CHAPTER -2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

52
 CHAPTER -2
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

The lack of supervision and the absence of close

relationships between the teenager and his or her parents are
factors that influence delinquency. A Mullens found that children
from biologically intact homes have a lower incidence of illegal
behaviour that is paralleled by their lower rate of susceptibility to
peer pressure to commit deviant acts. The study suggests that
there is a link between juvenile deviance and family structure. The
study also suggests that juveniles who are charged with more
serious acts of delinquency are from incomplete homes than
juveniles charged with lesser acts of misconduct.
A family may influence a person‟s behaviour either
negatively or positively both at childhood and adulthood. An intact
family can be said to be a functioning union between a mother and
a father, so when a break up exist, the turmoil may affect a child to
a greater extent. A functioning family is beneficial to a child than a
dysfunctional one. Family separation was a great contributor of
child neglect which generally leads to child deviant behaviour. For
example, leaving homes and addicted to vices and the like from
parental and family neglect, lack of supervision and guidance.
Many family characteristics and family environments
influence juvenile deviant behaviour such as the number of people
in a family, inconsistent parenting, family problems, child neglect
and children‟s attachment to parents.180
If violence encompasses all emotional environmental
aspects of a juvenile‟s life, he is more likely to engage in

53
delinquent activities.181 In a study by H. Juby and D. Farrington,
182 delinquency rates were found to be higher among the children
who live in permanently disrupted families compared to those living
in intact families. The same pattern was found in case of intact but
high-conflict families. Cohesiveness of the family successfully
predicts the frequency of delinquent acts for non-traditional
families.
The lack of supervision and the absence of close
relationships between the teenager and his or her parents are
factors that influence delinquency.184 A. Mullens185 found that
children from biologically intact homes have a lower incidence of
illegal behaviour that is paralleled by their lower rate of
susceptibility to peer pressure to commit deviant acts. The study
suggests that there is a link between juvenile deviance and family
structure. The study also suggests that juveniles who are charged
with more serious acts of delinquency are from incomplete homes
than juveniles charged with lesser acts of misconduct.
A broken home is a factor in personality mal-adjustment. For
males, the largest proportion of crimes brought to the attention of
the court was the petty theft offenses. The female delinquents
were referred for running away from home and involved in some
type of sexual deviancy. Certain types of delinquency are related
to broken homes (e.g. runaway, truancy and fighting). Juveniles
from broken homes according to A. Mullens186 are 2.7 times more
likely to run away from their family than children living in intact
homes. The core belief is that a broken home has an imbalance
and as a result is detrimental to a child‟s socialization and
personality adjustment. As a result, a child may be more
susceptible to negative peer pressure and may ultimately commit
54
acts of delinquency not committed by children from intact homes
where there is a balanced structure of man and women who act as
good role models in child acquiring proper roles.
While examining the relationship between family structure
and juvenile delinquency, it was found that proportionately more
juvenile offenders come from family arrangements other than the
two-parent family home.
. Mugo and K. Kamau188 say that various reasons such as
poor marriages, lack of parental controls, ineffective parental
behaviour and failure to provide a natural and loving environment
attribute to the rise in delinquency. A family has a greater effect on
individual‟s trait acquisition and development.
A broken home is a factor in personality mal-adjustment. For
males, the largest proportion of crimes brought to the attention of
the court was the petty theft offenses. The female delinquents
were referred for running away from home and involved in some
type of sexual deviancy. Certain types of delinquency are related
to broken homes (e.g. runaway, truancy and fighting). Juveniles
from broken homes according to A. Mullens186are 2.7 times more
likely to run away from their family than children living in intact
homes. The core belief is that a broken home has an imbalance
and as a result is detrimental to a child‟s socialization and
personality adjustment. As a result, a child may be more
susceptible to negative peer pressure and may ultimately commit
acts of delinquency not committed by children from intact homes
where there is a balanced structure of man and women who act as
good role models in child acquiring proper roles.
While examining the relationship between family structure
and juvenile delinquency, it was found that proportionately more
55
juvenile offenders come from family arrangements other than the
two-parent family home. M. Mugo and K. Kamau say that various
reasons such as poor marriages, lack of parental controls,
ineffective parental behaviour and failure to provide a natural and
loving environment attribute to the rise in delinquency. A family has
a greater effect on individual‟s trait acquisition and development.
Ngale (2009) explored the relationship between family
structure and juvenile delinquency. The analysis revealed the
following significant relationships: the moral education of juvenile
delinquents is undertaken more by others than their biological
parents; most delinquent children come from the lowest socio-
economic stratum of society; about two-thirds of the juvenile
delinquents come from homes where 7 persons and above live
under the same roof; most parents of our respondents have low
paid jobs which keep them for long periods away from their
children. A growing number of parents need additional
socioeconomic support, development of vital skills of responsible
parenting, in order to adequately manage periods of rapid social
change and simultaneous multi dimensional challenges.
A.K. Kimani (2010) investigated the causative relationship
between family unit structure and juvenile delinquency. The
research revealed that there was a strong correlation between
murder and a child having come from an intact family. For a single
parent family parenthood, there was a strong correlation between
street life, sex and defilement offences. Children brought up in a
step parent home had a strong inclination towards substance
abuse but the correlation was even greater for stealing and
refusing school. For children having come from a children‟s home,
they had a strong correlation towards substance abuse and street
56
life but showed a negative strong correlation with refusing school.
For children brought up in a grandparent family structure, the
correlation was strong for substance abuse and the highest for
stealing. Murder was the least committed offence while refusing
school and street life were the most dominant. This research
concludes that single parenthood families were the most significant
for all offences in the study except murder.
In another study by K. Sanni and others (2010) the results
indicated that three family variables namely: family stability, family
cohesiveness and family adaptability impact strongly on juvenile
delinquency among secondary school students in Nigeria.
E. Obioha and M. Nthabi (2010) investigated the social
background patterns of juvenile delinquents to ascertain their
contributions to juvenile delinquencies in Lesotho. The results in
the main corroborated what exists in literature that most
delinquents come from broken homes; most delinquents are
males; delinquency is at a higher rate in urban areas compared to
the rural areas and that most delinquents are part of peer groups
who engage in delinquent behaviours. The most committed
offence across the country was robbery.
Another study links parental care with high levels of
psychological distress, which leads to delinquency. J. Chambers
and others198 found that high parental control, such as in an
authoritarian parenting style, leads to a faster first arrest. They also
discovered that low parenting care, such as in a permissive
parenting style, is related to high levels of distress in adolescents.
These finding would also indicate harmful results from being
reared in a permissive or authoritarian home.

57
 The major area within juvenile delinquency and families is
single parent households versus two parent households. K. Klein
and R. Forehand suggest that the prediction of juvenile
delinquency in early childhood depends on the type of maternal
parenting skills that are imposed upon the child during early
adolescence.
In addition, highly active children and children who frequently
and intensely experienced negative emotions had less constructive
conflict with their mothers, involving less resolution, more
aggravation and less justification, than children who did not have
these qualities. Attachment security was not related to the
frequency of conflict between mothers and their children, but to the
quality, the study found. Mothers and children who had secure
relationships had constructive conflict involving high levels of
resolution, compromise and justification. In sum, both the quality of
children's relationships with their mothers and children's
personality types were found to shape the nature of conflict
between mothers and their children at age two. A 2008 study by
UNICEF claimed that mothers who went back to work less than a
year after giving birth were gambling with their children‟s
development.
Father involvement is positively correlated with children
experiencing overall life satisfaction, less depression, less
emotional distress and fewer expressions of negative emotionality
such as fear and guilt.
According to Rogers (1959), self concept governs individuals
behaviors and adjustment He found that the self concept is viewed
as the way an individual perceives himself and his behavior is
strongly influenced by the way others perceive him.
58
 K.N. Wright and K.E. Wright194 suggest positive parenting
practices during the early years and later in adolescence appear to
act as buffers preventing delinquent behaviour and assisting
adolescents involved in such behaviour to desist from delinquency.
Research indicates that various exposures to violence are
important sources of early adolescent role exits, which means that
not only can a juvenile witness violence within the family but on the
outside as well.
D. Gorman-Smith and P. Tolan195 found that parental
conflict and parental aggressiveness predicted violent offending;
whereas, lack of maternal affection and paternal criminality
predicted involvement in property crimes. Familial characteristics
suggesting familial antisocial behaviour or values such as family
history of criminal behaviour, harsh parental discipline, and family
conflict have been among the most consistently linked.
D.G. Myers196 identified one reason why people believe so
strongly in the nurture assumption is that they can see parents
influencing their children. They observe the child of permissive
parents being obnoxious and the child of abusive parents looking
cowed and fearful, in the presence of their parents. The
fundamental attribution error causes observers to assume that
these children will be obnoxious or fearful in other social contexts
too. In another study conducted by D. Gorman-Smith and her
colleagues197, data show that children are more likely to resort to
violence if there is violence within relationships that they may
share with their family.
Bishop, Sue M & Ingersolls, Gray M. (1989), state that
effects of marital conflict and family structure on the self concept of
pre and early adolescents.
59
 Cox & Cox, 1979 also have stated that warm, loving parents
tend to create a secure and thus learn environment in which they
can be more readily socialized and thus learn more appropriate
behavior.
Robert (1998) found that adolescents living in single family
are more prone to behavior problems like school dropout, running
away from home and engaging in premarital sexual activities and
family structure remained a salient factor in the prediction of these
problems. The impact of parental death on the process of
separation - individuation in adolescence was examined by Elder
and Sandra (1995) showed that adolescents from the father –
deceased group who were more attached to mothers showed less
autonomy according to their scores on the emotional autonomy
scale. Single parent children were found to have significantly more
problem areas of discipline/self-control than those from intact
families.
Spigelman, Spigelman and ingles son (1991) and Hodges,
Buchsbaum and Tierney (1983) hold that hostility and aggression
are found in higher levels in children from divorced homes.
Adam (2002) revealed that visit the separation from parent,
adolescents shoed higher levels of adjustment problems on an
index measuring cognitive, emotional and behavioral functioning.
Allen (2002) observed more feeling of abandonment,
helplessness, powerlessness, anger, guilt and conflicts among
children of divorced parents. Sons tended to report closer
relationships with their father than do daughters (King, 2002).
Mueller (2003) reported that boys showed several emotions in
response to parental divorce, including loneliness, sadness, fear,
shame or embarrassment and anger. jain and Rathore (2006)
60
reported that children of single parent families significantly feel
more insecure in comparison to children of intact families.
Researchers debate when self-concept development begins
but agree on the importance of person‟s life. Tiedemann (2000)
indicates that parents‟ gender stereotypes and expectations for
their children impact children‟s understandings of themselves by
approximately age 3. Leflot (2010) Others suggest that self-
concept develops later, around age 7 or 8, as children are
developmentally prepared to begin interpreting their own feelings,
abilities and interpretations of feedback they receive from parents,
teachers and peers about themselves.
Marsh (2011) Trautwein (2009) Despite differing opinions
about the onset of self-concept development, researchers agree
on the importance of one‟s self-concept, influencing people‟s
behaviours and cognitive and emotional outcomes including (but
not limited to) academic achievement, levels of happiness, anxiety,
social integration, self-esteem, and life satisfaction.
Moreover, Ayodele (2007) stated that the environment where
a child finds himself/herself goes a long way in determining his
learning ability and ultimately his academic performance in school.
The influence of sex (gender) on academic performance has also
been an issue of concern to most researchers. This is because
„gender‟ appears to have some powerful effect on learning.
According to Fauto-Sterling (2005) and Friedman (2005)
suggest no significant difference in cognitive ability between males
and females. Although research results vary widely the following
conclusions have been drawn. Males are more abstract learners,
females have more anxiety about study success, males are more

61
instructive, and females are more analytical and organized
(Bielinskia & Davison 2003).
Okoye (2008) postulated that sex differences may have little
or no effect on academic performance, rather, he submits that
eventual achievement by learners is predicted more on personal
effort than sex variable. However, the overall picture suggests that
males and females may learn differently. In the same vein, socio-
economic background is another factor that may affect academic
performance of students. This background refers to the parent‟s
educational attainment, occupation, level of income and social
class placement. When a child‟s needs are not properly
addressed, his learning ability could be affected due to lack of
motivation.
Igbinosa Victor Omoruyi (2014) This study investigated the
influence of broken homes on academic performance and
personality development of the adolescents in lagos state
metropolis with particular focus on the Kosofe Local Government
Area of Lagos State. In carrying out the study, three null
hypotheses were tested. The sample for the study consisted of two
hundred (200) adolescents randomly selected from four public
senior secondary schools in Kosofe Local Government Area of
Lagos State. The instrument used for data collection was a self –
developed questionnaire. The data collected were analyzed using
both independent t-test and Pearson Product Moment Correlation
statistical methods. The results were held significant at 0.05 alpha
level. The results revealed that: i. There is a significant difference
between single- parenting and academic performance of the
adolescents. ii. There is a significant difference between parental
socio- economic status and academic performance. iii. There is
62
significant relationship between adolescents from broken homes
and academic performance.
The majority of children in intact families have never
experienced a marital disruption and live with both biological
parents. This family structure has been theorized to have several
benefits for children. First, children have easy access to both
biological parents. One study based on mothers‟ reports found
higher parental involvement, more enjoyable parent-child
interactions, and the fewest disagreements between children and
parents among intact families (Acock and Demo, 1994). Intact
families, however, may not be free of parental conflict (Simons et
al., 1996), and the physical presence of parents does not ensure
emotional presence (LaRossa, 1988). In other words, more time
together does not necessarily mean high-quality time together
(Acock and Demo, 1994).
McLanahan and Sandefur (1994) argue that intact two-
parent families create a system of checks and balances for parents
to act in appropriate ways. Parents can put pressure on each other
to spend time with the children, have a good relationship with their
children, and monitor each other‟s discipline of the children. Thus,
having two biological parents in the household, who care about
their children, makes each parent more likely to be involved with
their children.
Second, parents in intact families are likely to have higher
levels of psychological well-being when compared to parents in
other family structures (Acock and Demo, 1994; Gove, 1972).
Married parents have also been shown to be less antisocial. For
example, substance abuse, delinquent and deviant acts are less
prevalent among parents within intact families (Simons, Johnson,
63
and Lorenz, 1996). And third, two-parent families generally have
higher household incomes. The average family income for intact
households is $49,491, as compared to $10,512 for never-married
families and $20,262 for divorced families (Acock and Demo,
1994; McLanahan and Sandefur, 1994).
Children from divorced and separated families have
obviously experienced or are experiencing a marital disruption. For
the purpose of this research, these children live in a single-parent
household with their biological mother, which is the most common
custody arrangement. I have combined divorced and separated
family structures in this section of the literature review for two
reasons. First, research specifically on separated families is
limited, and second, the family processes and socioeconomic
characteristics within these structures are very similar. However,
based on the crisis model of divorce, I imagine that individuals in
separated families experience more difficulties with family
processes and more socioeconomic problems than divorced
families. Separated individuals are likely to be in the initial phase of
a marital breakup. According to the crisis model of divorce, the
effects of marital disruption are most influential during the divorcing
years and the years immediately following divorce. The effects,
however, decrease and eventually disappear over time (Amato
and Booth, 1991).
Divorced families have several disadvantages and difficulties
to overcome. First, conflict is more likely to occur between parents
going through a divorce (Emery, 1982; Mechanic and Hansell,
1989). One study, based on parents‟ responses, reported that 50%
of divorcing spouses engaged in frequent verbal fighting, an
additional 30% reported occasional verbal fighting, and one in five
64
reported physical abuse (Furstenberg, 1991). In another study,
51% of children whose parents had recently divorced reported that
frequent verbal fighting occurred in their home. The differences in
conflict between intact and divorced families, however, are small
and conflict within divorced families typically 10 subsides over
time. Thirty-six percent of children from intact families report
frequent verbal fighting between their parents, and only 40% of
children whose parents divorced over a year ago report frequent
verbal fighting (Mechanic and Hansell, 1989).
Although some conflict subsides over time, conflict can be a
continuing problem. Former partners may have old anger based on
the reasons for the divorce and are likely to develop new anger
from the divorce, especially over settlement issues (Wallerstein,
1989). For example, men think they pay too much support, while
women find payments to be very inadequate (Wallerstein, 1980).
Disagreements such as these can create lasting conflict between
parents (Furstenberg, 1991).
Second, divorce can lower the quality of parent-child
relationships, especially for the non-custodial parent. Parents
adopt a different image of parenting after divorce, and some find it
difficult to maintain their parental role (Furstenberg, 1984). In
addition, adults who are absorbed in their own problems may be
less affectionate and communicate poorly with their children
(Hetherington, Cox and Cox, 1982; Wallerstein and Kelly, 1980).
Divorced parents sometimes have lower levels of parent-child
interactions than parents in intact families (Acock and Demo, 1994;
McLanahan and Sandefur, 1994), and are more likely to engage in
inept parenting. Inept parenting consists of inconsistent and harsh
punishment, less monitoring and more hostility toward children
65
(Simons and Johnson, 1996). Poor parenting practices, however,
are usually only temporary (Hetherington, Cox and Cox, 1982;
Wallerstein and Kelly, 1980), and many parents are able to
maintain proper parenting practices after martial disruption.
In some cases, divorce may result in a closer relationship
between custodial parents and children. Divorced mothers report
having more private talks with their children (Acock and Demo,
1994; McLanahan, 1994). In addition, divorce may separate
children from an abusive parent. Interactions with nonresidential
parents may be advantageous only if these interactions are
positive, supportive and nurturant (Barber &Thomas, 1986; Rollins
and Thomas, 1979). If they are strained, sporadic, or conflicted,
they may hurt children‟s well-being (Cooper, Holman, and
Braithnaile, 1983; Demo et al., 1987). Some researchers suggest
that diminished parental involvement of the nonresidential parent
has no affect on children‟s well-being (Clingempeel, & Segal,
1986; Furstenberg & Nord, 1985).
The non-residential parent-child relationship is more difficult
to maintain than the custodial parent-child relationship. Two-thirds
of non-residential fathers have no contact with their children over a
one-year period, and the more time that elapses since the divorce,
the less involved fathers become. Many aspects of the visiting
relationship make it difficult for a quality parent-child relationship to
be sustained after the physical separation of divorce. One
important factor is fathers‟ emotional state and attitude. Many
fathers feel unappreciated, rejected and isolated from their families
(Furstenberg, 1991). In addition, they are apprehensive about their
abilities as fathers (Hetherington, 1989), because mothers usually
provide a mediating link between fathers and their children. When
66
this link is severed by divorce, fathers find it difficult to relate to
their children (Furstenberg, 1991).
As a result, for some fathers visiting can become emotionally
difficult (Hetherington, 1989). Gradual disengagement is the
frequent consequence of the visiting situation. Since fathers are
outsiders, it is very easy for them to fade away (Furstenberg,
1991). Another important factor is how close geographically fathers
live to their children. With divorce, however, residential moves are
likely and on average, fathers live about 400 miles away from their
children (Acock and Demo, 1994).
Non-residential fathers, however, can maintain close
relations with their children if they were close to their children
before the divorce and if they make the effort to maintain the
relationship. Empirical evidence suggests that even parents who
infrequently see their children can maintain close relations with
their children. For example, only a moderate 12 correlation exists
between children feeling close to their father and the amount of
time fathers spent with their children (Furstenberg, Morgan and
Allison, 1987). Marital disruption alone does not lead to less
closeness between non-residential fathers and their children.
Children‟s perceptions of their father‟s not making an effort to be a
part of their life or providing for them financially perpetuates these
feelings (Arditti, unpublished paper; Stevenson and Black, 1995).
Thus, closeness can be maintained between nonresidential fathers
and their children. In fact, 21% of children in one-parent families
reported higher levels of paternal emotional support than children
from intact families (Amato, 1987)
A never-married family is created when mothers do not
marry the biological father of their children. This family structure
67
faces many of the same difficulties as divorced mothers in terms of
lower levels of parental involvement, inconsistent discipline of
children, lower levels of psychological well-being, and low income,
but to a higher degree (Acock and Demo, 1994; Lempers, 1989;
McLanahan and Sandefur, 1994). For example, they are the
poorest and have the lowest levels of psychological well-being. In
addition, continuously single mothers are often young, have little
education (Acock and Demo, 1994), and their children may never
have established relations with their biological father.
Mother-partner families have rarely been included in
comparisons of family structures, but I hypothesize that the family
processes and socioeconomic characteristics of these families are
very similar to stepfamilies. Stepfamilies and mother-partner
families are very complex family structures. Children in these
families could have previously been in a intact family or a
continuously single family before entering into the stepfamily.
Thus, they would be exposed to all the possible problems and
benefits of these family forms prior to forming their new stepfamily.
Stepfamilies and mother-partner families face unique
difficulties, but they also have some benefits over divorced and
single families. First, remarriage affects the parentchild relationship
in many ways and the effects depend on which parent is
remarried: the custodial or the non-custodial parent. When the
custodial parent remarries, children sometimes feel like an outsider
in their own home (Hetherington, 1989). The more positive the
marital relationship between the newlywed couple, the worse the
parentchild relationship will be (Hetherington, 1989). Remarriage
may make children feel rejected, because the newlywed couple
wants time alone (Wallerstein, 1989). Children in stepfamilies
68
spend less time with their biological parents and stepparents, and
the time they do spend with their parents is less enjoyable than
children from homes (Acock and Demo, 1994). In addition, the
remarriage of a custodial parent may cause a residential move
(Furstenberg, 1984; McLanahan and Sandefur, 1994). As a result,
relations with the non-custodial parent can become strained
because geographical proximity is important in maintaining the
non-custodial parent-child relationship (Hetherington, 1989).
Remarriage of the non-custodial parent can cause these
parents to become less involved in their children‟s life. Remarried
non-custodial parents are likely to spend more time with their
stepchildren, whom they live with, than with their biological children
from a previous marriage. As a result, non-custodial parents may
begin to emotionally care for their stepchildren more than their
biological children (Furstenberg, 1984; Seltzert and Bianchi, 1988).
When stepfamilies are formed, a new relationship between a
stepparent and a stepchild needs to be negotiated. The age of the
child when the stepfamily is formed seems to be the most
important factor in determining whether or not a stepparent will
have a parent-like relationship with the stepchild. When children
are under the age of five, a parent-like relationship is likely to form
(Parkes and Hinde, 1982). For example, young children reported
receiving the same level of discipline from their stepfathers as
children from intact families did from their biological fathers
(Amato, 1987). A second factor is how frequently children see their
nonresidential father. The less interaction with the nonresidential
father, the more likely the stepparent will take on a parent-like role
(Marsiglio, 1982).

69