|
Psychological theories have attempted to explain the reasons for and how criminality occurs. The psychoanalytic perspective involves two major theories – Freud’s theory of the Sexual Stages of Development and the Theory of Attachment purposed by Bowlby (1947).
These theories conclude that there is an association between
the formation of personality in childhood and that of future criminal
behaviour. The Freudian theory of development suggests that we go
through several stages of development – these stages are motivated by
one’s sexual desires. These desires are unconscious elements –
controlled by internal forces – which Freud claims are the id, ego and
superego. The id represents the individual’s impulsive desires which
are regulated by the superego. The ego acts out the socially desirable
behaviour. The id works in keeping with the pleasure principle, which
can be understood as a demand to take care of needs immediately (e.g.
this could relate to the behaviour of stealing). These demands are
innocently explored through childhood – through the four stages of
sexual development. Freudian theory believes that criminality is
influenced by mental disturbances –which have aroused by a conflict
between the id, ego and superego, or it may be the result of improper
fixations during one of the stages of development. This mental
disturbance often displays itself in the form of behavioural disorders
such as social aggression or passiveness. Therefore Freud would argue
that criminality is caused by a difficulty that has not been overcome
during childhood. The adult individual displaying the criminal
behaviour has developed a defective personality, based upon conflict,
impulsiveness and aggression. Freudian theorist believe that this
childhood conflict during his or her younger years has caused the adult
individual to lack the ability to feel empathy, remorse, regret or
guilt and has failed to develop a sense of right or wrong. Therefore,
Freudian theory believes that criminality is a result of personality
defects that have been influenced by a disturbance and lack of
progression in the stages of development occurred in childhood.
In addition Bowlby (1947) and Ainsworth (1969) have also explored the
notion that early childhood experiences may affect adult behaviour and
the prospect of criminality. Bowlby’s (1947) research into juvenile
delinquents revealed that those delinquent who as infants had lost
contact or experience separation with their natural mother were found
to be more prone to delinquent behaviour in their teenage years.
Similarly Ainsworth’s research with infants and the temporary
separation of their mother or caregiver encourages children to act in
an anti-social manner – either withdrawing or displaying aggressive
tendencies. These studies have added support to the notion of the
Attachment theory which implies that possible social factors in an
individual’s life may affect the likelihood of delinquency and or
criminal activities. Glueck and Glueck (1950) conducted an extensive
survey examining over 400 factors and their potential to cause juvenile
delinquency. They compared a control group of 500 11-18 year old young
men to an experimental group of 500 young men of the same age who were
in young offender’s institutions. The findings revealed that
delinquent boys were 1.5 times more likely to have experience a distant
relationships with their mothers. In addition, parenting skills also
seemed to have an impact on the likelihood of criminal behaviour. For
example delinquent boys were 2 times more likely to have experienced
physical punishment from their parents. Furthermore, Glueck and Glueck
(1950) found that the parenting skills of the delinquent boy’s parents
were 2 times more likely to be inconsistent with their discipline
techniques, in comparison to non-delinquent families. In addition, the
majority of boys interviewed (93%) came from homes where there was lax
parental supervision and they were allowed to make their own decisions.
Therefore, these findings suggest that the attachment or bond between a
child and their main care giver is important in the formation of
personality and the development of their moral beliefs. This research
also identifies how the parental use of punishment may be a cause of
delinquency and anti-social and criminal behaviour. However, later
research was to show this conclusion to be incorrect (e.g. Schuck,
1974). Later studies have infact indicated that parental permissiveness
was a cause of juvenile delinquency and aggression (Lipton, Martinson,
and Wilks, 1975). This latter point is a criticism of the Freudian
approach to parenting skills. Freudian theorists argue that parents
should be permissive and allow children to work their way through
problem situations without the parent causing internal trauma in the
child by being too strict in their expectations with their child. The
Freudian theory believes that healthy development will be encouraged
through a warm parent-child bond, whereby the child is helped through
interactive talk to uncover and reveal the unconscious conflicts that
are inhibiting the child’s progression. Therefore, Freudian theory
suggests that anti-social or criminal behaviour is heavily influenced
by early year’s experiences and the child’s ability to progress through
the sexual stages effectively.
The problem with assessing Freudian and Attachment theories is within
the lack of scientific validation these theories have gained. Freud
himself claimed that his theory needed no empirical testing. Therefore
it has been suggested that Freud’s psychological beliefs were
essentially based on theoretical subjective speculation (Torrey, 1992).
However, this statement causes substantial problems in the replication
of his studies and tests of reliability. It can be argued that
personality and behaviour is an individual property – however, within
the assessment of the association between psychological theories and
criminality it is impossible to treat the individual as an individual
entity. Reports have often generalised and claimed that ‘juvenile
delinquents are more likely to commit crime’ (e.g. Bowlby) – therefore
to assessing this claim it is essential to include reliable research
studies in doing so. Therefore, the above account lacks reliability and
possibility validity – due to the differences in research methods that
these studies utilised to collect and generalise their findings. Most
research that attempts to find an association between childhood events
and adult behaviour is up against questionable validity – due to the
nature of the material they are researching. For example, assessing
childhood experiences is difficult – as it is retrospective
information. If relying on self-reported information this is open to
distortions, elaboration or down-playing of events. Also if details of
criminal behaviour or childhood incidences brought to the attention of
professionals are sought, this can also be distorted, due to the nature
of relying on a third person to interpret the events of the individual
in question. Therefore it must be brought to one’s attention that
assessing the relationship between early year’s experiences and
criminality is a complicated issue that may not have any clear cut
conclusions to be drawn. Another complication involved in the
assessment of such psychological theories such the Attachment theory is
that the conclusions are highly dependent on social and cultural
ideologies of childhood and acceptable behaviour. For example, children
and parents from different social groups and different cultures
interact differently. This means that what is consider lax parenting
techniques in one social circle may be considered differently in
another. Similarly the concept of criminal behaviour is also determined
by political ideology and how societies see a certain type of
behaviour. Different societies and cultures may be more tolerate of
certain types of behaviour than others. Another complication of the
assessment of psychological theories such as the Freudian approach to
personal development is that it fails to account for environmental
influences that may affect a child’s early years –for example,
parenting skills have been mentioned above, however other social
factors may play an important role as to whether the individual may be
exposed to or be involved in criminal activities. For example, the
Social Control Theory looks at the elements that keep an individual
from committing criminal offences or acting in a deviate manner.
Therefore, social control theories try to explain why people conform to
society – regardless of their childhood background. Factors in society
that may contribute to reasons why people conform to desirable ways of
behaviour may include schooling, family, church, social networks and
the community they live in. Although Freudian theory does address how
moral development occurs through childhood, yet it fails to effectively
incorporate how social interactions may influence one’s internal
thoughts.
In conclusion, drawing on Freudian and Attachment theories to assess
the relationship between early year’s experiences and criminality has
provided us with little scientific evidence to suggest that criminal
behaviour is a result of childhood experiences. Due to the likelihood
that parental figures will be involved in the early years of an
individual’s life, parenting styles were looked at in this discussion.
However, the evidence discussed above gives us mixed opinion as to
whether particular parenting techniques adopted through childhood have
a bearing affect on how a young adult will act in the future. It may be
more beneficial to assess other factors, such as environmental and
social aspects, as well as psychological factors as to how individuals
as children and adults respond to situations within their life as a
child and as a growing adult. It may be that certain life events may
have affected the individual to react in a anti-social manner –
however, if these events did not occur during the early years of a
person’s life, then psychological theories such as Freud’s and the Attachment Theory may not pick up important indicators of potential and actual criminal behaviour.
References
Books
Bowlby, John. (1947). Forty-four Juvenile Thieves: Their Characters and Home Life. London: Bailliere, Tindall, and Cox.
Glueck, S., & Glueck, E. (1950). Unravelling Juvenile Delinquency. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Lipton, D., Martinson, R., & Wilks, J. (1975). The Effectiveness
of Correctional Treatment: A survey of treatment evaluation studies.
New York: Praeger.
Schuck, J. R. (1974). The use of causal non-experimental models in
aggression research. In Jan de Wit and Willard W Hartup (Eds.),
Determinants and Origins of Aggressive Behaviour. The Hague: Mouton
& Co.
Torrey, E. F. (1992). Freudian Fraud. New York: HarperCollins.
Journals
Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1969). Object relations, attachment and dependency. Child Development, 40, 969-1025.
McCord, J. (1978). A thirty year follow-up of treatment effects. American Psychologist, 33, 284-289.
|
