Content uploaded by Japheth Lumadede
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Japheth Lumadede on Oct 10, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VII July 2024
Page 2559
www.rsisinternational.org
Breaking the Criminogenic Cycle: Exploring Parental Influences on
Juvenile Delinquency in Nairobi and Mombasa Counties, Kenya
1Lumadede Japheth., 1Dr. Charles Mwirigi., 2Dr. Nyachoti W. Otiso,
1Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Tharaka University
2School of Law, Chuka University, Kenya.
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.807200
Received: 01 July 2024; Revised: 13 July 2024; Accepted: 17 July 2024; Published: 17 August 2024
ABSTRACT
There has been a rise in juvenile delinquency worldwide, particularly in developing countries such as Kenya.
Failures in interventions point to the possible inefficacy of the measures, misdiagnosis, or scanty analysis of the
security problem. This was precipitated by mixed results and insufficient documented research. There has been
therefore a need to comprehensively confirm, analyze, and document the relationships between various
criminogenic situational predictors and juvenile delinquency in Kenya. The purpose of this study thus was to
examine the relationship between parental characteristics and juvenile delinquency in Nairobi and Mombasa
counties in Kenya. For this purpose, the researcher hypothesized that there is no statistically significant
predictive relationship between parental characteristics and juvenile delinquency in Nairobi and Mombasa
counties. This was both evaluated on both non-delinquents and delinquents to establish clear relations. The study
was anchored on Social Learning theory. The study adopted a Concurrent Nested mixed-method Research
approach with a qualitative component being embedded in a quantitative Causal-Comparative Research Design.
The target population of the study was 2,908,950 juveniles in the two counties. The accessible population was
235,861 respondents, out of which a sample of 400 was drawn, from which the researcher got 360, a response
rate of 90%. The researcher drew the sample using a disproportionate stratified random sampling thus ensuring
representation of both delinquents and non-delinquents in each county. The delinquent population entailed both
delinquents who had committed minor violations and delinquents who had committed serious violations.
Delinquents who had committed serious violations were drawn from borstal institutions, while those who had
committed minor violations were drawn from the Probation Department. The non-delinquents were drawn from
county secondary schools in each of the counties. Random sampling was done using the Excel data analysis tool
pack. In addition, 12 respondents were selected purposively from the authorities dealing with children matters, 6
from each county. The total sample size attained was thus 372 respondents. A face-to-face interview
questionnaire and an in-depth key informant interview schedule were the main instruments of data collection.
Binary logistic regression was conducted on the quantitative data at a 95% confidence interval (CI) and a
p-value < 0.05 considered significant with the help of Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version
26.0 software. Thematic content analysis was conducted on the qualitative data with the help of Max. Qda
software. The odds ratio indicates that when holding all other variables constant, a child is 7.2 times more likely
to turn out delinquent with poor parental characteristics than turn out non-delinquent. Therefore, employing a .05
criterion of statistical significance, the null hypothesis was thus rejected because the findings show a statistically
significant predictive relationship between parental characteristics and juvenile delinquency. The findings of this
study will be useful to the government, academia, policy actors as well as parents in developing crime prevention
policies, contributing to theory and literature, informing on better family management practices, and informing
effective tailoring of relevant social policies respectively.
Keywords: Parental Characteristics, Parental Criminality, Parental Attitudes, Juvenile Delinquency,
Criminogenic
INTRODUCTION
Juvenile delinquency, defined as illegal acts committed by individuals under the age of 18, represents a
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VII July 2024
Page 2560
www.rsisinternational.org
significant societal concern with far-reaching consequences (Young, Greer, & Church, 2017). Understanding the
factors contributing to juvenile delinquency is paramount for effective intervention and prevention strategies.
Parental influences have been identified as critical in shaping youth behaviour and involvement in delinquent
activities (Frías-Armenta & Corral-Verdugo, 2013). However, limited research has delved into the specific role
of parental characteristics, particularly in the context of Nairobi and Mombasa counties in Kenya.
Global trends indicate a concerning rise in juvenile delinquency rates, prompting heightened attention to this
issue (Field, 2019). In Africa, the problem of juvenile delinquency has garnered increasing interest, with studies
revealing a notable uptick in delinquent behavior (Walker & Maddan, 2019). Despite this, comprehensive
investigations into the predictive relationship between parental attributes and juvenile delinquency remain scarce,
particularly in the Kenyan context.
This study sought to address this gap by examining the criminogenic potential of parental characteristics on
juvenile delinquency in Nairobi and Mombasa counties. Drawing on theoretical frameworks highlighting the
significance of family influences, this research explored various aspects of parental behavior, including
criminality and attitudes favoring antisocial behavior, and their impact on youth involvement in delinquency. By
comprehensively analyzing the nuances of parental influences, this study contributes valuable insights to the
understanding and mitigation of juvenile delinquency in urban Kenyan settings.
LITERATURE REVIEW
The literature on the relationship between parental characteristics and juvenile delinquency underscores the
significance of understanding familial influences on delinquent behavior. Studies conducted over the past two
decades, such as those by Vieno et al. (2009) and Cardona-Isaza and Trujillo-Cano (2023), have examined
various parental features and their association with juvenile delinquency across different socio-economic
backgrounds and geographical locations.
For instance, Cardona-Isaza and Trujillo-Cano (2023) investigated recidivism among Colombian juvenile
offenders, focusing on parental criminality, parenting skills, and parental attitudes toward drug and antisocial
behavior. Their findings highlighted a significant link between parental criminality, poor parenting skills, and
parental attitudes, and higher rates of recidivism among juvenile offenders. However, it's important to note that
this study's sample size was limited to youths aged 17 to 21 admitted to the Medellin Family and Minors Court
House, which may not fully represent the broader Colombian population.
In a Kenyan context, Mwanza (2022) explored pupil characteristics associated with adolescent delinquency
using qualitative methods at Kabete Rehabilitation School in Nairobi. The study identified parental criminality,
parental attitudes toward drugs and antisocial behavior, and parental supervision as familial factors influencing
juvenile delinquency. Notably, the incidence of delinquency was notably higher among children from families
characterized by criminal behavior. However, this study's scope was limited to a single rehabilitation school in
Nairobi, which may limit the generalizability of its findings.
Moreover, research by Beelmann and Klahr (2022) conducted a meta-analysis of parental training programs'
effectiveness in preventing juvenile delinquency. Their findings indicated that such programs, particularly
those focused on structural parenting, demonstrated significant reductions in delinquent behavior. Additionally,
Ferencz, Kinderman, and Libby (2022) examined the influence of sibling relationship quality and parental
rearing style on the development of Dark Triad traits, finding significant associations between parental
favoritism and certain antisocial behaviors.
While existing literature has primarily focused on parenting styles and disciplinary practices, there's a growing
need to explore the influence of parental criminality and attitudes favoring antisocial behavior on juvenile
delinquency outcomes. Understanding these factors comprehensively can inform the development of more
effective prevention strategies and interventions tailored to address the underlying familial influences on
delinquent behavior. Therefore, further research is warranted to investigate the predictive role of parental
characteristics in juvenile delinquency within diverse cultural and geographical contexts.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VI June 2024
Page 2561
www.rsisinternational.org
METHODOLOGY
This study utilized a concurrent-nested mixed-method research design, where quantitative methods took
precedence while qualitative components were embedded within. The quantitative aspect employed a
causal-comparative research design to examine the correlation between independent and dependent variables,
focusing particularly on parental influences on youth delinquency.
The research was conducted in Nairobi and Mombasa Counties, Kenya, chosen for their high crime rates and
representation of areas impacted by juvenile delinquency. The target population consisted of children aged
15-17 years in these counties, totaling around 2,908,950. Stratified random sampling ensured diverse
representation from both delinquent and non-delinquent groups. Sampling procedures targeted 400 juveniles
for questionnaires and 12 for key informant interviews, though the final sample size reached 372 participants.
To determine the sample, a formula proposed by Israel (2009) was adopted:
𝑁 235,861
𝑛 = 1 + 𝑁(𝑒)2 = 1 + 235,861 (0.05)2 = 399.3
where:
n= sample size,
N=Target population
e= The error term (0.05).
The sample size of 400 juveniles is distributed as shown in Table 1
Table 1: Showing the Sample size distribution
County
Category
Target
Population
Accessible
Population
Sample Expected
Sample Responded
Nairobi
Serious
Delinquents
58
58
50
23
Minor
Delinquents
896
896
50
37
Non-
Delinquents
2,288,796
184,702
100
(20
from
each
randomly sampled 5
county schools)
100 (20 from each
randomly sampled 5
county schools)
Total
2,289,750
185,656
200
160
Mombasa
Serious
Delinquents
72
72
50
50
Minor
Delinquents
644
644
50
50
Non-
Delinquents
618,484
49,489
100
(20
from
each
randomly sampled 5
county schools)
100 (20 from each
randomly sampled 5
county schools)
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VII July 2024
Page 2562
www.rsisinternational.org
Total
619,200
50,205
200
200
Total
2,908,950
235,861
400
360
The researcher employed disproportionate stratified sampling in order to get the sample. Data collection
utilized structured face-to-face interview questionnaires and in-depth key informant interview schedules,
focusing on various aspects of parental influences on youth delinquency. Piloting was conducted in Kakamega
County to refine research instruments, and ethical approval and considerations were observed throughout the
process.
Data analysis encompassed descriptive and inferential statistics, including binary logistic regression for
quantitative data and thematic content analysis for qualitative insights. These methods ensured a
comprehensive exploration of the relationship between parental influences and youth delinquency.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The relationship between the parental influences and delinquency was tested using Binary logistic regression at
α =0.05 level of significance.
Qualitative data analysis was also conducted. A total of 12 Key Informant Interviews were conducted, 6 in
each respective region. The data gathered from key informant interviews were analyzed through a thematic
approach by the help of Max QDA Software.
Response Rate
A total of 360 responses were recorded for the interview questionnaires representing a response rate of 90%.
This percentage was within the required standard criterion of between 80% and 100% used in research
(Morton, 2012). This information is presented in the table 3 below.
Table 2: Respondents Response Rate
Response Rate
Frequency
Percentage
Response
360
90.0
Non – response
40
10.0
Total
400
100
In addition to the number of children interviewed, all the 12 respondents identified by the researcher for the
purpose of Key informant interviews participated in the study producing 100% response rate.
Biodata
This subsection discusses the respondent’s biodata such as county, delinquency done, education background,
with whom the child is living with, type of family, number of siblings and birth order. Crosstabulations were
also done against delinquency where necessary to gain a deeper understanding of the phenomenon under study.
These data made it possible to understand the composition of the sample for drawing meaningful conclusions
and generalizing findings.
Distribution of Respondents by County
Of the 360 respondents who responded to the interview questionnaires, 55.6% were from Mombasa, while
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VI June 2024
Page 2563
www.rsisinternational.org
44.4% were from Nairobi. This points to a higher representation from Mombasa in the complete response rate.
This distribution is as shown in the Table 4 below;
Table 3: Distribution of Respondents by County
County
Frequency
Percentage
Mombasa
200
55.6
Nairobi
160
44.4
Total
360
100
Distribution of Respondents by Gender
The analysis of gender distribution of the respondents shows that the number of male respondents was 200
which forms approximately 55.6% of the total number of respondents in both sub counties. This means that
there was slightly high male response rate in the study compared to the female respondents. The numbers of
girls in conflict with the law is lower than number of boys as shown in table 4. This might imply that there are
fewer females who violate the law compared to males which agrees with crime reports (National Crime
Research Centre, 2018). This distribution is shown in the Table 6 below;
Table 4: Distribution of Respondents by Gender
Gender
Boys (Mombasa)
Girls (Nairobi)
Not in Conflict
100
100
In Conflict
100
60
Total
200
160
Distribution of Respondents by Education Level
Majority of the respondents, 76.9%, have completed their education at the high school level. The cumulative
percent also indicates that 12.8% of respondents have no formal schooling, thus 22.8% (rounded up to 23%)
have either no formal schooling or primary education.
Figure 1: Distribution of Respondents by Education Level
This finding is still reflected per county since 70.0% of the respondents in Mombasa and 86.3% in Nairobi
have completed their education at the high school level. Table 6 presents this information.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VII July 2024
Page 2564
www.rsisinternational.org
Table 5: Distribution of Respondents by Education Level
Education Level
Mombasa
Nairobi
Number
Percentage
Number
Percentage
No formal
27
18.5
9
5.6
Primary
23
11.5
13
8.1
Secondary
140
70.0
138
86.3
Total
200
100
160
100
Distribution of Respondents by Whom the Children are living with
The largest percentage indicating that a significant portion of the children (60.0%) live with both their mother
and father. This implies a situation where the parents are together and jointly responsible for the care and
upbringing of the children. A smaller percentage of children (10.6%) live with their fathers alone. This could
indicate situations where the mother is not present in the household, and the father has primary custody or is
the sole caregiver. Mother (16.7%): A substantial percentage of children (16.7%) live with their mothers alone.
Some children (6.9%) live with a guardian, indicating a scenario where someone other than the biological
parents has assumed the responsibility for their care. Another group of children (5.6%) live with their
grandparents.
Table 6: Distribution of Respondents by Whom the Children are living with
With whom child lives with?
Frequency
Percentage
Both Mother and Father
216
60.0
Father
38
10.6
Mother
56
16.7
Guardian
25
6.9
Wife/ Husband
5
1.4
Grandparents
20
5.6
Total
360
100
In regard to living arrangements of delinquents and non-delinquents, non-delinquents seem to have a slightly
higher percentage of living with both parents compared to delinquents. This might suggest a potential
correlation between intact family structures and reduced likelihood of delinquency. Non-delinquents also had a
higher percentage of living with their mothers compared to delinquents. This could indicate a potential
protective factor associated with maternal presence. Delinquents show a significantly higher percentage of
living with their fathers compared to non-delinquents. These findings align with a 2022 Swedish study, which
revealed that, in comparison to adolescents residing with both a mother and father, delinquent behavior was
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VI June 2024
Page 2565
www.rsisinternational.org
more prevalent among those living with a single father (incident rate ratio [IRR] 1.898), compared to those
living with a single mother (IRR 1.661), a father and stepmother (IRR 1.606), or a mother and stepfather (IRR
2.044) (PLOS, 2022). The data suggests that family structure and living arrangements play a role in juvenile
delinquency. Living with both parents appears to be associated with lower delinquency rates, while living with
the father or grand parents may contribute to an increased likelihood of delinquency. Figure 5 below presents
this information clearly.
Figure 2: Distribution of Respondents by Whom the Children are living with
Distribution of Respondents by Family Structure
In regard to whether the children come from Polygamous or monogamous families, slightly over half of the
children (53.10%) come from monogamous family structures while (46.90%) come from polygamous family
structures.
Figure 3: Distribution of Respondents by Family Structure
The get more insights into the family structures, specifically comparing whether delinquents and
non-delinquents come from monogamous or polygamous families, a crosstabulation was done. Delinquents
showed a significantly higher percentage (62.70%) of coming from polygamous families compared to
non-delinquents (37.30%). This points towards a potential association between polygamous family structures
and a higher likelihood of juvenile delinquency. This is in agreement with research conducted by Denga (1981)
involving 100 families and 200 delinquents, the findings revealed a higher incidence of juvenile delinquency in
polygamous families compared to monogamous ones.
Monogamous
53.10%
Poligamous
46.90%
43.00%44.00%45.00%46.00%47.00%48.00%49.00%50.00%51.00%52.00%53.00%54.00%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
B OT H M OT H ER
A ND FA TH E R
F AT H ER M OT H ER G RA N D P AR EN T S G UA R DI A N W IF E / HU SB A ND
PERCENTANGE
TYPE OF DRUGS
Non-delinquent Delinquent
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VII July 2024
Page 2566
www.rsisinternational.org
Figure 4: Distribution of Respondents by Family Structure
Distribution of Respondents by Birth Order
The respondents' birth order distribution revealed that 24.90% identified as first-born, 38.10% as mid-born,
and 37.00% as last-born. Non-delinquents had a higher representation among first-born individuals (31.00%)
compared to delinquents (18.80%). This suggests a potential association between being a first-born and a
reduced likelihood of engaging in delinquent behavior. Notably, the last-born individuals are more prevalent
among delinquents (44.40%) compared to non-delinquents (29.50%). This suggests a potential association
between being the last-born and an increased likelihood of engaging in delinquent behavior. These results
partly agree with common claims that propose a 33% to 33% higher likelihood of delinquent behaviors among
'middle children' compared to first-borns and a 20% higher likelihood of such behaviors among last-born
children compared to first-borns, and also partly contradict common claims that 'middle children' are the most
likely to be delinquent (Breining, 2020).
Figure 5: Distribution of Respondents by Birth Order
Normality Test
To test the normality of the variables the Kolmogorov-Smirnova
was used and the p-values (Sig.) were very
low (0.00) which is less that the critical value of 0.05, which typically indicates that the data significantly
deviates from a normal distribution. The table 6 below summarizes this information.
Poligamous Monogamous
Delinquent
Non-Delinquent
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
34.60%
37.30%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
62.70%
65.40%
70.00%
60.00%
Last Born
44.40%
29.50%
Mid
36.90%
39.50%
First Born 18.80%
31.00%
0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00% 45.00% 50.00%
Delinquent Non-Delinquent
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VI June 2024
Page 2567
www.rsisinternational.org
Table 7: Tests of Normality for Variables
Kolmogorov-Smirnova
Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic
df
Sig.
Statistic
df
Sig.
Score parental criminality
.232
360
.000
.748
360
.000
Score parental attitudes
.223
360
.000
.812
360
.000
Score parental characteristics
.171
360
.000
.854
360
.000
H01: There is No Statistically Significant Predictive Relationship Between Parental Characteristics and
Juvenile Delinquency in Nairobi and Mombasa Counties.
The researcher tested the null hypothesis that there is no statistically significant predictive relationship between
parental characteristics and juvenile delinquency in Nairobi and Mombasa counties. Respondents were asked to
fill a questionnaire regarding the relationship between Parental Characteristics and juvenile delinquency.
Questions regarding parental criminality were asked for instance, how often parent/caregiver (s) use drugs,
how often their parent/caregiver (s) have been arrested and convicted, as well as how often their
parent/caregiver (s) have been violent. Questions regarding parental attitudes towards criminality were asked
for instance, whether parent/caregiver (s) encourages the abuse of drugs or encourages the use of violence
when wronged, as well as whether their parent/caregiver (s) warned them about misbehavior.
The majority of respondents (65.30%) reported that their parents or caregivers never used alcohol, while a few
(3.10%) did use alcohol. The majority (82.50%) reported that their parents never used marijuana. However, a
small percentage (3.90%) of the respondents' parents used bhang. For both khat/miraa and cocaine, the
majority reported never witnessing parental use (88.90% and 93.30%, respectively). However, some
respondents reported occasional use of these substances (3.1% in either).
Table 8: Relationship between parental characteristics and juvenile delinquency.
#
PARENTAL CRIMINALITY
Kindly rate your assessment of the following
attributes in your parents or caregivers by
marking any of the 5 boxes between 1-5 as
appropriate (Never-1; Rarely-2; Sometimes-3;
Frequently-4; Always-5)
N
R
S
F
A
1
How often does/did your parent/caregiver (s) use
any of these drugs
(1.1) Alcohol
23565.3%
4913.6%
4713.1%
185%
113.1%
(1.2) Bhang
29782.5%
82.2%
185%
236.4%
143.9%
(1.3) Khat/Miraa
32088.9%
71.9%
123.3%
102.8%
113.1%
(1.4) Cocaine
33693.3%
61.7%
123.3%
102.8%
113.1%
To get a clearer understanding the researcher cross-tabulated delinquency versus non-delinquent against their
parental use of drugs. Interestingly, delinquents exhibited a higher frequency of parental drug use (alcohol,
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VII July 2024
Page 2568
www.rsisinternational.org
bhang, khat), especially for those who reported that their parents use drugs "Frequently" and "Always"
suggesting a potential correlation between the frequency of parental drug use and juvenile delinquency.
Table 9: Cross-tabulated delinquency versus non-delinquent against their parental use of drugs
Always
Frequently
Sometimes
Rarely
Never
Non Delinquent
00.0%
15.6%
1634.0%
2653.1%
15766.8%
Alcohol
Delinquent
11100.0%
1794.4%
3166.0%
2346.9%
7833.2%
Bhang
Non Delinquent
428.6%
00.0%
527.8%
112.5%
19064.0%
Delinquent
1071.4%
23100.0%
1372.2%
787.5%
10736.0%
Khat/Miraa
Non Delinquent
545.5%
220.0%
541.7%
228.6%
18658.1%
Delinquent
654.5%
880.0%
758.3%
571.4%
13441.9%
Cocaine
Non Delinquent
00.0%
00.0%
216.7%
233.3%
19658.3%
Delinquent
4100.0%
2100.0%
1083.3%
466.7%
14041.7%
When asked whether their parents or caregivers had been arrested, a significant portion of respondents
(76.70%) reported that their parents or caregivers had never been arrested. However, a few respondents,
(1.90%) reported that their parents/caregivers had been arrested. Most respondents (83.60%) also reported that
their parents or caregivers had never been convicted while a few (3.30%) reported their parents or caregivers
were being convicted always. A majority of respondents (66.90%) reported never witnessing violence from
their parents or caregivers. However, a small percentage (3.60%) witnessed violence from their parents or
caregivers.
Table 10: Whether their parents or caregivers had been arrested
2
How often has your parent/caregiver (s) been
arrested?
27676.7%
4913.6%
215.8%
71.9%
71.9%
3
How often has your parent/caregiver (s) been
convicted?
30183.6%
185%
174.7%
123.3%
123.3%
4
How often have you seen your parent/caregiver
(s) be violent?
24166.9%
5816.1%
4211.7%
61.7%
133.6%
A crosstabulation of delinquents versus non-delinquents indicates that most delinquents (85.7%) and (75.0%)
exhibited a higher prevalence of parental arrest and conviction respectively, indicating a potential correlation
between parental arrest, conviction and juvenile delinquency. Delinquents also exhibited a higher frequency
(92.3%) of witnessing parental violence suggesting a potential association between parental violence and
juvenile delinquency.
Table 11: Crosstabulation of delinquents versus non-delinquents
Category
Always
Frequently
Sometimes
Rarely
Never
How often does/did
Non Delinquent
925.0%
311.1%
2144.7%
2863.6%
13967.5%
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VI June 2024
Page 2569
www.rsisinternational.org
your parent/caregiver
(s) use any of these
drugs
Delinquent
2775.0%
2488.9%
2655.3%
1636.4%
6732.5%
Total
3610.0%
277.5%
4713.1%
4412.2%
20657.2%
How often has your
parent/caregiver (s)
been arrested?
Non Delinquent
114.3%
114.3%
733.3%
2755.1%
16459.4%
Delinquent
685.7%
685.7%
1466.7%
2244.9%
11240.6%
Total
71.9%
71.9%
215.8%
4913.6%
27676.7%
How often has your
parent/caregiver (s)
been convicted?
Non Delinquent
325.0%
18.3%
317.6%
527.8%
18862.5%
Delinquent
975.0%
1191.7%
1482.4%
1372.2%
11337.5%
Total
123.3%
123.3%
174.7%
185.0%
30183.6%
How often have you
seen your parent/
caregiver (s) be violent?
Non-Delinquent
17.7%
00.0%
1126.2%
4069.0%
14861.4%
Delinquent
1292.3%
6100.0%
3173.8%
1831.0%
9338.6%
Total
133.6%
61.7%
4211.7%
5816.1%
24166.9%
To be sure that the differences in the findings observed on parental criminality are not just by chance, the
researcher tested the hypothesis that there is no statistically significant difference on the parental criminality
score between delinquents and non-delinquents. A Mann-Whitney U test was conducted to determine whether
there was a statistically significant difference between the score of parental criminality between delinquents
and non-delinquents. Results of the analysis indicated that there was a difference U=11865, z = -4.661, p < .05,
with a small effect of r = 0.246 with delinquents scoring higher in parental criminality (median=1.25, N=160),
compared to non-delinquents (median=1.00, N=200). The comparative analysis thus highlights distinct
differences in parental criminality between delinquents and non-delinquents.
In seeking to unravel the intricate relationship between parental characteristics and juvenile delinquency,
insights were garnered from stakeholders deeply involved in matters concerning children. A unanimous
consensus among these stakeholders emphasized that parental characteristics assume a foundational role in
shaping a child's behavioral trajectory, particularly within the realm of criminality. The stakeholders lending
perspectives through interviews, shed light on the multifaceted ways in which parental characteristics wield
influence over juvenile delinquency.
One paramount revelation arising from the analysis is the critical link between parental criminality and the
predisposition of children toward antisocial behavior with stakeholders mentioning the higher probabilities of a
child turning out delinquent when the parents exhibit criminal tendencies. Stakeholders underscored the
generational transmission of criminal tendencies within families, thereby establishing an environment where
delinquency becomes normalized. To delve deeper, they said that specific types of criminal activities engaged
in by parents such as robbing, conning, or assaulting others intricately shape the development of antisocial
behavior in their children. Some respondents reported that they are aware of instances where parents of some
of the children were involved in illicit activities such as organized crimes and white-collar offenses, which may
have contributed to the manifestation of delinquent behaviors in their offspring because the children were
arrested engaging in similar activities. This they said, points to a generational transmission of criminal
tendencies within families, creating an environment where delinquency becomes normalized.
A salient finding from the responses also underscored the explicit correlation between parental drug use and
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VII July 2024
Page 2570
www.rsisinternational.org
juvenile delinquency. The stakeholders accentuated that parents using drugs, such as illicit alcohol and bhang,
were more prone to raising delinquent children. This correlation is especially pronounced in situations where
children either witness or are directly involved in the sale of drugs by their parents or caregivers. For instance,
a child regularly exposed to their parent's drug activities, perhaps involved in packaging or distribution, may
internalize and replicate such behaviors, perpetuating the cycle of drug-related delinquency. The stakeholders
from the borstal institutions asserted that there exists a strong correlation between parental use of drugs and
delinquency since most delinquents acquire criminal behaviors from situations of having parents who use
drugs. Furthermore, parental substance abuse emerges as a significant criminogenic contributor because
substance-abusing parents may at times exhibit impaired judgment, leading to neglect and an environment
conducive to criminal activities. They reported that the ramifications of parental drug abuse on behavior, akin
to other behaviors, hinge heavily on the frequency of drug use and the subsequent level of exposure
experienced by children. Consider, for instance, a scenario where parents regularly engage in drug use within
the household. The constant exposure to such behavior not only normalizes substance abuse for the child but
also significantly increases the likelihood of them adopting similar practices as they mature. Beyond the direct
impact on the child's behavior, the analysis underscores that parental drug use creates a ripple effect by
contributing to a deficiency in supervision, and guidance, and fostering a permissive attitude towards
delinquent behavior. This lack of structure and authority can pave the way for adolescents to explore risky
behaviors without adequate guidance, further amplifying the risk of juvenile delinquency within the familial
context.
Furthermore, the frequency of arrests and convictions emerged as a critical aspect of parental criminality.
Delving into the legal challenges faced by families with a history of criminality, particularly concerning
substance abuse-related offenses, the respondents provided insights into the disruptions and uncertainties
experienced by the children involved. For instance, a child growing up in an environment marked by frequent
parental arrests may grapple with instability, potentially contributing to a heightened vulnerability to
delinquency and criminal behavior.
Stakeholders also highlighted the role of violence within the family as a significant criminogenic contributor to
juvenile delinquency. The observation that juveniles who witness familial violence often exhibit similar
behaviors emphasizes the potential transmission of violent conduct across generations. Frequent bouts of
violence within families are crucial for understanding the emotional and psychological impact on children,
who may subsequently engage in violent activities outside the home. The stakeholders reported that witnessing
violence may desensitize juveniles to aggressive behavior, increasing the likelihood of their involvement in
violent activities outside the home. For example, a child exposed to domestic violence may internalize
aggression as a coping mechanism, reflecting such behaviors in their interactions outside the family sphere.
Furthermore, the stakeholders underscored the intertwining of parental criminality with broader economic and
societal challenges in the family's environment. Economic hardships were identified as contributors to a lack of
resources for proper child rearing, amplifying the risk of criminal behavior. Respondents noted that parental
drug use, often fueled by economic hardships, becomes a means of financial survival and influences the child's
trajectory toward delinquency. One respondent mentioned that parental drug use is often fueled by economic
hardships, with parents resorting to illicit activities as a means of financial survival, and in turn influences the
child. This complex interplay between economic challenges and parental criminality underscores the need for
holistic interventions that address both the root causes and consequences of juvenile delinquency within
affected families.
In conclusion, this multifaceted analysis contributes to a comprehensive understanding of the complex
interplay between parental characteristics and juvenile delinquency. These insights inform the development of
targeted interventions and support systems tailored to address the intricate challenges faced by families
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VI June 2024
Page 2571
www.rsisinternational.org
affected by parental criminality. Such nuanced approaches are crucial for breaking the cycle of delinquency
and fostering positive outcomes for the affected children. The following statements from the stakeholders
illustrate these assertions:
A parent's job is to provide guidance. Therefore, whatever he does matters. Youngsters learn more from
observation than from instruction. Think about the situation when a young person's father is a drug dealer.
During this crucial developmental stage, the youngster unknowingly becomes an apprentice, learning not just
the surface-level details but also the intricate ways of the illegal trade. The father's activities work as an
unintentional curriculum, teaching drug-dealing techniques without any official educational intention. The
youngster is exposed to a world of illegal activity through this implicit mentorship within the family, which
affects how they perceive right and wrong.
(Stakeholder 2, Mombasa)
Parental criminality affects children in negative ways. The blurred lines between legality and criminality in the
parent's actions can expose the child to the risks associated with substance abuse. This early exposure, even if
concealed, can set the stage for the child to engage in substance abuse themselves, further perpetuating the
cycle of delinquency.
(Stakeholder 4, Nairobi)
If the parent is a criminal, the child may adopt the criminal activities. For example, a parent who engages in
violence at will influence the child to sell, hence involving them in crimes
(Stakeholder 2, Mombasa)
These results are in agreement with the findings from a study by Khan, Alkazemi, & Almekhlafi (2017),
examined the connection between adolescent delinquency and parental criminality in Morocco. The study by
Khan et.al indicated that parental criminality significantly affected the chance of adolescent delinquency using
data from the World Bank's "Demographic and Health Surveys." In particular, the study discovered that
parental crime was linked to a higher risk of juvenile delinquency, particularly for young males. The authors
had hypothesized that this would be because male children are more likely to be exposed to criminal behavior
and peers at home. This study had sampled 477 urban Moroccan households and used a cross-sectional
methodology. Parental criminality, parent-child interactions, parental supervision, and socioeconomic level
were all used as the study's metrics. The findings just like findings from this study clearly showed that a higher
risk of adolescent delinquency is linked to parental criminality. The authors came to the conclusion that
parental crime is a significant contributor to juvenile delinquency and should be considered when determining
the risk of juvenile delinquency.
Zou, Li, Chen & Wu (2018), also investigated how the parental crime affected juvenile delinquency in China.
Parental criminality had a considerable impact on adolescent delinquency, according to the study, which used
data from the "China Family Panel Survey." In particular, the study discovered that parental crime was linked
to a higher risk of child delinquency, especially for females. The authors hypothesized that this would be
because young women are more likely to grow up in homes where they are exposed to criminal activity and
peers. A sample of 4,054 homes, from both urban and rural China, was included in the cross-sectional study. In
the study, measures such as parental crime, parental marital status, parental education, parental supervision,
and family structure were used. The findings showed that a higher risk of adolescent delinquency was linked to
parental criminality. The authors came to the conclusion that parental crime is a significant contributor to
juvenile delinquency and should be considered when determining the risk of juvenile delinquency.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VII July 2024
Page 2572
www.rsisinternational.org
Similarly, Yüksek, Tuncer & Arslan (2020) investigated the link between adolescent delinquency and parental
criminality in Turkey. Parental criminality had a large impact on child delinquency, according to the study,
which used data from the "Turkish Family Health Survey." In particular, the study discovered that parental
crime was linked to a higher risk of juvenile delinquency, particularly for young males. The authors had
hypothesized that this would be because male children are more likely to be exposed to criminal behavior and
peers at home. A sample of 1,737 households in urban Turkey were used in the study's cross-sectional
methodology. In the study, measures such as parental crime, parental marital status, parental education,
parental supervision, and family structure were used. The findings showed that a higher risk of adolescent
delinquency was linked to parental criminality. The authors came to the conclusion that parental crime is a
significant contributor to juvenile delinquency and should be considered when determining the risk of juvenile
delinquency.
Zhang, Johnson, Laub & Holleran (2021) also looked at the connection between parental criminality and child
delinquency in the US. The study demonstrated a substantial relationship between parental criminality and
child delinquency using data from the "National Longitudinal Survey of Youth." In particular, the study
discovered that parental crime was linked to a higher risk of juvenile delinquency, particularly for young males.
The authors hypothesized that this would be because male children are more likely to be exposed to criminal
behavior and peers at home. A sample of 1,788 American households from the study's cross-sectional
methodology was used. In the study, measures such as parental crime, parental marital status, parental
education, parental supervision, and family structure were used. The findings showed that a higher risk of
adolescent delinquency was linked to parental criminality. The authors came to the conclusion that parental
crime is a significant contributor to juvenile delinquency and should be considered when determining the risk
of juvenile delinquency.
The relationship between parental crime and child delinquency was also the subject of a study by Farrington
(2017). The parental crime was found to be a significant predictor of adolescent delinquency in the study,
which examined data from a sample of 5,392 British boys and girls. According to the study, the probability of
juvenile delinquency was 2-3 times higher in children who had criminal parents. Additionally, the study found
that parental criminality was a stronger predictor of delinquency than any other aspect of the family
background.
In regard to parental attitudes towards criminality, a high percentage (83.3%) of the children reported that their
parents do not encourage the use of drugs compared to those who receive their encouragement (3.1%). The
children also reported significantly higher percentages (52.5%) for parental warnings about misbehavior
compared to those who do not receive warnings (14.7%). A high percentage (73.9%) of the children reported
that their parents do not encourage the use of violence when wronged.
Table 12: Parental attitudes towards criminality
PARENTAL ATTITUDES TOWARD CRIMINALITY
Always
Frequently
Sometimes
Rarely
Never
5
My parent/caregiver (s) encourages
the abuse of drugs
113.1%
185.0%
164.4%
154.2%
30083.3%
6
My parent/caregiver (s) often warned
or warn me about misbehavior
18952.5%
6718.6%
298.1%
226.1%
5314.7%
7
My parent/caregiver (s) encouraged
the use of violence when wronged
226.1%
92.5%
3610.0%
277.5%
26673.9%
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VI June 2024
Page 2573
www.rsisinternational.org
Further analysis by crosstabulation revealed that delinquents report significantly higher percentages in the
"Always" and "Frequently" categories for parental encouragement of drug abuse compared to non-delinquents.
Non-delinquents, on the other hand, predominantly indicate lower levels of parental encouragement of drug
abuse, with the majority marking "Never" or "Rarely." The data suggests a potential correlation between
parental encouragement of drug abuse and juvenile delinquency. Delinquents appear to experience a higher
degree of exposure to such attitudes, emphasizing the role of familial influences in shaping behavior.
Delinquents exhibit lower percentages in the "Always" and "Frequently" categories for parental warning about
misbehavior compared to non-delinquents who showed higher percentages in these categories. There was a
significant proportion of delinquents who marked "Never" or "Rarely," for parental warning about misbehavior
compared to non-delinquents suggesting a potential lack of effective guidance or communication about
misbehavior in their families. The data implies that non-delinquents perceive higher levels of parental guidance
and warnings about misbehavior. In contrast, delinquents experience a potential deficit in such communication,
indicating a gap in familial guidance and disciplinary measures. Delinquents also reported higher percentages
in the "Always" category for parental encouragement of violence when wronged compared to non-delinquents.
Non-delinquents, in contrast, display lower percentages in the "Always" category, with a notable portion
marking "Never." The data suggests a potential association between parental encouragement of violence and
juvenile delinquency. Delinquents seem to experience higher levels of such encouragement, indicating a
criminogenic influence within the family environment.
Table 13: Further crosstabulation
Question
category
Always
Frequently
Sometimes
Rarely
Never
Non Delinquent
545.5%
15.6%
425.0%
213.3%
18862.7%
Delinquent
654.5%
1794.4%
1275.0%
1386.7%
11237.3%
113.1%
185.0%
164.4%
154.2%
30083.3%
Non Delinquent
1630.2%
522.7%
1448.3%
5074.6%
11560.8%
Delinquent
3769.8%
1777.3%
1551.7%
1725.4%
7439.2%
5314.7%
226.1%
298.1%
6718.6%
18952.5%
Non Delinquent
313.6%
00.0%
719.4%
1555.6%
17565.8%
Delinquent
1986.4%
9100.0%
2980.6%
1244.4%
9134.2%
226.1%
92.5%
3610.0%
277.5%
26673.9%
To be sure that the differences in the findings observed on parental attitudes towards criminality are not just by
chance, the researcher tested the hypothesis that there is no statistically significant difference on the parental
attitudes towards criminality score between delinquents and non-delinquents. A Mann-Whitney U test was
conducted to determine whether there was a statistically significant difference between the score of parental
attitudes towards criminality between delinquents and non-delinquents. Results of the analysis indicated that
there was a difference U=8972.5, z = -7.486, p < .05, with a medium effect of r = 0.39 with delinquents scoring
higher in parental attitudes towards criminality (median=2.33, N=160), compared to non-delinquents
(median=1.00, N=200). The comparative analysis thus highlights distinct differences in parental attitudes
towards criminality between delinquents and non-delinquents.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VII July 2024
Page 2574
www.rsisinternational.org
To get a better understanding of the relationship between parental attitudes towards criminality and juvenile
delinquency, the researcher sought answers from the relevant stakeholders dealing with children. They all
agreed to that parental attitudes towards criminality are foundational in shaping a child's behavioral trajectory,
especially in the context of criminality. The nuanced perspectives provided by the stakeholders interviewed
shed light on the multifaceted ways in which parental attributes influence juvenile delinquency. The
respondents introduced a notion that children, perceiving approval for delinquent actions from their parents,
may be inclined to engage in unlawful activities. This underscored the significance of the parent-child dynamic
and the role of parental influence in shaping moral perspectives. They reported that the nature of parental
attitudes, whether lenient, indifferent, or actively encouraging antisocial behavior, influences the behavior of
the children. A parent's attitude was described as establishing boundaries that dictate the extent to which a child
should proceed while engaging in their activities. When the parent doesn’t react to negative actions of the child,
the child ends up normalizing the acts which could be wrong. Positive attitude from a parent towards good acts
of a child motivates them to even do better.
Several respondents highlighted instances where parents or caregivers were indifferent about their children in
engaging drug-related activities, exposing them to a crime-conducive attitude and environment from a young
age. The stakeholders also mentioned that parents or caregivers with attitudes favoring antisocial behavior are
also likely to encourage their children to abuse drugs or commit other delinquent acts such as shoplifting or
stealing. This offers insights into family dynamics contributing to delinquent behavior as it sheds light on the
normalization of drug use within these families.
The stakeholders also mentioned how often parents warn their children about misbehavior, coupled with an
investigation into the nature of these warnings, as valuable determinants of children’s behavior. Inconsistent
warnings, and warnings that are either too harsh or too lenient are a pivotal factor in shaping juvenile behavior.
The counsellors mentioned that communication dynamics within families which is depicted by the attitudes the
parents have affects the effectiveness of parental guidance and its potential impact on juvenile delinquency.
Effective communication emphasizing that the consequences of misbehavior can serve as a deterrence, while
inconsistent or ineffective warnings may contribute to a lack of guidance, potentially increasing the risk of
delinquent behavior.
The endorsement of violence within the family represents another critical aspect of parental attitudes towards
criminality. Insights gained from interviews reveal the dynamics of power and control within these families,
providing a nuanced understanding of the link between parental encouragement of violence and juvenile
delinquency. For instance, a scenario where a parent actively supports or engages in domestic violence. In such
cases, the child not only witnesses aggressive behaviors but is also likely to internalize these patterns as
acceptable forms of conflict resolution. This normalization of violence within the family can contribute
significantly to the child's likelihood of engaging in delinquent behaviors outside the home. Moreover, the
perpetuation of violence across generations, as observed in such environments, underscores the need for
targeted interventions addressing both parental behaviors and the impact on the developing psyche of the child.
The comprehensive analysis of parental attitudes towards violence within the family is instrumental in
formulating strategies aimed at breaking the cycle of intergenerational transmission of criminal tendencies and
fostering healthier family dynamics.
Additionally, the analysis from the respondents unveiled a link between cultural norms and societal
expectations of various local contexts which in one way or another influence these attitudes. They said parental
attitudes towards criminality is intricately woven into broader cultural and societal fabrics. The respondents
also mentioned that economic strain contributes to a permissive attitude towards drug use among children,
which in turn perpetuates a cycle of delinquency. The following statements from the stakeholders illustrate
these assertions:
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VI June 2024
Page 2575
www.rsisinternational.org
Even in households where parents themselves are not directly involved in criminal activities, the attitudes they
exhibit, especially noticeable in single mothers facing various challenges, can significantly influence a child's
perception of anti-social behavior. For instance, an uneasy single mother's subtle tolerance towards certain
deviant activities may indirectly communicate to the child that such behavior is not always unequivocally
wrong.
(Stakeholder 1, Mombasa)
Parents who do not show their dissatisfaction on small issues done by the children, indirectly encourage the
children to do the same over and over again. When these issues escalate, the parent will lack the moral
authority to tell the child that it was wrong to do that. On the other hand, some parents might exhibit an overly
strict approach, pushing their children to conform excessively to societal expectations. This can create an
environment where the child feels compelled to meet unrealistic standards, potentially leading to frustration
and a rebellious response. A scenario where a parent consistently emphasizes the importance of impeccable
behavior without allowing room for the child to navigate and learn from their own experiences may
inadvertently foster a sense of rebellion, as the child seeks autonomy in response to the perceived pressure to
conform.
(Stakeholder 4, Mombasa)
Some parents do appreciate and support their children for things like bringing money home, bullying fellow
students in school as revenge despite the fact that they are encouraging the child to continue practicing
delinquent acts. The parents attitude becomes a confirmation to this child that whatever thing they are doing is
right. This is still the same acts that will escalate to serious criminal acts we are dealing with today like
robbery with violence.
(Stakeholder 4, Nairobi)
These findings are in agreement with the findings from a study by Moore, Rothwela & Segrott (2010) who
conducted a study to establish the relationship between parental attitudes and behavior, and young people's
consumption of alcohol after considering the increased consumption of alcohol among the youth in the UK.
The study used a cross-sectional design, involving secondary analyses of self-completion questionnaire
responses from 6,628 secondary school children who were aged 11-16 years), from 12 schools within an urban
location in Wales. The study included questions that related to family functioning and perceived parental
attitudes that were used for factor analysis. The study established that closed-knit families had lower
prevalence cases of alcohol consumption among the youth in the UK. The family factors associated with such
behaviors as alcohol consumption included families with a history of violence, conflicts, and emerging liberal
attitudes among parents, petty crime.
To ascertain the predictive effects of parantal characteristics (combination of parental criminality and parental
attitudes towards criminality or antisocial behavior) on the likelihood that a child will be delinquent versus not
be delinquent a logistic regression was performed. The researcher tested the null hypothesis that there is no
statistically significant predictive relationship between parental characteristics and juvenile delinquency in
Nairobi and Mombasa counties. The logistic regression model was statistically significant, X2 (1, N = 360) =
84.80, p = .000. The model explained 28.1% (Nagelkerke R2) of the variance in delinquency. The model was
able to correctly classify 63.8% of those who would turn out delinquent and 82% of those who would not, for
an overall success rate of 73.9%. Table 2 shows the logistic regression coefficient, Wald test, and odds ratio for
each of the predictors. The odds ratio for parental characteristics indicates that when holding all other variables
constant, a child is 7.2 times more likely to turn out delinquent than non-delinquent with poor parental
characteristics. Therefore, employing a .05 criterion of statistical significance, null hypothesis was thus
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VII July 2024
Page 2576
www.rsisinternational.org
rejected because the findings show a statistically significant predictive relationship between family
management practices and juvenile delinquency. Parental characteristics has significant partial predictive
effects on juvenile delinquency at 0.00 which is less than the threshold of 0.05.
Table 14: Omnibus Tests of Model Coefficients
Omnibus Tests of Model Coefficients
Chi-square
df
Sig.
Step 1
Step
84.801
1
.000
Block
84.801
1
.000
Model
84.801
1
.000
Table 15: Model Summary and Hosmer and Leme show Test
Model Summary
Step
-2 Log likelihood
Cox & Snell R Square
Nagelkerke R Square
1
409.812a
.210
.281
Estimation terminated at iteration number 5 because parameter estimates changed by less than .001.
Hosmer and Leme show Test
Step
Chi-square
df
Sig.
1
10.265
6
.114
Table 16: Classification Table
Classification Tablea
Observed
Predicted
category
Percentage Correct
no conflict
conflict
Step 1
category
no conflict
164
36
82.0
conflict
58
102
63.8
Overall Percentage
73.9
a. The cut value is .500
Table 17: Variables in the Equation
Variables in the Equation
B
S.E.
Wald
df
Sig.
Exp
(B)
95% C.I. for EXP(B)
Lower
Upper
Step
Score2ParentalCharacteristics
1.976
.258
58.490
1
.000
7.215
4.348
11.973
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VI June 2024
Page 2577
www.rsisinternational.org
1a
Constant
-3.192
.394
65.801
1
.000
.041
a. Variable(s) entered on step 1: Score2ParentalCharacteristics.
It is therefore evident from both quantitative and qualitative analysis that parental characteristics are linked to
juvenile delinquency. The generational transmission of criminal tendencies within families normalizes
delinquency, while specific types of criminal activities engaged in by parents contribute uniquely to the
development of antisocial behavior in their children. Additionally, parental attitudes towards criminality,
including the endorsement of violence within the family, are identified as crucial factors influencing juvenile
delinquency.
Other than parental characteristics persistent themes according to the findings from the interview also revealed
parental education level is another significant characteristic that correlates with a child's academic
achievements and, subsequently, their involvement in delinquent activities. Higher parental education is
associated with increased supervision, better communication skills, and a conducive environment for a child's
development. Initiatives that promote adult education, provide resources for parental education, and implement
school-based programs can positively impact both parents and children, contributing to a healthier family
environment.
Parenting styles was also been mentioned as a predictor of delinquency. One respondent mentioned that
parenting styles yield varied impacts on juvenile delinquency. Authoritarian parenting, characterized by strict
rules and harsh discipline, may lead to rebellion and increased delinquency. On the contrary, authoritative
parenting, combining warmth and clear expectations, fosters a healthy environment, reducing the risk of
juvenile delinquency.
Parental mental health significantly influences the family environment, impacting a child's daily routines,
parenting consistency, and overall stability. Children in households with parents experiencing mental health
issues face an increased risk of developing behavioral problems and engaging in delinquent activities.
In light of these findings, several recommendations emerge as imperative for addressing the complex issue of
parental criminality and parental attitudes and their contribution to juvenile delinquency. Given the link
between parental drug use and juvenile delinquency, substance abuse treatment and prevention programs are
crucial. Suggested interventions should focus on providing support for parents struggling with addiction, as
well as educational programs aimed at preventing substance abuse within families. Collaborative efforts
between healthcare providers, social services, and community organizations can address the multifaceted
nature of this issue.
Addressing the impact of violence within families requires family counseling and support services.
Interventions should focus on providing resources for families to break the cycle of violence, promoting
healthy communication, and offering mental health support. Family-centered programs can contribute to
creating a nurturing environment that reduces the risk of juvenile delinquency.
The interviewees mentioned that interventions should also address the broader economic and societal factors
contributing to juvenile delinquency. Educational and economic empowerment programs can provide families
with the tools and resources needed to overcome the challenges associated with poverty. Creating opportunities
for education, skill development, and employment can empower families to break free from the cycle of
criminality. By adopting a comprehensive approach that considers the interplay of familial, economic, and
societal factors, intervention strategies can effectively mitigate the impact of parental criminality on juvenile
delinquency, fostering a healthier and more resilient community.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VII July 2024
Page 2578
www.rsisinternational.org
Additionally, addressing the impact of violence within families requires family counseling and support services.
Interventions should focus on providing resources for families to break the cycle of violence, promoting
healthy communication, and offering mental health support. Family-centered programs can contribute to
creating a nurturing environment that reduces the risk of juvenile delinquency.
To address broader cultural and societal factors contributing to juvenile delinquency, educational and economic
empowerment programs are thus imperative. These initiatives can provide families with the tools and resources
needed to overcome the challenges associated with poverty, thereby breaking free from the cycle of criminality.
Creating opportunities for education, skill development, and employment can empower families to navigate
societal expectations and cultural norms, fostering healthier attitudes towards criminality. By adopting a
comprehensive approach that considers the interplay of familial, economic, and societal factors, intervention
strategies can effectively mitigate the impact of parental attitudes towards criminality on juvenile delinquency,
contributing to the development of a resilient and thriving community.
Mental health awareness campaigns, accessible mental health services, and community-based support
networks are vital in controlling the influence of mentally unhealthy adult negatively influencing the child.
Authoritative parenting can also be advocated, combining warmth and clear expectations, thus fostering a
healthy environment, reducing the risk of juvenile delinquency. Parenting education programs, support groups,
and community workshops can help parents adopt more effective parenting styles.
Consistency in disciplinary practices is crucial for creating a stable and predictable environment. Inconsistent
discipline may lead to confusion and resentment, contributing to delinquent behaviors. Parental training
programs, counseling services, and community initiatives can help parents establish and maintain consistent
disciplinary practices, fostering a more secure environment.
Effective communication and conflict resolution within the family are critical for a healthy and supportive
environment. Poor communication and unresolved conflicts may contribute to stress for children, potentially
leading to delinquent activities as a coping mechanism. Family counseling services, conflict resolution
workshops, and community-based initiatives can help improve communication within families, reducing the
risk of juvenile delinquency.
In conclusion, the comprehensive analysis of parental characteristics and their impact on juvenile delinquency
underscores the multifaceted nature of the issue. The findings highlight the need for targeted interventions
addressing various aspects of parental characteristics, as well as socioeconomic disparities, and parental
behaviors. By adopting a holistic approach, incorporating economic empowerment, educational initiatives,
substance abuse treatment, mental health support, and effective parenting strategies, stakeholders can
formulate comprehensive and practical action plans to mitigate the risk of juvenile delinquency and contribute
to the overall well-being of families and communities.
CONCLUSIONS
There was a statistically significant differences in scores of parental criminality and attitudes towards
criminality between delinquents and non-delinquents, emphasizing the association. Parental characteristics,
particularly parental criminality and attitudes towards criminality, demonstrate significant predictive effects on
juvenile delinquency. Correlations are observed between parental characteristics and juvenile delinquency,
indicating a potential influence of parental factors on delinquent behavior.
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
The policy recommendations from this study include:
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VI June 2024
Page 2579
www.rsisinternational.org
Implementing targeted parent education programs focusing on reducing criminality and promoting positive
attitudes towards law-abiding behaviour. This could encompass developing community-based initiatives and
support systems to mitigate the impact of adverse parental characteristics on juvenile delinquency. Adopting a
holistic and multifaceted approach to preventing and addressing juvenile delinquency would prove effective
since it recognizes the pivotal role of parental characteristics in shaping outcomes for at-risk youth.
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
The first limitation is that the study was conducted using a cross-sectional strategy which fails to fully capture
the trends and clear effects. i. There is need for further research to explore the nuanced interplay between
various parental characteristics and their specific impacts on different types of delinquent behaviors through
longitudinal studies. Longitudinal studies as opposed to cross-sectional studies may provide valuable insights
into the developmental trajectories of juvenile offenders in relation to parental influences allowing for a deeper
analysis.
REFERENCES
1. Beelmann, A., & Klahr, A. (2022). The Moderating Role of Parental Training on Delinquency,
Conduct, and Defiant Disorders: A Meta-Analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1753.
2. Besemer, S., Ahmad, S. I., Hinshaw, S. P., & Farrington, D. P. (2017). A systematic review and
meta-analysis of the intergenerational transmission of criminal behavior. Aggression and Violent
Behavior, 37, 161-178.
3.
Cardona-Isaza, M., & Trujillo-Cano, D. (2023). Risk and Protective Factors of Recidivism in
Colombian Juvenile Offenders. Acta Colombiana de Psicología, 26(1), 61-72.
4. Ferencz, A.J., Kinderman, P., Libby, J. (2022). Examining the Influence of Sibling Relationship Quality
and Parental Rearing Style on the Development of Dark Triad Traits: A Longitudinal Study. Personality
Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 12(8), 1125-1136.
5. Field, B. C. (2019). The evolution of the juvenile court: Race, politics, and the criminalizing of juvenile
justice (Vol. 4). NYU Press.
6. Frías-Armenta, M. & Corral-Verdugo, V. (2013). Environmental and Individual Factors in Adolescent
Antisociality: A Structural Model of Mexican Teenagers. International Journal of Criminal Justice
Sciences (IJCJS), 8 (2): 198–214.
7. Khan, A., Alkazemi, M., & Almekhlafi, M. (2017). Parental criminality and juvenile delinquency in
Morocco. International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences, 12(1), 1-12.
8. Li, G., Gao, Y., & Wang, H. (2023). Differences in Parenting Styles and Their Relationships with
Juvenile Delinquency: Comparison Between China and the United States. Frontiers in Psychology.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.643265
9. Moore, G. F., Rothwell, H., & Segrott, J. (2010). An exploratory study of the relationship between
parental attitudes and behavior and young people's consumption of alcohol. Substance abuse treatment,
prevention, and policy, 5(1), 1-14.
10. Mwangangi, R. (2019) The Role of Family in Dealing with Juvenile Delinquency. Open Journal of Social
Sciences, 7, 52-63. doi: 10.4236/jss.2019.73004.
11. Mwanza, D. (2022). Familial Factors Influencing Juvenile Delinquency: A Study of 300 Juveniles at
Kabete Rehabilitation School in Nairobi, Kenya. Journal of Comparative Social Work, 3(3), 647-656.
12. Vaughan, E. P., Speck, J. S., Frick, P. J., Robertson, E. L., Ray, J. V., Thornton, L. C., & Cauffman, E.
(2022). Longitudinal associations of parental monitoring and delinquent peer affiliation: The potential
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume VIII Issue VII July 2024
Page 2580
www.rsisinternational.org
influence of parental solicitation and monitoring rules. Journal of Adolescence, 94(4), 656-666.
13. Vieno, A., Nation, M., Pastore, M., & Santinello, M. (2009). Parenting and antisocial behavior: a model
of the relationship between adolescent self-disclosure, parental closeness, parental control, and
adolescent antisocial behavior. Developmental psychology, 45(6), 1509.
14. Walker, J. T., & Maddan, S. (2019). Statistics in criminology and criminal justice. Jones & Bartlett
Learning.
