Journal of Bioeconomics

, Volume 4, Issue 3, pp 269–282

The Impact of Families on Juvenile Substance Use

  • Catalina Amuedo-Dorantes
  • Traci Mach
Article
  • 72 Downloads

Abstract

This paper examines the effect of family composition on juvenile substance use and drug sales using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997. The results underscore the importance of having a father figure in the household in deterring juvenile smoking, marijuana use, and drug sale. However, the extent to which father figures affect juvenile substance use and drug sales varies according to their biological link to the youth and the youth's gender. Results further indicate that siblings and their involvement in substance use and drug sales significantly influence youths' own exposure to these delinquent practices.

biological parents siblings substance abuse 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References cited

  1. Baumrind, Diana C. 1986. Familial antecedents of adolescent drug use: A developmental perspective. In C. Jones, & R. Battjes (ed.) Etiology of Drug Abuse. NIDA Research Monograph # 56.Google Scholar
  2. Block, Jack, Jeanne H. Block & Susan Keyes. 1988. Longitudinally foretelling drug usage in adolescence: Early childhood personality and environmental. Child Development 59:336–355.Google Scholar
  3. Garis, Dalton. 1998. Poverty, single-parent households, and youth at-risk behavior: An empirical study. Journal of Economic Issues 32(4):1079–1105.Google Scholar
  4. Glaeser, Edward L. & Bruce Sacerdote. 1999. Why is there more crime in cities? Journal of Political Economy 107(6):S225-S258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Grogger, Jeff. 1998. Market wages and youth crime. Journal of Labor Economics 16(4):756–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hawkins, J.David, Richard Catalano & Janet Y. Miller. 1992. Risk and protective factors for alcohol and other drug problems in adolescence and early adulthood: Implications for substance abuse prevention. Psychological Bulletin 112(1):64–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Johnson, Robert A., John P. Hoffman & Dean R. Gerstein. 1996. The relationship between family structure and adolescent substance use. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Office of Applied Studies, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, Maryland.Google Scholar
  8. Johnston, Lloyd D., Patrick M. O'Malley & Jerald G. Bachman. 1999. National survey results on drug use from the Monitoring the Future Study, 1975–1997. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, NIDA. Publication No. 98–4346.Google Scholar
  9. Levitt, Steven D. 1998. Why do increased arrest rates appear to reduce crime: Deterrence, incapacitation, or measurement error? Economic Inquiry 36(3):353–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Neal, Derek. 1997. The effect of catholic secondary schooling on educational attainment. Journal of Labor Economics 15(1):98–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Shedler, Jonathan & Jack Block. 1990. Adolescent drug use and psychological health: A longitudinal inquiry. American Psychologist 45:612–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. U.S. Dept. of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation. UNIFORM CRIME REPORTING PROGRAM DATA [UNITED STATES]: COUNTY-LEVEL DETAILED ARREST AND OFFENSE DATA, 1995 [Computer file]. ICPSR ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [producer and distributor], 1997.Google Scholar
  13. Witte, Ann Dryden & Helen Tauchen. 1994. Work and crime: An exploration using panel data. Public Finance 49(0):155–167.Google Scholar
  14. Yamada, Tetsuji, Michael Kendix & Tadashi Yamada. 1996. The impact of alcohol consumption and marijuana use on high school graduation. Health Economics 5(1):77–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Catalina Amuedo-Dorantes
    • 1
  • Traci Mach
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsSan Diego State UniversitySan DiegoUSA

Personalised recommendations