Influence of Family Structure on Juvenile Deliquency


INFLUENCE OF FAMILY STRUCTURE ON JUVENILE DELIQUENCY IN NAKURU CHILDREN’S REMAND HOME

By
ANTHONY KIRORI KIMANI

A RESEARCH REPORT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN PROJECT PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT, UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI

2010.
DECLARATION
This research is my original work and has not been presented for a degree or any other award in any other university
----------------------------------------- ------------------------------
Anthony Kirori Kimani Date
L50/72693/2008

This Project Research has been submitted for examination with my approval as University Supervisor:

----------------------- ----------------------------------
PROF. JOSEPH BOSIRE Date
(Professor of Curriculum Studies,
Department of Curriculum and Educational Management,
Laikipia University College – Egerton University)

DEDICATION
A post humus dedication to my late dad; Mwalimu George Kimani as I unconsciously fulfill his wish that I will teach and touch the world despite my earlier resistance to his desire!

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

To God, to my wonderful family, the Project Supervisor, Prof. Joseph Bosire, the course lecturers, my friends and support group namely: Mworia,Tumme, Kefa,Lengapian and Mr. Rodgers for assistance in Data analysis, colleagues at work; the Nakuru Pioneer MA class and finally, to :
ALL THE CHILDREN OF THE WORLD; It is all in your best interest!

TABLE OF CONTENT
Page
DECLARATION ii
DEDICATION iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS v
LIST OF TABLES/FIGURES viii
LIST OF ABBREVIATION ix
ABSTRACT x
CHAPTER ONE 1
INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background to the study 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem 3
1.3 Purpose of the Study 3
1.4 Objectives of the Study 3
1.5 Research Questions 4
1.6 Significance of Study 4
1.7 Limitations & delimitations of the Study 5
1.7.1 Limitations of the study 5
1.7.2 Delimitations of the Study 5
1.8 Basic Assumptions of the Study. 5
1.9. Organisation of the study............................................................................................................
1.9 Operational Definition of Significant terms 6
CHAPTER TWO 7
REVIEW OF LITERATURE 7
2.1 Introduction 7
2.2 Juvenile Delinquency and Intact Family Unit Structure 7
2.3 Non-resident fathers 8
2.4 Broken Homes 8
2.5 Parenting practices 10
2.6 The Single Parenthood 11
2.7 Children in Homes 12
2.8 Delinquency in children raised by grandparents 15
2.9 Theoretical Framework on the Family structure 16
2.9.1 The Coercion Theory 16
2.9.2 The social learning theory 18
2.10 Conceptual Framework 19
2.11 Summary of Reviewed Literature 20
CHAPTER THREE 21
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 21
3.1 Introduction 21
3.2 Research Design. 21
3.3 Target Population 21
3.4 Sampling Size and Sample Selection 22
3.5 Research Instruments 22
3.5.1 Validity of the research instrument 23
3..5.2 Reliability of Instruments 23
3.6. Data Collection procedures 23
3.9 Operational definition of Variables 24
3.10 Data Analysis Techniques 28
3.11 Ethical Considerations 28

CHAPTER FOUR 29
DATA ANALYSIS, INTERPRETATION, PRESENTATIONS AND DISCUSSION 29
4.1 Introduction 29
4.2 Background characteristics of the respondents. 29
CHAPTER FIVE 43
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS 43
5.1 Introduction 43
5.2 Summary of Findings 44
5.3Conclusions 45
5.5 Recommendations 45
5.6 Contribution to the Body of Knowledge 46
REFERENCES 47
APPENDIX 1: THE STRUCTURED INTERVIEW SCHEDULE 52

LIST OF FIGURES Page

Figure 2.3.1 Conceptual Framework 16

LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 4.0.1 Table showing Operation definition of Variables
Table 4.2.1: Table showing statistics for Gender, Age and Education
Table 4.2.2: Table showing frequencies for Gender Only
Table 4.2.3: Table showing the frequencies for Age Distribution
Table 4.2.4: Table showing the family structure prior to child being in conflict
with the law
Table 4.2.5: Table showing frequencies for Education Levels
Table 4.2.6: Table showing frequency for Statistics of Violence
Table 4.2.7: Table showing frequency for prevalence of Violence
Table 4.2.8. Statistics by Offence
Table 4.3.2: Table showing the Correlations for Intact Family Structure
Table 4.3.3: Table showing the Correlations for a Mother only Structure
Table 4.3.4: Table showing the Correlations for a Father only Family Structure
Table 4.3.5: Table showing the Correlations for a Step parent Family Structure
Table 4.3.6. Table showing the Correlations for living in a Children Home
Structure
Table 4.3.7: Table showing the Correlations for a Grandparent
Structure
Table 5.2.1 Table of Objectives and Summary of Findings

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

1. NCRH- Nakuru Children’s Remand Home
2. P/C- Child in Need of Protection and Care
3. UNICEF- United Nations Children Fund
4. OVC- Orphans and Vulnerable Children
5. UNCRC- United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Children
6. M&E- Monitoring and Evaluation
7. SPSS- Statistical Package for Social Science
8. NGO- Non Governmental Organisation
9. CBO- Community Based Organisation

ABSTRACT
A UNICEF report (2006) says the global number of children deprived of liberty as a result of conflict with the law is estimated to be not less than one million. The root social causes that bring children into conflict with the law include poverty, broken homes, and lack of education and employment opportunities, migration, drug or substance misuse, peer pressure, lack of parental guidance, violence, abuse and exploitation. The purpose of this study in this connection sought to investigate the influence of family unit structure on juvenile delinquency at Nakuru Children’s Remand Home. The specific objectives of the study was to study the relationship between Juvenile delinquency and intact family structure, a single parent family structure(mother only/father only), a family structure with a step parent, a child brought in a children home and for children brought up by grandparents. The research adopted an expost facto design. In order to collect the required data the population of the study comprised an analysis of Secondary data from the records on Children whose cases have been concluded by the Children Court and the use of a questionnaire that guided a structured interview for child offenders admitted at NCRH.The expected sample size was 60. The Questionnaire was piloted in a similar children home at the Nakuru Probation Hostel to improve on its validity. The collected data was coded and analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics namely; frequency tables and correlations respectively. Frequency distributions and Pearson Correlation tables were used to present the findings of the study. The Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) for Windows version 12 was used in data analysis. The findings for this research found that there was a strong correlation between murder and a child having come from an intact family but there was a weak correlation between substance abuse and children from an intact family. For a single parent family parenthood, there was a strong correlation between street life, sex and defilement offences. Children brought up in a step parent home had a strong inclination towards substance abuse but the correlation was even greater for stealing and refusing school. For children having come from a children’s home, they had a strong correlation towards substance abuse and street life but showed a negative strong correlation with refusing school. For children brought up in a grandparent family structure, the correlation was strong for substance abuse and the highest for stealing. Murder was the least committed offence while refusing school and street life were the most dominant. This research concludes that single parenthood families were the most significant for all offences in the study except murder.

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background information
Children offenders are mandated by law to be taken care of by the Department of Children’s Services. This department is now in the Ministry of Gender, Children and Social Development and its origin can be traced back to the colonial era, when it existed as a Juvenile Correctional Institution. Its earliest correctional and rehabilitation institution, the then Kabete Approved School (now Kabete Rehabilitation School) was built between 1910 and 1912, in the lower Kabete area. (GOK, 2009).The Department of Children’s Services currently runs 23 children’s institutions established under the Children’s Act (2001) under section 50 .The 5th schedule, sub- section 10(1) of the Children’s Act(2001)states that ‘children who have not been released on bail shall be remanded at a children’s remand home in line with section 57 of the Act’. This is the part of the Children’s Act that gives the department powers to remand children in a Children remand home. A remand home caters for children aged 10-17 years, both boys and girls.

In Kenya, there are 12 Children’s Remand Homes all under the Department of Children’s Services. The remand homes in Kenya handled 1490, 3224 and 3340 in 2005, 2006 and 2007 respectively. On the other hand, the children rehabilitation schools handled 2362, 1164 and 2490 in 2005, 2006 and 2007 respectively (GOK, 2009) According to country response to the Children Rescue committee 44th Session, 5113, children were involved in crime in 2005.Out of these, only 3,500 were handled by the Remand institutions due to capacity constraints (GoK/UNICEF, 2006).An increasing trend thus is that Children are thus being remanded in children remand homes in Kenya Delinquency in children is as a result of various factors namely: poverty, broken homes, and lack of education and employment opportunities, migration, drug or substance misuse, peer pressure, lack of parental guidance, violence, abuse and exploitation.

This research while acknowledging these other causes only seeks to focus on the family and its contribution to delinquency. Research by Mugo et al (2006) in the report, Juvenile Justice and Management of Children Offenders in Kenya says that a gap does exist as all studies to juvenile delinquency tend to propose curative measures compared to seeking the causes. Angela D. Mullens, (2004) studied the relationship between juvenile delinquency and family unit structure based in Lewis County of West Virginia in the United States. This study in a bid at replication specifically focuses on Nakuru District and will compare the results of the two studies.Tomoko (2004), says that in Japan, juvenile offender cases can be dismissed without hearing and the matter handled at family level.

In Kenya, this does not happen as yet hence a proper understanding of the children’s family unit structure. Gitau(2002);Ouma,Ndungú and Wamakobe,(2008) in an M&E exercise of the Save the Children Funded Diversion Programme of children from the justice system despite having committed offences called for proper identification on why children left their homes in the first place and noted a general lack of parental involvement in child protection issues. This study therefore, seeks to establish the interplay that may exist between Family unit Structure and Delinquency specifically to children offenders in Nakuru Children Remand Home. They suggest that recommendations should lean towards interventions; one way being an analysis of the family structure in a bid to start preventive programmes for juvenile delinquency at community level.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Mugo et al (2006) says that various reasons such as poor marriages, lack of parental controls, ineffective parental behaviour and failure to provide a natural and loving environment in Kenya, have been attributed to the rise in delinquency. A family has a greater effect on individual’s trait acquisition and development. Wright (2004) says that most studies in delinquency have focussed on classification of crimes committed but have not delved deep into causative relationships, (Mugo et al (2006).In this regard, this study on the effect of the family unit structure on delinquency is an attempt to delve into such a relationship . This therefore investigated the influence of family unit structure on child delinquency in Nakuru Children’s Remand Home.
1.3 The Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to identify the influence of family unit structure and juvenile delinquency in Nakuru Children’s Remand Home. The various family structures studied are namely: an intact family, presence of a single parent (mother only/father only), presence of a step parent, a child brought up in a children’s home and finally a child brought up by grandparents and how this relates to them becoming delinquents.
1.4 Objectives of the Study
The study was guided by the following objectives:
1. To determine the extent to which an intact home family structure influence child delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home.
2. To assess the extent to which a single parenthood (father only/mother only) structure contribute to children delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home.
3. To examine the extent to which a step parenthood structure influence child delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home.
4. To establish the extent to which a children’s home structure influence child delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home.
5. To investigate the extent to which a grandparent’s family structure influence child delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home.
1.5 Research Questions
The study was based on the following research questions:
1. What is the extent of an intact home family structure likely to influence child delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home?
2. Does a single parenthood (father only/mother only) structure contribute to children delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home?
3. To what extent does a step parenthood structure influence child delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home?
4. Is a child who has lived in a children’s home structure influenced to engage in child delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home?
5. To what extent is a child living in a grandparents family structure influenced to engage in child delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home?
1.6 Significance of Study
It is hoped that the results of the study added to improving the rehabilitation programmes run by the Children Department in Kenya to deal with the problem of child offenders especially the repeat cases (recidivism) that always appear to crop up in the streets of major urban centers in Kenya. This study was also expected to be significant for more existing body of knowledge in the area of children in conflict with the law and in turn enhance rehabilitation programmes and the offering of psychosocial support. Researchers, children officers, Children home managers and families dealing with children with discipline problems are expected to be assisted to understand the issue of juvenile delinquents. It is hoped that Children Psychologists will use the study to come up with effective treatment plans of children in conflict with the law.
The study is hoped to enhance the understanding of juvenile crimes in the possible review of the Children’s Act, 2001.It is hoped that Family Counselors will find the study on the dynamics and how families contribute to juvenile delinquency and show the need for Government to come up with polices that strengthen the family unit as its stability may lead to reduced cases of juvenile delinquency hence a more community preventive policies in planning of the Kenya’s Juvenile justice system and its handling of issues of juvenile delinquency. A lot of studies also focus on the influence of biological parents, this study went a step further to analyze the roles of a step parents either male or female; a child who lives with a grandparent and a child who has no home but could have been brought up in a Children Home, by an uncle, aunt or grandparent and how this influenced the child to engage in delinquent acts.

1.7 Limitations and delimitations
1.7.1 Limitations of the study
The research instrument used was expected to generate varying data depending on the truthfulness of the children under study. This was, however, mitigated by design of a reliable and a valid research instrument. Finally, analysis of Secondary data was a challenge as some of the records were found to be inconsistent for meaningful analysis. This was overcome by getting assistance from the Archives assistant who was well versed on the status of major records in NCRH.
1.7.2 Delimitations of the Study
The research only investigated the research problem based on only one children’s remand home: Nakuru Children’s Remand Home. There are 12 Statutory Remand Homes namely; Nakuru, Kericho, Eldoret, Nairobi, Othaya, Murangá Kiambu, Kakamega, Kisumu, Manga, Likoni and Malindi .The findings therefore will not reflect the situation of family unit structures and juvenile delinquency across all remand homes in Kenya.
1.8 Operational Definition of Significant terms
1.8.1 Juvenile delinquency- a legal term for behavior of children and adolescents that in adults would be judged criminal under law. Juvenile delinquency is the violation of a law of Kenya committed by a person prior to his eighteenth birthday which would have been a crime if committed by an adult. Juvenile delinquency is generally thought of as misbehavior by children (Children’s Act, 2001)
1.8.2 Family Unit Structure:
Family Structure analysis examines one of these relationships, that between women and men or father and mother in a household. It can be defined as the varied roles played by women (mothers) and men (fathers) and its influence to the girls and boys born or brought up in the household. (CIDA 2007)The family actors may both be present(intact),father only available, mother only available, both parents absent and a situation where the child is brought up by non relatives like well wishers. This is the context of this term in this research work.

1.9 Organisation of the study
This research is organised in the following manner: Chapter one deals with the preliminaries from dedication, acknowledgements, abstract, background and statement of the study, the objectives and research questions, significance, limitations and delimitations of the study and finally, the operation definition of terms. Chapter two deals with the review of Literature based on a discussion of the objectives and the Theoretical framework based on the Coercion Theory and finally on the Operational definition of Variables.
Chapter three deals with the methodology for the research from the design, target population, sampling size and selection, research instruments validity and reliability of instruments, data collection procedure and ethical considerations for the research. Chapter four deals with data analyses, presentation, interpretation and discussion of the findings. Finally chapter five deals with the summary of findings based on the objectives, conclusion and recommendations also based on the findings and the contribution of this research to the body of knowledge. The appendix has the structured interview schedule and the letter of authority to conduct research.

CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 Introduction
This chapter focused the phenomenon of delinquency and how this is influenced by family combinations that exist in Kenya. There was analysis of delinquency and an intact family, broken homes with child left with father or mother only, step parent influence to juvenile delinquency and situation where a child has lived in a children’s home and finally has lived with a grandparent. The chapter also looks in detail the concept of broken families and the influence on juvenile deliquency.The Chapter also focuses on the theory of Coercion in relation to Juvenile delinquency. The views of scholars cited in this review will later be compared in Chapter five with the findings from this research to see whether the findings will concur with the other cited authors in the literature or not.
2.2 Background information
Loeber, Kalb and Huizinga (2001) says Juvenile crime and delinquency are serious problems all over the world. Their intensity and gravity depend mostly on the social, economic and cultural conditions in each country. There is evidence, however, of an apparent world-wide increase in juvenile criminality combined with economic recession, especially in marginal sectors of urban centres. In many cases, youth offenders are "street children" who have been exposed to violence in their immediate social environment, either as observers or as victims. Their basic education, when they have it, is poor; their primary socialization from the family is too often inadequate; and their socio-economic environment is shaped by poverty and destitution.
Rather than relying solely on the criminal justice system, approaches to the prevention of violence and crime should thus include measures to support equality and justice, to combat poverty and to reduce hopelessness among young people. Young people who drop out of school or come from broken families should benefit from specific social programmes that help them build self-esteem and confidence conducive to responsible adulthood. Destitution, poor living conditions, inadequate education, malnutrition, illiteracy, unemployment and lack of leisure-time activities are factors that marginalize young people, which make some of them vulnerable to exploitation as well as to involvement in criminal and other deviant behaviour.
If preventive measures address the very causes of criminality, rehabilitation programmes and services should be made available to those who already have a criminal history. In general, youth delinquency begins with petty offences such as robbery or violent behaviour, which can be easily traced by and corrected through institutions and community and family environments. Indeed law enforcement should be a part of rehabilitation measures. Finally, the human rights of young people who are imprisoned should be protected and principles of penal majority according to penal laws should be given great attention. World Youth Report (2005), Juvenile delinquency covers a range of different violations of legal and social norms, ranging from minor offences to severe crimes committed by minors. Quite often youth take advantage of illegal opportunities and get involved in crime, substance abuse and violent acts against others, especially their peers.
Statistically young people constitute the most criminally active segment of the population, although eventually most young people will desist from criminal and deviant activity. Young people who live in difficult circumstances are often at risk of becoming delinquent. Poverty, dysfunctional families, substance abuse and the death of family members have been demonstrated to be risk factors for becoming delinquent. Insecurity due to an unstable social environment increases vulnerability, and young people with poorly developed social skills are less able to protect themselves against the negative influences of a peer group. Countries with economies in transition have witnessed a dramatic rise in delinquency rates. Since 1995, juvenile crime levels in many of these countries have increased by more than 30 per cent.
Juvenile delinquency is often highly correlated with alcohol and drug abuse. In Africa, delinquency tends to be attributed primarily to hunger, poverty, malnutrition and unemployment. The most effective prevention efforts focus on the families of troubled youths, including those young people with serious behavioural problems. Discipline is another interrelated part of family relationships that affects delinquency. Disturbed family relations play a very important role in the problem of delinquency. In an investigation of high-delinquency areas in New York City, Craig and Glick (2005ed) found three factors related to increased likelihood of delinquency: i.e. careless or inadequate supervision by the mother or surrogate mother; erratic or overly strict discipline and lack of cohesiveness of the family unit. Sheldon and Glueck (2000 ed) found that 4.1 percent of fathers were found to use sound discipline practices; 26.7 percent, fair; and 69.3 percent, unsound.
____ Consistency and persistence in discipline are needed if controls are to be adequately internalized into a youth’s personality. Situations, and appropriate methods of discipline to deal with a child, must occur regularly enough to let the child develop concepts of conduct and be able to distinguish suitable and unsuitable responses. Travis Hirschi was quoted in Causes of Delinquency by Haskel & Yablonsky (2004 ed). He cited an example of what may occur if the parent of a delinquent child were to be of a lower class. He states that, even if the father is committing criminal acts, he may not publicize the fact to his children. The father operates to foster obedience to a system of norms to which he himself may not conform. It sounds like a firm control but it may not be strict enough to make a child want to conform to rules or norms. Travis Hirschi (2004) argues that parents may not necessarily transmit delinquent values.
However, Sykes and Matza (1994 ed) state that even though the family of the delinquent may agree with society that delinquency is wrong, the family may tolerate or even encourage the commission of certain offenses, though not others, for example, drug offenses a high crime, big money societal issue of the ‘90s. Or consider the example of a parent with an alcohol problem who is setting an example that many children would follow. It is also important to understand that the intimacy with which parents communicate is strongly related to the commission of delinquent acts. The idea is whether the parent is psychologically present when temptation to commit a crime appears. If, in the situation of temptation, the child gives no thought to parental reaction, the child would tend to commit the act. Children who perceive that their parents are unaware of their whereabouts are likely to do what they want, all of which suggests that the focus of communication can affect the likelihood that the child can recall his parents when and if a situation of potential delinquent behavior arises, or he/she may ignore it if he/she chooses to.

Another problem with correcting juvenile offenders is recidivism. This mean the rate of reoffending among juvenile offenders which is a cause for concern for those involved in criminal justice agencies around the world. In North America, for example, the recidivism rate for young people leaving custody has been reported to be as high as 96 per cent (Lewis et al. 1994). In another study, 88 per cent of British males between 14 and 16 years reoffended within two years of release from custody (Hagell 2002). Re-offending among juveniles following community orders appears to be much lower, but the majority still reoffend.

In Australia, a Victorian government study into recidivism among juvenile justice clients (DHS 2001) reported that nearly half (41%) of a sample of more than 1,500 juvenile justice clients reoffended, with this rate rising to 61 per cent for those who had previously been on supervised orders. Such statistics provide a strong rationale for juvenile justice services to scrutinise their models of service delivery and maximise the effectiveness of their rehabilitation programs. It is encouraging that effective rehabilitation programs are available. In their review of more than 200 programs delivered to serious and violent young offenders, Lipsey and Wilson (1998: 338) reported that the best programs were capable of reducing recidivism rates by as much as 40 per cent.

They regarded this as an ‘accomplishment of considerable practical value in terms of the expense and social damage associated with the delinquent behaviour of these juveniles.’A reduction in recidivism of this magnitude compares favourably with those commonly cited in reviews of rehabilitation programs for adult offenders which have found that these programs typically reduce rates of reoffending by between 5 and 18 per cent (Hollin 1999).Effectiveness rates are known to be higher in the best quality programs (Andrews &Bonta 1998).This research aims at influencing the incorporation of the family for rehabilitation of children offenders.

2.3 African Context
Musonda Lemba (2002), in an assessment of street children in Lusaka Zambia says that contrary to expectations, streetism may not necessarily be a result of orphanhood. Nearly two thirds of the children (808 of 1,232, or 65.6%) reported that their mother was still alive; half (618 of 1,232) reported that their father was still alive. Out of the 1,232 children surveyed, a total of 1,153 children were able to provide the status of both parents. Of these:
• 487 (42.2%) reported both parents alive;
• 300 (26.0%) reported their mother alive, father dead;
• 115 (10.0%) reported their father alive, mother dead;
• 251 (21.8%) reported both parents dead.
In the Zambian context, the extended family functions as a social safety net for its members. In the absence of biological parents, close relatives like uncles, aunts, or cousins often assist members of the extended family who are destitute. Street children were therefore asked if they had close relatives other than their biological parents.
Of the 1,232 respondents, 800 (64.9%) replied that they had close relatives, while the remaining 432(35.1%) responded that they did not. When the two variables—status of parents and presence of relatives—are cross-tabulated, results show that 90.7% of the street children in the assessment had either parents or close relatives still alive. Only 9.3% of the children stated that they had neither of their parents, nor any close relative, that they could rely on. When asked about the employment status of parents or guardians, the vast majority of those who responded to the question (324 of 353, or 92%) indicated that their guardians were unemployed. The remainder for the most part had jobs in the informal sector or doing menial labour.

Responses to a question about whom the children were staying with at the time of the assessment support the finding that most are in fact not abandoned children or those living exclusively on the streets. Two-thirds of the children (66.4%) were living with parents or relatives, including 43.2% who were living with one or both parents. A total of 113 (9.1%) were staying at a centre for street children or church facility. 250 (20.3%) were staying with friends, which may or may not have meant on the streets.

In Nigeria, a study by Kudirat B. Sanni, Nsisong A. Udoh, Abayomi A. Okediji,Felicia N. Modo and Leonard N. Ezeh (2010) focused on identifying the influence of family types on juvenile delinquency among secondary school students in Nigeria. Based on empirical findings, three research questions were raised along with three hypotheses to guide the study. Using the multistage random sampling technique, 200 students were selected for the study from five public secondary schools in Uyo metropolis. The self-report Family Delinquency Questionnaire (FADEQ) was used for data collection. Frequencies and simple percentages were used to answer the research questions while the hypotheses were tested statistically using the chi square statistic.

The results indicate that three family variables namely: family stability, family cohesiveness, and family adaptability impact strongly on juvenile delinquency among secondary school students in Uyo metropolis. The discussion was also put in the context of previous findings. Based on these findings, the counseling implications were proffered. The aim of this research was to find out how family types influence juvenile delinquency among secondary school students.
Based on empirical findings, three variables namely family stability, family cohesion, and family adaptability were drawn on and from the results obtained, there was a cumulative effect such that the presence of more than one of these negative family attributes compounded the likelihood of delinquency. Since children who are inadequately supervised by parents, whose parents fail to teach them the difference between right and wrong, whose parents do not monitor their whereabouts and activities, whose parents discipline them erratically and harshly, and those who experience some measure of violence in the home are more likely to become delinquent. It has therefore become apparent that a healthy home environment is the single most important factor necessary to keep children from becoming delinquent.

2.4 Kenyan Context
In Kenya, juvenile delinquents mostly fall under the Probation, Prison and in the greatest measure, the Department of Children’s Services. With the reorganization and prior to the attainment of independence, the Approved Schools were up-graded into a fully-fledged Department under the repealed Children and Young Persons Act Cap 141.Initially, the Department was known as the Department of Approved Schools but after independence it became Children's Department, hereby referred to as the Department of Children’s Services. Currently, the Department draws its mandate from the Children Act, 2001. This is an Act of Parliament that makes provision for parental responsibility, fostering, adoption, custody, maintenance, guardianship, care and protection of children; it also makes provision for the administration of children’s institutions; gives effect to the principles of the Convention of the Rights of the Child and the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child and other related purposes.
Wakanyua,(1995) in his survey of rehabilitation programmes in Approved Schools in Kenya, did a profile of the children offenders and found that 63% had both parents,32.2% were brought up by a single mother while 2.54 had no parents. He further found that were from broken homes 50% were meaning that they had limited opportunities of being brought upon normal families.(Wakanyua, 1995), also noted that prior to being at the rehabilitation programmes, only 24.2 % were living with both parents. Generally the researcher found that the children said that they lacked food, money, clothing, shelter and not being to school prior to their committal at the rehabilitation school.

The scholars’ conclusion was that juvenile delinquency was a social problem affected by the home dynamics including the family unit structure. There has been considerable evidence that poor parenting caused juvenile delinquency, (Ndirangu, 2001) says most children admitted in Children’s institutions came from broken homes and did not know the parents whereabouts.(Cradle 2004) while reporting on Street children and juvenile justice notes that the disintegration of the African family kinship means most unit roles are not inculcated on children and as a result may have an inclination towards juvenile delinquent behaviour. Family separation was a great contributor of children for example running to the streets from their homes. (Namwaba, 2001), says many children continued to suffer from violations emanating from their families, disinheritance and sexual abuse perhaps due to the disorganization and breakdown of the family structure. In a Juvenile justice study, Kangethe, Mugo&Musembi,( 2006) in their findings conclude there is a strong link between social background and topology of child offenders who majority came from poor and disconnected family backgrounds.

Muola, Ndung’u and Ngesa (2009) in a Study of the Relationship between Family Functions and Juvenile Delinquency a Case of Nakuru Municipality, Kenya found that the incidences of juvenile delinquency have increased in recent years in Kenya. Most of the studies done on Juvenile delinquency had paid little or no attention to family functions as one of the possible causes. Their study was carried out in Nakuru town Municipality on former street children on rehabilitation in three homes. The sample was 148 and included all the 30 girls in the three homes and 118 boys selected using the stratified random sampling technique from a population of 241.
Three managers of the three homes and six purposively selected parents were included. Two interview schedules and a questionnaire were used to collect data from the respondents. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics, Pearson’s moment correlation and t-test. Juvenile delinquency was found to be significantly related to marital stability, family size, marital adjustment and mode of discipline. A weak relationship between juvenile delinquency and socio-economic status was observed. The delinquency level of boys was significantly higher than that of girls. It was concluded that there is a relationship between family functions and juvenile delinquency. The study recommended strengthening of counselling on parenting and involvement of families and non-governmental organizations in the rehabilitation efforts.
2.5 Juvenile Delinquency and Intact Family Unit Structure
A family may influence a person’s behaviour either negatively or positively both at childhood and even at adulthood. An intact family can be said to be a functioning union between a mother and a father, so when a break up exist, the turmoil may affect a child to a greater extent. A functioning family is beneficial to a child than a dysfunctional one. Family separation was a great contributor of children for example running to the streets from their homes. It has been reported that family dynamics and structure are causal variables in discussing delinquency because they have a critical role in both the socialization and control of juveniles (Norland et al., 1979).Data has shown that an intact home with a mother and father (emphasis on the father) has a stabilizing effect and may act as a deterrent in certain areas of juvenile delinquency (Stern et al., 1984).

An intact family structure has been found to influence a child’s susceptibility to peer pressure (Steinberg, 1987), contribute to offspring development and capabilities in adapting to society (Smith, & Walters, 1978) and is linked to fewer incidences of delinquency related issues (McCarthy et al1982).It is thus important to analyse the various acts of delinquency and investigate the influence the various family units may have influenced children into committing them. Proportionately more juveniles who are referred to police agencies and the juvenile courts for delinquency charges live in disrupted families when compared to the general population.
Children from biologically intact homes have a lower incidence of illegal behaviour that is paralleled by their lower rate of susceptibility to peer pressure to commit deviant acts (Mullens 2004).The study suggests that there is a link between juvenile deviance and family structure. The study also suggests that juveniles who are charged with more serious acts of delinquency are from incomplete homes than juveniles charged with lesser acts of misconduct. The family is shown to have a direct influence on negative peer pressure that may in turn affect a juvenile’s involvement in delinquent activity (Steinberg 1987).
2.6 The role of fathers in juvenile delinquency
Fathers are a significant contributor to offspring development and a capability in adapting to society. The presence of a functioning father in the home is associated with positive adjustment in children.
Among the cross-sectional group studies, children who are living with their natural fathers show significantly fewer incidences of fighting, delusions-hallucinations, delinquency, late development and isolation, and benefit from living in an intact home. An intact home enjoys the socialisation roles of both mother and father. (Mullens, 2004).The study also found that children living with a surrogate father (broken home) manifest a greater number of behavioural issues (McCarthy et al., 1982).High-quality father-child ties may be particularly important for child well-being because fathers who develop close affective bonds with children can be more effective in monitoring, teaching, and communicating with children, thereby allowing the social capital inherent in the father-child relationship to be realized (Amato, 1998; King, Harris, & Heard, 2004).

Contact alone does not guarantee that this will occur. Many non-resident fathers engage in leisure activities such as taking their children to restaurants and movies but fail to engage in responsive parenting or other authoritative practices, such as talking about problems or setting limits (Amato & Gilbreth; Stewart, 1999).His presence is influential in a child’s identity and adjustment with others as well as the child’s inclination toward delinquency (Smith & Walters, 1978).Past research has demonstrated the many disadvantages faced by children who grow up without their fathers (Amato, 2000; McLanahan & Sandefur, 1994). These studies found that fathers who are involved in a positive relationship with their children are important in the prevention of delinquency.

Although half of all American children face this situation for some period during their childhood (Bianchi, 1990), a father's absence from the household however detrimental to trait development does not necessarily mean that he is absent from his child's life (King, 1994).A significant number of non resident fathers still maintain ties with their children (Amato & Sobolewski, 2004), although the dynamics and consequences of this relationship are not well understood. Increased attention is needed to understand the role of non-resident fathers in their children's lives and the ways in which involvement by non-resident fathers can promote child well-being (King, 1994b).

2.7 The role of Broken Homes in juvenile delinquency
A broken home is a factor in personality mal-adjustment. For males, the largest proportion of crimes brought to the attention of the court was the petty theft offenses.
The female delinquents were referred for running away from home, and committing some type of sexual deviancy. Certain types of delinquency are related to broken homes (e.g. runaway, truancy and fighting).Juveniles from broken homes according to Mullens (2004) are 2.7 times more likely to run away from their family than children living in intact homes. The core belief is that a broken home has an imbalance and as a result is detrimental to a child’s socialization and personality adjustment. As a result, a child may be more susceptible to negative peer pressure and may ultimately commit acts of delinquency not committed by children from intact homes where there is a balanced structure of man and women who act as good role models in the child’s acquiring proper roles.

The literature also reflects the influence a broken home has on certain types of delinquency (Bartusch et al 2005).Upon further examination, Rankin, 1983 compared various broken homes and runaway offenses and found that children from a single parent home (no step-parent) are 1.8 times more likely to run away than as a child living in an intact home. The odds increase to 2.7 for children living with one biological parent and a Step-parent and increase to 4.0 for a child living with neither biological parent regardless of the sex or age of the child (Rankin, 1983). This literature is however silent about a child who has exclusively been brought up a Children’s Home and for a reason or another run away from the home to the streets. Children living with uncles’, aunts and grandparents have also not been analysed in this dichotomy.
2.8 Influence of parenting practices on juvenile delinquency
Gorman-Smith and Tolan (1998) found that parental conflict and parental aggressiveness predicted violent offending; whereas, lack of maternal affection and paternal criminality predicted involvement in property crimes. Familial characteristics suggesting familial antisocial behavior or values such as family history of criminal behavior, harsh parental discipline, and family conflict have been among the most consistently linked. In another study conducted by Gorman-Smith and her colleagues, data show that children are more likely to resort to violence if there is violence within relationships that they may share with their family (Gorman-Smith, et al. 2001).

Family structure and dynamics are causal variables in discussing delinquency due to their critical role in the socialization and control of children. The absence of a male parent significantly affects the behaviour of juveniles, especially males. Their results showed that this absence has the greatest influence in three areas: Cannabis, marijuana usage and sexual activity. They found that males whose fathers were absent had the highest rate of any group studied. They concluded that this data fails to reflect the true significance of the father and his role in transmitting values and being a role model.

Their data suggests that the father has a stabilizing effect and his presence may act as a deterrent in the three problem areas studied (Stern, Northman and Van Slyck, 1984) Doggett, (2008) in a study on Juvenile Delinquency and Family Structure says that obviously something is going on in today’s society if more and more children are committing delinquent crimes. This study in response to Doggett’s assertion, therefore explores how family life influences juvenile delinquency.

All of these aspects of family are very crucial to the upbringing of a child and could ultimately lead to delinquent behaviors if the family is not functioning properly. ‘Properly’ is defined as a two parent, violence free and openly communicating household. According to Wright and Wright (1994) the family is the foundation of human society. Families are one of the strongest socializing forces in life. They teach children to control unacceptable behavior, to delay gratification, and to respect the rights of others. Conversely, families through roles can teach children aggressive, antisocial, and violent behavior (Wright & Wright 1994).This statement alone could easily explain how the juvenile may end up becoming a delinquent.

Wright and Wright (1994) suggest positive parenting practices during the early years and later in adolescence appear to act as buffers preventing delinquent behavior and assisting adolescents involved in such behavior to desist from delinquency. Research indicates that various exposures to violence are important sources of early adolescent role exits, which means that not only can a juvenile witness violence within the family but on the outside as well (Hagan & Foster 2001).
A substantial number of children engage in delinquency. Antisocial and/or aggressive behaviors may begin as early as preschool or in the first few grades of elementary school. Such childhood misconduct tends to be resistant to change; for example, the parents disciplining more harshly, often predicts continuing problems during adolescence, as well as adult criminality (Prochnow and DeFronzo 1997).Conflict within "step families" (families where at least one of the married parents is not the biological parent of all the children) also has serious effects. According to the California Youth Authority study of female delinquents, conducted by Jill Leslie Rosenbaum, professor of criminology at California State University, In the two parent families examined in this study a great deal of conflict was present. Of these parents, 71 percent fought regularly about the children. Since there were often 'his', 'hers' and 'theirs' present, the sources of conflict tended to result from one set of children having a bad influence on the others, the type of punishment invoked, or one particular child receiving too much attention."
2.9 The role of Single Parenthood in juvenile delinquency
The third major area within juvenile delinquency and families is single parent households versus two parent households. Klein and Forehand (1997) suggest that the prediction of juvenile delinquency in early childhood depends on the type of maternal parenting skills that are imposed upon the child during early adolescence. Muehlenberg (2002) poses the question of how do children from single parent family homes fare educationally compared to children from intact two parent families. A number of studies have been undertaken which show a very real connection between delinquent and /or criminal behavior, and single parent families. Wright and Wright’s (1994) research shows that single parent families, and in particular mother-only families, produce more delinquent children than two parent families.

Indeed the very absence of intact families makes gang membership more appealing (Muehlenberg 2002). Sometimes the focus is taken off the mother and shifted towards the father. The lack of emphasis on the role of fathering in childhood conduct problems is especially unfortunate given that there are several reasons why fathers can be expected to be particularly significant in the initiation and persistence of offspring offending. For example, fathers are particularly likely to be involved with sons who are at higher risk than daughters of delinquent behavior (Flouri & Buchannan 2002).
Popenoe (1997) states that fatherlessness is a major force behind many disturbing US social problems. The institution of marriage acts as culture’s chief vehicle to bind men to their children.Although the young of many species are born helpless, their maturity level is rapid and far surpasses that of humans who need years of protection and nurturance to achieve physical and emotional independence (Whitehead, 1993).A child’s home and family are the centre of development. One of the most important functions of this matrix is to provide structure and guidance in an effort to encourage and aid children in their socialization and identity development (Stern et. al., 1984).
2.10 The influence of Children in Homes in juvenile delinquency
In a study on Juvenile delinquency in child welfare: Investigating group home effects, Joseph Ryan,(2008), says that Group homes fall into the broad category of residential care, a category that also includes statutory children homes like rehabilitation homes, other children remand homes, borstal institutions or prisons for younger offenders between the age of 16-19, half-way homes, charitable children homes, emergency shelters, self-contained settings and children rescue centres. In general, residential care services represent an option of last resort. The results indicate that the relative risk of delinquency is approximately two and one half times greater for adolescents with at least one group home placement as compared with youth in foster care settings. This finding raises serious questions about the use of group homes for victims of physical abuse and neglect. Carter (2005) claims that the overuse of institutional care for children is far more widespread than official statistics suggest.
The figures show the total number of children (0 to 17 years) in social care facilities within these 20 countries to be approximately 1.3 million, and nearly double the 714,910 children officially reported to UNICEF for the same time period. Over the past 15 years, Carter (2005) observes a small decline (13%) in the absolute number of children in institutional care in this specific region. However, if the decline in birth rate is taken into account, the proportion of the child population in social care facilities has actually increased by 3% since the collapse of the communist systems. Comparable data for North America is difficult to identify as they refer to all children in public care as ‘fostered’, rather than restricting this term for children placed into professional surrogate families.

Nonetheless, Johnson et al. (2006) report that on30 September 2001, 542,000 children (0–18 years) were in public (‘foster’) care in the USA, and approximately one quarter of these (130,857) were under five years. Across the 50 states, an average of 9% of children under 12 years in public (‘foster’) care were placed in residential children’s homes (ranging from 1.3% in Hawaii to 27.2% in Arizona).Therefore, it can be estimated for the USA that approximately 11,777 young children under five years resided in residential care institutions. Outside the developed world of Europe and North America, the problem of institutionalised young children is commonplace, but accurate statistics are unavailable. Overall, UNICEF estimates that the total number of children in institutional care globally is 2.2 million, but they point out that under-reporting and a lack of regulation in some countries indicates that this figure is an underestimate.

Information available from UNICEF and other international organisations suggests that the use of residential care for children is increasing, especially for countries in economic transition, conflict or disaster zones despite the institutional care of children offenders is being discouraged (UNICEF, 2008).In sub-Saharan Africa, for example, recent reports indicate that the number of privately funded institutions has risen rapidly. A contributing factor is the concern about where to place the growing numbers of children orphaned by HIV/AIDS. It was estimated in 2001 that Ethiopia alone has 989,000 children orphaned by AIDS. Therefore, governments are looking for simple solutions, without considering what is in the best interests of children in adversity.

Studies have demonstrated that many young children with institutional care backgrounds can make a rapid recovery from their poor health, sleep and eating problems (Beckett et al., 2002; Fisheret al., 1997), and ‘catch up’ on their physical and cognitive development when they are placed in a caring family environment at an early age (Rutter and The English and Romanian Adoptees Study Team, 1998; Marcovitch et al., 1997).This is despite the initial obvious problems shown in their preschool years (Beckett et al., 2006; Vorria et al., 2006). Indeed, a substantial proportion of children who had experienced early deprivation in institutional care were shown to have normal intellectual functioning at age 11 (Kreppner et al., 2007), as long as the new family setting had been responsive to their needs.

However, the poor conditions and deprivation encountered by children in Romanian ‘children’s homes’ have a profound effect on development, and complete recovery has only been observed, so far, in children who were placed in family-based care before the age of six months. Children who were placed later made significant improvements in their development after leaving institutional care, but were still at an intellectual and social disadvantage six years later (Beckett et al., 2007; O’Connor et al., 2000b).The effects of early institutional care on social and emotional behaviour also seem to be as Persistent as delays in intellectual development. The insecure/anxious attachments shown by Romanian adoptees were qualitatively different from national adoptees. Romanian adoptees from institutional care backgrounds had disinhibited emotional attachments, and there were few differences in the children’s social responses to their adopting parents or strangers (O’Connoret al., 2003). This attachment disorder was still evident at age 11 years (Rutter et al., 2007a).

Furthermore, one in ten Romanian adoptees also exhibited quasi-autistic behaviours, and three-quarters of this group had autistic features to their behaviour at age 11 (Rutter et al., 2007b). The child’s first emotional attachment to their primary caregiver (usually a mother figure) is considered to be a ‘blueprint or inner working model’ for all later emotional attachments, as the young child learns how to love and to be loved, which forms the basis of self worth and empathy for others (Bowlby, 1969; Egeland, Bosquet and Chung, 2002; Grossman and Waters, 2006). The absence of this experience puts the child at a considerable disadvantage, with a greater probability of low self esteem, anxiety and depression, possibly leading to social withdrawal, antisocial behaviour and delinquency (Anderson, 2005; Browne and Herbert, 1997; Fisher et al., 1997). This study seeks to investigate repeat offenders among children who at one time has been in housed in a children home among the children offenders in Nakuru Children’s Remand Home.
2.11 Delinquency in children raised by grandparents
In a research on children raised by grandparents as compared to Children raised by parents Frederick, Lynn M, (2008) found that respondents who were being cared for by a grandparent with neither parent present in the home, provided no statistically significant data to show that youth being raised by grandparents were more likely to have committed delinquent acts than youth not being raised by grandparents.
So, no further detailed analysis was completed while the findings did not support the hypothesis, this is a new topic and may serve as a foundation for further research on the specific subject area of outcomes for youth raised by grandparents and other older caregivers (Aged 55 and over). The topic is timely in view of the widely recognized increase in the phenomena of grandparents raising their grandchildren in recent years. The previously cited work by Deborah Whitley (2002) provides strong documentation of health problems among the 100 older African American caregivers in her study. Generally, the aging literature reveals that older relatives may be in a weaker position to provide custodial care for children than parents. This is related to factors such as, income, health status, stamina and the competing demands inherent in providing care for others in their lives. This study thus seeks to investigate how children raised by this category of parents contribute to their being delinquents. The next body of research that is relevant to this study addresses the increasing phenomenon of grandparents becoming full-time caregivers for their grandchildren. The 1994 Census Bureau Report estimated that 3.7 million children lived in a household headed by a grandparent. For almost 1.3 million children, a grandparent, often the grandmother is their primary caregiver (Minkler, 2002).

Between 1990 and 1998, the number of children being raised exclusively by grandparents or other relatives grew by over 50% and by the late 1990’s, 5.4 million children lived in homes headed by grandparents or other relatives. More than one in ten grandparents (10.9%) at some point raise a grandchild for at least six months, and usually for far longer periods of time. For nearly 40% of these children, neither parent was present in the home (Casper and Bryson, 1998).Nearly 46% of these children are African American, 42% are Caucasian, and 12% are Hispanic (Administration on Aging, 2002). In 1998, about 3% of children lived with relatives other than their parents (US Census Bureau, 1999). Most kinship care is done by grandparents (Minkler, 2002).The literature on grandparents raising grandchildren demonstrates their unique and valuable contribution to society since the outcomes for children in these care situations are generally good, yet literature appears to fail to address the special question of how these older caregivers do with controlling delinquency among the adolescents for whom they have assumed responsibility.

Frederick, Lynn, 2008, in a study with populations of the elderly and delinquent youth living separately, and together. It is predicted that a custodial arrangement of older persons caring for adolescents is a risk factor for youth engaging in delinquent acts. Some of the recent efforts to help the older persons, such as grandparents who provide custodial care for children are documented literature, but not herein due to the constraints of this document. Based on review of the literature, it seems that these efforts are not specifically targeted to older persons caring for delinquent adolescents. Studying the special situation of these older caregivers and their grandchildren was expected to make a contribution to scholarship in a variety of fields.
2.12 Theoretical Framework on the Family structure: The Coercion Theory
In the realm of family functioning the coercion theory suggests that the family environment influences an adolescent’s interpersonal style, which in turn influences peer group selection (Cash well & Vacc 1996). Peers with a more coercive interpersonal style tend to become involved with each other, and this relationship is assumed to increase the likelihood of being involved in delinquent behavior. Thus understanding the nature of relationships within the family, to include family adaptability, cohesion, and satisfaction, provides more information for understanding youth (Cashwell &Vacc 1996).The cohesiveness of the family successfully predicted the frequency of delinquent acts for non-traditional families (Matherne & Thomas 2001).Family behaviors, particularly parental monitoring and disciplining, seem to influence association with deviant peers throughout the adolescent period (Cashwell & Vacc 1994). Among social circumstances which have a hand in determining the future of the individual it is enough for our present purpose to recognize that family is central (Wright & Wright 1994).

Previous research found that coercive parenting and lack of parental monitoring contributes not only directly to boys’ antisocial behaviors, but also indirectly as seen in the contribution to their increased opportunity to associate with deviant peers, which is predictive of higher levels of delinquent acts (Kim, et al. 1999).Communication also plays a big role in how the family functions Clark and Shields (1997) state that the importance of positive communication for optimal family functioning has major implications for delinquent behavior.
They also discovered that communication is indeed related to the commission of delinquent behavior and differences are shown within categories of age, sex, and family marital status. Gorman-Smith and Tolan (1998) found that parental conflict and parental aggressiveness predicted violent offending; whereas, lack of maternal affection and paternal criminality predicted involvement in property crimes. In another study conducted by Gorman-Smith and her colleagues, data show that children are more likely to resort to violence if there is violence within relationships that they may share with their family (Gorman-Smith, et al. 2001).For family disruption and delinquency, the composition of families is one aspect of family life that is consistently associated with delinquency.Coercion theory emerged from the larger behavioral perspective of social learning theory. A basic tenet of social learning theory is that social relationships are maintained through rewards and positive reinforcement.

Conflict arises, however, when rewards do not exist or aversive reactions occur within the relationship (Home & Sayger, 1990). Definitions of reciprocity and coercion provide further explanation. Reciprocity refers to social exchanges in which positive reinforcement is shared equitably to maintain a relationship. Conversely, Coerdon refers to a relationship in which aversive reactions are used to control the behavior of the other (Home & Sayger).Negative reinforcement occurs when aversive behaviors are not met with adverse consequences. Observers witnessing aggressive interactions with no noticeable negative consequence may learn to engage in similarly aggressive behaviors. The identification of this negatively reinforcing pattern led Patterson (1982) to hypothesize that family interactions could result in the development of aggressive behaviors in children. Patterson (1982) developed coercion theory by studying interaction patterns in families. He describes the theory as "a set of statements about pain control techniques employed by one or both members of a dyad" (Patterson, p. 6). Each aversive action affects either the performance of the other person or the performance of the target subject.

For a behavior to be labeled as coercive it must be aversive, consistently follow specific behaviors, and produce a consistent reaction in the victim that ultimately serves the aggressor (Patterson, 1982).Parents can unknowingly reinforce coercive behaviors in their aggressive children by nagging, scolding, and yelling when the child misbehaves. These behaviors initiate the coercive interaction. If the child continues to misbehave despite the parent's aversive behaviors, the parent eventually will reach an exhaustion point. At this point negative reinforcement of the child's misbehavior occurs when the parent fails to follow through with promised consequences. Because the parent backs down and fails to discipline the child adequately, children learn that they can coerce the parent into meeting their needs. Children become aware that if they continue to misbehave or respond to the parent's aversive behaviors with increased aggression, they can shape the parental behaviors for their own benefit (Patterson 1982).

2.13 Conceptual Framework

Figure1:

Figure 2.13.1 Conceptual frameworks for analysis of the relationship between Family Unit structure and Juvenile Delinquency.
According to the Conceptual framework, juvenile delinquency may be influenced by the family unit structure. The various family structures included for analysis of relationships include an intact family structure with both biological parents; a single family structure with either a father only or mother only household head; a family structure with a step parent; a child who has lived in a children’s home and finally a child who lives in a family structure with a grandparent.
The intervening variables for this research are lack of parental control, lack of parental love; Parental Violence and to a great extent the peer influence as the factors influencing juvenile delinquency. Juvenile delinquency can be moderated by such factors as the Children’s act 2001 which gives guidelines as to how a Child should be tried in a court of law. A child may be tried using the Penal code. The role and activities of NGO and CBO’s on such children can as well be a moderating variable for juvenile delinquency as per this conceptual framework.
2.14 Summary of Reviewed Literature:
This review looked at the connection between juvenile delinquency and the crimes committed by juvenile offenders, from the USA to Kenya and the family socialisation structure and in particular how socialisation roles influence juvenile delinquency. The chapter also looked at theories relevant to the topic under study and provided literature on the various family structures as provided in the objectives of the study. Finally, the chapter provided enough literature on the situation of juvenile delinquency situation and family structure in Kenya and the conceptual framework on the relationship between the variables under study.

CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter presented the research methodology that was used to collect data and the means of analysing it for all logical conclusions. The instrument has been discussed in terms of its validity and reliability. This chapter also contained the research design, methods of data collection, and methods of data analysis.
3.1 Research Design.
This research explored relationships between two variables: Family unit structure and juvenile delinquency. Mugenda &Mugenda,2003 says that this design is also called Ex-post facto research because the causes expected namely family structure have already exerted their effect on another variable; delinquency hence the reason why the children offenders under study are already remanded for incidences of delinquency. It was also possible to manipulate variables and see the emerging relationships with a group (Children offenders) which possess the characteristics which the research wanted to study.
3.2 Target Population
The target population was all the children (male and female) admitted as child offenders in the NCRH which is based in Nakuru Town. The study analysed the children admitted and exited in the NCRH for the period of about 1(one) month. This was through the use and review of secondary data. This study focused on the analysis of the relationship between a child becoming a delinquent based on the way the family unit is structured, the underlying variables in a family unit under study included: an intact home with both biological parents present, father only household, mother only household, a home where there is a step parent either stepmother or a stepfather and finally a family where the child lives with a non parent like aunt or uncle or parental figure being completely absent.

The level of delinquency was based on the various categories’ of crimes committed ranging from simple truancy, loitering, dropping out of school to offences like defilement, gang rape, assault and even capital offence like murder. This research was conducted on child offenders admitted at Nakuru Children’s Remand Home both male and female whose mean admission per month is about 60 children both male and female.

Analysis of secondary data was done on earlier admitted cases whose cases have been concluded by the children’s court. This was important as a justification that indeed children do engage in criminal acts and are tried and found guilty hence a justification for this research.
3.3 Sampling Size and Sampling Procedure
The subjects ranged from 9 to 17 years of age (m =15.59).The mean average admission (N) is about 60 per month. With a 95% confidence interval and an error of 0.05, the sample size (n) was 52.from the sample formulae= {(z2.p.q.N)} ÷ {e2 (N-1) +z2.p.q}. (Mugenda&Mugenda, 2003)The research was to have n as the entire population to increase validity and the expected children who may not open up during the data collection and interviewing. The research used purposeful sampling as the respondents and the available children offenders were purposed to address the expectations of the research objectives. It was also anticipated that some offender might be held up on the daily children court during the day of instrument administration. The study thus covered all the 60 children, male and females admitted from the Children Court with a court warrant of committal of such crimes ranging from petty to serious capital offences like murder. During the analysis of Secondary data, 38 files were perused whose case had already been concluded by the Children’s court. 17 cases already in remand were questioned using the structured questionnaire. This gave a total of 55 respondents for the study.
3.4 Data Instruments

The research instruments were questionnaires that guided a structured interview where the interviewer checked the children’s response. This was appropriate as the questions were accompanied by a list of all possible alternatives from which the children in the sample would best respond to the answer that best describes their situation.(Mugenda&Mugenda, 2003).Part A is the Subject History (questions 1 through 4) and was processed during the child’s initial appearance on admission in the NCRH. The child’, Home particulars are recorded, as well as other demographic information. Question 3 was the main topic of this study. For the purposes of this study, only the children who live with both biological parents at the time of the crime were considered to live in an intact home; all others were classified according to their adult custodians. Question 5 explored violence a child experiences at the family structure. Question 6 dealt with drugs behaviour. Question 7 dealt with the status or delinquent offense allegedly committed by the juvenile.
3.5 Research Instrument Validation
Anastasia (1982) refers to validity as the quality that a procedure or instrument or a tool used in research is accurate, correct, true and meaningful and right. The research intended to use Content validity as a measure of the degree to which data that was collected using the Questionnaire was representing the domain of indicators in the five research questions. The instrument contained all possible items that were used in measuring the concept of Family unit structure and juvenile delinquency. The instrument was given to fellow Children Officers and Probation Officers and the Research supervisor to assess what concept the instrument was trying to measure and their views were incorporated in the final questionnaire. The research instrument was piloted in the Nakuru Girls Probation Hostel which is a home for already sentenced girls offenders aged between 12-18yrs. The Hostel thus accommodates children with similar characteristics as the NCRH and it was possible to accept the research instrument validity from the content of the girls’ responses.
3.6 Reliability of Instruments
Mugenda and Mugenda (2003) says that reliability is concerned with estimates of the degree to which a research instrument yields consistently after repeated trials. Test-Retest- a method of estimating test reliability in which a test developer or researcher gives the same test to the same group of research participants on two different occasions. The results from the two tests are then correlated to produce a stability coefficient. Studying the coefficients for a particular test allows the assessor to see how stable the test is over time.

For the purpose of this research, reliability was determined from a test-retest administered to a similar sample size of children in another children home, namely, The Welcome to the Family Social Ministry that admits children similar in characteristics as those in NCRH. The information obtained for test-retest reliability was evaluated with information from the children in the sample. The research instrument was administered on two separate times to the children from this children home with the test-retest mean interval of 20 days. The average collected was evaluated from the two tests and the stability coefficient was above 90, the instrument was deemed reliable to apply to children offenders at NCRH.

3.7 Data Collection procedures
Confidentiality was maintained in each case by assigning each subject a random number. The children were initially divided into five family categories: intact homes (children living with both biological parents, father only household/mother only households, step-parent households (children living with one biological parent and an opposite sex significant other, children in contact with a children’s home and finally, children living with a grandparent.

Once a separation was made, each group was broken down further by offense category. Each offense was further separated by type e.g. (street life, drug use, street life to serious offences like murder). Finally, the age of each juvenile at the time of the offense was gathered. The goal was to compare the family unit type with the offense type and produce data in answer of the research questions. A research permit was sought from the National Council for Science and Technology on approval and clearance from the university.
3.8 Data analysis Techniques
The qualitative data collected from open ended questions was coded to enable for quantitative analysis. The coding specifically targeted the kind of family structure in question 3 and the type of drug in question 6 and finally, the kind of offence committed. The coded data and the quantitative data was analysed using descriptive statistics namely: frequencies tables. Further, correlation, a parametric test was used to analyse the relationship between juvenile delinquency and the various family structures, since the data captured was mainly ratio and interval scales. Correlation allowed for examination of the relationship between the two variables that have a direct relationship. The Statistical Procedure for Social Sciences (SPSS) 12.0 was used in analysis.
3.9 Ethical Considerations
The researcher was aware of, and respectful of, children’s limitations, level of cognitive development and social and emotional needs. The researcher recognized that if children participate in a research project planned to accommodate their needs, as well as those of the client, it can be a very positive experience providing kids with a rare opportunity to be “heard” by adults, gain confidence in expressing their opinions, and to learn to think for themselves.
The researcher was thus able to recognize, and accommodate children’s emotional and social vulnerabilities as they were administered the Questionnaire in the guided interview. The researcher had to make sure that every child was allowed to complete the interview with his dignity intact.
4.0 Operational definition of Variables
Mugenda &Mugenda, 2003, says that Operationalising or operationally defining a concept to make it measurable is done by looking at the behavioural dimensions, indicators and properties denoted by the concept to make it measurable and observable. The measures made it possible to construct a meaningful data collection instrument. The variable seen as operation depending on whether they fell in the range of ordinal, intervals, nominal and ratios scales. (See table 4.0.1 below)
Table 4.0.1: Operational Definition of Variables
Research questions Variables Indicators/Dimensions Measurements Measurement levels Data collection Tools of analysis

1. What is the influence of a child living in an intact family likely to engage in delinquent behaviour?
Independent Variable:
Both biological parents(intact family structure)

-Number of Arrests/contact with the Law agencies.
-Instances of Running to the streets.
-Instance of truancy in school
-Incidences of involvement in Violent crime
Frequency of substance drug use

Number of times into contact with law agencies- police, probation, children dept, remand homes
-Periods of Absence from home
-Frequency of school absenteeism per week
Reported cases of violent crime.
Frequency of use and type of drug used.

Ratio

Interval
Ratio
Ratio
Ratio

-Questionnaire
-Interviews

-Questionnaire
-Interviews

Correlation
2. Is living in a single parent (father only/mother only) household likely to influence child delinquent behaviour?

Independent Variable:
a single parent household -Number of Arrests/contact with the Law agencies
-Instances of Running to the streets.
-Instance of truancy in school
Incidences of involvement in Violent crime
Frequency of substance drug use
Contact with law agencies- police, probation, children dept, remand homes
-Periods of Absence from home
-Frequency of school absenteeism per week
-Reported cases of violent crime.
Frequency of use and type of drug used.

Ratio

Interval

Ratio
Ratio
-Questionnaire
-Interviews

-Questionnaire
-Interviews

Correlation

3. To what extent can a child living in a step parent household be likely to develop delinquent behaviour?
Independent Variable: a step parent household Number of Arrests/contact with the Law agencies.
-Instances of Running to the streets.
-Instance of truancy in school
-Incidences of involvement in Violent crime
Frequency of substance drug use
Contact with law agencies- police, probation, children dept, remand homes
-Periods of Absence from home
Frequency of school absenteeism per week
-Reported cases of violent crime.
Frequency of use and type of drug used.

Ratio

Interval

Ratio
Ratio
Ratio

-Questionnaire
-Interviews

-Questionnaire
-Interviews

Correlation
4. Is a child having lived in a children’s home likely to develop delinquent behaviour?
Independent Variable: child living in a children’s home Number of Arrests/contact with the Law agencies.
-Instances of Running to the streets.
-Instance of truancy in school
-Incidences of involvement in Violent crime
-Frequency of substance drug use
Contact with law agencies- police, probation, children dept, remand homes
-Periods of Absence from home
-Frequency of school absenteeism per week

-Reported cases of violent crime.
Frequency of use and type of drug used.
Ratio

Interval

Ratio
Ratio
Ratio

-Questionnaire
-Interviews

-Questionnaire
-Interviews

Correlation
5. What is the extent of a child living with grandparents likely to develop delinquent behaviour?
Independent Variable:
A grandparent household Number of Arrests/contact with the Law agencies.
-Instances of Running to the streets.
-Instance of truancy in school
-Incidences of involvement in Violent crime
-Frequency of substance drug use
Contact with law agencies- police, probation, children dept, remand homes
-Periods of Absence from home
-Frequency of school absenteeism per week
-Reported cases of violent crime
Frequency of use and type of drug used.

Ratio

Interval
Ratio
Ratio
Ratio

-Questionnaire
-Interviews

-Questionnaire
-Interviews

Correlation

CHAPTER FOUR
DATA ANALYSES, INTERPRETATION AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
4.1 Introduction
This chapter presents the study findings. As an initial motivation, simple descriptive statistics are presented then followed by Pearson Correlations. This is aimed at assessing the nature of distributed cases in each variable as well as forming the basis for recording of variables which would in turn facilitate meaningful further analysis.
4.2 Response Return Rate
In this study the respondents were drawn from Nakuru Children Remand Home. This is a statutory institution run by the Children’s Department of Kenya. It houses children who are in conflict with the law until such a time that the case are heard and determined by either a children’s court or a normal criminal court. The following characteristics were considered; Gender, Age, Education placement and exposure to violence. Statistics show that out of the anticipated sample size of 60 children offenders, the results indicate that only 55 were able to be analysed; 38 from secondary data and 17 with the interview schedule.
4.3 Demographic Details
4.3.1 Distribution by Gender
Majority were Males, aged between 13-15 years and mostly had an upper primary level of education placement. Regarding gender, the findings revealed showed that out of a population of 55, there were 32 or 58.2 percent of the respondents who were males while 23 or 41 percent were females. These findings are presented in Table 4.3.1 showing the frequency and percentages for Gender characteristics in the entire study population of 55.

Table 4.3.1: Table showing frequencies for Gender Only
Gender Frequency Percent
Male 32 58.2
Female 23 41.8
Total 55 100

4.3.2 Distribution by Age
A closer examination of the respondents by age distribution reveal that the respondents aged between 10-12 years were 16.4 per cent, those aged between 13 -15 years constituted the highest admission percentage of 45.5 percent, while the age 16-18 years the percentage was 38.2 per cent. Table 4.3.2 below show that the majority of the children respondents were from the age bracket 13-15 by the age bracket 16-18 years and the least was the age bracket ranging between 10-12 years.
Table 4.3.2: Table showing the frequencies for Age Distribution.
Age Frequency Percent
10-12 9 16.4
13-15 25 45.5
16-18 21 38.2
Total 55 100

4.3.3 Family structure the respondent was living with prior to coming into conflict with the law.
The respondents were distributed across the family structures with intact family structure having the highest number of respondents at 21.8 %, Mother only, father only and grandparent’s family structure had an almost equal number of respondents ranging between 10-11 respondents at 20 % and 18.2 % respectively. The respondents from a children home and father only were relatively fewer at 9 % and 18.2 %respectively. The Frequency table for this distribution is represented on table 4.3.3 below.
Table 4.3.3: Frequency Table showing the family structure the respondent was living with prior to coming into conflict with the law.
Family Structure Frequency Percentage
Intact 12 21.8
Mother Only 11 20.0
Father Only 5 9.09
Step Parent 11 20.0
Children Home 6 10.9
Grandparent 10 18.2
Total 55 100

4.3.4 Distribution by Education
Regarding education level 3.6 per cent had not had a contact with any formal education level. Another 10.9 per cent had gone up to ECD level. 30.9 were at the lower primary level. 47.3 percent had been placed at the Upper primary level while a further 7.3 percent were at the secondary level of education. This shows that the Upper Primary level was the most dominant level of education placement at 47.3 percent. These results are presented in Table 4.3.4, showing the frequencies and percentages for Education level among the respondents.
Table 4.3.4: Table showing frequencies for Education Levels
Education Level Frequency Percentage
None 2 3.6
ECD 6 10.9
Lower Primary 17 30.9
Upper Primary 26 47.3
Secondary 4 7.3
Total 55 100

4.3.5 Distribution by Exposure to Violence
For the children exposed to violence at the respective family structures, the statistics revealed that the mode for such a frequency distribution was 1. And that all the respondents answered the question. In the frequency distribution, 60 per cent showed to have been exposed to violence at one time within the family structure they lived in prior to arrest. This means majority or a higher per cent of the respondents who were children at one time have been exposed to instances of violence ion all the family structures across the board. The Per cent for such an exposure to violence was seen to be 60 %. While those not exposed to it were 40 per cent. The results are presented in table 4.3.5
Table 4.3.5 Table showing Frequency for statistics of Violence
Exposed to Violence Frequency Percentage
Yes 33 60
No 22 40
Total 55 100

4.3.6 Statistics for distribution by Offence
The statistics for offence are distributed with refusing school and street life having the highest respondents at 82% and 73% respectively. Murder and defilement had the lowest statistics at 0.09 % and 18 % respectively. Those respondents who had abused glue and cannabis were equally higher at 65% and 53% respectively. This statistics are represented in the table below 4.3.6:

Table 4.3.6. Statistics by Offence
Offence Frequency Percentage
Glue 35 65
Cannabis 29 53
Stealing 25 45
Street Life 41 73
Refuse School 45 82
Sex 30 55
Defilement 10 18
Murder 5 0.09

Total 220*
*The total is higher than N=55 because one subject is involved in more than one offence.
4.4 To determine the extent to which an intact home family structure influence a child to engage in delinquent behaviour?
The question aimed to establish the relationship between a child living in an intact family with both biological parents and the child developing delinquent behaviour. The correlation was done against such behaviour problems as a respondent having take glue, Cannabis, stealing, refusing school, street life, engaging in sex, defilement to murder. The Pearson Correlation for each is presented. At the critical value for r at < 0.01, the Pearson values for glue, Cannabis and street life were not significant and showed a negative correlation of -0.169 and -0.028 respectively.
This shows that there is no significant relationship between a child living with both parents and a child taking glue or Cannabis, and also a child engaging in street behaviour. The Pearson correlation for engaging in sex and defilement showed a weak positive correlation of 0.52 and 0.157 respectively, while the Pearson correlation for stealing and refusing school showed an almost stronger positive correlation at 0.244 and 0.247 respectively. There was also a significant correlation between a child living in an intact family and such a chid engaging in Murder which constituted a capital offence at 0.319, this was a stronger correlation based on the population used in the study of N 55. The results for these correlations involving a child from an intact family are presented in Table 4.4.1
Table 4.4.1: The influence of intact family Structure and Juvenile delinquency
Offence Pearson Correlation Significance(2 Tailed)
Glue -.169 .218
Cannabis -.028 .842
Stealing .244 .286
Refusing School .247 .286
Street life -.072 .604
Sex .052 .706
Defilement .157 .677
Murder .319 .108

4.4.2. The extent to which a single Mother parenthood structure contribute to children delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home
The research question aimed to establish the relationship between a child living in a single parent family specifically with a mother only and the child developing delinquent behaviour. The correlation was done against such behaviour problems as a respondent having take glue, Cannabis, stealing, refusing school, street life, engaging in sex, defilement to murder. The Pearson Correlation for each is presented. At the critical value for r at < 0.01, the Pearson values for glue were seen to be a positive correlation at 0.150. This was a very significant correlation. The relationship between a child taking Cannabis and having come from a Mother only household was a positive correlation 0.135.
The Pearson correlation of a child in a mother only household and street life was significant and showed a positive correlation of 0.355. This shows that there is a significant relationship between a child living with a mother only and a child engaging in street behaviour. The Pearson correlation for engaging in sex and defilement showed a positive correlation of 0.244 and 0.354 respectively, while the Pearson correlation for stealing and refusing school showed an almost positive correlation at 0.243 and 0.240 respectively.
There was no significant correlation between a child living in a mother only family unit structure and such a chid engaging in Murder which constituted a capital offence at 0.00 Pearson Correlation, this was a stronger negative correlation based on the population used in the study of N 55.The results for these correlations involving a child from a mother only family are presented in Table 4.3.4
Table 4.3.4: Table showing the Correlations between a child living in a Mother only Structure and Juvenile delinquency.
Offence Pearson Correlation Significance(2 Tailed)
Glue .150 .708
Cannabis .135 .800
Stealing .243 .756
Refusing School .240 .308
Street life .355 .692
Sex .244 .750
Defilement 354 .261
Murder .000 1.00

4.3.5. To examine the extent to which a single fatherhood structure contribute to children delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home?
The research question aimed to establish the relationship between a child living in a single parent family specifically with a father only and the child developing delinquent behaviour. The correlation was done against such behaviour problems as a respondent having take glue, Cannabis, stealing, refusing school, street life, engaging in sex, defilement to murder. The Pearson Correlation for each was presented. At the critical value for r at < 0.01, the Pearson values for glue were seen to be a strong positive correlation at 0.349. This was a very significant correlation. The relationship between a child taking Cannabis and having come from a father only household was also a positive correlation of 0.289.

The Pearson correlation of a child in a mother only household and street life was significant and showed a positive correlation of 0.355. This shows that there is a significant relationship between a child living with a mother only and a child engaging in street behaviour. The Pearson correlation for engaging in sex and defilement showed a positive correlation of 0.246 and 0.339 respectively, while the Pearson correlation for stealing and refusing school showed an almost positive correlation at 0.327 and 0.355 respectively. There was no significant correlation between a child living in a father only family unit structure and such a chid engaging in Murder which constituted a capital offence at -0.90, this was a stronger negative correlation based on the population used in the study of N= 55. The results for these correlations involving a child from a single father only are presented in Table 4.3.5.
Table 4.3.5: Table showing the Correlations between a child living with a father only Family Structure and child delinquency.

Offence Pearson Correlation Significance(2 Tailed)
Glue .349 .723
Cannabis .289 .520
Stealing .327 .844
Refusing School .355 .259
Street life .321 .380
Sex .246 .920
Defilement 339 .311
Murder -.090 .512

4.3.6. To establish the extent to which step parenthood structure influence child delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home.
The research question aimed to establish the relationship between a child living in a family structure with a step parent and the child developing delinquent behaviour. The correlation was done against such behaviour problems as a respondent having taken glue, Cannabis, stealing, refusing school, street life, engaging in sex, and defilement to murder. The Pearson Correlation for each is presented. At the critical value for r at < 0.01, the Pearson values for glue were seen to be a strong positive correlation at 0.277. This was a very significant correlation. The relationship between a child taking Cannabis and having come from a step parent household was also a positive correlation at 0.235. The Pearson correlation of a child in a step parent household and street life was significant and showed a positive correlation of 0.282.This shows that there is a significant relationship between a child living with step parent and a child engaging in street behaviour.
The Pearson correlation for engaging in sex and defilement showed a weak positive correlation of 0.044 and 0.189 respectively, while the Pearson correlation for stealing and refusing school showed an almost stronger positive correlation at 0.371 and 0.340 respectively. There was no significant correlation between a child living in a step parent family unit structure and such a chid engaging in Murder which constituted a capital offence at 0.00; this showed no correlation based on the population used in the study of N =55. The results for these correlations involving a child from a step parent are presented in Table 4.3.6.

Table 4.3.6: Table showing the Correlations between child delinquency and step parent Family Structure
Offence Pearson Correlation Significance(2 Tailed)
Glue .277 .575
Cannabis .235 .800
Stealing .371 .211
Refusing School .340 .308
Street life .282 .553
Sex .044 .750
Defilement .189 .632
Murder .000 1.00

4.3.7. To establish the extent to which step parenthood family structure Influence child delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home.
The research question aimed to establish the relationship between a child living in a family structure with a step parent and the child developing delinquent behaviour. The correlation was done against such behaviour problems as a respondent having take glue, Cannabis, stealing, refusing school, street life, engaging in sex, defilement to murder. The Pearson Correlation for each is presented. At the critical value for r at < 0.01, the Pearson values for glue were seen to be a positive correlation at 0.344. This was a very significant correlation. The relationship between a child taking Cannabis and having lived in a children home was a weak correlation at 0.198. The Pearson correlation of a child in having lived in a children home and street life was significant and showed a positive correlation of 0.334.
This shows that there is a significant relationship between a child having lived in a children home and a child engaging in street behaviour. The Pearson correlation for engaging in sex and defilement showed a weak positive correlation of 0.185 and -0.98 respectively, while the Pearson correlation for stealing and refusing school showed an almost weak positive correlation at 0.157.Similarly, the Pearson correlation at -0.127 for refusing school was not found to be not significant.
There was a weak significant correlation between a child living in a step parent family unit structure and such a chid engaging in Murder which is a capital offence. The Pearson correlation was 0.123; this showed a weak positive correlation based on the population used in the study of N= 55. The results for these correlations involving a child having lived in a children home and delinquency are presented in Table 4.3.7
Table 4.3.7. Table showing the Correlations between children have been to a Charitable Children Home and child delinquency.
Offence Pearson Correlation Significance(2 Tailed)
Glue .344 .293
Cannabis .298 .477
Stealing .157 .677
Refusing School -.127 .357
Street life .334 .331
Sex .185 .177
Defilement -.098 .479
Murder .123 .730

4.3.8. Is living with a grandparent family structure likely to influence child delinquent behaviour?
The research question aimed to establish the relationship between a child living in a family structure with a grandparent and the child developing delinquent behaviour. The correlation was done against such behaviour problems as a respondent having take glue, Cannabis, stealing, refusing school, street life, engaging in sex, defilement to murder. The Pearson Correlation for each is presented. At the critical value for r at < 0.01, the Pearson values for glue were seen to be a strong positive correlation at 0.377. This was a very significant correlation. The relationship between a child taking Cannabis and living with a grandparent was a weak correlation at- 0.035.The Pearson correlation of a child living with a grandparent and street life was significant and showed a positive correlation of 0.282 .This shows that there is a significant relationship between a child having lived with a grandparent and a child engaging in street behaviour.
The Pearson correlation for engaging in sex and defilement showed a weak positive correlation of 0.176 and 0.144 respectively, while the Pearson correlation for stealing and refusing school showed an almost strong positive correlation at 0.410 thus, the Pearson correlation at 0.144 for refusing school was found to be significant. There was a weak significant correlation between a child living in a grandparent family unit structure and such a chid engaging in Murder which is a capital offence. The Pearson correlation was 0.102; this showed a weak positive correlation based on the population used in the study of N= 55. The results for these correlations involving a child having lived in a grandparenthood home and delinquency are presented in Table 4.3.8
4.3.8. Is living with a grandparent family structure likely to influence child delinquent behaviour?
Offence Pearson Correlation Significance(2 Tailed)
Glue .377 .575
Cannabis -.035 .800
Stealing .357 .058
Refusing School .410 .124
Street life .282 .553
Sex .176 .198
Defilement .144 .750
Murder .102 .458

CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Introduction
This chapter discusses the findings, conclusion and recommendations based on each of the objectives of the study. It also gives the contributions of the study to the general body of knowledge specifically with reference to management children in need of care and protection, offenders, juvenile justice programmes and also on programmes affecting children in conflict with the law.
5.2 Summary of findings
The main focus of this study was to analyze the influence of family structure on juvenile delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home; identify the influence of specifically, intact family, single father only, single mother only, step parenthood, a child who has lived in a children’s home and finally a child who has lived with grandparents and how this contributes to their being juvenile delinquents and subsequently admitted in Nakuru Children Remand Home. The research identify how the families structures contribute to the children engaging in such offences ranging from committing truant offences like refusing school to a felony like defilement and capital offences like murder.
The research further gives the relationship and seeks to identify either positive, negative or no correlation kind of relation among the two variables. The research uses a structured interview and an accompanying questionnaire to gather data as explained in chapter three. The data analysis was done using SPSS and findings presented in Chapter Four. Chapter two had explored views of other authors and it is against these views that the researcher will discuss the findings on this chapter five. The table 5.2 .1 shows the objectives of the study and findings:

Table 5.2.1 Table of Objectives and Findings
OBJECTIVES PEARSON CORRELATION FINDINGS
1. To determine the extent to which an intact home family structure influence Child Delinquency • Glue, Cannabis and street life negative correlation of -0.169, -0.028 and- 0.072 respectively.
• Sex and Defilement showed a weak positive correlation of 0.052 and 0.157 respectively.
• Stealing and refusing school positive correlation at 0.244 and 0.247 respectively.
• Murder which constituted a capital offence at 0.319, this was a stronger correlation

2. To assess the extent to which a mother only family structure contribute to child delinquency • Glue was seen to be a positive correlation at 0.150.
• Cannabis a positive correlation 0.135.
• Street life was significant and showed a positive correlation of 0.355.
• Sex and Defilement showed a positive correlation of 0.244 and 0.354 respectively,
• Stealing and refusing school stronger positive correlation at 0.243 and 0.240 respectively.
• There was no significant correlation a chid engaging in Murder at 0.00
3 To assess the extent to which a father only family structure contribute to child delinquency • Glue was seen to be a strong positive correlation at 0.349.
• Cannabis a strong positive correlation 0.289.
• Street life was significant and showed a positive correlation of 0.355.
• Sex and defilement showed a positive correlation of 0.246 and 0.339 respectively,
• Stealing and refusing school showed stronger positive correlation at 0.327 and 0.355 respectively.
• There was no significant correlation engaging in Murder at -0.90, this was a stronger negative correlation

4 To determine the extent to which a step parent family structure influence child delinquency • Glue was a strong positive correlation at 0.277.
• Cannabis was also a positive correlation at 0.235.
• Street life was significant and showed a positive correlation of 0.282.
• Sex and defilement showed a weak positive correlation of 0.044 and 0.189 respectively,
• Refusing school showed an almost stronger positive correlation at 0.371 and 0.340 respectively.
• Murder which constituted a capital offence at 0.00; this showed no correlation
5 To establish the influence of being brought up in a children’s home to child delinquency • Glue had a positive correlation at 0.344.
• Cannabis was a weak correlation at 0.198.
• Street life was significant and showed a positive correlation of 0.334. Engaging in sex and defilement showed a weak positive correlation of 0.185 and -0.98 respectively,
• Stealing and refusing school showed an almost weak positive correlation at 0.157.
• -0.127 for refusing school was not found to be not significant.
• There was a weak significant correlation engaging in Murder. The Pearson correlation was 0.123;
6 To investigate the influence of living in a grandparents family structure and child delinquency • Glue was seen to be a strong positive correlation at 0.377.Cannabis was a weak correlation at- 0.035.
• Street life was significant and showed a positive correlation of 0.282.
• Engaging in sex and defilement showed a weak positive correlation of 0.176 and 0.144 respectively,
• Stealing showed a strong positive correlation at 0.410 and a weak positive correlation of 0.144 for refusing school
• The correlation with Murder was 0.102; this was a positive but weak correlation.
5.3 Discussion of Findings
This section will look at the research findings and compare with other authors findings to see whether they concur or their findings were different. The researcher will look at the findings according to the objectives. The first objective of this study was to determine the extent to which an intact home family structure influences child delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home. These respondents also were found not to like school despite having come from this intact family structure. There is also a higher prevalence of stealing cases among children brought up in this category. However, not many in this category will like to go the streets in this category. This may mean that not many children with both parents will want to go to the streets when both biological parents are alive terms of substance abuse, this agrees to Smith and Walters (1978) and is linked to fewer incidences of delinquency related issues (McCarthy et al1982.
It follows that not many children were involved in abuse of glue from this category though they may also abuse Cannabis as deduced from the two Pearson correlations.Sex and defilement cases had a positive correlation but it was generally low. However, this category of child offenders showed a higher affinity to committing Murder in all the family unit structures at 0.319.This was a very strong correlation and this could be explained by other factors like violence and aggression in some of the intact families.
Mullens (2004) found that children in this kind of parenthood had a high significance to engaging in such offences as breakages which can be classified as a felony like Murder. This also agrees to previous data that has shown that an intact home with a mother and father (emphasis on the father) has a stabilizing effect and may act as a deterrent in certain areas of juvenile delinquency (Stern et al., 1984). An intact family structure has been found to influence a child’s susceptibility to peer pressure (Steinberg, 1987), contribute to offspring development and capabilities in adapting to society.
The second objective was focussing on the extent to which a single mother only Parenthood structure contributes to child delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home. For the mother only, the study found that that defilement and street life to be the most prevalent children offence for this unit structure. This does agree with the literature that also reflects the influence a broken home with a mother only has on certain types of delinquency (Bartusch et al 2005) like sex related offences.
Upon further examination, Rankin,(1983) compared various broken homes and runaway offenses and found that children from a single parent home (no step-parent) are 1.8 times more likely to run away from home than as a child living in an intact home. The children from this category similarly engaged in substance abuse namely Glue and cannabis. The Pearson correlation was almost similar for the two substances and both displayed a positive correlation. The children from this category also exhibited prevalence towards stealing and refusing to go to school. We can deduce that the children from this family structure were in the streets after they refuse to go to school. The Pearson correlation of children from this family unit structure going to the streets is thus high and constitutes a bigger percentage of the children who were found to be in conflict with the law as a result of loitering and engaging in street life. However, it can be deduced that there is no correlation between a child from a mother only home engaging in murder perhaps the greatest preoccupation being street life.
The children from this category, however, exhibited a propensity to engage in sex and defilement cases being at a higher correlation. Sexual offences for the children in this structure were almost similar to that of fathers’ only family structure which was generally high and positive for sexual activity. We can thus deduce that children brought up in single mother only set up or family unit have a higher propensity to committing sexual offences than any other form of family unit structure. This does agree to Wright and Wright’s (1994) research shows that single parent families, and in particular mother-only families, produce more delinquent children than two parent families. Indeed as Muehlenberg (2002) argues, the very absence of intact families makes criminal gang membership more appealing.
The third objective was to examine the extent to which a single father parenthood family structure influences child delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home, there was a high prevalence in the taking of glue and cannabis respectively, this mean that for the mother only, there was a strong relationship but for father only it is even stronger in terms of substance abuse. The children from this family unit structure will also steal and run away from school. It may mean that the prevalence for such a child engaging in these offences is higher compared to a mother only and even an intact family structure. Fathers being left to take care of children appear to have lees control of the children behaviour compared to all the other family unit structures. Similarly, this family structure also produced a greater correlation for sex and defilement offences.
This agrees to similar conclusions where scholars argue that the fathers presence is influential in a child’s identity and adjustment with others as well as the child’s inclination toward delinquency (Smith & Walters, 1978).Past research has demonstrated the many disadvantages faced by children who grow up without their fathers (Amato, 2000; McLanahan & Sandefur, 1994). These studies found that fathers who are involved in a positive relationship with their children are important in the prevention of delinquency. It means that children living up with their fathers are more likely to engage in sexual related offences just like in a Mother only family structure which has the highest prevalence at 0.345 for all the family structures in the study.
This data suggests that the father has a stabilizing effect and his presence may act as a deterrent in the child committing asexual offences committed.(Stern, Northman and Van Slyck, 1984) Doggett, (2008) in a study on Juvenile Delinquency and Family Structure says that obviously something is going on in today’s society if more and more children are committing delinquent crimes.The relationship with murder was, however, low. This means not many of these children from father only structure will engage in this capital crime of crime of murder as compared to the intact family structure which exhibited the highest prevalence at 0.319 Pearson correlations.

The third objective was to examine the extent to which step parenthood family structure influence child delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home. Children living with a step parent were found to engage in both glue and cannabis, with each showing a positive correlation. Conflict within "step families" (families where at least one of the married parents is not the biological parent of all the children) also has serious effects. According to the California Youth Authority study of female delinquents, conducted by Jill Leslie Rosenbaum in Patrick Faghan (1995) professor of criminology at California State University, "In the two parent families examined in this study a great deal of conflict was present. Of these parents, 71 percent fought regularly about the children. Since there were often 'his', 'hers' and 'theirs' present, the sources of conflict tended to result from one set of children having a bad influence on the others, the type of punishment invoked, or one particular child receiving too much attention.

This may explain why such children had a higher affinity to stealing perhaps as a way to survive and would run away from school. Similarly the children would find their way to the streets as a result of dropping school. This agrees with Namwaba, (2001), who says that many children continued to suffer from violations emanating from the step families, disinheritance and sexual abuse perhaps due to the disorganization and breakdown of the family structure. In a Juvenile justice study, Kangethe, Mugo and Musembi, (2006) in their findings conclude there is a strong link between social background and topology of child offenders who majority came from poor and disconnected family backgrounds.
Muola, Ndung’u and Ngesa (2009) in a Study of the Relationship between Family Functions and Juvenile Delinquency a Case of Nakuru Municipality, Kenya found that the incidences of juvenile delinquency have increased in recent years in Kenya especially involving step parents. The Pearson correlation for a child living with a step parent being in the street was a high positive correlation. Perhaps as a way of survival the children from this category had the highest Pearson Correlation coefficient for stealing at 0.371. Sexual offences though having a positive correlation was lower compared to single parent family structures. Prevalence for murder had no correlation at all. The next objective wanted to establish the extent to which a children home structure influences child delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home. Since most children homes take children from difficult circumstances, the children offenders in this category were found to engage in glue and street life and may be as a result may have found their way into a children home.
However, this category exhibited the highest level of recidivism especially from children offences that were of street life in nature. The children appeared to have an affinity for street life. Joseph Ryan, (2008), there is indication of relative risk of delinquency which is approximately two and one half times greater for adolescents with at least one group home placement as compared with youth in foster care settings. This finding had raised serious questions about the use of group homes for victims of physical abuse and neglect according to Carter (2005). However, though there was a weak positive correlation, this category appeared to like going school perhaps as a result of the fact that most children’s homes also have an adjoining academies or schools. These children had the lowest Pearson correlation in school refusal in all the family structures studied and appeared to have a strong desire to, learn than any other family structure in the study. Perhaps this is one positive aspect of children being placed in an institution.
The children from this structure had a weak positive correlation with defilement and sex. The children as a result of exposure to children homes appeared to have a lower prevalence to sex and even had a weak positive correlation with involvement in murder. The last objective was to investigate the extent to which a grandparent’s family structure influences child delinquency in Nakuru Children Remand Home. Frederick, Lynn, (2008) in a study with populations of the elderly and delinquent youth living separately, and together. It is predicted that a custodial arrangement of older persons caring for adolescents is a risk factor for youth engaging in delinquent acts. The findings suggest that there a strong correlation for children living in this kind of arrangement to engage in juvenile delinquency.
The dominant substance abused by these respondents was glue but the same children did not take cannabis which had a very lower correlation. The children had a higher affinity to stealing just like those from step parents. Perhaps this was seen as a preoccupation with survival. Pearson Correlation for refusing school was high in this category of family unit structure with the majority of respondents refusing go to school perhaps as a result of living with a grandparent who may not be strict on enforcing attendance to school. The involvement in defilement and sex was a weak positive correlation and so was for Children involved in Murder had a weak correlation at 0.102 meaning they are not likely to involve in this offence as a result of living with a grandparent.
5.4 CONCLUSIONS
All of the family categories except the intact unit displayed the highest correlation of crimes in the substance abuse category. The children live in an intact family had a lower prevalence to go to the street and also take cannabis.
In the felony category, all family units exhibited it as the lowest percentage of crimes except the intact unit where the prevalence for murder was very high. Single family unit structures had a high prevalence to sexual crime like involvement in sex and defilement cases.
The highest percentage of crime was found to be in the school violation section at with the grandparent structure showing the highest correlation. In terms of the gender, boys were seen to have a high prevalence to commit crimes at 58.2% compared to girls at 41.8%.
It is also children from father only and those who had at one time lived in a childr34n home were fewer in number for this ample compared to the other family units perhaps suggesting that not many children are offender but living in this kind of family structures.
Although the results of this study add some weight to the premise of this research, other equally important factors were not accounted for in this analysis. Additional limitations include the limited sample size.
The Borstal institutions are very significant because the cases have been tried and determined by the Children and criminal courts. Children at Remand Homes have their cases yet to be determined. They cannot be said to be offenders as they are just remanded as the cases are ongoing. This research does not therefore mean they are guilty.
It is for the Courts to decide, they have not been tried. The uneven data in the family, crime and level units were also a limitation. Research had found that parental absence has been linked to a child’s susceptibility toward juvenile delinquency for years.
The data from this study, although minimal, adds weight to this specific theory by finding that a statistically significant relationship exists between the variables. It was quite interesting that none of the individual models produced a significant effect except the father only and mother households.
Much of the research has been focused on the father’s absence, but in this study apparently a father’s presence is also statistically significant in a juvenile’s susceptibility toward delinquency.
5.5 Recommendations
A non-delinquent control group was also not utilized in this study. Further research should focus on a state-wide replication across other Children Remand Home and Borstal Institutions.
There is need for research on other variables such as the parent-child relationship, economic status and ineffective parental controls which were not incorporated or tested in this.
Additional focus should be placed on incorporating a wide range of variables to produce a more significant study which could be generalized to a larger population.
There is need to replicate this kind of research with other or with a wider range of offences to see the existing correlations.
There is need for further research specifically for step parent, father only children homes and for children living with grandparents to compare the results and add to the existing body of knowledge.
5.6 Contribution to the body of Knowledge
This study’s findings did not end the debate over the cause of juvenile misconduct but only added other insights and dimensions for further research and theorising. The study gives more insight into the intact family structure that proves that the children are a majority to engage in offences at around 12 in the sample despite assertion by scholars like Matherne and Thomas (2001) who argued on the stability of a family and how this leads stability in a child’s behaviour and hence this research sought to provide a basis for providing Community based alternatives (Kenya NGO-CRC Coalition, 2001).

They further argue that cohesiveness of the intact family successfully predicted the frequency of delinquent yet this appears to be contradicting the results of this research. It is worth noting that intact family had high offences in Murder despite the two parents being present.
Similarly, there was a tendency for children coming from both single fatherhood and single motherhood to engage in defilement and sexual offences and this needs further study to see if the findings can be collaborated in other findings.
This research also comes up with an interesting finding that Children from institutions appeared to like school despite the discouragement of Institutionalization of Children. (Anderson, 2005; Browne and Herbert, 1997; Fisher et al., 1997)
Finally, this research adds to knowledge since it can be inferred that there was strong prevalence for stealing and refusal of school from children who have been brought up by grandparents and the reason for this is ideal for further research.

REFERENCES

Amato, Paul & Juliana M. S. (2001):The effects of divorce on adult children’s psychological well-being. American Sociological Review. 66: 900-921.
Andrew Day, Kevin Howells and Debra Rick wood (2004), Current Trends in the Rehabilitation of Juvenile Offenders (PP1-6) Australian Government.
Berger, Joseph & Zelditch.J.(Eds) (1993). Theoretical Research Programs: Studies in the Growth of Theory. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Brown, K. (2009). The risk of Harm to Young Children in Institutional Care. London. Save the Children Fund.owne
Burnette, D. (1996). Grandparents Raising Grandchildren in the Inner City. The Journal of Contemporary Human Services. Sept./Oct. pp. 489-499.
Burnette, D. (1999). Custodial Grandparents in Latino Families: Patterns of Service Use and Predictors of Unmet Needs. Social Work, 44(1), 22-34.
Bynum,J.E. & Thompson. (2005)Juvenile Delinquency: A Sociological Approach.Newyork. Sage
Canter, R. J. (1982). Family correlates of male and female delinquency. Criminology, 20 (2), 149-167.
Cashwell, Craig S.& Niccholas A.(1996).Family Functioning and Risk Behaviors: Influences on adolescent delinquency. School Counselor. 44: 105-15.
Chalfie, D. 1994. Going It Alone: A Closer Look at Grandparents Parenting Grandchildren. Washington, DC: The American Association of Retired Persons.

Clark, Richard D. and Glenn Shields.(1997).Family Communication and Delinquency. Adolescence. 32: 81-91.
Cradle.(2010),March, Thursday).Cradle. Retrieved March Thursday, 2010 from Craddle.co.ke: http://www.cradle.co.ke
Craig, M.M. and S.J. Glick (2005) Crime and delinquency. New York: New York City Youth Board, , pp. 231-32
Department of Children’s Services.(2008).National Standards and Regulations For Statutory Institutions Nairobi.JICA/GOK
Dishion, T., Accord,J.&Poulin, F. (1999).When Interventions Harm. The American Psychologist .755-762.
Elliott, D. S. (1994). Youth Violence: An Overview. Boulder: University of Colorado, Centre for the Study and Prevention of Violence. Institute of Behavioural Sciences.
Feld, B. C. (1999). Bad Kids: Race and the Transformation of the Juvenile Court. Oxford. Oxford. University Press.
Flouri, Eirini & Buchannan. A. (2002). Father Involvement in Childhood and Trouble with the Police in Adolescence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 17: 689-94.
Gender, M (2010, March, Friday). Gender. Retrieved March Friday, 2010, from Gender.co.ke: http://www.gender.co.ke
Glueck Sheldon and Eleanor T. Glueck.(2000 ed) Unravelling juvenile delinquency. New York. Commonwealth Fund
Government of Kenya(2009).Department of Children’s Services, Reform Guidelines.Nairobi. Government Printers.
Government of Kenya. (2001).Children’s Act. Nairobi. Government of Kenya Printers.
Hagan, John& Holly .F.(2001).Youth violence and the end of adolescence. American Sociological Review. 66: 874-899.
Hirschi, Travis (2004 ed). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press, p. 341
Jendred, M. P.(1993). Grandparents Who Parent Their Grandchildren: Effects on Proceedings of ASBBS Volume 15 Number 1 February 2008 1182
Juby, Heather & David P.(2001).Disentangling the Link between Disrupted Families and Delinquency. British Journal of Criminology. 41: 22-40.
Kim, Jungmeen .E, Mavis.H,&David R. (1999).Associations among Family Relationships, Antisocial Peers, and Adolescents’ Externalizing Behaviors: Unit and Family Type Differences. Child Development. 70: 1209-30.
King,V., Elder. (1995). American Children View Their Grandparents: Linked Lives Across Three Rural Generations. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, pp. 165-178.
Koziey.W.&Davies, L. (1982). Broken homes: impact on adolescents. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 28 (2), 95-99.
Kudirat B. Sanni, Nsisong A. Udoh, Abayomi A. Okediji, Felicia N. Modo and Leonard N. Ezeh (2010) Family Types and Juvenile Delinquency Issues among Secondary School Students in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria: Counseling Implications. Journal of Social Sciences: Interdisciplinary Reflection of Contemporary Society, 23(1): 21-28 (20)
Matherne, Monique & Adrian.T.(2001).Family environment as a predictor of adolescent delinquency. Adolescence. 36: 655-65.
Matza, David (1994). Delinquency and drift. New York: Wiley & Sons,
McCarthy,E. D., Gersten, J. C., & Langer, T. S. (1982).The behavioural effects of father absence on children and their mothers. Social Behaviour and Personality, 10 (1), 11
McWhirter, J. J., McWhirter, B. T., McWhirter A. M. and McWhirter, E. H. (1998). At Risk Youth: A Comprehensive Response. Brooks/Cole.
Minkler, M., Deurr-Berrick, J. and Needell, B. (1999). The Impact of Welfare Reform on California Grandparents Raising Grandchildren. Berkeley: Centre for Social Services Research, School of Social Welfare.
Minkler, M.,Fuller-Thompson, Miller.D. &Driver, D. (1997). Depression in Grandparents Raising Grandchildren. Archives of Family Medicine. 6: 445-452.
Minkler,M. and Roe, K. (2002). Grandmothers as Caregivers: Raising Children of the Crack Cocaine Epidemic. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Muehlenberg, Bill. (2002).The case for two-parent family Part II.National Observer. 53: 49
Mugenda.O.&Mugenda.A.(2003) Research Methods: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches. Nairobi: Acts Press
Mugo, Musembi & Kamau .K. (2006).Juvenile Justice and Management of Offenders in Kenya: Annotated Biography of Research 1958-2005.Gtz, Government of Kenya.
Mullens.A, (2004).The Relationship between Juvenile Delinquency and Family Unit Structure.MA Theses. Marshall University
Muola.J.M, N.M Ndung’u, F Ngesa (2009) The Relationship between Family Functions and Juvenile Delinquency: A Case of Nakuru Municipality, Kenya; African Research Review Vol 3, No 5
Musonda Lemba, 2002, Rapid Assessment of Street Children In Lusaka University of Zambia Lusaka .Project Concern International Zambia
Ouma,Ndungú &Wamakobe. (2007) The Diversion Project in Kenya: An internal evaluation (Reflection) of the Diversion project the period (2004-2007). GoK, Oak Foundation and Sida.
Patrick Fagan, 1995. The Real Root Causes of Violent Crime: The Breakdown of Marriage, Family, and Community. Heritage Foundation
Poe, Lenora (1992). Black Grandparents as Parents. Berkeley, CA: By the Author.
Popenoe. (1997). Life without Father. New Jersey, US: Annual Conference of the NCFR Fatherhood and Motherhood in a Diverse and Changing World.
Prochnow, Jane E. & James.V.D. (1997).The impact of economic and parental characteristics on juvenile misconduct. Journal of Emotional & Behavioral Disorders. 5:119-128.
Rankin, J. H., & Wells, L. E. (1991). Family and delinquency: a meta-analysis of the impact of broken homes. Journal of Social Problems, 38 (1), 71-93.
Ryan, J.P. (2008) Juvenile delinquency in child welfare: Investigating group home effects School of Criminal Justice and Criminalities, California State University at Los Angeles, USA
Save The Children Fund, (2009) Keeping Children Out of Harmful Institutions: Why we should be investing in family-based care. Save the Children.
Shelley, J. F. and Wright, J. D. (1995). In the Line of Fire. New York: Walter de Proceedings of ASBBS Volume 15 Number 1 February 2008 1183
Steinberg, L.(1987).Single Parents, Stepparent, and the Susceptibility of Adolescence to Antisocial Peer Pressure. Child Development, 58, 269-275.
Stern, M., Northman, J. E., & Van Slyck, M. R. (1984). Father absence and adolescent problem behaviours: Cannabis consumption, drug use and sexual activity. Adolescence, 19 (74), 301-312.
Thompson, W & Hickey, J.(1999). Society in Focus: An Introduction to Sociology. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Thornberry, Terence P., Carolyn S., Craig R., David H.,& Magda,S.L. (1999).Family Disruption and Delinquency. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. 1-7.
Tomoko Akane (2004) Juvenile justice in Japan.UNAFEI
UNICEF, (2009).Don‘t Call Me a Street Child: Estimation and Characteristics of Street Children in Georgia. UNICEF.
UNICEF.)2010, April, Tuesday).UNICEF.Retrieved April Tuesday, 2010 from UNICEF.co.org:http://www.UNICEF.co.org.
Wood, K. M. (1990). The family of the juvenile delinquency. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 41 (1), 19-37
Wright. & Wright K.E. (1994). Family Life, Delinquency, and Crime: A Policymakers Guide. Research Summary. Washington DC: OJJDP. 4-2

APPENDIX 1: THE STRUCTURED INTERVIEW SCHEDULE
This schedule is meant to generate information that will help in analysis of the problems you face at home and seek possible solutions to those problems. It is completely voluntary. When completing this survey be honest. Don’t write your name in this schedule. None of this information will be reported. If you come across a question that makes you uncomfortable, leave it blank. Only answer the questions that you feel obliged to answer but it will be appreciated if all the questions are answered.
Thank you for your cooperation.
SECTION A-Subject History
Please circle your answer or fill in the blanks where necessary.
1. What is your gender?
a). Male b). Female
2. How old are you? _________ (years)
3. Whom do you live with? (At the time of Arrest)
a) Both mother and father (biological)
b) Mother only……/Father only……… (Tick one only)
c) With a step parent(s)
d) Lived in a Children’s Home
e) Lived with a Grandparent
4. Education Placement ………………….. (At the time of Arrest)
a) None
b) ECD
c) Lower Primary
d) Upper Primary
e) Secondary

SECTION B
This section is about behavior.
5. Do you experience violence at home? Yes/No------
6.Type of drug

Glue/thinner
Cannabis
7 .Type of behaviour Type of behaviour
Stealing from home Begging/street life
Refuse school Defilement/rape
Prostitution/sex Murder

Related Essays Criminal Justice