1

Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTINGS

Background of the Study

Juvenile delinquency, also known as juvenile offending, or youth crime, is

participation in illegal behavior by minors (juveniles) (individuals younger than the

statutory age of majority). Most legal systems prescribe specific procedures for

dealing with juveniles, such as juvenile detention centers, and courts. A juvenile

delinquent is a person who is typically under the age of 18 and commits an act that

otherwise would have been charged as a crime if they were an adult. Depending on

the type and severity of the offense committed, it is possible for persons under 18 to

be charged and tried as adults.

In recent years a higher proportion of youth have experienced arrests by their

early 20s than in the past, although some scholars have concluded this may reflect

more aggressive criminal justice and zero-tolerance policies rather than changes in

youth behavior. Juvenile crimes can range from status offenses (such as underage

smoking), to property crimes and violent crimes. Youth violence rates in the United

States have dropped to approximately 12% of peak rates in 1993 according to official

US government statistics, suggesting that most juvenile offending is non-violent.

However, juvenile offending can be considered normative adolescent behavior. This

is because most teens tend to offend by committing non-violent crimes, only once or a

few times, and only during adolescence. It is when adolescents offend repeatedly or

violently that their offending is likely to continue beyond adolescence, and become
 2

increasingly violent. It is also likely that if this is the case, they began offending and

displaying antisocial behavior even before reaching adolescence (Moffit, 2012).

A CSWDO primer on child welfare services elaborates that youth offenders

are victims of circumstances beyond their control hence they should be treated as

individuals with problems who need help and not as criminals. Filipino youth

offenders, says DSWD, should be understood in the context of the Filipino family in

crisis. But then, the family as the basic unit of social production should be further

viewed as a miniature of the larger Filipino society that is in crisis. Following the

United Nations definition (that persons under 18 years old are considered children

unless a state recognizes otherwise), the independent research group IBON

Foundation reports that there are 34.7 million children in the country out of the total

population of 75.5 million as of last year. The National Statistics Office (NSO)

reports that one out of every five Filipino children had no early education. Only 15%

of children aged 3 to 5 years old are attending some early childhood program in pre-

school, nursery and daycare centers. On basic education (elementary and high

school), only 77% (17.3 million) of the 22.5-million school-aged children (5 to 17

years old) were reportedly enrolled in school year 1999-2000. This means that about

five million Filipino children failed to go to school at that time. As of the last school

year, the rate of completion of primary education is only 68 percent. This means that

for every 100 students who enter Grade 1, only 68 are able to finish grade 6. The

rates in secondary education are much lower; participation is only 65% while

completion rate is 47% (Soriano, 2011).

 3

In its latest survey, the NSO documented that around 800,000 minors aged 10

to 14 years old are part of the country’s labor force. Child laborers (five to 17 years

old) reportedly number around 3.7 million. Five years ago, the number of young

workers was pegged at 3.6 million. According to IBON Foundation, one in every 10

of these children engaged in heavy physical work. About 1.3 million child workers

were out of school at that time. Quoting the Bureau of Women and Young Workers,

IBON says that the economic recession has pushed children to skip their studies and

help their families augment their income. Children started competing with the adults

in non-skilled jobs. And because they are willing to support their families and are

ignorant of their rights, management prefers them. The fact that a large number of

the crimes committed by juvenile offenders were crimes against property usually

theft and robbery already indicates the economic difficulties that push them into

criminal activities. Poverty, together with dysfunctional family relationships and

negative peer influence, is a major factor that pushes the youth toward lawlessness

(Bulatlat, 2011).

The purpose of this study is to provide an overview of published research on

the services of Department of Social Welfare and Development among juvenile

delinquents.

Statement of the Problem

This study was conducted to determine the level of services of Department of

Social Welfare Development among juvenile delinquents as basis for monitoring

development in Koronadal City from the period of 2012 to 2015.

 4

Specifically, it tried answers to the following questions:

1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of their;

1.1 Age;

1.2 Gender; and

1.3 Educational Attainment?

2. What is the level of services implemented by CSWDO to the juvenile

delinquents in Center Based?

3. Based on the result of the study, what monitoring development program can

be proposed?

Theoretical Framework

“Once a criminal, always a criminal”, this is a famous saying that is common

to the American household and which most finds to be true. Once an individual

associates him or herself with criminal behavior they are labeled by their community

and expected to reoffend. Society now looks at these juveniles and wonder why it is

that these children are behaving in such matter.

              It has been clear by now what Juvenile Delinquency is and how it affects

society. A juvenile is a youth teen ranging from as young as 9 years old till the age of

18 who engage in illegal criminal behavior. Defining delinquency is not the hard part,

figuring out the reasons why adolescents commit crimes is. The study of juvenile

delinquency is important because it provides us with trustworthy and reliable theories

that can help with understanding the motives of juveniles. These theories fall under

three categories, biological, sociological and psychological. Biological Theory

 5

considers delinquent behavior as predisposed and revolves around the idea that

children are born to be criminals. Cesear Lambrosso is credited for creating the major

biological theory called Positivism. His theory states that individuals whom grow up

committing crimes have inherited biochemical and genetic factors. Lombroso also

states that criminals tend to have certain facial features that are considered a

predisposition to commit crime such as a flattened nose and supernumerary teeth.

Another criminalist, Sheldon, found that different body types made individuals

behave differently. For example, he believed that mesomorphs were more likely to

commit crimes because they were athletic, as opposed to the physic of an endomorph,

a fat person (Champion, 2014).

Conceptual Framework of the Study

This study was determined the level of services of Department of Social

Welfare Development among juvenile delinquents as basis for monitoring

development.

This research paradigm as shown in figure 1 shows the relationship of the

independent and the dependent variables. The independent variable concentrates on

the level of quality services of Department of Social Welfare Development among

juvenile delinquents.

Hence, the independent variable is presumed to have an effect to the dependent

variable which refers to the basis for monitoring development.

 6

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

LEVEL OF SERVICES
OF DSWD AMONG PROPOSED
JUVENILE MONITORING
DELINQUENTS DEVELOPMENT

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework of the Study

 7

Significance of the Study

This research would beneficial to the following:

Juvenile Delinquents. This study will help them to determine the effects of

intervention program or the services to the juvenile delinquents especially the

peacefulness and obedience of the individuals to the law.

Philippine National Police. This research will give them an idea on different

ways on how to discipline the youth especially those who are found out doing illegal

activities. Thus, they could help implement laws and ordinance that create peaceful

community.

Department Social Welfare Development. This research will give them idea

on different intervention program or services implemented to the juvenile delinquents

to reform and how to be a law abiding citizen.

Member of the Community. This study may awaken their mind on how to

discipline their children. It may give them better techniques in guiding their children

effectively.

Researchers and other Criminology students. They can make use of this

research paper as a reference for further and deeper study about juvenile delinquency.

Scope and Limitation of the Study

This study focused on the findings of the level of services of Department of

Social Welfare Development among juvenile delinquents as basis for monitoring

development. It also involves the juvenile delinquents during the period of 2012 –

2015. This study started on June 2015 and ended on March 2016.
 8

Definition of Terms

The following terms were defined operationally to help establish better

understanding to the reader of this research paper.

Level of Services. It refers to the programs which are implemented by the

institution to the juvenile delinquents to reform and to become a law abiding citizen.

Juvenile Delinquents. It refers to the youth below 18 years old who are

involved any illegal activities.

DSWDO. It refers to the institution of the government who are in charged to

the rehabilitation or reformation of the youth below 18 years of age and involved in

illegal activities.
 9

Chapter 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURES AND STUDIES

This Chapter discussed the related literatures which are useful and necessary

in any research and intensive undertakings. These provide significant data and

additional needed information that include books, journals, unpublished thesis, and

from internet sources based on the results of some studies relative to this endeavor.

Juvenile offending is disproportionately committed by young men. Feminist

theorists and others have examined why this is the case. One suggestion is that ideas

of masculinity may make young men more likely to offend. Being tough, powerful,

aggressive, daring and competitive becomes a way for young men to assert and

express their masculinity. Acting out these ideals may make young men more likely to

engage in antisocial and criminal behavior. Also, the way young men are treated by

others, because of their masculinity, may reinforce aggressive traits and behaviors,

and make them more susceptible to offending. Alternatively, young men may actually

be naturally more aggressive, daring and prone to risk-taking. In recent years

however, there has also been a bridging of the gap between sex differences

concerning juvenile delinquency. While it is still more common for males to offend

than females, the ratio of arrests by sex is one third of what it was 20 years ago. When

considering these statistics, which state that Black and Latino teens are more likely to

commit juvenile offenses it is important to keep the following in mind: poverty, or

low socio-economic status are large predictors of low parental monitoring, harsh

parenting, and association with deviant peer groups, all of which are in turn associated
 10

with juvenile offending. The majority of adolescents who live in poverty are racial

minorities. Also, minorities who offend, even as adolescents, are more likely to be

arrested and punished more harshly by the law if caught (Holmes, James and Javad,

2011).

Particularly concerning a non-violent crime and when compared to white

adolescents. While poor minorities are more likely to commit violent crimes, one third

of affluent teens report committing violent crimes. Individual psychological or

behavioural risk factors that may make offending more likely include low

intelligence, impulsiveness or the inability to delay gratification, aggression, lack of

empathy, and restlessness. Other risk factors which may be evident during childhood

and adolescence include aggressive or troublesome behavior, language delays or

impairments, lack of emotional control and cruelty to animals. Children with low

intelligence are more likely to do badly in school. This may increase the chances of

offending because low educational attainment, a low attachment to school, and low

educational aspirations are all risk factors for offending in themselves. Children who

perform poorly at school are also more likely to be truant, and the status offense of

truancy is linked to further offending. Impulsiveness is seen by some as the key aspect

of a child's personality that predicts offending. However, it is not clear whether these

aspects of personality are a result of “deficits in the executive functions of the brain”

or a result of parental influences or other social factors. In any event, studies of

adolescent development show that teenagers are more prone to risk-taking, which may

explain the high disproportionate rate of offending among adolescents (Delisi, 2015).
 11

Family factors which may have an influence on offending include: the level of

parental supervision, the way parents discipline a child, particularly harsh

punishment, parental conflict or separation, criminal parents or siblings, parental

abuse or neglect, and the quality of the parent-child relationship. Juvenile

Delinquency, which basically is the rebellious or unlawful activities by kids in their

teens or pre-teens, is caused by four main risk factors namely; personality,

background, state of mind and drugs. These factors may lead to the child having low

IQ and may increase the rate of illiteracy. Children brought up by lone parents are

more likely to start offending than those who live with two natural parents. It is also

more likely that children of single parents may live in poverty, which is strongly

associated with juvenile delinquency. However once the attachment a child feels

towards their parent(s) and the level of parental supervision are taken into account,

children in single parent families are no more likely to offend than others. Conflict

between a child's parents is also much more closely linked to offending than being

raised by a lone parent. If a child has low parental supervision they are much more

likely to offend. Many studies have found a strong correlation between a lack of

supervision and offending, and it appears to be the most important family influence on

offending. When parents commonly do not know where their children are, what their

activities are, or who their friends are, children are more likely to truant from school

and have delinquent friends, each of which are linked to offending. A lack of

supervision is also connected to poor relationships between children and parents.

Children who are often in conflict with their parents may be less willing to discuss

their activities with them (Raine, 2013).

 12

Adolescents with criminal siblings are only more likely to be influenced by

their siblings, and also become delinquent, if the sibling is older, of the same

sex/gender, and warm. Cases where a younger criminal sibling influences an older

one are rare. An aggressive, non-loving/warm sibling is less likely to influence a

younger sibling in the direction of delinquency, if anything, the more strained the

relationship between the siblings, the less they will want to be like, and/or influence

each other. Peer rejection in childhood is also a large predictor of juvenile

delinquency. Although children are rejected by peers for many reasons, it is often the

case that they are rejected due to violent or aggressive behavior. This rejection affects

the child's ability to be socialized properly, which can reduce their aggressive

tendencies, and often leads them to gravitate towards anti-social peer groups. This

association often leads to the promotion of violent, aggressive and deviant behavior.

"The impact of deviant peer group influences on the crystallization of an antisocial

developmental trajectory has been solidly documented." Aggressive adolescents who

have been rejected by peers are also more likely to have a "hostile attribution bias"

which leads people to interpret the actions of others as purposefully hostile and

aggressive towards them. This often leads to an impulsive and aggressive reaction.

Hostile attribution bias however, can appear at any age during development and often

lasts throughout a person’s life. Children resulting from unintended pregnancies are

more likely to exhibit delinquent behavior. They also have lower mother-child

relationship quality (Dishion & McCord, 2010).

Juvenile delinquents are often diagnosed different disorders. Around six to

sixteen percent of male teens and two to nine percent of female teens have a conduct
 13

disorder. These can vary from oppositional-defiant disorder, which is not necessarily

aggressive, to antisocial personality disorder, often diagnosed among psychopaths. A

conduct disorder can develop during childhood and then manifest itself during

adolescence. Juvenile delinquents who have recurring encounters with the criminal

justice system, or in other words those who are life-course-persistent offenders, are

sometimes diagnosed with conduct disorders because they show a continuous

disregard for their own and others safety and/or property. Once the juvenile continues

to exhibit the same behavioral patterns and turns eighteen he is then at risk of being

diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder and much more prone to become a

serious criminal offender. This is why habitual juvenile offenders diagnosed with

conduct disorder are likely to exhibit signs of antisocial personality disorder early in

life and then as they mature. Some times these juveniles reach maturation and they

develop into career criminals, or life-course-persistent offenders. "Career criminals

begin committing antisocial behavior before entering grade school and are versatile in

that they engage in an array of destructive behaviors, offend at exceedingly high rates,

and are less likely to quit committing crime as they age (Ryan, 2012).

A “delinquent child” is defined generally as a child who has violated any state

or local law; a federal law or law of another state; or who has escaped from

confinement in a local or state correctional facility. Juveniles are subject to police

intervention for a broader range of behaviors than are adults. Juvenile status offenses

include alcohol violations, curfew violations, disobeying parents, running away, and

school truancy. Status offenders may be stopped and questioned by police, and

returned home to their parents, to school, or to the juvenile court intake officer. Most
 14

serious property and personal violent crimes are committed by adult offenders over

the age of 18. Considerable attention is directed at delinquent behavior and juvenile

offending, however, for at least two reasons. Juvenile-age youth commit a

disproportionate number of crimes and delinquency prevention efforts are the first

step in reducing crime and violence committed by adult offenders. Criminologists,

social scientists, lawmakers, and policymakers have focused their efforts on

examining the causes of juvenile crime, and on developing programs and public

policies to prevent delinquency and correct juvenile offenders. There is growing

evidence that people who are crime victims also seem more likely to commit crime

themselves. There is going strong evidence that being abused or neglected as a child

increase the odds of being arrested both as a juvenile and as an adult. People,

especially young males, who were physically or sexually abused, are much more

likely to smoke, drink, and take drugs than are non-abused youth. Incarcerated

offenders report significant amounts of posttraumatic stress disorder as a result of

prior victimization, which may in part explain their violent and criminal behaviors

(Siegel, 2014).

According to the developmental research of there are two different types of

offenders that emerge in adolescence. One is the repeat offender, referred to as the

life-course-persistent offender, who begins offending or showing antisocial/

aggressive behavior in adolescence and continues into adulthood; and the age specific

offender, referred to as the adolescence-limited offender, for whom juvenile offending

or delinquency begins and ends during their period of adolescence. Because most

teenagers tend to show some form of antisocial, aggressive or delinquent behavior

 15

during adolescence, it is important to account for these behaviors in childhood in

order to determine whether they will be life-course-persistent offenders or

adolescence-limited offenders. Although adolescence-limited offenders tend to drop

all criminal activity once they enter adulthood and show less pathology than life-

course-persistent offenders, they still show more mental health, substance abuse, and

finance problems, both in adolescence and adulthood, than those who were never

delinquent (Moffitt, 2011).

The longitudinal birth cohort was used to examine a trend among a small

percentage of career criminals who accounted for the largest percentage of crime

activity. The trend exhibited a new phenomenon amongst habitual offenders. This

phenomenon was later researched among an adult population in 1977 and resulted in

similar findings. The habitual crime behavior found amongst juveniles is similar to

that of adults. As stated before most life-course persistent offenders begin exhibiting

antisocial, violent, and/or delinquent behavior, prior to adolescence. Therefore, while

there is a high rate of juvenile delinquency, it is the small percentage of life-course

persistent, career criminals that are responsible for most of the violent crimes (Longo

and Prescott, 2015).

Conducted a meta-analytic review of the family intervention literature for

young offenders and reported that programs that engaged participants who were

younger than 15 years of age yielded significantly higher mean reductions in re-

offending than programs that engaged older clients. More related to the present

review, conducted a meta-analysis of the entire correctional treatment literature for

both adult and juvenile offenders. In a preliminary analysis of programs that

 16

addressed substance abuse as at least one of its program targets, the findings were

quite similar to those reported by Latimer, in that age had an inverse correlation with

program success. These findings complement quite nicely the fervent arguments made

by other researchers regarding the importance of early identification and treatment of

substance abuse problems in adolescent populations. Thus, the preliminary

correctional-based evidence that is available suggests that, unlike the broader

adolescent substance abuse treatment literature, age of client may have an important

impact on treatment success, (Latimer, 2011).

The literature, although sparse, does provide some preliminary evidence for the

provision of culturally specific treatment services to Aboriginal offenders. For

example, a recent follow-up study conducted by Correctional Services Canada of

federal Aboriginal offenders admitted to Healing Lodges found that almost 70% of

the clients completed the programs. In addition, and arguably more important, only

6% of program clients returned to custody, a statistic which is even more impressive

when one considers that the national average is 12%. Further evidence regarding the

importance of culturally-specific treatment is obtained from the work of Waldram,

who found promising evidence for Aboriginal spirituality using a case study approach

(Boe, 2010).

A recent study conducted in Quebec explored the therapeutic impact of a

multistage 12 month substance abuse treatment program that was divided into two

months of inpatient treatment, three months of outpatient treatment, and seven months

of aftercare. The goal of the study was to explore any client factors that may have

been related to program outcome by looking at three separate groups of program

 17

clients: a) treatment completers who improved on program measures; b) treatment

completers who did not improve; and c) program dropouts. Interestingly, there were

several significant between-group differences on the various assessment tools

employed within the program. More specifically, while the non-completers exhibited

significantly higher social maladjustment, aggression, and school-related problems,

program completers who improved in the program had significantly higher scores on

repression and denial of emotions. Finally, program completers who did not improve

evidenced significantly higher levels of depression and social anxiety, (Dobkin,

2013).

Children and youth are victims of theft and violent crimes. Some juveniles are

victims of abuse and neglect at the hands of their parents or other caregivers. The term

“dependent and neglected children” describes those who are not provided with proper

shelter, clothing, food, clean and safe living conditions, and medical needs. Child

abuse ranges from verbal abuse to physical and sexual abuse. The extent of child

victimization is reported by the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System

(NCANDS). Child victimization has been linked to problem behaviors, delinquency,

and criminal behavior later in life. An understanding of victimization and juvenile

delinquency is therefore important for a better understanding of the most appropriate

juvenile justice system responses to these problems (Steinberg, 2013).

Changes in these statistics can be attributed to many fluctuations. Negative

changes in the economy greatly affect all crime rates because people are more likely

to find themselves in pressing situation like unemployment. Changes in population

affect juvenile delinquency rates as well because changes in population translate into
 18

more or less juveniles. Shifts in population could also mean more general societal

shift, like a wave of immigration. An influx of new people who are unfamiliar with

the legal system could negative affect the juvenile crime rates. Other social changes,

such as educational or health reforms, could have a large impact on juvenile crime

rates if they create a larger population of at-risk children (Snyder, 2012).

Juveniles are required to attend school betweens the age of 6 and 18; they are

expected to obey their parents; they are forbidden to purchase alcohol or cigarettes or

drive motor vehicles; they may not marry without parental permissions; they cannot

enter into business or financial contracts; and they are not permitted to vote, enter the

military, or run away from home. Some jurisdictions place other restriction on

juveniles, such as curfew, or law against ‘incorrigible” or “immoral” behaviour. On

the contrary, adults have the right to vote to marry, to hold government office, and to

enter into contracts. In legal terms a juvenile is a person subject juvenile court

proceeding because statutorily defined event or condition cause by or affecting that

person was alleged to have occurred while his or her age was below statutorily

specified age limit or original description of a juvenile court. From the viewpoint of a

social worker, a delinquent is a person, of whatever age, whose attitude toward other

individuals, toward the community, toward lawful authority is such that it may lead

him into breaking the law. A delinquent person is also defined as one who repeatedly

commits an act that is against the norms or mores observe by the society. When a

person habitually commits an act which is not in accordance to rules or policies of the

organization or the community where he belongs, he is considered a delinquent

(Woolard, 2010).
 19

Social pathologist defined as social problems those behaviors which, in their

judgment, ran contrary to the maintenance of a healthy society, a society that harbored

little or no deviance. The social pathologist typically cast the blame for such

behaviors onto the individuals involved. They explained phenomena like criminality

largely in terms of such presumed personal weaknesses as a character deficiency and

psychological in adequacy. Many suggested or implied that criminals and other

“undesirable” individuals were genetically or biologically inferior to “normal” people.

Further consultation on education and training for young people in custody took place

within the context of the wider reforms for mainstream 16-18 education funding and

commissioning set out in the White Paper: Raising Expectations: Enabling the System

to deliver. This then led to the publication of the Youth Crime Action Plan in 2008,

which announced plans to improve education and training for young offenders by

placing duties on local authorities to plan and commission education in juvenile

custody, bringing young offenders in custody under the education legislative regime.

The Youth Crime Action Plan also set out wider commitments to improve education

and training for young offenders (Brown, 2010).

Indicate the seriousness and extent of juvenile victimization in the United

States: On average, between 1980 and 2002 about 2,000 juveniles were murdered

annually in the United States; In 2002, on average, four juveniles were murdered daily

in the United States; Children under 6 years of age who were victims of murder were

most often killed by a parent; Nearly one million (906,000) children were victims of

abuse or neglect in 2003, a rate of 12 victims per 1,000 children ages 0–17; As

juveniles age, they are less likely to be victims of a violent crime by a family member;
 20

About two thirds of violent crimes with juvenile victims occur in a residence; Youth

between ages 7 and 17 are about as likely to be victims of suicide as they are to be

victims of homicide; About half of all violent crimes experienced by male and female

students occurred in school or on the way to and from school; Many youth are

subjected to inappropriate and potentially dangerous experiences on the Internet

(Steffensmeier and Schawrtz, 2010).

Delinquency prevention is the broad term for all efforts aimed at preventing

youth from becoming involved in criminal, or other antisocial, activity. Because the

development of delinquency in youth is influenced by numerous factors, prevention

efforts need to be comprehensive in scope. Prevention services may include activities

such as substance abuse education and treatment, family counseling, youth mentoring,

parenting education, educational support, and youth sheltering. Increasing availability

and use of family planning services, including education and contraceptives helps to

reduce unintended pregnancy and unwanted births, which are risk factors for

delinquency. education is the great equalizer, opening doors to lift themselves out of

poverty. Education also promotes economic growth, national productivity and

innovation, and values of democracy and social cohesion. Prevention through

education aides the young person to interact more effectively in social contexts

therefore diminishing need for delinquency (Booth, 2012).

It has been noted that often interventions may leave at-risk children worse off

then if there had never been an intervention. This is due primarily to the fact that

placing large groups of at risk children together only propagates delinquent or violent

behavior. "Bad" teens get together to talk about the "bad" things they've done, and it is
 21

received by their peers in a positive reinforcing light, promoting the behavior among

them. As mentioned before, peer groups, particularly an association with antisocial

peer groups, is one of the biggest predictors of delinquency, and of life-course-

persistent delinquency. The most efficient interventions are those that not only

separate at-risk teens from anti-social peers, and place them instead with pro-social

ones, but also simultaneously improve their home environment by training parents

with appropriate parenting styles parenting style being the other large predictor of

juvenile delinquency (Hunter, 2010).

Juveniles who commit sexual crimes refer to individuals adjudicated in a

criminal court for a sexual crime. Sex crimes are defined as sexually abusive behavior

committed by a person under the age of 18 that is perpetrated “against the victim’s

will, without consent, and in an aggressive, exploitative, manipulative, and or

threatening manner”. It is important to utilize appropriate terminology for juvenile sex

offenders. Harsh and inappropriate expressions include terms such as “pedophile,

child molester, predator, perpetrator, and mini-perp” These terms have often been

associated with this group, regardless of the youth’s age, diagnosis, cognitive abilities,

or developmental stage. Using appropriate expressions can facilitate a more accurate

depiction of juvenile sex offenders and may decrease the subsequent aversive

psychological affects from using such labels (Righthand and Welch, 2014).

Examining prevalence data and the characteristics of juvenile sex offenders is a

fundamental component to obtain a precise understanding of this heterogeneous

group. With mandatory reporting laws in place, it became a necessity for providers to

report any incidents of disclosed sexual abuse. Longo and Prescott indicate that
 22

juveniles commit approximately 30-60% of all child sexual abuse. Center for Sex

Offender Management indicates that approximately one-fifth of all rapes and one-half

of all sexual child molestation can be accounted for by juveniles. The Office of

Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention indicate that 15% of juvenile arrests

occurred for rape in 2006, and 12% were clearance (Righthand and Welch, 2014).

Juvenile males contribute to the majority of sex crimes, with 2 – 4% of

adolescent males having reported committing sexually assaultive behavior, and 20%

of all rapes and 30 – 50% of all child molestation is perpetrated by adolescent males.

It is clear that males are over-represented in this population. This is consistent with

Ryan and Lane’s research indicating that males account for 91-93% of the reported

juvenile sex offenses. Right hand and Welch reported that females account for an

estimated 2 – 11% of incidents of sexual offending, the Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention. In the juvenile arrests during 2006, African American male

youth were disproportionately arrested (34%) for forcible rape (Barbaree and

Marshall, 2012).

The anti-social personality has also been suggested that chronic delinquency

may result from a personality pattern or syndrome commonly referred to as the

psychopathic or sociopathic (the terms are used interchangeably). Though no more

than 3 percent of the male offending population may be classified as sociopathic, it is

possible that a large segment of the persistent chronic offenders share this trait.

Psychopathic (sociopathic) youths exhibit a low level of guilt and anxiety and

persistently violate the rights of others. Although they may exhibit superficial charm

and above-average intelligence, these often mask a disturbed personality that makes
 23

them incapable of forming enduring relationships with others. Frequently involved in

such deviant behaviors a s truancy, running away, lying, substance abuse, and

impulsivity, psychopath’s home life was filled with frustrations, bitterness, and

quarreling, (Welsh, 2012).

Intervention programs are focused on teenage youths considered to be at higher

risk for engaging in petty delinquent acts, using drugs or alcohol, or associating with

antisocial peers. Interventions at this stage are designed to ward off involvement in

more serious delinquency. Many jurisdictions are developing intervention program for

teenage youths. An example is the Big Brother/Big Sister program, which matches a

volunteer adult with a youngster. Similarly, in the Office of Juvenile Justice

Delinquency Prevention’s Juvenile Mentoring Program (JUMP), responsible and

caring adults volunteer their time as a mentor to youths at risk for delinquency and

dropping out of school. The mentors work one-on-one with the children, offering

support and guidance (Stuckhoff, 2011).

Offending among young people has been at the centre of public and policy

makers’ attention in recent years. Media coverage of high-profile cases and the

frequent portrayal of hooded teenagers terrorizing communities would suggest that

young people are becoming increasingly criminalized. The image of young people

today appears to be under threat indeed, one study found that 71 per cent of media

stories about young people were negative and a third of articles concerned the issue of

crime (Mori, 2012).

The consequence of this intense focus on young people’s behaviour is that they

are faced with the challenge of growing up in a culture that has widespread negative
 24

perceptions of youth. Public perceptions matter especially as government agendas and

policies are inevitably shaped by the concerns and attitudes of society. But how

accurate is this perception of worsening youth crime? Has offending amongst young

people really scaled new heights? This review of literature on youth crime and public

opinion attempts to establish the facts by asking the following questions. Looking

beyond the newspaper headlines is essential if we are to find out where the genuine

problems are. If youth crime really is on the rise, then more time and money should be

invested in diverting young people from crime or working with those already

exhibiting offending behavior. If, however, it is the public’s exaggerated fear of youth

crime that is the biggest issue, then Government and local authorities may consider

ways in which these concerns could be allayed. Of course, both are equally valid

investments but in order to target resources appropriately, it is important to assess the

reality of youth crime and how the public feel about it accurately (Bateman, 2010).

It is surprising that more is not done to ascertain the reality of youth crime,

given the apparent levels of public concern, as well as the time and resources invested

in addressing what is commonly perceived to be a growing problem. The facts are that

‘overall’ crime levels are not rising (a fact supported both by the British Crime Survey

and official crime statistics). ‘Detected’ youth crime shows signs of some increase in

recent years (after a period of long-term decline) but this may be associated with

factors unrelated to the actual crime levels (e.g. a political focus on antisocial

behaviour and breaches of subsequent orders). In contrast, self-report studies do not

indicate a rise in overall offending levels amongst young people (Jansson, 2012).
 25

Unfortunately, there has been a paucity of research examining the provision of

substance abuse treatment services to young offenders. Consequently, it was

necessary to review other sources to extract relevant treatment information that may

be pertinent to adolescent offender populations. More specifically, articles were

reviewed within the general offender treatment literature as well as, to a lesser extent,

the adolescent substance abuse treatment literature. The decision was made to reduce

the amount of exposure to the adolescent substance abuse treatment literature given

the potential incompatibility of both samples. who argued that first-time offenders can

be reasonably assumed to be distinct from repeat offenders. This line of reasoning can

be extrapolated quite nicely to argue for the potential incompatibility of delinquent

and non-delinquent populations as well (Gilvarry, 2010).

Crimes committed by youth are newsworthy events that get a lot of attention

from the news media. Violent crimes naturally are reported more often, and get a

disproportionate amount of news coverage, so the public often gets a distorted view of

the true extent of juvenile crime. Television, radio, and newspapers play an important

role in society, informing the public about important events. Citizens depend on the

media as a source of information. Most Americans’ knowledge and opinions of crime

and justice are based on what they see on television and read in the newspapers. Small

percentage of violent victimization and homicides involving juvenile victims occur in

schools. Children and youth are at greater risk of victimization in their own homes

and in other parts of their communities. Understanding the true extent and source of

juvenile crime and victimization is the first step to responding effectively to the

problem. Homicide tends to receive the most attention in government and news media
 26

reports of deaths of children and youth. Deaths by homicide, however, are not the

most common causes of deaths of children and young people (Cauffman, 2010).

Though the causes are debated and controversial as well, much of the debate

revolves around the punishment and rehabilitation of juveniles in a youth detention

center or elsewhere. There are many factors that cause juvenile delinquency.

Sometimes children want to test their parents' limits, or society's limits. Some people

believe that imposing strict laws such as curfews will cause a drop in juvenile

delinquency rates, but sometimes imposing strict rules merely give the children more

of an incentive to break them. However, sometimes juvenile crimes do in fact occur

due to the exact opposite reason that is, a lack of rules and supervision. One example

of this is that children many times commit crimes after school and while their parents

are at work or preoccupied. Statistics that are mentioned below explain the peak hours

of juvenile crime rates and conceptualize this very cause (Farrington, 2012).

Crime rates vary due to the living situations of children; examples of this could

be a child whose parents are together, divorced, or a child with only one parents,

particularly a teen mom. This is largely due to the fact that living arrangements are

directly related to increases and decreases of poverty levels. Poverty level is another

factor that is related to the chances a child has of becoming a juvenile delinquent.

Statistics on living arrangements, poverty level and other influential factors can be

found in a later section. Others believe that the environment and external factors are

not at play when it comes to crime; they suggest that criminals are faced with rational

choice decisions in which they chose to follow the irrational path. Finally, another

cause could be the relationships a child develops in school or outside of school. A

 27

positive or negative friendship can have a great influence on the chances of children

becoming delinquents. Peer pressure is also at play.. Relationships and friendships can

lead to gangs, which are major contributors of violent crimes among teens (Cauffman

and Steinberg, 2012).

There are roughly 75 million juveniles in The United States as of 2013. That is,

one in four Americans have the potential of being labeled as juvenile delinquents

(because they are considered juveniles). More specifically, in 2009 there were 74.5

million juveniles in the US, which was 2 million more than in the year 2007 which

was 72.5 million due to sexual child abuse. The population of juveniles in the US is

projected to increase until 2015, at least. In fact, the Federal Interagency on Child and

Family Statistics reported that the number of juveniles might reach 101.6 million by

2050. If the juveniles delinquency rates were to increase with the population, or even

plateau, this would translate into thousands of more juvenile delinquents (Aaron and

Dallaire, 2010).

Poverty, which is also directly connected to a child's chances of becoming a

juvenile delinquent, varies by numerous factors. The poverty level of a child can vary

by race and living arrangement. For instance, in 2009, Black and Hispanic children

were about three times more likely than White children of being poor. The

demographic statistics mentioned above pertain specifically to juveniles, which in

turn, are closely related to juvenile delinquency. Many of the demographics

mentioned above change on state level; to look up state-specific juvenile delinquency

rates in general, or by race/poverty level/living arrangement, visit the Office of

Juvenile and Delinquency Prevention website(Bartol, Curt & Bartol, 2010).

 28

Also on the Children Defense Fund website are statistics pertaining to Black

and Latino boys and their juvenile delinquency rates. 1 of every 3 Black boys is at

risk of incarceration, as well as 1 of every 6 Latino boys Traveling back to the

statistics provided by the OJJDP, their website also says that in 2008, juveniles were

the offenders in 908 cases of murder, which constitutes 9% of all murders committed

that year. Also related to homicides, in the 1980s 25% of the murders that involved

juvenile delinquents as the offenders also involved an adult offender. The time of day

juvenile delinquents commit their crimes is the times they are not in school. On

average, juvenile crimes begin occurring most frequently after the school is let out,

peaking from 7 pm to 9pm (usually night time), after dark. Violent juvenile crimes

involving a firearm follow the same peak a little later, from 8pm to 10pm (Kirk and

Sampson, 2012).

The primary measures of juvenile crime are official measures by police, courts,

and corrections; self-report measures; and victimization surveys. Official crime

statistics are often considered the most accurate measures of crime and are the ones

most often reported in the news media and by justice agencies. They are not a precise

measure of the true extent of crime, however, because many crimes are not reported to

police or other criminal justice agencies. The problem of unreported crime led

criminologists to devise other unofficial methods of measuring crime. Self-report

measures are confidential questionnaires administered to samples of youth who

voluntarily report on their own involvement in delinquent activities, whether or not

they were ever caught. Self-reports provide a more complete picture of juvenile

delinquency, but are not completely errors free since they depend on subjects’ honesty
 29

and reliability of memory. Victimization surveys are a third measure of crime

designed to supplement official statistics and self-report measures. Moreover, there

are many suggested explanations as to why it is that boys commit more crimes than

girls. One comes from theorists who believe men and boys are naturally more

aggressive than women and girls. Another theory communicates the idea that men and

boys commit more crimes because of societal pressures to be masculine and

aggressive. A third theory suggests that the manner in which boys are treated by their

families calls for more criminal action. The crime rates vary across boys of different

races (Graham and Bowling, 2015).

In England and Wales, Every Child Matters is the key strategy which

underpins the Westminster Government's approach to delivering services to children

and young people. It is described as a shared national programme of change to

improve outcomes for all children and young people. It is founded on the principle

that every child and young person (aged 0-19 years of age), whatever their

background or circumstances, should have the support they need to be healthy, stay

safe, enjoy and achieve, make a positive contribution, and achieve economic

wellbeing". All organizations and services involved with providing services to

children and young people are required work together to protect and support children

and are evaluated against these five outcomes. Closely linked to Every Child Matters,

Youth Matters outlines a strategy to improve services for teenagers. Youth Matters

recognises that "services for teenagers need to expand opportunities for all young

people while helping to tackle the range and complexity of problems faced by the
 30

minority who are at risk". We need to provide the right mix of challenge and support

to young people who are involved in anti-social behaviour and crime (Dodge, 2013).

Many government policies connect to Every Child Matters and a number of

developments in recent years specifically focus on youth offending. Key amongst

these has been the Green Paper Reducing Re-Offending through Skills and

Employment, published in 2005, and the Next Steps document in 2006, which

followed consultation on the Green Paper and outlined the government's commitment

to improving education for young people in the youth justice system. A key

development took place in England in July 2006, when the Learning and offender

learning is a key component of the Skills and Employment pathway, one of seven

identified pathways in the National Reducing Re-offending Delivery Plan. Other

pathways cover: accommodation; drugs and alcohol; health; children and families;

finance benefit and debt; and attitudes, thinking and behaviour. Most offenders will

have issues to be addressed across a range of these pathways - and solving one set of

problems is likely to be less effective unless the range of issues affecting their

particular re-offending behaviour is addressed. Each of these provides a detailed

specification of the elements the learning provider is expected to deliver, personalised

to the individual's needs. Education for Young People supervised by the Youth Justice

Systempresented four "issue papers" which discussed: "Ensuring Participation";

"Delivering a relevant curriculum"; "Workforce development", and "Clarifying

accountability" (Monea and Thomas, 2011).

Age standing, they are held to a standard of behaviour that is different from

that for adults. Juveniles are required to attend school betweens the age of 6 and 18;
 31

they are expected to obey their parents; they are forbidden to purchase alcohol or

cigarettes or drive motor vehicles; they may not marry without parental permissions;

they cannot enter into business or financial contracts; and they are not permitted to

vote, enter the military, or run away from home. Some jurisdictions place other

restriction on juveniles, such as curfew, or law against ‘incorrigible” or “immoral”

behaviour. On the contrary, adults have the right to vote to marry, to hold government

office, and to enter into contracts. In legal terms a juvenile is a person subject juvenile

court proceeding because statutorily defined event or condition cause by or affecting

that person was alleged to have occurred while his or her age was below statutorily

specified age limit or original description of a juvenile court (Brown, 2010).

The history of juvenile delinquency and juvenile justice is relatively short.

While deviance on the part of young person has always been a fact, societal

intervention and participation in the handling of juvenile transgressors has gained

most of its momentum in the last 100-150 years. The reasons for this are easy to see.

Throughout most of history, youthful members of society did not enjoy a distinct

status as “child.” The young were either properly or people. The very young, from

birth to age 5 or 6, had much the same status any other piece of property.

Accompanying these views were alternatives in beliefs about disciplining youthful

offenders. Methods for dealing with problems youths grew out of the establishment of

way to handle the poor. A key method of dealing with the poor was the removal of

children from the bad influences and substandard training of poor parents. The first

such institution opened in New York in 1825. Key features of these institutions were

the use of education, skills training, hard work, and apprenticeship-all geared toward
 32

producing productive members of society. Despite the goals of the houses of refuge,

various problems emerged (Travis III, 2012).

Among the concerns were the mixing of adults and juveniles, the mixing of

criminals and non-criminals, over the failure to supply intended education and

training, the use of harsh physical punishment, and the exploitive use of the clients for

monetary gain. The failure of the early houses of refuge gave rise of the establishment

of cottage reformatories in the second half the 1800s. These new institution closely

paralleled a family; surrogate parents provided the education and moral training for a

small number of youths. Probation and the use of foster homes also emerged at the

same time as the reformatories. Unfortunately, like the earlier houses of refuge, these

new alternatives suffered from many of the same problems. Once a police officer

takes a youth into custody, it is likely that the police will refer that youngster to

juvenile court. While the judge is the primary decision maker, other court personnel

play important roles in deciding the fate of juvenile suspects (Travis III, 2012).

The purpose of discipline is to equip your child with the basic tool, particularly

values and character, that will allow him to realize that his potentials and live his life

to the full. Discipline is education, contrary to an interpretation that it is punishment,

although punishment is sometimes applied in order to extinguish an undesirable

chronic behavior. But punishment, if ever, is use only as a last resort. The child must

be taught how to behave properly in any given situation. He must be made to

understand that his action have corresponding consequences which he has to face

responsibly. And he must be also be made to realize that he cannot do everything he

wishes to do, that there are boundaries and that he must learn how to accept “no” for
 33

an answer. Stick to your guns. Follow your rules. Children will sometimes reason or

that their friend’s parent allows them to go to parties until the wee hours of the

morning without chaperons. Take a stand if you don’t take a stand you tolerate an

undesirable behavior to get in, if not condone it. Nobody wants to be near an

overindulged child because he always wants his way followed or done. He is bad

mannered, destructive, selfish, ill-tempered and self-centered. He thinks the world

owes him he was brought up by his parents who gave in to his demands, whims and

caprices in order to compensate for their failure as parents who are most likely trying

to leak their own guilt feelings (Lorenzo, 2011).

Not to discipline our children according to the values and beliefs that will

guide them through life is a sure way to their perdition. The vacuum inside them has

to be filled up. If you remiss in duty to do it as a parent, someone else will do it for

you this is how street children go their values and beliefs that shape their behavior.

Many of these street children become a menace to society Parents sometime play

detectives by catching their children doing wrong. They wait until their children

misbehave and then punish them for their “crimes”. As a result, their children become

good in lying and manipulating people in order to avoid punishment, but they are not

good in creating new ideas and testing unexploded territories. Behaviorists call it

“positive reinforcement.” By positively reinforcing a desirable behavior, the child will

always look forward to do something that is good and acceptable to his parents.

Eventually, the reinforced behavior will carry him throughout his life. On the other

hand, if a child will always be punished for misbehavior, he will either become adept

at avoiding punishment by telling lies, denying things, and playing innocent; or he

 34

may become passive, indifferent, uncreative, and resentful. Some parents simply don’t

mind anything at all. They leave their children to their own thing, hoping they will

learn from their experiences. They give their children so much freedom to go around

and a long stick to play with. The laissez faire attitude on the part of parents will have

dire consequences on the lives of their children as they grow up (Lorenzo, 2011).

Prolonging the transition from childhood to adulthood in an urban-industrial

society has been functional in many ways. For example, it has extended the length of

time spent on formal education, delayed marriage, and extended the period of time

available for anticipatory socialization into future adult roles. It also had some

negative consequence. One of these is the marginality experience by individuals who

have biologically and physiologically matured into young adulthood, but who are

socially and legally denied access to a meaningful adult role. A youth sub-cultures has

formed, in part, in response to the difficulty of growing up in a society that forces

adult values upon juveniles who are not allowed to fully participate in the social

system. The creation of adolescence, and the fact the youth automatically experience

social “limbo,” denies the youth the opportunity to acquire the basic skills,

knowledge, and other attributes required in adult life the marginal status arising from

this temporary “no man’s land,” between child and adult, undoubtedly adolescent

deviance. From the sociological perspective, juvenile delinquency, like any other

social problems, is inherently social in nature. This necessitates totally rethinking the

problem of delinquency-its definition, its social causes, social context, and its social

consequences. This process of rethinking the problem necessitates eliminating or at

least reducing the social and legal marginality experienced by juveniles. It also should
 35

included standardizing juvenile codes, decriminalizing status offenses, revising

juvenile courts, and modifying juvenile corrections (Soriano 2010).

There are at least four distinct visions of how the legal system should deal with

juvenile offenders. Phrased in terms of the well-know purposes of punishment, they

might be said to focus on rehabilitations, adult retribution, diminished retribution, and

individual prevention (the latter implemented through incapacitation, specific

deterrence measures, and treatment at reducing recidivism). Other visions of juvenile

justice are possible, but these other visions can all be seen as variants of one or more

of these four models. The rehabilitative vision, which probably comes closest to the

original motivation for establishing a separate court for juveniles, views wayward

youth as innocent and salvageable despite their antisocial behavior. On this view,

disposition is designed to make the child a better person and confinement as

punishment is to be avoided. This vision leads to broad transfer jurisdiction, adult-like

sentences in juvenile court, or both. Note that if agreement can be reached on the

appropriate age threshold, the first and second visions re not necessarily incompatible.

The third vision- diminished retribution-probably represents the consensus academic

view as well as the practice in many moderate jurisdictions and sits somewhere

between the rehabilitative and adult retribution approaches. It sees juveniles as neither

innocent nor fully culpable but rather as being whose responsibility is diminished

because of youth. Disposition are discounted proportionate to the degree of the

juvenile’s immaturity. This diminished retribution view can be compatible with the

first two of only the youngest offenders are left unpunished and only the most

mature adolescent are transferred to criminal court, with the middle group receiving
 36

more lenient sentences in juvenile court. The individual prevention vision, which is

sometimes incorporated into other visions but is never their principal focus, views

youthful offenders not in terms of relative treatability or relative culpability but rather

in terms of relative treatability; its premise is that youth have greater propensity to

ignore the dictates of the criminal law. Treatment is designed solely than the to reduce

recidivism and thus is likely to be narrower in scope than under the rehabilitation

vision ,while resort to confinement occurs only if necessary to prevent bad conduct

and thus may be less likely than under the second and third, retribution oriented

visions (Slobogin, 2010).

Under common law, parents and people who take the place of parents have a

natural right to the custody, care and control of their children. They have a duty to

provide food, clothing, shelter, and medical care to the children and to educate and

discipline them. Under the common law, a person in loco may use a reasonable

amount of force in discipline a child. A 2001 study reported that the majority of

American families discipline their preschool children by using occasional mild to

moderate spanking. The study reported no negative effects on children. However, the

study also showed that 4 to 7 percent of parent fell into the “red zone” (danger zone)

because they discipline their children frequency and impulsively by such means as

verbal punishment, using a paddle, hitting their children in the face or body, or

throwing or shaking their child. These children were more likely to behavioral

problems or experience anxiety or depression the age, size, and health of the child, as

forced used on a baby or a sick or helpless child is much different than the same force

used on a healthy 14- year-old. The reason for the discipline, because spanking a child
 37

for unintentional bed-wetting or throwing up could lead to the conclusion that the

parent was out of control and not rational (Bottoms, Najdowski, Goodman, 2010).

Barangay officials and Police officers continue to arrest minors and

temporarily detain them in their barangay halls or police stations for disciplinary

action, long periods of illegal detention awaiting complainants to file their complaints

and then bringing them to the police station for the formal filing of complaints, long

detention in the Police station without charges being filed. The barangay tanods or

police are ignorant of the law or are still in the culture of “areglo system”, i.e.

extortion, demanding payments to allow the minor to be released. Indulging in a form

of “kidnapping for ransom”. Police authorities also arrest minors as if they are dealing

with adults. The minors rights are violated by the arresting officers when: They arrest

them for petty offenses like so-called gambling, trespassing, rugby sniffing, vagrancy

Although these are not even violations under the Penal code RPC, the most

compelling reason as to why the law enforcers arrest them is just because of the

“quota system”, their chief of police demands so many arrests a week. The police

want to enhance their success record. The police chief wants success and

achievements to report to headquarters and show crimes solved. Likewise they only

file many charges to pad their achievement report and get a promotion. The arresting

officer also makes money and gets a pay off from family of the detained minor to

withdraw the charge or lose the evidence, or not appear in court to testify and allow

the charge to be dismissed. All the while the minor is in detention (at times with

adults in the police station) unable to pay bail. Failure to transfer the minor to an

NGO or government rehabilitation center while awaiting trial, they are arrested and
 38

detained without informing the Social Services, this the Department of Social Welfare

and Development (DSWD) or their parents within eight(8 )hours [Section 21(i)

Procedure for Taking the Child into Custody (Santos, 2012).

The University of the Philippines Population Institute (UPPI) sought the

answer in nationwide survey of about 11,000 youth, male and female, aged 15-24.

The survey with financial assistance from the United Nations Population Fund

(UNFPA) was conducted to strengthen the data base on the youth and provide

information to improve adolescent fertility and sex education programs. The survey

also shows or revealed that among those who indulge in these activities, 16 and 17 are

the ages of experimentation, with different patterns among male and female youths

(Domingo, 1995).

Synthesis

The present study is similar to the idea of Holmes, James and Javad (2011),

they stated that juvenile offending is disproportionately committed by young men.

Feminist theorists and others have examined why this is the case. One suggestion is

that ideas of masculinity may make young men more likely to offend. Delisi (2015),

stated that poor minorities are more likely to commit violent crimes, one third of

affluent teens report committing violent crimes. Raine (2013), stated that family

factors which may have an influence on offending include: the level of parental

supervision, the way parents discipline a child, particularly harsh punishment,

 39

parental conflict or separation, criminal parents or siblings, parental abuse or neglect,

and the quality of the parent-child relationship.

Dishion & McCord (2010), stated that adolescents with criminal siblings are

only more likely to be influenced by their siblings, and also become delinquent, if the

sibling is older, of the same sex/gender, and warm. Cases where a younger criminal

sibling influences an older one are rare. Ryan (2012), stated that Juvenile delinquents

are often diagnosed different disorders. Around six to sixteen percent of male teens

and two to nine percent of female teens have a conduct disorder. Siegel (2014), stated

that A “delinquent child” is defined generally as a child who has violated any state or

local law; a federal law or law of another state; or who has escaped from confinement

in a local or state correctional facility. Moffitt (2011), stated that according to the

developmental research of there are two different types of offenders that emerge in

adolescence. Longo and Prescott (2015), stated that the longitudinal birth cohort was

used to examine a trend among a small percentage of career criminals who accounted

for the largest percentage of crime activity.

Latimer (2011), stated that the family intervention literature for young

offenders and reported that programs that engaged participants who were younger

than 15 years of age yielded significantly higher mean reductions in re-offending than

programs that engaged older clients. Boe (2010), stated that some preliminary

evidence for the provision of culturally specific treatment services to Aboriginal

offenders. Dobkin (2013), stated that substance abuse treatment program that was

divided into two months of inpatient treatment, three months of outpatient treatment,

and seven months of aftercare. Steinberg (2013) stated that some juveniles are
 40

victims of abuse and neglect at the hands of their parents or other caregivers. Snyder

(2012), stated that changes in population affect juvenile delinquency rates as well

because changes in population translate into more or less juveniles. Woolard (2010),

stated that Juveniles are required to attend school betweens the age of 6 and 18; they

are expected to obey their parents; they are forbidden to purchase alcohol or cigarettes

or drive motor vehicles; they may not marry without parental permissions; they

cannot enter into business or financial contracts; and they are not permitted to vote,

enter the military, or run away from home. Brown (2010), stated that social

pathologist defined as social problems those behaviors which, in their judgment, ran

contrary to the maintenance of a healthy society, a society that harbored little or no

deviance. Steffensmeier and Schawrtz (2010), they stated that extent of juvenile

victimization in the United States: On average, between 1980 and 2002 about 2,000

juveniles were murdered annually in the United States.

Booth (2012), stated that prevention services may include activities such as

substance abuse education and treatment, family counseling, youth mentoring,

parenting education, educational support, and youth sheltering. Hunter (2012), stated

that, peer groups, particularly an association with antisocial peer groups, is one of the

biggest predictors of delinquency, and of life-course-persistent delinquency.

Righthand and Welch (2014), stated that juveniles who commit sexual crimes

refer to individuals adjudicated in a criminal court for a sexual crime. Barbaree and

Marshall (2012), stated that Juvenile males contribute to the majority of sex crimes,

with 2 – 4% of adolescent males having reported committing sexually assaultive

behavior, and 20% of all rapes and 30 – 50% of all child molestation is perpetrated by
 41

adolescent males. Welsh (2012), stated that The anti-social personality has also been

suggested that chronic delinquency may result from a personality pattern or syndrome

commonly referred to as the psychopathic or sociopathic (the terms are used

interchangeably). Stuckhoff (2011), stated that Intervention programs are focused on

teenage youths considered to be at higher risk for engaging in petty delinquent acts,

using drugs or alcohol, or associating with antisocial peers. Mori (2012), stated that

Media coverage of high-profile cases and the frequent portrayal of hooded teenagers

terrorizing communities would suggest that young people are becoming increasingly

criminalized. Bateman (2010), stated that Public perceptions matter especially as

government agendas and policies are inevitably shaped by the concerns and attitudes

of society. Jansson (2012), stated that the reality of youth crime, given the apparent

levels of public concern, as well as the time and resources invested in addressing what

is commonly perceived to be a growing problem. Gilvarry (2010), stated that there

has been a paucity of research examining the provision of substance abuse treatment

services to young offenders.

Cauffman (2010), stated that crimes committed by youth are newsworthy

events that get a lot of attention from the news media. Farrington (2012), stated that

around the punishment and rehabilitation of juveniles in a youth detention center or

elsewhere. Aaron and Dallaire (2010), stated that the juveniles delinquency rates

were to increase with the population, or even plateau, this would translate into

thousands of more juvenile delinquents. Bartol, Curt & Bartol (2010), stated that

Poverty, which is also directly connected to a child's chances of becoming a juvenile

delinquent, varies by numerous factors. Kirk and Sampson (2012), stated that
 42

juvenile delinquents commit their crimes is the times they are not in school. Graham

and Bowling (2015), stated that the primary measures of juvenile crime are official

measures by police, courts, and corrections; self-report measures; and victimization

surveys. Dodge (2013), stated that the principle that every child and young person

(aged 0-19 years of age), whatever their background or circumstances, should have

the support they need to be healthy, stay safe, enjoy and achieve, make a positive

contribution, and achieve economic wellbeing". Monea and Thomas (2011), stated

that the government's commitment to improving education for young people in the

youth justice system.

Travis III (2012), stated that the young were either properly or people. The

very young, from birth to age 5 or 6, had much the same status any other piece of

property. Lorenzo (2011), stated that the purpose of discipline is to equip your child

with the basic tool, particularly values and character, that will allow him to realize

that his potentials and live his life to the full. Soriano (2010), stated that Prolonging

the transition from childhood to adulthood in an urban-industrial society has been

functional in many ways. Slobogin (2010), stated that to focus on rehabilitations,

adult retribution, diminished retribution, and individual prevention (the latter

implemented through incapacitation, specific deterrence measures, and treatment at

reducing recidivism). Bottoms, Najdowski, Goodman (2009), stated that Under

common law, parents and people who take the place of parents have a natural right to

the custody, care and control of their children. Santos (2012), stated that Barangay

officials and Police officers continue to arrest minors and temporarily detain them in

their Barangay halls or police stations for disciplinary action, long periods of illegal
 43

detention awaiting complainants to file their complaints and then bringing them to the

police station for the formal filing of complaints, long detention in the Police station

without charges being filed. Domingo (2010), stated that to strengthen the data base

on the youth and provide information to improve adolescent fertility and sex

education programs.
 44

Chapter 3

METHODOLOGY

This Chapter presented the research design, research instrument, locale of the

study, respondents and sampling used, data gathering procedure and statistical

treatment of data.

Research Design

This study used the descriptive survey research method. It is descriptive

because it described the level of services of Department of Social Welfare and

Development among juvenile delinquents as basis for monitoring development.

According to Ardales (2002), descriptive survey method is a technique of

gathering data by asking questions to people who are thought to have desired

information. A formal list of questionnaire is prepared.

Locale of the Study

This study was conducted in Department of Social Welfare Development in

Koronadal City. Koronadal City has continually developed in terms of economy and

industry where many investors are putting industrial infrastructures as center of

business. Thus, its growth may become a cause for the increase of occurrence of

criminalities in the place. However, the city government keeps on strengthening the

security and safety of the community.

 45

Research Instrument

The research instrument used in this study is survey questionnaire, which

answer all the questions on level of services of Department of Social Welfare and

Development among juvenile delinquents as basis for monitoring development.

Respondents and Sampling Used

The respondents were the one hundred (100) juvenile delinquents in Koronadal

City during the period of 2012 to 2015. The researcher used the random sampling

method to determine the sample size of the respondents.

Data Gathering Procedure

The researcher observed the following procedure in data gathering:

Asking Permission to Conduct Study. The researcher sent a letter to the head

of DSWD and to the respondents to conducts survey and gather some information.

Distribution of Questionnaires. Upon approval of the request letter, the

researcher personally distributed the survey questionnaire to the respondent.

Retrieval of Questionnaire. The researcher personally retrieved the

questionnaires as soon as the respondents finished answering the questionnaire.

Tallies and Collaboration of Data. At this stage, the researcher tallied and

combined the summarized data gathered.

 46

Statistical Treatment of Data

The researcher was used the following statistical tools:

Frequency Counts and Percentage was used to describe the profile of the

respondents.

Weighted Arithmetic Mean was used to determine the level of services of City

Social Welfare Development Office among juvenile delinquents.

__ ∑fx
Xw = ______ where

∑f f = frequency

X = weight
 47

Chapter 4

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This Chapter presented, analyzed and interpreted the data of the study
investigated.

Table 1

Profile of the Respondents in terms of Age

Age f Percentage

7–9 12 12%

10 – 12 26 26%

13 – 15 45 45%

16 – 17 17 17%

Total 100 100%

Table 1 presented the profile of the respondents in terms of age. It showed that

45 or 45% of the total respondents were 13 – 15 years old, followed by 10 – 12 years

old with 26 or 26%, 16 – 17 years old of the total respondents were 17 or 17% and 12

or 12% of the total respondents were 7 – 9 years old.

The result revealed that most of the respondents were 13 – 15 years old.
 48

Table 2

Profile of the Respondents in terms of Gender

Gender f Percentage

Male 81 81%

Female 19 19%

Total 100 100%

Table 2 presented the profile of the respondents in terms of gender. It showed

that 81 or 81% of the total respondents were male and 19 or 19% were female.

The results revealed that majority of the respondents were male.

 49

Table 3

Profile of the Respondents in terms of Educational Attainment

Year Level f Percentage

Primary Level 42 42%

Secondary Level 54 54%

Tertiary Level 4 4%

Total 120 100%

Table 3 presented the profile of the respondents in terms of educational

attainment. It showed that 54 or 54% of the total respondents were in secondary level,

followed by 42 or 42% were in primary level and 4 or 4% of the total respondents

were in tertiary level.

The result revealed that most of the respondents were in secondary level.
 50

Table 3

Centre Based Services Implemented by DSWD to the

Juvenile Delinquents

Indicators Mean Description

1. Casework/Group Work Services the focus is on

treatment and rehabilitation of delinquent children 3.9 Often
who have undergone traumatic experiences that
may affect their growth and development as human
beings.

2. Organization of Support Groups examples are

survivor groups or parent groups, etc. to assist in the 3.88 Often
rehabilitation efforts of delinquent children.

3. Psychological and Psychiatric Interventions

refers to tests and other modes of assessment as well
as therapeutic sessions extended to the delinquent 3.87 Often
children to determine aptitudes, capacities, interests
and behavioural problems to facilitate treatment in
accordance with individual needs.

4. Medical Services are the form of referral for

medico-legal examination, hospitalization and 3.82 Often
medical treatment if indicated for delinquent
children.

5. Livelihood Service refers to the provision of

skills training and grant of capital assistance to
enable the delinquent children and family to engage 3.79 Often
in income generating activities to alleviate their
financial difficulties and improve their economic
conditions.

6. Group Living Services/ Home Life Services this

provision of well-balanced, organized and non-
formal activities to the delinquent children which 3.86 Often
are geared toward achievement of
treatment/rehabilitative goals for the child and the
group as a whole.
 51

7. Educational Services provide opportunities for

the continuing education of delinquent children
through formal or non-formal education in 3.88 Often
cooperation with the Department of Education and
NGOs.

8. Spiritual/Religious Activities attendance church,

bible studies and fellowships that would bring the 3.84 Often
delinquent children to the knowledge of their
Creator.

9. Functional Literacy provides alternative

education, cultural activities such as art and music
session, theatre workshops, tutoring, spiritual 3.81 Often
guidance to develop creativity and critical thinking
for delinquent children.

10. Provision of Limited Financial Assistance to

meet needs for food, clothing, footwear, 3.76 Often
transportation assistance, school supplies and
emergency needs for medicines.

11. Issuance of Travel Clearance to minors traveling 3.77 Often

alone or with only one parent.

12. Recreational, Sports and other Socio-Cultural

Activities the provision of a wide range of both
indoor and outdoor activities to encourage and 3.82 Often
motivate the delinquent children to participate on
the basis of their interests and needs. As much as
possible, community facilities can be used.

13. Conduct of Critical Incident Stress Debriefing

(CISD) a stress management strategy designed to
assist delinquent children in handling stress caused
by armed conflict to prevent trauma and 3.8 Often
impairment. The Senior Social Worker and the City
Social Worker Development Office (CSWDO) shall
conduct this activity which may consist of games,
songs, storytelling, drama, arts, crafts and others.
 52

14. Family Reunification and Counseling an

intervention that enables unaccompanied displaced
delinquent children to be reunited with their
families. They are also made aware of the dynamics 3.37 Often
of their children and the roles and responsibilities of
each member in the treatment and rehabilitation
process.

Grand Mean 3.79 Often

Table 5 showed the center based implemented by DSWD to the juvenile

delinquents. The data presented that the mean ranges from 3.37 to 3.9. The result

revealed that the center based implemented by DSWD to the child in conflict with the

law has a grand mean of 3.79 or interpreted often.

This means that the DSWD was often conducted their center based program to

the juvenile delinquents.

 53

Proposed Monitoring Development Program

It signifies that the Department of Social Welfare and Development in

Koronadal City is often implementing their program for the juvenile delinquents to

eliminate or minimized youth offender. Through their programs youth will educated

the implication of committing crimes to their lives and to the community.

The result indicates that implementation of DSWD to their intervention

program for the juvenile delinquents helps them to rehabilitate, reformed, avoid the

children into committing crimes and makes the youth to be a law abiding citizen.

The researcher proposed another monitoring development program for child in

conflict with the law through the help of the PNP, LGU’s, Barangay Officials,

Teachers and Parents to conduct more seminars in every barangays on crime

prevention, awareness and give them programs that will enhanced their skills and not

engaging in any criminal activities.

 54

Chapter 5

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

This Chapter discussed the summary of findings, conclusion and corresponding

recommendations derived from the study.

Summary

This study was conducted to determine the level of services of Department of

Social Welfare Development among juvenile delinquents as basis for monitoring

development in Koronadal City from the period of 2012 to 2015.

Specifically, it tried answers to the following questions:

1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of their;

1.1 Age;

1.2 Gender; and

1.3 Educational Attainment?

2. What is the level of services implemented by DSWD to the juvenile

delinquents in Center Based?

3. Based on the result of the study, what monitoring development program can

be proposed?

The study was used a descriptive survey method of research. It is descriptive

because it determined the level of services of Department of Social Welfare

Development among juvenile delinquents as basis for monitoring development in

Koronadal City.
 55

The research instrument used in this study was the survey questionnaire which

is composed of three parts. The first part entails about the profile of the respondents.

The second part entails about the level of services implemented by DSWD to the

juvenile delinquents in Center Based.

Frequency Counts and Percentage was used to describe the profile of the

respondents. Weighted Arithmetic Mean was used to determine the level of services

implemented by DSWD to the juvenile delinquents in Center Based.

The major findings of the study are enumerated as follows:

1. It was found out that 45 or 45% of the total respondents were 13 – 15 years

old, followed by 10 – 12 years old with 26 or 26%, 16 – 17 years old of the

total respondents were 17 or 17% and 12 or 12% of the total respondents were

7 – 9 years old.

2. It was found out that 81 or 81% of the total respondents were male and 19 or

19% were female.

3. It was found out that 54 or 54% of the total respondents were in secondary

level, followed by 42 or 42% were in primary level and 4 or 4% of the total

respondents were in tertiary level.

4. It was found out that the mean ranges from 3.37 to 3.9. The result revealed that

the center based implemented by DSWD to the child in conflict with the law

has a grand mean of 3.79 or interpreted often.

5. The result revealed that implementation of DSWD to their intervention

program for the juvenile delinquents helps them to rehabilitate, reformed,

 56

avoid the children into committing crimes and makes the youth to be a law

abiding citizen.

Conclusions

Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions have been made:

1. That most of the respondents were 13 – 15 years old.

2. That most of the respondents were male.

3. That most of the respondents were in secondary level.

4. That the DSWD was often conducted their center based program to the

juvenile delinquents.

5. The researcher proposed another monitoring development program for child in

conflict with the law through the help of the PNP, LGU’s, Barangay Officials,

Teachers and Parents to conduct more seminars in every barangays on crime

prevention, awareness and give them programs that will enhanced their skills

and not engaging in any criminal activities.

Recommendations

Based on the summary of findings and conclusions, the following

recommendations are considered:

1. It is recommended that the PNP, LGU’s and Barangay Officials, to conduct

more seminars in every barangays on crime prevention, awareness and give

them programs that will enhanced their skills and not engaging in any criminal

activities.
 57

2. It is recommended that the teachers and parents should always monitor their

students/children so that they will engage in any illegal activities.

3. Further study is recommended.

 58

REFERENCES

Aaron, L.; Dallaire, D. H. (2010). "Parental Incarceration and Multiple Risk

Experiences: Effect on Family Dynamics and Children's Delinquency". Journal
of Youth and Adolescence 39 (12): 1471–1484. doi:10.1007/s10964-009-9458-
0.

Barbaree, H. E., Marshall, W. L. (2012). An introduction to the juvenile sex

offender: Terms, concepts, and definitions (2nd Ed.). New York: Guilford
Press.

Bartol, Curt & Bartol, Anne (2010). Juvenile Delinquency and Antisocial Behavior:
A Developmental Perspective, 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Prentice Hall.

Bateman, (2010). 'Career Criminals in Society' London, United Kingdom: Sage

Publications.

Boe, (2010). Understanding Youth and Crime (Listening to youth?), Buckingham:

Open University Press.

Booth, Marilyn. (2012). "Arab adolescents facing the future." Pp. 232 in Brown et.
al., (eds) The World's Youth: Adolescence in Eight Regions of the Globe.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 052180910x.

Borttons, B.L. Najdowski, C.J Boodman, B.S (2010). Discipline Children. Children
as Victims, Witness and Offenders (Psychological Science and the law).

Brown, S. (2010) Understanding Youth and Crime (Listening to youth?),

Buckingham: Open University Press. Page 109.

Cauffman., (2010). "Bad boys or poor parents: Relations to female juvenile

delinquency". Journal on Research on Adolescence 18 (4): 119–142.
doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2008.00577.x.

Cauffman and Steinberg; (2012). "Legal, individual, and environmental predictors

of court disposition in a sample of serious adolescent offenders". Law and
Human Behavior 31 (6): 519–535. doi:10.1007/s10979-006-9076-2.

DeLisi, Matt (2015). Career Criminals in Society. London, United Kingdom: Sage
Publications. p. 39. ISBN 1412905532.

Dishion & McCord (2010). When interventions harm :Peer groups and problem
behavior. American Psychologist, 54, 755-764.
 59

Dobkin, (2013)."The prevention and treatment of juvenile delinquency: A review of

the research", Clinical Psychology Review, 1993.

Dodge., (2013), A Biopsychosocial model of the development of chronic conduct

problems in adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 39, 349-371.

Domingo, Lita J., (2010). How Prevalent among the Youth? Manila Bulletin. The
Nationals Leading Newspaper.

Eadie, T.; Morley, R. (2013). "Crime, Justice and Punishment". In Baldock, J.; et al.
Social Policy (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0199258945.

Farrington, D. P. (2012). "Developmental criminology and risk-focused prevention".

In Maguire, M.; et al. The Oxford Handbook of Criminology (3rd ed.). Oxford:
Oxford University Press. ISBN 0199256098.

Graham, J. & Bowling, B. (2015). Young People and Crime, Home Office Research
Study No. 145, London: Home Office.

Gilvarry, (2010).Developmental criminology and risk-focused prevention’ in M.

Maguire et al. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology (3rd edn.). Oxford:
Oxford University Press.

Holmes, S. E.; James, R. S.; Javad, K. (2011). "Risk Factors in Childhood that Lead
to the Development of Conduct Disorder and Antisocial Personality Disorder".
Child Psychiatry and Human Development 31 (3): 183–193.
doi:10.1023/A:1026425304480.

Hunter, J. (2010). The Center for Sex Offender Management. Understanding juvenile
sex offending behavior: Emerging research, treatment approaches, and
management practices. Retrieved October 11, 2009 from
http://www.csom.org/pubs/juvbrf10.html.

Kirk, David S.; Sampson, Robert J. (2012). "Juvenile Arrest and Collateral
Educational Damage in the Transition to Adulthood". Sociology of Education.
doi:10.1177/0038040712448862.

Latimer, 2011. 'Risk Factors in Childhood that Lead to the Development of Conduct
Disorder and Antisocial Personality Disorder': Child Psychiatry and Human
Development, Vol.31(3), Spring 2001.

Longo, R. E., Prescott, D. S. (2015). Introduction: A brief history of treating youth

with sexual behavior problems. Current perspectives: Working with sexually
aggressive youth and youth with sexual behavior problems, (pp, 31-43).
Massachusetts: NEARI Press.
 60

Lorenzo, L.C Dr. (2011). Law to Catch your Children Doiny Right. Law 5 Discipline
your Child with Best End in Mind. Drug Abuse, Crime and Home.

Monea J, Thomas A (2011). "Unintended pregnancy and taxpayer spending".

Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 43: 88–93.
doi:10.1363/4308811. PMID 21651707.

Moffitt (2011). "Life course persistent versus adolescent limited antisocial behavior".
In Cicchetti, D.; Cohen, D. Developmental Psychopathy (2nd ed.). New York:
Wiley.

Mori (2012). ‘The decline in crime and the rise of anti-social behaviour’, Probation
Journal, 53, 4, 397-407.

Raine, A. (2013). The Psychopathology of Crime: Criminal Behavior as a Clinical

Disorder. San Diego, California: Academic Press. ISBN 0125761600.

Righthand, S.; Welch, C. (2014). "Characteristics of youth who sexually offend".

Journal of Child Sexual Abuse 13 (3): 15–32. doi:10.1300/J070v13n03_02.

Ryan, G., Lane, S., (2012). Juvenile Sexual Offending: Causes consequences and
correction. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Steffensmeier and Schawrtz (2010). "An assessment of recent trend in girl's

violence using diverse longitudinal sources: Is gender gap closing?".
Criminology 43 (2): 355–406. doi:10.1111/j.0011-1348.2005.00011.x.

Siegel, Larry J., (2014). Juvenile Delinquency: The Core (4th ed.). Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth/cengage Learning. ISBN 0534519326.

Slobogin, C. (2010). Different Visions of Juvenile Justice. Criminal Justice Law.

Soriano, O. (2010). Introduction (Juvenile Crime). What is juvenile delinquency,

Social Nature of Juvenile Delinquency. Juvenile Delinquency Crime
Prevention. Publish in Quezon City.

Steinberg, L. (2013). Adolescence (8th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

ISBN 9780073405483.

Stuckhoff, David R. (2011). Delinquency in Society. Federal Bureau of Investigation

Crime Report (2009). Crime in the United States 2008. Retrieved on October
11, 2009, from http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm.

Snyder, H. M. (2012). "Juvenile arrests 2006". Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention. Retrieved October 15, 2009.
 61

Travis III, L.F (2012). History of Juvenile Justice. The Juvenile Court Process.
Criminal Justice.

Walklate, S (2013). Understanding Criminology – Current Theoretical Debates, 2nd

edition, Maidenhead: Open University Press. Study Reveals Specific Gene in
Adolescent Men with Delinquent Peers Newswise, Retrieved on October 1,
2008.

Welsh, Brandon C. (2012). Juvenile Delinquency, Theories, Practice and Law 9 th

edition,

Woolard; Scott (2010). "The legal regulation of adolescence". In Lerner, R.;

Steinberg, L. Handbook of Adolescent psychology 2 (3rd ed.). New York:
Wiley. pp. 345–371. ISBN 9780470149225.