, pp.
Blumstein, A., Farrington, D.P., and and Crime: Current Theories, edited by 90–110.
Moitra, S. 1985. Delinquency careers: J.D. Hawkins. New York, NY: Cambridge
Innocents, desisters, and persisters. University Press, pp. 149–197. Earls, F., and Jung, K.G. 1987. Tempera-
In Crime and Justice, vol. 6, edited by ment and home environment charac-
M. Tonry and N. Morris. Chicago, IL: Cohen, M.A. 1998. The monetary value teristics as causal factors in the early
University of Chicago Press, pp. 187– of saving a high-risk youth. Journal of development of childhood psychopa-
222. Quantitative Criminology 14(1):5–33. thology. Journal of the American Acade-
my of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
Bor, W., Najman, J.M., Andersen, J., Coie, J.D., and Miller-Johnson, S. 2001. 26(4):491–498.
O’Callaghan, M., Williams, G.M., and Peer factors and interventions. In Child
Behrens, B.C. 1997. The relationship Delinquents: Development, Intervention, Egeland, B., and Farber, E.A. 1984. Infant-
between low family income and psycho- and Service Needs, edited by R. Loeber mother attachment: Factors related to its
logical disturbance in young children: and D.P. Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA: development and changes over time.
An Australian longitudinal study. Aus- Sage Publications, Inc., pp. 191–209. Child Development 55:753–771.
tralian and New Zealand Journal of
Psychiatry 31(5):664–675. Coie, J.D., Miller-Johnson, S., Terry, R., Elliott, D.S., and Menard, S. 1996. Delin-
Lochman, J.E., Maumary-Gremaud, A., quent friends and delinquent behavior:
Brewer, D.D., Hawkins, J.D., Catalano, and Hyman, C. 1995. The influence of Temporal and developmental patterns.
R.F., and Neckerman, H.J. 1995. Prevent- deviant peer associations on juvenile In Delinquency and Crime: Current
ing serious, violent, and chronic juve- offending among African-American ado- Theories, edited by J.D. Hawkins. New
nile offending: A review of evaluations lescents. Paper presented at the annual York, NY: Cambridge University Press,
of selected strategies in childhood, meeting of the American Society of pp. 28–67.
adolescence, and the community. In Criminology, Boston, MA.
Sourcebook on Serious, Violent, and Espiritu, R.C., Huizinga, D., Crawford, A.,
Chronic Juvenile Offenders, edited by Dembo, R., and Brown, R. 1994. The and Loeber, R. 2001. Epidemiology of
J.C. Howell, B. Krisberg, J.D. Hawkins, Hillsborough County Juvenile Assess- self-reported delinquency. In Child
and J.J. Wilson. Thousand Oaks, CA: ment Center. Journal of Child & Ado- Delinquents: Development, Intervention,
Sage Publications, Inc., pp. 61–141. lescent Substance Abuse 3(2):25–43. and Service Needs, edited by R. Loeber
and D.P. Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications, Inc., pp. 47–66.
15
Farrington, D.P. 1994. Early developmen- Guerin, D.W., Gottfried, A.W., and Howell, J.C. 1998. Youth Gangs: An Over-
tal prevention of juvenile delinquency. Thomas, C.W. 1997. Difficult tempera- view. Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S.
Criminal Behavior and Mental Health ment and behavior problems: A longi- Department of Justice, Office of Justice
4(3):209–227. tudinal study from 1.5 to 12 years. Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and
International Journal of Behavioral Delinquency Prevention.
Farrington, D.P. 2000. Explaining and Development 21(1):71–90.
preventing crime—the globalization of Howell, J.C. 2001. Juvenile justice pro-
knowledge: The American Society of Haapasalo, J., and Tremblay, R.E. 1994. grams and strategies. In Child Delin-
Criminology 1999 Presidential Address. Physically aggressive boys from ages 6 quents: Development, Intervention, and
Criminology 38:1–24. to 12: Family background, parenting Service Needs, edited by R. Loeber and
behavior, and prediction of delinquency. D.P. Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Farrington, D.P., Lambert, S., and West, J. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psy- Sage Publications, Inc., pp. 305–321.
1998. Criminal careers of two generations chology 62(5):1044–1052.
of family members in the Cambridge Howitt, P.S., and Moore, E.A. 1991. The
Study in Delinquent Development. Hawkins, J.D., and Catalano, R.F. 1992. efficacy of intensive early intervention:
Studies on Crime and Crime Prevention Communities That Care. San Francisco, An evaluation of the Oakland County
7:85–106. CA: Jossey-Bass. Probate Court Early Offender Program.
Juvenile and Family Court Journal
Farrington, D.P., Loeber, R., and Kalb, Hawkins, J.D., Herrenkohl, T., Farring- 42:25–36.
L.M. 2001. Key research and policy ton, D.P., Brewer, D., Catalano, R.F., and
issues. In Child Delinquents: Develop- Harachi, T.W. 1998. A review of predic- Hrynkiw-Augimeri, L., Pepler, D., and
ment, Intervention, and Service Needs, tors of youth violence. In Serious and Goldberg, K. 1993. An outreach program
edited by R. Loeber and D.P. Farrington. Violent Juvenile Offenders: Risk Factors for children having police contact.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, and Successful Interventions, edited by Canada’s Mental Health 41:7–12.
Inc., pp. 385–394. R. Loeber and D.P. Farrington. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc., pp. Karoly, L.A., Greenwood, P.W., Evering-
Farrington, D.P., Loeber, R., Stouthamer- 106–146. ham, S.S., Hoube, J., Kilburn, M.R.,
Loeber, M., Van Kammen, W.B., and Rydell, C.P., Sanders, M., and Chiesa, J.
Schmidt, L. 1996. Self-reported delin- Hawkins, J.D., Lishner, D.M., Jenson, 1998. Investing in Our Children: What
quency and a combined delinquency J.M., and Catalano, R.F. 1987. Delin- We Know and Don’t Know About the
scale based on boys, mothers, and quents and drugs: What the evidence Costs and Benefits of Early Childhood
teachers: Concurrent and predictive suggests about prevention and treat- Interventions. Santa Monica, CA: RAND
validity for African Americans and ment programming. In Youth at High Corporation.
Caucasians. Criminology 34:493–517. Risk for Substance Abuse (DHHS Pub-
lication No. ADM 87–1537), edited Kazdin, A.E., and Kendall, P.C. 1998.
Farrington, D.P., and Welsh, B.C. 1999. by B.S. Brown and A.R. Mills. Wash- Current progress and future plans for
Delinquency prevention using family- ington, DC: U.S. Government Printing developing effective treatments: Com-
based interventions. Children and Office, pp. 81–131. ments and perspectives. Journal of
Society 13(4):287–303. Clinical Child Psychology 27(2):217–226.
Henggeler, S., Pickrel, S., and Brondino,
Goldsmith, H.H., Buss, A.H., Plomin, R., M. 1999. Multisystemic treatment of Keenan, K. 2001. Uncovering preschool
Rothbart, M.K., Thomas, A., Chess, S., substance-abusing and dependent precursors to problem behavior. In
Hinde, R.A., and McCall, R.B. 1987. delinquents: Outcomes, treatment fideli- Child Delinquents: Development, Inter-
Roundtable: What is temperament? ty, and transportability. Mental Health vention, and Service Needs, edited by
Four approaches. Child Development Services Research 1:171–184. R. Loeber and D.P. Farrington. Thousand
58(2):505–529. Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc., pp.
Herrenkohl, T.I., Hawkins, J.D., Chung, 117–134.
Gottfredson, G.D., and Gottfredson, D.C. I.J., Hill, K.G., and Battin-Pearson, S.
1985. Victimization in Schools. New York, 2001. School and community risk fac- Keenan, K., and Wakschlag, L.S. 2000.
NY: Plenum Press. tors and interventions. In Child Delin- More than the terrible twos: The nature
quents: Development, Intervention, and and severity of behavior problems in
Grisso, T. 1996. Society’s retributive re- Service Needs, edited by R. Loeber and clinic-referred preschool children.
sponse to juvenile violence: A develop- D.P. Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA: Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology
mental perspective. Law and Human Sage Publications, Inc., pp. 211–246. 28(1):33–46.
Behavior 20(3):229–247.
16
Kempf-Leonard, K., Chesney-Lind, M., Loeber, R. 1988. The natural histories of Miller-Johnson, S., Coie, J.D., Maumary-
and Hawkins, D.F. 2001. Ethnicity and juvenile conduct problems, substance Gremand, A., Bierman, K., and Conduct
gender issues. In Child Delinquents: use, and delinquency: Evidence for Problems Prevention Research Group.
Development, Intervention, and Serv- developmental progressions. In Ad- 1997. Peer rejection and aggression and
ice Needs, edited by R. Loeber and vances in Clinical Child Psychology, early starter models of conduct disor-
D.P. Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA: vol. 11, edited by B.B. Lahey and A.E. der. Paper presented at the meeting of
Sage Publications, Inc., pp. 247–269. Kazdin. New York, NY: Plenum Press, the Society for Research in Child De-
pp. 73–124. velopment, Indianapolis, IN, April 1997.
Kochanska, G., Murray, K., and Coy, K.
1997. Inhibitory control as a contributor Loeber, R., and Farrington, D.P. 1998a. Moffitt, T. 1993. Adolescence-limited and
to conscience in childhood: From tod- Never too early, never too late: Risk fac- life-course-persistent antisocial behav-
dler to early school age. Child Develop- tors and successful interventions for ior: A developmental taxonomy. Psy-
ment 68(2):263–277. serious and violent juvenile offenders. chological Review 100(4):674–701.
Studies on Crime and Crime Prevention
Krohn, M.D., Thornberry, T.P., Rivera, C., 7(1):7–30. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delin-
and Le Blanc, M. 2001. Later delinquen- quency Prevention. 1995. Delinquency
cy careers. In Child Delinquents: De- Loeber, R., and Farrington, D.P., eds. Prevention Works. Summary. Washing-
velopment, Intervention, and Service 1998b. Serious and Violent Juvenile ton, DC: U.S. Department of Justice,
Needs, edited by R. Loeber and D.P. Offenders: Risk Factors and Successful Office of Justice Programs, Office of
Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Interventions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Publications, Inc., pp. 67–93. Publications, Inc. Prevention.
Kuczynski, L., and Kochanska, G. 1990. Loeber, R., and Farrington, D.P., eds. Oldenettel, D., and Wordes, M. 1999.
Development of children’s noncompli- 2001. Child Delinquents: Development, Community Assessment Centers. Fact
ance strategies from toddlerhood to Intervention, and Service Needs. Thou- Sheet. Washington, DC: U.S. Department
age 5. Developmental Psychology sand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,
26(3):398–408. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delin-
Loeber, R., and Stouthamer-Loeber, M. quency Prevention.
Kupperstein, L. 1971. Treatment and 1998. Development of juvenile aggres-
rehabilitation of delinquent youth: Some sion and violence: Some common Olds, D., Henderson, C.R., Cole, R.,
socio-cultural considerations. Acta- misconceptions and controversies. Eckenrode, J., Kitzman, H., Luckey, D.,
Criminologica 4:11–111. American Psychologist 53(2):242–259. Pettitt, L., Sidora, K., Morris, P., and
Powers, J. 1998. Long-term effects of
Lahey, B.B., Piacentini, J.C., McBurnett, Maguin, E., and Loeber, R. 1996. Aca- nurse home visitation on children’s
K., Stone, P., Hartdagen, S., and Hynd, G. demic performance and delinquency. criminal and antisocial behavior:
1988. Psychopathology in the parents In Crime and Justice, vol. 20, edited by Fifteen-year follow-up of a randomized
of children with conduct disorder and M. Tonry. Chicago, IL: University of controlled trial. Journal of the American
hyperactivity. Journal of the American Chicago Press, pp. 145–264. Medical Association 280:1238–1244.
Academy of Child and Adolescent Psy-
chiatry 27(2):163–170. Marans, S., and Berkman, M. 1997. Child Parks, G. 2000. The High/Scope Perry
Development–Community Policing: Part- Preschool Project. Bulletin. Washington,
Landy, S., and Peters, R.D. 1992. Toward nership in a Climate of Violence. Bulletin. DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of
an understanding of a developmental Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Jus- Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile
paradigm for aggressive conduct prob- tice, Office of Justice Programs, Office Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
lems during the preschool years. In of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Aggression Throughout the Life Span, Prevention. Patterson, G.R., and Bank, L. 1989. Some
edited by R.D. Peters, R.J. McMahon, amplifying mechanisms for pathologic
and V.L. Quinsey. Newbury Park, CA: McCord, J., and Conway, K.P. 2002. processes in families. In Systems and
Sage Publications, Inc., pp. 1–30. Patterns of juvenile delinquency and Development: The Minnesota Symposia
co-offending. In Crime and Social Organi- on Child Psychology, edited by M.R.
Loeber, R. 1982. The stability of anti- zation, vol. 10 of Advances in Crimino- Gunnar and E. Thelen. Hillsdale, NJ:
social and delinquent and child behav- logical Theory, edited by E. Waring and Erlbaum, pp. 167–209.
ior: A review. Child Development 53(6): D. Weisburd. New Brunswick, NJ: Trans-
1431–1446. action Publishers, pp. 15–30.
17
Patterson, G.R., Capaldi, D.M., and Bank, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delin- Welsh, B.C. 2001. Economic costs and
L. 1991. An early starter model for pre- quency Prevention. benefits of early developmental preven-
dicting delinquency. In The Development tion. In Child Delinquents: Development,
and Treatment of Childhood Aggression, Silva, P.A. 1990. The Dunedin Multidis- Intervention, and Service Needs, edited
edited by D.J. Pepler and K.H. Rubin. ciplinary Health and Development by R. Loeber and D.P. Farrington. Thou-
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 139–168. Project: A 15 year longitudinal study. sand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.,
Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology pp. 339–355.
Patterson, G.R., Crosby, L., and Vuch- 4:96–127.
inich, S. 1992. Predicting risk for Wiig, J.K. 2001. Legal issues. In Child
early police arrest. Journal of Quanti- Snyder, H.N. 2001. Epidemiology of offi- Delinquents: Development, Intervention,
tative Criminology 8(4):335–355. cial offending. In Child Delinquents: and Service Needs, edited by R. Loeber
Development, Intervention, and Service and D.P. Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Patterson, G.R., Reid, J.B., and Dishion, Needs, edited by R. Loeber and D.P. Sage Publications, Inc., pp. 323–338.
T.J. 1992. Antisocial Boys. Eugene, OR: Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Castalia. Publications, Inc., pp. 25–46. Williams, S., Andersen, J., McGee, R.,
and Silva, P.A. 1990. Risk factors for
Peeples, F., and Loeber, R. 1994. Do Snyder, H.N., and Sickmund, M. 1999. behavioral and emotional disorder in
individual factors and neighborhood Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 1999 preadolescent children. Journal of the
context explain ethnic differences in National Report. Report. Washington, American Academy of Child and Adoles-
juvenile delinquency? Journal of Quan- DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office cent Psychiatry 29(3):413–419.
titative Criminology 10(2):141–158. of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Wilson, J.J., and Howell, J.C. 1993. Com-
Prior, M., Smart, M.A., Sanson, A., and prehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent,
Oberklaid, F. 1993. Sex differences in Stattin, H., and Klackenberg-Larsson, I. and Chronic Juvenile Offenders. Program
psychological adjustment from infancy 1993. Early language and intelligence Summary. Washington, DC: U.S. Depart-
to 8 years. Journal of the American development and their relationship to ment of Justice, Office of Justice Pro-
Academy of Child and Adolescent Psy- future criminal behavior. Journal of grams, Office of Juvenile Justice and
chiatry 32(2):291–304. Abnormal Psychology 102(3):369–378. Delinquency Prevention.
Reiss, A.J., and Farrington, D.P. 1991. Ad- Stevens, A.B., Owen, G., and Lahti- Zigler, E., Taussig, C., and Black, K. 1992.
vancing knowledge about co-offending: Johnson, K. 1999. Delinquents Under Early childhood intervention: A promis-
Results from a prospective longitudinal 10: Target Early Intervention Phase I ing preventative for juvenile delinquency.
survey of London males. Journal of Evaluation Report. St. Paul, MN: Wilder American Psychologist 47(8): 997–1006.
Criminal Law and Criminology 82:360– Research Center, Amherst H. Wilder
395. Foundation. This Bulletin was prepared under grant num-
ber 95–JD–FX–0018 from the Office of Juvenile
Rowe, D.C., and Gulley, B. 1992. Sibling Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Loeber, R., Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. De-
effects on substance abuse and delin- Wei, E., Farrington, D.P., and Wikström, partment of Justice.
quency. Criminology 30:217–233. P-O.H. 2002. Risk and promotive effects Points of view or opinions expressed in this
in the explanation of persistent serious document are those of the authors and do not
Sampson, R.J., Raudenbush, S.W., and delinquency in boys. Journal of Consult- necessarily represent the official position or
Earls, F. 1997. Neighborhoods and vio- ing and Clinical Psychology 70:111–123. policies of OJJDP or the U.S. Department of
Justice.
lent crime: A multilevel study of collec-
tive efficacy. Science 277(5328):919–924. Tremblay, R.E., Pihl, R.O., Vitaro, F., and
The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Dobkin, P.L. 1994. Predicting early onset Prevention is a component of the Office of
Schweinhart, L.J., Barnes, H.V., and of male antisocial behavior from pre- Justice Programs, which also includes the
Weikart, D.P. 1993. Significant Benefits: school behavior. Archives of General Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of
The High/Scope Perry Preschool Study Psychiatry 51(9):732–739. Justice Statistics, the National Institute of
Through Age 27. Ypsilanti, MI: High/ Justice, and the Office for Victims of Crime.
Scope Press. Webster-Stratton, C. 1998. Preventing
conduct problems in Head Start chil-
Sexton, T.L., and Alexander, J.F. 2000. dren: Strengthening parenting compe-
Functional Family Therapy. Bulletin. tencies. Journal of Consulting and
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Clinical Psychology 66:715–730.
Justice, Office of Justice Programs,
18
Acknowledgments
Rolf Loeber, Ph.D., is Professor of Psy-
chiatry, Psychology, and Epidemiology,
University of Pittsburgh, PA; Professor
of Developmental Psychopathology,
Free University, Amsterdam, Nether-
lands; and Director of the Pittsburgh
Youth Study. David P. Farrington, Ph.D.,
is Professor of Psychological Criminol- W ant to know more about the issues
ogy, Cambridge University, Cambridge, It’s Fast in this Bulletin or related information?
England. David Petechuk is a freelance
Log on to ojjdp.ncjrs.org:
health sciences writer. The authors
thank Magda Stouthamer-Loeber for
her contributions to this research.
➤ Browse titles alphabetically or
It’s Easy by topic.
Photographs pages 5 and 10 copyright
© 2001 Corbis Corporation; photograph ➤ Discover the latest OJJDP releases.
page 7 copyright © 2001 PhotoDisc, Inc.
➤ Subscribe to OJJDP’s listserv
It’s Free JUVJUST and the electronic
newsletter JUSTINFO.
➤ Link to the NCJRS Abstracts Data-
base to search for publications
of interest.
NCJ 186162
19
*NCJ~186162*
Related docs
Other docs by yyc14999
Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children in New York City, Executive Summary
Views: 3 | Downloads: 0
Federal Resources on Missing and Exploited Children: A Directory for Law Enforcement and Other Public and Private Agenci
Views: 89 | Downloads: 0
Community Organizations and Crime: An Examination of the Social-Institutional Processes of Neighborhoods
Views: 6 | Downloads: 0
Effects of Parental Imprisonment on Child Antisocial Behaviour and Mental Health: A Systematic Review
Views: 289 | Downloads: 0
