By 1990 parents were, on average, available to their children 10 hours
less per week than they were in 1980 and 40 percent less than they were in 1965.1
A characteristic shared among the vast majority of violent juveniles is family
instability.2 Research has shown that in most cases, family stability can trump
negative influences that might otherwise lead to a child's violent behavior.
For each individual violent juvenile, any number of influences can contribute
to violent behavior:
In each stage of a child's life, parental involvement is highly important.
|
When researchers study juvenile violence, they try to determine
what characteristics or outside influences are responsible. Does a certain
temperament lead to violent behavior? Do certain physical anomalies make some
kids prone to violence more than others? Does a child's physical or mental
make up determine whether he will grow up to be a violent juvenile? The answer,
according to the best research, is "it depends." It depends upon
the child's family. In the war against juvenile violence, research shows that
there is no more effective weapon than a healthy family.
A stable family life serves as a "buffer" to help shield kids from
the forces (biological or social) that contribute to violent behavior. A child's
family is in many ways his first and last "line of defense," especially
in the socially toxic environment that permeates youth culture. Researchers
at Columbia University and St. Luke's/Roosevelt Hospital Center in New York
City connected the erosion of family life as a primary cause of teen violence.
They said that the family is important because it "constrains adolescents
within the bounds of community values. The change in the family structure —
the rise in single-parent households and the dispersal of the extended family
— leaves less time, patience, consistency and flexibility in rearing children.3
The negative effects of divorce, single parent households, illegitimate births
and fatherlessness on children have been amply documented. The data clearly
shows that children in homes where both biological parents are present have
a much lower incidence of behavior problems and criminal activity. The vast
majority of violent juveniles come from broken homes, usually a single-parent
household headed by the mother.4
In a 1994 study in Albuquerque, public health researchers investigated the
social background of elementary schoolchildren involved in violent behavior.
Statistical analysis revealed that "compared with matched control students,
children who exhibited violent misbehavior in school were 11 times as likely
not to live with their fathers and six times as likely to have parents who were
not married."5
This isn't to say that kids reared in living arrangements other than a two-parent
family will automatically grow up to be violent juveniles. Such a conclusion
would be incorrect. Nor is it accurate to conclude that a child who grows up
in a two-parent home is guaranteed not to become violent. In fact, the killers
at Columbine High School in April, 2004 both came from two-parent homes. So
what is it that makes the difference?
Most experts agree that what traditionally has been the advantage of the two-parent
home can be summed up in one word: time. Adequate time with parents is critical
for the development of every child, especially for self-esteem and confidence.
The amount of conversation and the level of interaction between parents and
children have an enormous impact on the child's development. It is stating the
obvious that the more time a parent and child can spend together, the more influence
the parent has in shaping the child's values and behavior.
In each stage of a child's life, parental involvement is highly important.
Even beyond the early "attachment" years, through adolescence and
into adulthood, children need parents to help them make their way through a
myriad of changes that will shape their character and establish their values.
If parents do not spend time with their children, their values will be shaped
largely by their peers and by popular culture.
—John C. Thomas
Endnotes:
1Patrick Fagan, "The Breakdown of the Family: The Consequences for Children and Society," The Heritage Foundation, 1998.
2Dr. James Garbarino, Lost Boys: Why Our Sons Turn Violent and How We Can Save Them, (New York: The Free Press), 1999.
3Jonathon L. Sheline, Betty J. Skipper, and W. Eugene Broadhead, "Risk Factors for Violent Behavior in Elementary School Boys: Have You Hugged Your Child Today?" American Journal of Public Health 84, 1994, p. 661-663.
4See Karl Zinsmeister, "Raising Hiroko," The American Enterprise (March/April, 1990), pp. 53-59. See also Judith Wallerstein, Surviving the Breakup: How Children and Parents Cope With Divorce (New York: Basic Books), 1980; Sara McLanahan and Gary Sandefur, Growing Up with a Single Parent: What Hurts, What Helps, (Cambridge: Harvard University Press), 1994; Darin R. Featherstone, "Differences in School Behavior and Achievement Between Children from Intact, Reconstituted and Single-Parent Families," Adolescence 27 (1992): 1-12.
5Patricia Cohen and Judith Brook, "Family Factors Related to Persistence of Psychopathology in Childhood and Adolescence," Psychiatry, November 1987.
Adapted from "The Rood Causes of Juvenile Violence."
Copyright © 1999 Focus on the Family.
All rights reserved. International copyright secured.
