Why Not Let Kids Be Kids? An Exploratory Analysis of the Relationship Between Alternative Rationales for Managing Status Offending and Youths’ Self-Concepts

  • Wesley G. Jennings
  • Chris Gibson
  • Lonn Lanza-Kaduce


Over the past several decades, the juvenile justice system has struggled with an effective response to status offenders and their unwanted behaviors. Three divergent rationales have emerged for handling these youth: (1) treatment, (2) deterrence, and (3) normalization. Using data from over 300 youth under supervision by agencies in three states, the current study assesses how these differing practices are related to youths’ self-concepts. Results provide support for both deterrence and normalization-based rationales over the historical treatment-based rationale. Viewing status offending as normal adolescent behavior (i.e., normalization) has the most beneficial effect on self-concept. Study limitations and directions for future research are discussed.


Status offenders Delinquency Treatment Juvenile justice 


  1. Barber, C. N., Ball, J., & Armistead, L. (2003). Parent-adolescent relationship and adolescent psychological functioning among African-American female adolescents: Self-esteem as a mediator. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 12, 361–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bartusch, D., & Matsueda, R. (1996). Gender, reflected appraisals and labeling: A cross-group test of an interactionist theory of delinquency. Social Forces, 75, 145–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bem, D. J. (1972). Self-perception theory. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (vol. 6, (pp. 2–62)). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  4. Benda, B. B. (1987). Comparison of rates of recidivism among status offenders and delinquents. Adolescence, 22, 445–458.Google Scholar
  5. Bilchik, S. (1999). Juvenile justice: A century of change. Washington, DC: U.S.Google Scholar
  6. Boisvert, M. J., & Wells, R. (1980). Toward a rational policy on status offenders. Social Work, 25, 230–234.Google Scholar
  7. Brownfield, D., & Thompson, K. (2005). Self-concept and delinquency: The effects of reflected appraisals by parent and peers. Western Criminology Review, 6, 22–29.Google Scholar
  8. Bynner, J. M., O’Malley, P. M., & Bachman, J. G. (1981). Self-esteem and delinquency revisited. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 10, 407–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bynum, E. G., & Weiner, R. L. (2002). Self-concept and violent delinquency in urban African-American adolescent males. Psychological Reports, 90, 477–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Clarke, S., Ringwalt, C., & Ciminello, A. (1985). Perspectives on juvenile status offenders: A report to the North Carolina’s Governor Crime Commission. Chapel Hill, NC: Institute of Government, University of North Carolina.Google Scholar
  11. Datesman, S. K., Scarpitti, F. R., & Stephenson, R. M. (1975). Female delinquency: An application of self and opportunity theories. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 12, 107–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Datesman, S. K. (1982). Impact of delinquency on adolescents’ attitudes and self-image. In V. Swigert (Ed.), Law and legal process (pp. 119–130). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  13. Datesman, S. K., & Aickin, M. (1985). Offense specialization and escalation among status offenders. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 75, 1246–1275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. DeCoster, S. (2003). Delinquency and depression: A gendered role-taking and social learning perspective. In R. Akers, & G. Jensen (Eds.), Advances in criminological theory (vol. 11, (pp. 129–150)). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.Google Scholar
  15. DeHaan, L. B., & MacDermid, S. M. (1999). Identity development as a mediating factor between urban poverty and behavioral outcomes for junior high school students. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 20, 123–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.Google Scholar
  17. Empey, L. T. (1978). American Delinquency: Its meaning and construction. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.Google Scholar
  18. Erickson, M. L. (1979). Some empirical questions concerning the current revolution in juvenile justice. In L. T. Empey (Ed.), Future of childhood and juvenile justice (pp. 277–311). Charlottesville, VA: University Press of Virginia.Google Scholar
  19. Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gibbs, J. P. (1975). Crime, punishment and deterrence. New York, NY: Elsevier Press.Google Scholar
  21. Giordano, P., Millhollin, T., Cernkovich, S., Pugh, M. D., & Rudolph, J. (1999). Delinquency, identity, and women’s involvement in relationship violence. Criminology, 37, 17−40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Henderson, C. E., Dakof, G. A., Schwartz, S. J., & Liddle, H. A. (2006). Family functioning, self-concept, and severity of adolescent externalizing problems. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 15, 719–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jessor, R., Turbin, M. S., & Costa, F. M. (1998). Risk and protection in successful outcomes among disadvantaged adolescents. Applied Developmental Science, 2, 194–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kelley, T. M. (1983). Status offenders can be different: A comparative study of delinquent careers. Crime & Delinquency, 29, 365–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Klein, M., & Maxson, C. (1994). Deinstitutionalization of status offenders: A study of intervention practices for youth in seven cities in the United States, 1987–1991 [Computer file]. Conducted by U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 1991. ICPSR ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 1994.Google Scholar
  26. Kinch, J. W. (1963). A formalized theory of the self-concept. American Journal of Sociology, 68, 481–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kobrin, S., & Klein, M. W. (1981). National evaluation of the deinstitutionalization of status offender programs. Vol. I & II. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.Google Scholar
  28. Koita, K., & Triplett, R. (1998). An examination of gender and race effects on the parental appraisal process. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 25, 623–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Leary, M. R., Schreindorfer, L. S., & Haupt, A. L. (1995). The role of low self-esteem in emotional and behavioral problems: Why is low self-esteem dysfunctional. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 14, 297–314.Google Scholar
  30. Lemert, E. M. (1967). Human deviance, social problems, and social control. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  31. Levy, K. (2001). The relationship between adolescent attitudes towards authority, self-concept, and delinquency. Adolescence, 36, 333–346.Google Scholar
  32. Lipton, D., Martinson, R., & Wilks, J. (1975). The effectiveness of correctional treatment: A survey of treatment evaluation studies. New York, NY: Praeger.Google Scholar
  33. Liu, X. (2000). The conditional effect of peer groups on the relationship between parental labeling and youth delinquency. Sociological Perspectives, 43, 499–514.Google Scholar
  34. Matsueda, R. L. (1992). Reflected appraisals, parental labeling and delinquency: Specifying a symbolic interactionist theory. American Journal of Sociology, 97, 1577–1611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Maxson, C. L., & Klein, M. W. (1997). Responding to troubled youth. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. McCarthy, J. D., & Hoge, D. R. (1984). The dynamics of self-esteem and delinquency. American Journal of Sociology, 90, 396–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Oyserman, D., & Markus, H. R. (1990). Possible selves and delinquency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 112–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Paschall, M. J., & Hubbard, M. L. (1998). Effects of neighborhood and family stressors on African American male adolescents’ self-worth and propensity for violent behavior. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 5, 825–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice (1967). Task force report: Juvenile delinquency and youth crime. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  40. Raley, G. A. (1995). The JJDP Act: A second look. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.Google Scholar
  41. Rausch, S. (1983). Court processing versus diversion of status offenders: A test of deterrence and labeling theories. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 20, 39–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rigby, K., & Cox, I. (1996). The contribution of bullying at school and low self-esteem to acts of delinquency among Australian teenagers. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 609–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Robison, J., & Smith, G. (1971). The effectiveness of correctional programs. Crime & Delinquency, 17, 67–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Raboteg-Saric, Z., Rijavec, M., & Brajsa-Zganec, A. (2001). The relation of parental practices and self conceptions to young adolescent problem behaviors and substance use. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 55, 203–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Reckless, W. C., Dinitz, S., & Murray, E. (1956). Self-concept as an insulator against delinquency. American Sociological Review, 21, 744–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Rosenberg, F. R., & Rosenberg, M. (1978). Self-esteem and delinquency. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 7, 279–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the self. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  48. Rosenberg, M., Schooler, C., & Schoenbach, C. (1989). Self-esteem and adolescent problems: Modeling reciprocal effects. American Sociological Review, 54, 1004–1018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schur, E. M. (1973). Radical nonintervention: Rethinking the delinquency problem. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  50. Shelden, R. G., Horvath, J. A., & Tracy, S. (1989). Do status offenders get worse? Some clarifications on the question of escalation. Crime & Delinquency, 35, 202–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Stewart, M. J., Vockell, E. L., & Ray, R. E. (1986). Decreasing court appearance of juvenile status offenders. Social Casework, 67, 74–79.Google Scholar
  52. Terrell, F., & Taylor, J. (1980). Self concept of juveniles who commit black on black crime. Corrective and Social Psychiatry and Journal of Behavior, Technology, Methods, & Therapy, 26, 107–109.Google Scholar
  53. Thomas, C. W. (1976). Are status offenders really so different? A comparative and longitudinal assessment. Crime & Delinquency, 22, 438–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Tittle, C. R., & Logan, C. H. (1973). Sanctions and deviance: Evidence and remaining questions. Law & Society Review, 7, 371–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Vermeiren, R., Bogaerts, J., Ruchkin, V., Deboutte, D., & Schwab-Stone, M. (2004). Subtypes of self-esteem and self-concept in adolescent violent and property offenders. Journal of Child Psychology & Psychiatry, 45, 405–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wells, L. E., & Rankin, J. H. (1983). Self-concept as a mediating factor in delinquency. Social Psychological Quarterly, 46, 11–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zimring, F. E., & Hawkins, G. (1973). Deterrence: The legal threat of crime control. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wesley G. Jennings
    • 1
  • Chris Gibson
    • 2
  • Lonn Lanza-Kaduce
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Justice AdministrationUniversity of LouisvilleLouisvilleUSA
  2. 2.Department of Sociology and Criminology & LawUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations