Download - deviance_rayment.pdf
7/27/2019 deviance_rayment.pdf
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/devianceraymentpdf 1/9
TASA Conference 2005, University of Tasmania, 6-8 December 2005 1
TASA 2005 Conference Proceedings
Dominant Theories of the Relationship between Child
Maltreatment and Juvenile Offending: A Critique
Cassandra Rayment
School of Justice Studies, Faculty of Law
Queensland University of [email protected]
Abstract
This paper examines the current state of knowledge and theory of the child
maltreatment-juvenile offending relationship. It argues that the only currently
acceptable pathways between child maltreatment and juvenile offending are
conceptualised within an individual’s pathology, the result of social and
environmental influences on the individual’s pathology or finally, a combination of
both. Therefore, research is tailored within this positivist paradigm and largely
ignores the possibility of the relationship being conceptualised within a different
framework. Subsequently, it fails to acknowledge or explore the possibility of other aims and purposes to the relationship of child maltreatment and juvenile offending
within a wider system of governance. Ultimately, this paper argues for a critical
analysis of the current assumptions and methodologies underpinning research on the
child maltreatment-juvenile offending relationship and calls for a re-evaluation of the
direction of future research in this area.
Dominant Theories of the Relationship between Child Maltreatment and
Juvenile Offending: A Critique
For many researchers, the progression from child maltreatment to juvenile offending
is a logical one. Schwartz, Rendon and Hsieh (1994: 640) assert that “the existence of
a relationship between child abuse, juvenile offending and adult crime is so well
accepted by professionals and lay people that it is considered common knowledge”.
On an empirical basis, the existence of a relationship between child maltreatment and
juvenile offending is hard to refute within the current positivist framework. However,
consensus over the nature of the relationship is less conclusive.
This paper examines the current state of knowledge and theory of the child
maltreatment-juvenile offending relationship. It argues that the only currently
acceptable pathways between child maltreatment and juvenile offending are
conceptualised within an individual’s pathology, the result of social and
environmental influences on the individual’s pathology or finally, a combination of
both. Therefore, research is tailored within this positivist paradigm and largely
7/27/2019 deviance_rayment.pdf
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/devianceraymentpdf 2/9
TASA Conference 2005, University of Tasmania, 6-8 December 2005 2
TASA 2005 Conference Proceedings
ignores the possibility of the relationship being conceptualised within a different
framework. Subsequently, it fails to acknowledge or explore the possibility of other
aims and purposes to the relationship of child maltreatment and juvenile offending
within a wider system of governance. Ultimately, this paper argues for a critical
analysis of the current assumptions and methodologies underpinning research on the
child maltreatment-juvenile offending relationship and calls for a re-evaluation of the
direction of future research in this area.
Theoretically, the link between child maltreatment and juvenile offending has been
premised on various perspectives deriving from psychological, criminological and
developmental fields of study. Theories which dominate this area include social
learning (Akers 1998), social control (Gottfredson and Hirschi 1990; Hirschi 1969),
strain (Agnew 1992), coercion (Colvin 2000; Patterson 1982), life course and
pathway models (National Crime Prevention 1999; Stewart, Dennison and Waterson
2002a). Social learning, social control, strain and coercion theories all focus on child
maltreatment as having a detrimental effect on an individual through their
development. Maltreatment in this sense is seen as producing dysfunctional attitudes,
and unacceptable ways of interacting with others, and is responsible for inhibiting
their overall childhood development (although each theory has a slightly different
perspective on the mechanisms which operate between child maltreatment and
subsequent delinquency). Life course and pathway models are the most recent in
theoretical attempts to link maltreatment to delinquency. These recognise that there
are multiple pathways for those who experience maltreatment and subsequently
engage in offending behaviour. To a certain degree, the pathway model incorporates
each of the theories previously advocated as a possible pathway between the two. It
uses the concept of risk and risk factors, with child maltreatment clearly articulated as
a strong risk factor for later offending behaviour. In doing this, it also asserts that
there are certain mediating factors (or protective factors) which may prevent
maltreatment leading to negative outcomes such as offending.
Widom (1994) is among researchers who advocate this perspective. She designates
six possible pathways between child maltreatment and juvenile offending. The first
five pathways are consistent with the previous theories of social learning, social
7/27/2019 deviance_rayment.pdf
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/devianceraymentpdf 3/9
TASA Conference 2005, University of Tasmania, 6-8 December 2005 3
TASA 2005 Conference Proceedings
control and strain theory previously mentioned. However, the last pathway differs in
its approach in that,
The observed relationship between early childhood victimisation and
problems behaviours in adolescence may be in part a function of juvenile
justice system practices that disproportionately label and adjudicate
maltreatment victims as juvenile offenders (Widom 1994: 143).
This pathway can operate in a number of ways. Primarily it is said to include a
policing bias towards those of lower socioeconomic status, and the “surveillance
hypothesis”, which maintains that once a family has come to the attention of a
government department, they are likely to be monitored more closely and are thereby
more likely to be reported or investigated for future incidents than a family who had
never come to the attention of the Department. However, this pathway is refuted by
Weatherburn and Lind (1997) and Stewart et al. (2002qa). Weatherburn and Lind
(1997: 3) acknowledge the surveillance hypothesis, but in negating its validity, cite
eight studies which have sought to disprove it. They state, “the most compelling
evidence against the surveillance hypothesis however, comes from studies which have
found evidence of a relationship between economic stress and neglectful or abusive
parenting without relying on official records”. Stewart et al. (2002a: 49) concur in that
“there is little evidence for these contentions, which at present are largely
speculative”.
Each of these theories has an individualistic basis which asserts that the experience of
maltreatment affects the pathology of a person, either individually, through social or
environmental influences, or through a combination of both. This focus on a person’s
internal make (wherever the source of the influence) up derives itself from positivism,
which is the most dominant research paradigm within the field. While the term
“positivism” carries with it a number of interpretations, the common underlying
thread is that “positivism promotes the scientific method as the only way to obtain
knowledge” (Neyhouse 2002: 23). However, positivism is arguably more than simply
a methodology, but a philosophy as well, which can be argued to outline ways in
which one should think about the world, and subsequently, prescribe standards of
behaviour for those interacting within the world.
7/27/2019 deviance_rayment.pdf
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/devianceraymentpdf 4/9
TASA Conference 2005, University of Tasmania, 6-8 December 2005 4
TASA 2005 Conference Proceedings
Positivism, as both a methodology and a philosophy, has dominated criminological
research for decades (see Neyhouse 2002). Its influence on research concerning the
relationship between child maltreatment and juvenile offending is evident. Positivism
has at its core, several concepts implicit in its understanding of the world. These
include the reliance on scientific research, the assumption that scientific research is
neutral or value free, the assumption that anything can be reduced to scientific study,
and a belief in the ability of statistics to explain experiences (see Usher 1997). It also
has an individualistic focus, which seeks to locate the explanations or causes of
behaviour within an individual, as opposed to wider societal structures.
In terms of the previous theoretical discussion of child maltreatment and juvenile
offending, the influence of positivism is clear. Each of the theories has the previously
established individualistic basis, which attributes maltreatment as affecting the
individual’s pathology which in turn leads to delinquency. However, the influence of
positivism is at its strongest in terms of the empirical studies which have examined
the relationship between child maltreatment and juvenile delinquency.
Empirical research on the relationship between child maltreatment and juvenile
offending is prolific. Some researchers have used the previously cited theories of
maltreatment and delinquency as the basis to their studies; however most of the
research in this area has been largely atheoretical (Kakar 1996: 29). To a certain
degree, each of the theories has some level of empirical support; however no theory
has been established as universally explaining a relationship between the two.
Nevertheless, researchers have continued to explore this relationship with clearly
stated intentions on determining the elusive concept of causality.
Despite the fact that the majority of children who experience maltreatment will not
offend (Stewart et al. 2002), once a child is in the child protection system, the vast
majority of empirical evidence demonstrates that they are more likely than children
not in the child protection system, to engage in offending behaviour (Stewart et al.
2002). While the degree of association is far less conclusive, a correlation between
maltreatment and delinquency is hard to refute. Studies dated as early as 1960 cite a
causal link between child maltreatment and juvenile offending (Schwartz et al. 1994:
641). However, later research has come to modify that position. Widom (1989),
7/27/2019 deviance_rayment.pdf
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/devianceraymentpdf 5/9
TASA Conference 2005, University of Tasmania, 6-8 December 2005 5
TASA 2005 Conference Proceedings
Zingraff, Leiter, Myers and Johnsen (1993) and Smith and Thornberry (1994) all
studied the relationship between child maltreatment and juvenile offending, with the
conclusion that although maltreated children appear to be at greater risk of offending
than non-maltreated children, the pathway was neither causal nor inevitable, and the
association between maltreatment and delinquency was more modest than previous
claims.
Such results have not deterred researchers from seeking to establish a causal link
between child maltreatment and juvenile offending. This goal remains, despite all
available evidence stating that the majority of children who experience maltreatment
do not engage in offending behaviour. In fact, most researchers who seek to establish
causality in the relationship do so after acknowledging it is only a small group of
children to which their research pertains (see Stewart et al. 2002).
Australian research into the child maltreatment-juvenile offending relationship is not
exempt from this desire to determine causality. The most important piece of research
in this area is that of Stewart, Dennison and Waterson (2002a). Stewart et al. (2002a:
3) examined the risk factor of child maltreatment and the effect such maltreatment has
on juvenile offending. They employed both a prospective (examining future offending
behaviour of those identified as maltreated) and a retrospective (examining the past
maltreatment history of those who have been identified as offenders) focus and
concluded that, “the prospective focus of the present study provides further evidence
of a causal relationship between maltreatment and juvenile offending” (Stewart et al.
2002b: 5-6). However their ability to expand beyond this statement is limited. While
asserting that maltreated children are more likely than non maltreated children to
offend in adolescence; physical abuse and neglect are more predicative of offending
than sexual or emotional abuse; young people whose final maltreatment incident
occurs within their adolescence are more likely to offend than those whose
maltreatment does not extend beyond childhood; and that children in out-of-home
placements are more likely to offend than those not in out-of-home placements,
possible explanations for these results are unable to be answered through their given
data set.
7/27/2019 deviance_rayment.pdf
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/devianceraymentpdf 6/9
TASA Conference 2005, University of Tasmania, 6-8 December 2005 6
TASA 2005 Conference Proceedings
While the research appears to be unable to clarify the nature of any causal
relationship, the will to persevere and eventually establish this is apparent. This is
evidenced by Stewart et al. (2002a: 114) who state,
No significant relationship could be identified between the nature of
maltreatment experiences and offence behaviour. This is not to say that no
significant pathways exists between maltreatment and offending, but
rather a canonical correlation may not be the best statistical procedure to
identify pathways to offending. A trajectory analysis may be the most
appropriate method of elucidating any significant pathways; however at
the time of analysis this procedure was not available.
This study, just as many others, failed in its ability to identify the nature of a
significant relationship between maltreatment and juvenile offending. Therefore, each
study, as witnessed by Stewart et al. (2002a), advocates recommendations which if
followed, should alleviate problems and limitations encountered in the current study.To a certain extent, each study sets out to prove causality by improving the
methodology, examining a set of variables previously unstudied, using an improved
data set or through another mechanism (see Widom, 1989). However, despite these
improvements, the end result remains the same, in that there appears to be an
association between child maltreatment and juvenile offending, but how this operates
and more importantly, why this occurs, is less forthcoming.
Therefore, it appears that the only acceptable pathway between child maltreatment
and juvenile offending is conceptualised as being located within an individual’s
pathology, or as the result of social and environmental influences on the individual or
family unit or both. Those who have sought to locate the pathway between the two as
being a product of the system itself or as a result of other processes or purposes, have
largely been refuted on the basis that it is difficult to test and therefore prove such
hypotheses on an empirical basis. What is ironic about this argument is that the
current search to define causality between child maltreatment and juvenile offending
is also difficult to test and prove on an empirical basis. Countless studies have
attempted to complete this task, however each one, while shedding light on certain
aspects of the relationship, has failed in its broader aims. While establishing a
correlation between maltreatment and offending, the nature of such a relationship is
still “largely speculative”.
7/27/2019 deviance_rayment.pdf
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/devianceraymentpdf 7/9
TASA Conference 2005, University of Tasmania, 6-8 December 2005 7
TASA 2005 Conference Proceedings
As a result, the basis on which a relationship is able to be conceived is exclusively
reliant on statistical methods to prove such a relationship and consequently, to outline
the extent and nature of the proven relationship. Current research and literature does
not appear to allow for the possibility of a relationship being conceptualised outside
of the realm of statistics, or more generally, outside the positivist framework
employed by the majority of researchers within this field. Overall, research such as
that of Stewart et al. (2002a) demonstrate the dominance of positivist methodologies
and philosophies evident in the area child maltreatment and juvenile offending.
Despite the inability of such research to articulate the nature of a perceived causal
relationship, researchers in the field refute those who wish to examine the relationship
outside a positivist framework, primarily on the basis that it is difficult to test or prove
empirically. The inherent contradiction to this argument is the inability of positivist
research to achieve the same aim.
Essentially there is a need to explore the relationship between child maltreatment and
juvenile offending outside the current framework. Positivism investigates factors
which affect the individual’s pathology or social and environmental factors which
also affect the individual pathology. As a result, the relationship between child
maltreatment and juvenile offending within the wider system of governance is
ignored. Rather than continuing the elusive search for causality between maltreatment
and delinquency, one might argue that it may be more beneficial to examine the
processes and objectives served in needing to establish a causal link between the two.
Ironically, exploring the relationship outside a positivist framework, may contribute to
a better understanding of a possible pathway between child maltreatment and juvenile
offending. Researchers within this area need to acknowledge that positivist research is
a valid form of inquiry; however it is not the only valid form inquiry. Research
outside this framework should not be refuted solely because of its inability to
empirically test hypotheses. Exploring child maltreatment and juvenile offending
outside the dominant positivist framework has the real potential of adding insights
into a relationship which positivist research is simply unable to provide.
7/27/2019 deviance_rayment.pdf
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/devianceraymentpdf 8/9
TASA Conference 2005, University of Tasmania, 6-8 December 2005 8
TASA 2005 Conference Proceedings
Reference List
Akers, R. (1998) Social Learning and Social Structure: A General Theory of Crime
and Deviance. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
Agnew, R. (1992) ‘Foundation for a General Strain Theory of Crime and
Delinquency’, Criminology, 5: 373-87.
Colvin, M. (2000) Crime and Coercion: AN Integrated Theory of Chronic
Criminality. New York: St Martin’s Press.
Gottfredson, M. and T. Hirschi (1990) A General Theory of Crime. California:
Stanford University Press.
Hirschi, T. (1969) Causes of Delinquency. Berkley: University of California Press.
Kakar, S. (1996) Child Abuse and Delinquency. Lanham: University Press of
America.
National Crime Prevention (1999) Pathways to Prevention: Developmental and Early
Intervention Approaches to Crime Prevention in Australia. Canberra: National
Crime Prevention Attorney General’s Department.
Neyhouse, T. (2002) Positivism in Criminological Thought: A Study in the History
and Use of Ideas. New York: LFB Scholarly Publishing LCC.
Patterson, G. (1982) A Social Learning Approach to Family Intervention: Coercive
Family Process. Oregon: Castalia.
Schwartz, I., J. Rendon and C. Hsieh (1994) ‘Is Child Maltreatment a Leading Cause
of Delinquency?’, Child Welfare, 73(5) 639-55.
Smith, C. and T. Thornberry (1995) ‘The Relationship Between Childhood
Maltreatment and Adolescent Involvement in Delinquency’, Criminology,
33(4): 451-81.
Stewart, A., S. Dennison and E. Waterson (2002a) Pathways from Child Maltreatment
to Juvenile Offending. Brisbane: Griffith University.
Stewart, A., S. Dennison and E. Waterson (2002b) Trends and Issues in Crime and
Criminal Justice No. 241: Pathways from Child Maltreatment to JuvenileOffending. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.
Usher, R. (1997) ‘Telling a Story about Research and Research as Story Telling:
Postmodern Approaches to Social Research’, pp. 27-41 in McKenzie, G., J.
Powell and R. Usher (eds.) Understanding Social Research: Perspectives on
Methodology and Practice. London: The Farmer Press.
7/27/2019 deviance_rayment.pdf
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/devianceraymentpdf 9/9
TASA Conference 2005, University of Tasmania, 6-8 December 2005 9
TASA 2005 Conference Proceedings
Weatherburn, D. and B. Lind, B. (1997) Social and Economic Stress, Child Neglect
and Juvenile Delinquency. Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and
Research.
Widom, C. (1989) ‘Child Abuse, Neglect, and Violent Criminal Behaviour’,
Criminology, 27(2): 251-71.
Widom, C. (1994) ‘Childhood Victimisation and Adolescent Problem Behaviours’,
pp. 127-64 in R. Ketterlinus and M. Lamb (eds.) Adolescent Problem
Behaviours: Issues and Research, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Publishers.
Zingraff, M., J. Leiter, K. Myers, and M. Johnsen, M. (1995) ‘Child Maltreatment and
Youthful Problem Behaviour’, Criminology, 31(2): 173-202.