Juvenile delinquency in light of data recorded at the Institute of Forensic Medicine

Rom J Leg Med [26] 70-75 [2018]
DOI: 10.4323/rjlm.2018.70
© 2018 Romanian Society of Legal Medicine
FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY
Juvenile delinquency in light of data recorded at the Institute of Forensic
Medicine
Andrea Müller-Fabian 1,* , Costel Siserman 2 , Ștefan-Mihai Anițan 2 , Cristian Delcea 2
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Abstract: Delinquency is a social mass phenomenon, encompassing individual behaviours that fall under the arm of
the law. This research paper will use the idea of socio-psychological interdisciplinarity in order to draw a more complete picture
of the data accumulated until now with regard to the risk factors of juvenile delinquency. We analysed 211 records of juvenile
delinquents, available at the Institute of Forensic Medicine, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
We mention some of the outcomes of the research: the majority of juvenile offenders live in the urban areas where they committed
the offences; usually they are males and aged between 15 and 16 years old at the time of wrongdoing; their preferred offence is
theft, but also aggravated delicts such as rape, robbery, assault with bodily harm, etc. Amongst the underage youth subjected
to research, some of them were recidivists, or struggled with behavioural disorders and/or poor schooling (even illiteracy).
Although almost half of them come from nuclear families, they have to cope with insufficient material conditions (frequently
below minimum means), insalubrious and overcrowded buildings, and often at least one convicted relative.
Key Words: factors of juvenile delinquency, forensic evaluation, delicts, socialisation, behaviour disorders.
Delinquency is a phenomenon that engages
and concerns the society as a whole even
though it is primarily an account of individual behaviours
that breach the law. Anthropological and biological
conceptions in general took man to be a natural being,
in whose behaviour social factors either do not play a
significant role at all, or just a limited one. They deemed
human behaviour to be influenced by constitutional
and physiological factors [1]. This view of human
make-up was proven unilateral and wrong because it
did not account for the fact that the constitutional and
physiological factors are not independent from social
environment. Overtime, these theories were completely
abandoned, but the hypothesis that the development of
the delinquent propensity is surreptitiously influenced by
biological particularities is given credit even today [2-4].
Beside the socio-biologist perspective which claims that a
major part of what today is meant by cultural and learned
behaviours and practices is genetically determined [5],
the evolutionist social psychology shows that biological
tendencies towards an increasingly adaptive behaviour
do not possess a fixed content. On the contrary, they
change as they respond to the corresponding mutations
occurring in physical and social environments and they
are manipulated by individuals’ cognitive processes
through inhibitions or powerful releases.
Psychologists propose a plethora of theories to
explain the differences between individuals: deficiencies
of consciousness [6-7]; sensitive immaturity [8-10];
incomplete socialisation [11-12]; absent mother in
childhood [13-14]; poor moral development [15-16].
They research how aggressive behaviour is learned, what
are the situations that lead to delinquency or aggression
[17-19], what is the relationship between personality
factors and delinquency [20-21] and how mental
disorders is connected with delinquency [22-23].
In opposition with anthropological and
biological theories, the formal sociological theory, the
1) “Babeș-Bolyai” University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
* Corresponding author: E-mail: amullerfabian@gmail.com
2) Institute of Legal Medicine, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
70

Romanian Journal of Legal Medicine Vol. XXVI, No 1(2018)
factorial theory underscored the exclusive and decisive
role of external factors in shaping human behaviour [24-
25]. Today it is unanimously agreed that the unilaterality
and exclusivism of both theories cannot be uphold.
Later on, sociological theories confirmed the
import of psychological tendency in the development
of social phenomena. It is certain that there is biological
determinism in human behaviour (for example,
aggression and its role in delinquency), but its share
in human conduct is still hotly debated. Consequently,
we should investigate the backstory and the family
precedents of the juvenile delinquent. One should also
pay attention to how one’s psychic structure determines
human behaviour.
By a complex examination of social, familyrelated,
schooling, and subjective factors, the researcher
is able to gather important data with regard to the genesis
of juvenile delinquency. Armed with this information,
one can discover the early causes that lead to the onset
of delinquent conduct. In this paper, therefore, we
will benefit from partaking in social-psychological
interdisciplinarity: it will allow us to build a more
accurate and complete portrait of risk factors in juvenile
delinquency.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
In view of our research, we contacted the
Institute of Forensic Medicine “Mina Minovici” from
Cluj-Napoca, which gave us access to 211 record files of
juvenile delinquents.
We used as research methods the analysis of
juvenile delinquents’ records, writing down and analysing
statistically the most significant data.
RESULTS
From 211 forensic investigations and assessments
carried out in delinquency cases, the majority of offenders
were boys (194). Age-wise, the most offences were
committed by minors aged 15-16 years, 41.75% of boys
and 64.70% of girls. Boys aged both between 14 and 15
years old and 16 to 17 years old committed approximately
the same percentage of offences: 24.74% (14-15 years old)
and 25.75% (16-17 years old). This percentage is loosely
the same for girls, with the remark that it is higher for
14-15 years old girls (17.64%) than 16-17 years old ones
(11.76%). For both genders, the delinquent behaviour
had decreased at the age of 17-18 years old, in boys’
case going as low as 7.73%, while for girls even lower:
5.88%. Offences committed by the juvenile delinquents
concerned are shown in Figure 1.
One can notice the high frequency of thefts:
serious thefts with destruction of common property
and goods, grand thefts and aggravated thefts. Special
attention should be paid to robberies, muggins, assaults,
breaking and entering, driving a vehicle without licence,
abetting and withholding.
Rape and sexual perversion are usually specific
to adults, but, albeit in rare instances, they can be
committed by juveniles. Identity forgery is a complex
and high-risk delict because most of the time is set off by
another act that is an offence. Normally, identity forgery
is carried out by adults, but when executed by youngsters
it means that he/she is under the influence of an adult
offender. Likewise, prostitution – a stomping ground
for adult criminals – can be practised by girls under the
“custody” of elder partners, who encourage them or,
more frequently, constrain them to sell their bodies for
money. As the chart above shows, beside prostitution,
girls were indicted also for private and public theft, for
destruction of private property and blackmail.
To undertake a thorough analysis of the record
files, we took into account the school trajectory of
juvenile delinquents. More than ¼ of young offenders are
illiterates or semi-illiterates. Around 35% went to primary
Figure 1. Offences comitted.
71

Müller-Fabian A. et al.
Juvenile delinquency in light of data recorded at the Institute of Forensic Medicine
school, and 20% came from trade schools or theoretical
high schools. Approximately 10% are pupils from special
needs schools or they just abandoned school.
Information about the health condition of
juvenile delinquents are shown in Figure 2.
Approximately 90% of juvenile delinquents have
not had an illness until today. CNS (central nervous
system) afflictions were spotted in only 2% of cases. Low
IQ and behavioural disorders were manifested by 6%
of delinquents and other 2% of them suffered serious
diseases that did not, however, impair the CNS.
We did not encounter during our research
intra-family afflictions, which would certainly act as a
propeller of delinquency. Over 87% of young offenders
came from healthy families. In approximately 5% of
cases, they had parents suffering from CNS diseases.
Medical conditions that seriously deplete the family
budget were found in 10% of those subject to research.
TB afflicted parents were registered for 3%, deceased for
6% and sickly retirees for 1%.
Our investigation laid bare the fact that at least
one parent was convicted in the families of more than
15% of juvenile delinquents.
By studying the family income of young
offenders, one can see that approximatively 50% have an
insufficient income or an income below the minimum
wage, respectively – according to Cătălin Zamfir’s
categories [26]. We also found families in which a stable
income was lacking for years.
Regarding family components, 47% of
delinquents come from nuclear families. More than 40%
of them live in large families.
Looking at youngsters’ behaviour, one notices
that in many cases there is evidence of conduct disorder.
The data collected in our investigation show that over
50% of minors displayed behaviour disorders before
committing offences. Thus, some of them strayed, were
disinterested in school, repeated an academic year, were
aggressive towards their schoolmates, took part in thefts,
etc.
All juvenile delinquents underwent psychological
examination during the forensic assessment. Its results
are presented in the Table 1.
The psychological factors took into consideration
Figure 1. Offences comitted.
Table 1. Psychological assessment results
Dress Behaviour Conscious
No. % No. % No. %
Adequate 115 59.3 Cooperative 113 58.2 Yes 114 58.8
Inadequate 79 40.7 Uncooperative 81 41.8 No 80 41.2
Has Bradypsychia Has Bradylalia Has Hypomnesia Has Hypoprosexia
no. % no. % no. % no. %
Yes 116 59.8 Yes 116 59.8 Yes 124 63.9 Yes 114 58.8
No 78 40.2 No 78 40.2 No 70 36.1 No 80 41.2
Verbalisation I.Q. Intellect-Raven
no. % no. % no. %
Age adequate 79 40.7 Insufficient
13
Medium
76.5 Low 114 58.8
38 19.6
Age inadequate 115 59.3 Normal 4 23.5 Well developed 42 21.6
72

Romanian Journal of Legal Medicine Vol. XXVI, No 1(2018)
influence minor’s behaviour, but in the majority of cases
it does not lead to impaired judgement. The team of
experts established to what extent the youngster is able
to exercise his/her judgement or discernment. The results
are shown in Figure 3.
In 20% of cases, the juvenile offender cannot
assess correctly the offence, which means that the misdeed
cannot be prosecuted.
Figure 4 shows the modalities of rehabilitation
recommended by the expertise team.
In around 50% of cases, the experts recommend
enhancement of family or school supervision of the
minor. In these instances, the social risks of the deeds
are low and the juvenile delinquent can correct his/
her behaviour most successfully within the family. The
preventive actions of the socio-familial environment are
the best way to spurr the delinquent to improve his/her
conduct.
DISCUSSION
The majority of juvenile delinquents concerned
by our research live in urban areas, where they also
committed the offences. More than 90% are boys and
only 10% are girls. The majority of youngsters are aged
between 15 and 16 years old. It follows that the age group
of 15-16 years old requires special attention to spot early
the onset of delinquent behaviour.
The most frequent delict was theft, but it carries
special meaning the fact that so early in their life many
young offenders were convicted for robberies, aggravated
bodily harm and sexual perversions.
Regarding school performance, in 1/5 of the cases under
scrutiny the juvenile delinquents did not attend any
classes, a little over a quarter of them attended less than
four years of studies and abandoned school completely.
Somatic and mental diseases were only
marginally present in delinquent youth. For only 6%, it
Figure 3. Juvenile delinquents’ discernment.
Figure 4. Rehabilitation of delinquents.
73

Müller-Fabian A. et al.
Juvenile delinquency in light of data recorded at the Institute of Forensic Medicine
has been observed a low IQ or behaviour disorders.
More than half of them come from disorganized
families. In 16% of cases, the juvenile offender came from
disorganized families due to divorce, while in 12% of
cases he/she was an orphan. In 9% of instances, the minor
was abandoned by parents.
Almost 20% of delinquents live in a house
with a stranger, with whom they have not had a good
relationship. In these situations, there was a lack of special
attention from other members of the family or/and honest
discussions within the family. They certainly played a role
in the developing of the delinquent behaviour.
In 15% of cases, one family member was convicted
to a custodial sentence. We believe that this negative
example contributed to the psychical development of the
youngster.
Lack of adequate material resources influences
the mental evolution of the minor. As per our research,
21% of juvenile delinquents came from families with
income under the limit of subsistence, and 24% struggled
with insufficient income. Another contributor to sliding
into delinquency is the fact that 40% of them live in
insalubrious and over-crowded buildings.
In 53% of cases, the delinquent showed
behavioural disorders, most of the time dating from early
childhood. They were known not only to parents, but
also to teachers. They could have effectively intervened to
prevent the onset of criminal conduct.
IQ-wise, for 59% of juvenile delinquents is very
low. The same cases, according to Raven, can be grouped
in the category inferior IQ, while only 20-25% of the
other researched cases belong to the group of medium
and superior IQ.
With regard to discernment, 80% could rightly
assess the offence and, consequently, they were hold
responsible. 17% were partially able to exercise their
judgment, while only 3% were incapable of evaluating the
nature of their acts. The latter were committed to special
institutions of rehabilitation.
The gravity and risk of the situation come into our
research as another criterion for determining delinquent
behaviour. It is disquieting that 11% of offenders were
convicted to custodial sentences, seen as the adequate
punishment necessary for their rehabilitation.
CONCLUSIONS
Poverty and lack of material resources foster
delinquent behaviour. The majority of youngsters
investigated by police really live in extremely poor
material conditions. Often, there is no stable income
in the family. In these situations, many youngsters are
pushed into stealing food in order to live another day.
If asked why they do not work, why they do not gain
money to purchase what they need, the answer might be
fourfold. Firstly, they are underage (the majority of them
just turned 14) and employment at this age is not legal.
Secondly, their physical development is behind that of
their peers and they are not able to engage in physical
work. Thirdly, most of them are not schooled and this
presents a major hindrance to hiring. Finally, they are
preyed upon by adult delinquents who make a profit by
introducing them to a life of crime. We recall here the
case of the two prostitute girls, underlining that there has
been an increase in juvenile prostitution.
The family can offer adequate moral support
and, therefore, thwart the negative effects of a dubious
entourage. The cases under research show that in those
families in which members pay attention to each other,
they can also detect the early signs of questionable
changes in behaviour; thus, the family has the opportunity
to take the necessary steps and measures to prevent the
onset of full-blown delinquency. In those instances where
the offence is already committed, the family can come
together and take responsibility as a group in order to
prevent a new offence. The delicts carried out in this last
occasion are usually low risk [27-29].
The majority of juvenile delinquents from
our research had difficulties in adapting to school
environment. Many were held back, and after passing two
or three classes, they abandoned school for good. Doing
so, they choose a dangerous path that most of the time
leads to delinquency.
Prevention of juvenile delinquency is extremely
important. Knowing the factors that contribute to the
genesis of delinquent behaviour, observing them from
early on and taking adequate measures can really stop the
development of delinquent conduct. In this sense, we can
advance a few ideas.
Delinquency is a multi-factorial behaviour.
Efficient prevention requires the collaboration of a
complex team of experts. The psychologist, psychiatrist,
forensic doctor, sociologist and the social worker form a
group of highly qualified professionals, able to fight for
the prevention of delinquency in general, and juvenile
delinquency especially.
Juvenile delinquency can be inferred or predicted
before the actual offence is committed. Through adequate
methods, one can recognize those individuals “receptive”
to crime behaviour: their attitude towards and behaviour
in school and within the family, their social, economic
and familial status. Appropriate education and support
of these persons might reduce to high extent the
development of delinquent conduct.
The adolescent, the juvenile delinquent should be
always examined in his/her social context, establishing as
accurately as possible his/her situation within the family.
Only in these conditions, his/her rehabilitation becomes
a realistic possibility.
Conflict of interest. The authors declare that
there is no conflict of interest.
74

Romanian Journal of Legal Medicine Vol. XXVI, No 1(2018)
References
1. Adler F, Mueller GOW, Laufer WS. Krimonológia, Budapest: Osiris; 2000.
2. Eysenck HJ, Gudjonnson GH. The Causes and Cures of Crime. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul; 1980.
3. Mednick SA, Moffitt TE, Stack SA. The causes of crime: New biological approaches, Cambridge University Press; 1987.
4. Ratner RA. Biological Causes of Delinquency. In: Rosner R., Schwartz HI., editors. Juvenile Psychiatry and the Law. Critical Issues in
American Psychiatry and the Law. Boston: Springer; 1989.
5. Iluţ P. Iluzia localismului şi localizarea iluziei (Romanian). Teme actuale ale psihosociologiei. Iaşi: Polirom; 2000, p. 24-31.
6. McDavid JW, McCandless BR. Psychological Theory, Research, and Juvenile Delinquency. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. 1962;
53(1):1-14.
7. Soung P. Social and Biological Constructions of Youth: Implications for Juvenile Justice and Racial Equity. Journal of Law and Social Policy.
2011; 6(2):10.
8. Shaughnessy MF, Cordova F, Strickland J, Smith C, Eisenman R. Working with the Emotionally Sensitive Adolescent. International Journal
of Adolescence and Youth. 1995; 6(1):47-55.
9. Moffitt TE. Adolescent-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review. 1993;
100(4):674–701.
10. Hughes JS, McPhetres J. The Influence of Psychosocial Immaturity, Age, and Mental State Beliefs on Culpability Judgments About Juvenile
Offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior. 2016; 43:11.
11. Mullens AD. The Relationship Between Juvenile Delinquency and Family Unit Structure. Theses, Dissertations and Capstones. Paper 750;
2004.
12. Siegel LJ, Welsh BC, Senna JJ. Juvenile delinquency: Theory, practice and law. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth; 2006.
13. Mullens AD. The Relationship Between Juvenile Delinquency and Family Unit Structure. Theses, Dissertations and Capstones. Paper 750;
2004
14. Crutchfield RD. Abandon Felon Disenfranchisement Policies. Criminology & Public Policy. 2007; 6:707–715.
15. Sagi A, Eisikovits Z. Juvenile Delinquency and Moral Development. Criminal Justice and Behavior. 1981; 8(1):79-93.
16. Young S, Greer B, Church R. Juvenile delinquency, welfare, justice and therapeutic interventions: a global perspective. BJPsych Bulletin.
2017; 41(1):21-29.
17. Keenan K, Shaw D, Delliquadri E, Giovannelli J, Walsh B. Evidence of the continuity of early problem behaviors: Application of a
developmental model. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology.1998; 26(6):441–452.
18. Moffitt TE. Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review. 1993;
100(4): 674-701.
19. Campbell S.B. Behaviour problems in preschool children: A review of recent research. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 1995;
36(1):115–19.
20. Agnew R, Brezina T, Wright JP, Cullen FT. Strain, Personality Traits, and Delinquency: Extending General Strain Theory. Criminology.
2002; 40:43–72.
21. Wilson JJ, Willams SE, Garner E, Duxbury E, Steiner H. Personality Traits in Juvenile Delinquents: Associations with Peer and Family
Relations. Jefferson Journal of Psychiatry. 2001; 16(1):6.
22. Underwood LA, Washington A. Mental Illness and Juvenile Offenders. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.
2016; 13(2):228.
23. Stoddard Dare PA, Mallett CA, Boitel C. Association Between Mental Health Disorders and Juveniles' Detention for a Personal Crime.
Social Work Faculty Publications. 2011; 14.
24. Mackenzie DL, Li SD. The Impact of Formal and Informal Social Controls on the Criminal Activities of Probationers. Journal of Research
in Crime and Delinquency. 2002; 39(3).
25. Rosta A. A deviáns viselkedés szociológiája, Piliscsaba: Loisir; 2007.
26. Zamfir C. Calitatea vieţii (Romanian). Bucureşti: Alternative; 1991.
27. Fabian A. Juvenile Delinquency in Romania: The Indirect Result of the Transition Process. Health and Welfare: Diversity and Convergence
in Policy and Practice. Hygiea Internationalis An Interdisciplinary Journal for the History of Public Health., Suedia: Linköping University
Electronic Press. 2010; 9 (1): 311-327.
28. Müller-Fabian A. Juvenile delinquency: Is society to blame? Education, Reflection, Development. 2015; 4.
29. Müller-Fabian A, Delcea C. Juvenile delinquent’s decision making capacity in risk situations: a multifactorial approach. International
Journal of Mental Health & Psychiatry. 2017; 3(1).
75