Exploration of Adolescent Developmental Theories - Report Example

A Question of Transitions: an exploration of Adolescent Developmental Theories What are the strengths and limitations of the ‘transition’ metaphor(象徵) for understanding young people’s pathways to adults? It is common to worry that the transition to adulthood characterized as delayed or extended in our contemporary era. In a technological society, some delay is inevitable if the needs of higher education are to be met. An elucidation of the challenges facing modern youth can be found to call into question more simplistic notions of Youth as essentially a transition from one state to the other. In the biological sense, the progression is inevitable, but casting the journey simply as an inevitable process risks obscuring to researchers the self-discovery that defines the teenage years. Children can be divided from adults by their age and status as minors rather than an assessment of their functional capacities. Adding to the delays for the onset of maturity are special restrictions created by society to protect them from either self-inflicted harm, or offenses imposed upon the young by others. Youth are routinely herded into the institutions of public education from the age of five onward, obviously to improve their life chances, or to make them ‘well-rounded’. The opportunities adults take for granted are withheld until the young are often well into their twenties; and are thus deemed suitable to join mainstream society. Much of the withholding is due to an assumption of the necessity of higher education, not to mention changing patterns in the onset of family formation, which includes the justifiable reasons for the postponement of childbirth, and marriage itself. One might wonder whether these delays are in part contributing to a frustration that encourages certain disaffected youth towards activities that make them the focus of criminal inquiry as well. The physical uprooting in terms of place and environment can be a vital ingredient towards an understanding youth transitions towards adulthood, and in the maladjustment that often develops. Sociologists must study biographical accounts, and concepts from geography, architecture, and anthropology as well, in order to advance a sociological argument for the consideration of stability and everyday registers of purpose as a way of understanding transitions. (Hall et al. 2009)This, among other root causes that may lead to unrest are worthy of study. Youth are the main focus of criminal investigations, and their more vociferous behavior can be seen as pathological, immoral, or rebellious instead of an -expression of the frustration due to age-ist power imbalances that are the normal consequence inherent in a high-tech, education-centric society. The apparent fact that the majority of criminal behavior is primarily the main province of these disaffected youth has occupied the theories of criminologists for countless decades, and will no doubt continue to be a primary focus as theorists attempt to safeguard society, and aid the young, whose crimes reflect rough-spots along the transition to adulthood. Throughout the twentieth century, psycho-medical studies triggered a cascade of positivist-assumptive research to cast youth in the role of a hapless population, where the emphasis of “scientific criminology” and “administrative criminology” was destined to become the focus (Brown, 1998). While the youth of many cultures are the fertile ground from which crime may sprout, it is far from universality. The true majority of young people who find themselves socially, and economically disadvantaged as they compete within the labor market, do not rebel with aggression against their plight, but greater numbers do seek to aspire towards mainstream ideals of stability and solvency (MacDonald, 1997). The reaction to the relative scarcity of the job market as experienced by disadvantaged youth has some tendency to reinforce not rebellion, but rather the continuity of more conventional, working-class life-styles, in much of Europe. (MacDonald, 1997) Youth tend to adopt diverse paths of their own during the transition towards adulthood, but find obstruction by socio-cultural constraints, often due to their Minor legal status as young adults. Social inequalities are of increasing interest to researchers as underlying causes of disaffection and inequality that impedes both the seeking of higher education, and later employment. And that lack of higher education, in itself is a barrier against housing opportunities, and further gainful employment. The latter thirty years of the twentieth century served as a turning point away from a critical examination of youth-subculture as a source of dysfunction, and more on structural restraints of society as a whole, than on individual behaviors from ‘misguided’ youth. In truth, it is more likely the policy that is misguided. In addressing the barriers teenagers face towards a successful process of maturation, one must take a serious view of the structure versus agency question; whether ‘wrong-headed’ choices are to blame for social dysfunction, or whether the structure of adult-controlled society contributes to inequality. (MacDonald et al, 2001). In essence, the simpler notions describing the transition to adulthood should be re-evaluated wherever considerable maladjustment exists. On a surface level, the word transition in terms of development seems to make sense; but it is not difficult to demonstrate the inevitability, and necessity of a process of discovery on the part of youth. The work of Thomson is excellent as a means to illustrate the true complexities of maturation. It is highly beneficial to put faces to the statistics, a biographical trends. Questions of religious acquisition, gender identity formation, and the means by which the maladjusted can ‘act out’, are necessary to appreciate the dimensions of the transitional process. (Thomson, 2009) To simply describe maturation as solely a transition makes certain assumptions that oversimplify human development. It presupposes that the agency that is in transit functions in a state of total clarity concerning where, or what it shall become. Sociologists must be careful to not formulate theories which are too generalized, and presumptive. For the disaffected youth, growing up from an emotional, cultural perspective is no more a simple transition than charting the Congo; the point of the journey being that one does not know precisely what is to be found at the other end. In terms of society as a whole, a purely structural perspective can be short-sighted; Largely, because of the inability to prioritize the actual experiences, perspectives, and interests of youth people as they perceive them, in favor of dry debate and intellectual discourse, most often of trends in employment, or lack of employment. and educational achievement patterns. (MacDonald et al, 2001). In the past, transitions research has painted a picture of a linear movement towards conventional goals of psychosocial development. The main transitional career pathways as ’ elucidated by sociologists since in the 1980s have been summarized by Coles (1995) like so: “ The transition from full-time education and training to a full-time job in the labor market. (the school-to-work transition) Equally important is the transition from family of origin (mainly the biological family) to the family of destination. (the domestic transition) and arguably most crucial, the transition from residence with parents (or surrogate parents) to living away from them (the housing transition) (Coles, 1995: 8). “ Before this heightening sociological interest in transitions among youth, anthropologists had been studying the perspectives of adolescents in less-industrialized, smaller cultures and the ‘rites of passage’ developed by each along the progress towards the rituals in preparation for adulthood. The particular term ‘youth’ was not perceived as the intermediate condition between childhood and the adult in such traditional cultures, nevertheless researchers have categorized three core elements in the transition from child to adult through the ideal of ‘rites of passage’. These are: Separation – ‘symbolic behavior implying the separation of the individual or group from a prior static placement in the social structure or a set of cultural/caste conditions. Margin – ‘In the midst of an intervening “liminal” period, the traits of the subject of ritual, (the “passenger”) are ambiguous; he passes through a cultural void with few or none of the attributes of the past or future conditions he is destined for. Aggregation – ‘the passage is fulfilled, or consummated. The ritual subject… has reached a stability once again and, by virtue of this state, has earned by merit new rights during dealings with others of a clearly delineated and “structural” nature.’ Liminal phase individuals can be described as: ‘people or ideals that (1) rank in the interstitial fabric of cultural structure, (2) exist on its margins, or (3) are relegated to its lowest rungs’ (Turner, 1967) Turner’s transitional elements amongst others, are for the most part structurally described and defined. There is however, one additional element cited infrequently in the youth transition research; which becomes the transition from dependence to independence. (Jones, 1996) In addition, other milestones arguably include the end of formal schooling, and the beginning of working life. (Brown, 1998) This paints a picture of a more individually-focused description of the transitional phase; allowing the Youth’s own voice to come to the fore, and it is through these accounts that academics have begun to question the strictly linear concept with regard to transitions which had previously been standard. A true metamorphosis, such as that of an insect emerging from a chrysalis produces predictable outcomes, the form and behavior of the resulting insect a fait’ accompli. But human adolescence is as much an unknown for the adolescent him or herself as it is to others. Sociologists must break from the idea of rail-line predictability in terms of the youth’s emotional, cultural, and intellectual maturation. Other researchers will assert, for example the transitions of youth during our modern era are by no means linear, nor are they limited to predictable patterns. Maturation can be thought of as a fragmentary spasm, cyclical as much as it is progressive. (Stephen and Squires 2003),Yet young people are not passive larva, slowly pupating in a cocoon of isolation, the choices of active agency drive the chaotic progression in ways that cannot be honestly denied. Adolescence cannot divorce themselves from the responsibility to play an active role in the journey themselves; rather than simply blaming parents or society. The socially-enforced traditional limitations extant from early in the twentieth century have largely evaporated; resulting in a ‘new freedom’, allowing for a greater flexibility of lifestyles and self-determination. (Holland et al., 1999). However a blended approach is needed, as the youth in every age must to an extent, chart their own path in response to the social structure around them. Despite the influence of parents and traditions; circumstances of the young person’s environs should never be underestimated for its influence upon development. Not even the most static of pre-industrial cultures would allow an exact replication of their parents, whoever traditional that society might be. The word ‘youth’ itself is a concept subject to change, having undergone increased interest from sociological circles for decades. Additional understanding has been garnered towards that fractious phase that young adults experience before they attain the stage where the ‘young’ may be dropped. It is an artifact of our industrialized society that acknowledges this intermediate period; rather than simply jumping through hoops, performing a ritualized sexual act, and then being thought of as an adult. Youth can be more than the ‘liminal’ phase described in research of various rites of passage. The transition must be extended, rather than being concentrated in a simple, ritualized cut-off point. A few sociologists define ‘Youth’ as a transition that can occur at a range of ages from 12, to 30, and perhaps even later. (Roberts, 2003) Some may never entirely become established in jobs that can support an adult lifestyle, or become married and produce children; specifically, those that live in their parent’s home as long as it remains thus. But within a public context, it is the teen years in which discrimination is most keenly felt, directly as a result of chronological age. This no doubt, produces a sense of uncertain confusion concerning the subject’s ‘true’ status? Not a child anymore; but barred from the world of adults. Transitional sociology researcher may become bogged down with the structure versus agency dichotomy as the socio-economics of our present culture grows increasingly complex. The preoccupation with this debate is pursued at the cost of social equality; in terms of citizenship, or civil rights. Should these concerns be simply brushed aside by virtue of the fact that the ‘kids’ will eventually age to the point where these rights are relinquished to them at last? What price is being exacted as a consequence of those years of status ambiguity? Should duties take precedence over rights, with an emphasis on a pretense of social inclusion as a substitute for actual legal rights? With an added understanding of the role of the self, that is personal responsibility as being equally crucial as cultural/legal structures, then it is reasonable to suppose that the schedule of maturation could vary greatly between individuals; as a result of their own self-willed actualization. Personal agency superseding structure, in theory. But the age/crime matrix would seem to suggest that in truth, social structure is predominant; with a preponderance of youth-related crimes compared to other age-groups. Arguably as a rebellion or instance of ‘acting out’ against strictures that feel unnatural and unfair. Further attempts to chart the phases of transition are helpful (childhood, youth, followed by adulthood) along with the three phases of offending, which are onset, maintenance and desistance. It may be asserted that the majority of the criminological research does not adequately discriminate between the first two phases of the onset followed by maintenance. Conventional research may also fail to identify fending as a transformative process in the adult/desistance transition. Seeing onset and cessation separately in terms of topics of sociological enquiry is not always illustrative towards a comprehension of offending and desistance in comparison with each other. If the investigator can find commonality respective to these two phenomena, one can comprehend offending, in a criminal sense in the context of a change-progression for the subject. Criminological theorists suggest the possibility of a strong correlation between the severity of crime and offender-age, specifically the level of offending statistical curve starts early in the teen years, achieves a peak in the middle- to latter-teens and then falls sharply thereafter; an age-crime curve. (Farrington, 1994) There is some reason to believe that socio-cultural factors tend to be seen as more influential in the propensity to offend for first time juveniles. Yet internal, personal factors tend to be more important towards cessation of criminal activity from youth. There appear to be political associations in regards to the original onset, but apparently there are no clear political remedies based on the literature for criminal desistance. Socioeconomic marginalization bears an association with initiation, but not with cessation. Another question for future sociologists is whether socio-cultural determinants connected with the onset of offending are truly separate from the individual, internal factors associated with cessation of offending, or is there a deeper interconnection, with the critical determinant being power, or the perception of power? These is much support for the idea that social integration, whatever the means, whether political, internally-motivated, or socially-structural. Most theories in the criminological literature support the proposition that social integration, whether this be by individual, structural or political means, is vitally influential towards youth in transition in our present industrialized society. There is some agreement among theorists that young people largely possess internal motivations to adapt to the principle demands of their society, towards the fulfillment of personal aspirations, with an eye towards recognition by society as a whole. (Roberts & Sachdev, 1996) Speculations and hand-wringing concerning youth subculture and other criminological potentialities may pose fertile ground for theories on deviancy, but may not fully account for youth expectations as a guiding factor. And again, a lack of rights and perceived dearth of opportunities cannot be discounted. Youth to adulthood transitional research is not common in the field of criminology, but this literature can be valuable as a means to understand the perspective of the offending youth from their own point of view. Primarily, these stages of transition serve as important milestones for youth, but they should also be seen as milestones for criminologists eager to broaden their understanding of the usually ephemeral nature of these youthful offenses. An investigation of adolescent transitions in tandem with youth offending allows deeper exploration of the volatile, age-related factors connected with interdependence, maturation, and power, as they pertain to the eventual integration in the transition to ‘true’ adulthood. These related factors of transition and offense are characterized by a shift in the importance and influence of the youth’s family and the friendship peer-group as children mature. Shifts also occur in the importance of youth sub-culture in the transitional stages. The pitfalls inherent with adulthood transition, and a willingness by sociologists to not oversimplify development into a didactic process are integral towards the reduction of youth offenses. YOUTH OFFENDERS STUDY A study by Barry, (Barry, 2006) has investigated the myriad causative factors and contributing agents of serious attempts to control criminal offenses among a population of 40 current or prior persistent youthful criminal-offenders. 20 male and 20 female offenders were included, aged 18-33. Each of the men and seven females were approached under the guise of a voluntary organization performing intensive probation investigations in Scotland, and the remaining thirteen women were former probation clients referred to the investigator by means of a variety of social worker departments. All had been on probation in the past. The average number of prior convictions for the males was 24 and for the females 12. The majority of interviews were performed in the subjects’ own homes, six however, were interviewed while behind bars and four of them in probation project offices. The interviews lasted typically one and a half hours, and included in-depth discussion of offender’s biographical histories, alleged reasons given for onset, maintenance and desistance. Also discussed were the advantages and disadvantages of persisting, or desisting in further offenses and expectations for the future. ONSET 80% of the respondents began offending younger than the age of 15, the most common crime being shoplifting. The implication was that they were motivated by the fact that their peers were offending initially, and that peer-pressure to join that friendship group inspired their initial conduct. “I was hanging about with a few pals that had money… if my friends can buy it, I can get it for nothing, just like that… I just wanted to be in there too… I didn’t want to be the odd one out (21 year old male).” (Barry, 2006) Two-thirds of the subjects, typically females, cited associations with friends and possible love-interests as key influences in the onset of their criminal activity. There are some that argue that young women during transitional periods are more sensitive to the need for attention and acceptance with others of similar age. Young women may be especially vulnerable to the influence of male drug-using partners as a factor in the onset of criminal behavior, especially where social support came from friends rather than family. (Gilligan, 1982) This is likely to be a factor in unstable home environments, or an impermanent living situation. In addition, domestic transitions in regards to partnership and family formation add one more layer of complexity to the youth transition process. The issue of housing, and the nature of the interconnected housing transitions of the young has received somewhat less attention. The early post-war period in which housing transitions from parental nest followed clearly demarcated patterns is far less certain now, taking place in a context of lower home ownership and affordability. The home environmental factor for youth combines familial, and structural conditions in a way that must not be underestimated for an overview of the youth transitions to adulthood. (Calvert, 2010) Available literature on transitional phases underscores these, and other family influences as a source of support for youth from disadvantaged backgrounds. Youth with a history of family dysfunction are more likely to seek out such social resources from friends as opposed to family, despite the peer-pressure enticing them into criminal misconduct. The social-proof gained from these offenses may have been perceived, rightly or wrongly, as the only means of friendship, and thus a path to identity. The following quote illustrates this social dynamic: “I was looking for, I suppose in a way, folk to look at me in a different light. For folk to think of me differently - to fit in, in a way… and to be noticed by my mother and stuff, you know, with her alcohol abuse, I was always like alone and it was very difficult to like, I dont know, to get on with anyone, you know… I was picked on at school. I tried to keep myself to myself and other folk dont like that and I was an outsider so they went out of their way to do you know, and that was what the main problem was really… I had to make friends because I was alone in a strange countryside village with no one that I knew about me and it was like, how - what can I do? Where am I gonna turn, you know? And to me, [offending] was my only escape’ (19 year old male).” (Barry, 2006) Many subjects stated that the family was not a reliable source of support for them. Friends, in essence providing a sense of identity and belonging. Among these disaffected youth, status as an offender is likely to give them a reputation boost within their desired peer group. With respect to gender differences in the onset of offending, the women tended to cite social, friendship-related reasons, as the primary influence in their starting offending. Males tended to credit practical factors, such as ‘spending money’. Indeed, both men and women saw the financial benefits they might accrue from their misconduct, females were more likely to want the money for narcotics. Men, on the other hand, were more likely to use ill-gotten gains on consumables commodities. (Barry et al. 2006) CONCLUSIONS & DISCUSSION Researchers must be cautious in simplifying; or inventing pat theories that chart a clear, and obvious path for adolescent maturation. The transition as a process creates generalizations which, even in terms of pure biology, are neither entirely consistent in terms of age, nor are these changes truly predicable. The inability to fully appreciate these complexities; and the matrix of internal and external social factors that define, and constrain young people can often lead to criminal activity without active attention and social support. The criminal findings imply that young people may start offending as a means, albeit short-sighted, to attain social identity/integration. Regardless of the final expenditure of illicit gains, the true purpose of youthful larceny and petty offenses is to gain a substitute for that which is lacking in the home environment. In the maintenance phase of this behavior, status can be over taken by necessity, an addiction, and acceptance of the above. Adding to their willingness to commit wrongdoing is a feeling they have little or nothing to lose, and the annoyance of the criminal justice system tends to push them into the arms of criminal peers, with whom they may empathize. To encourage desistance before the youth can become hardened, key factors for these youth tended to be practical or social. First is a growing determination to avoid the criminal justice system, and the support of positive relationships with family, friends, or love-interests. Programs that will provide opportunities for more practical goals, and gainful employment. An incentive to cease criminal conduct can be gained through trust; the opportunity to take on responsibilities, and a clean break with past confederates in law-breaking. Offenders are aided by family support, and a greater empathy with one’s parents. State-political programs also became an alternative source of legitimate income for those 18 and over. Methadone can also be made available to wean the addicted off of economically draining habits. All people, in transition or otherwise benefit from responsibility and stability in a way that allows a positive contribution for oneself, and the community. The ideal of the transition has a clean, simplistic logic. But the true progression to adulthood is rife with starts and stops, a fractious journey that proceeds at different rates, for different individuals. Not simply in biological terms of maturation, though variance does exist there, but the turbulence affects the development of intellect, and emotional stability as well. Where there are uncertainties; maladjustments on the path to adulthood, criminal conduct among the economically disadvantaged is all too common; but there is hope, if support and positive alternatives can be made available, whether from the government, family, or more congenial social interactions; bumps on the road to maturity can be overcome; but they can also form patterns that lead to hardened anti-social and criminal conduct. At present, it is difficult to say with total confidence whether the external, structural complexities of society, as it makes demands upon, yet restricts the status of teenagers is more impactful than motivations for self-actualization from within. Youth must balance the end of childhood with a nebulous period in which they are not yet adults, and those that feel slighted put themselves, and the community at risk. But recovery from dysfunction on the transitional path will surely not be possible unless the young person is willing and able to take responsibility for their own growth, their own realization of potential. But most are able, eventually to navigate the storms of anxiety, moral uncertainty, challenges to authority, in order to establish complete, constructive adult identities. There are few that would choose from the beginning a conflict-riddled life of crime; and there are numerous examples of youth able to rise above adversity to create beneficial lives of gainful employment and positive contributions to the community as a whole. REFERENCES Barry, Monica (2006) Youth Offending in Transition: The search for social recognition, Abingdon: Routledge. Barry, Monica (2010) Youth transitions: from offending to desistance. Journal of Youth Studies, 13 (1). pp. 121-136. ISSN 1367-6261 http://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/16854/ Brown, S. (1998) Understanding youth and crime: Listening to youth?, Buckingham: Open University Press. Calvert, Emma (2010) Young peoples housing transitions in context. Southampton, UK, ESRC Centre for Population Change (ESRC Centre for Population Change Working Paper, 8) Coles,B. 1995. Youth and Social Policy: youth citizenship and young careers. Routledge. Farrington, D. (1994) ‘Human Development and Criminal Careers’ in M. Maguire, R. Morgan and R. Reiner (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gilligan, C. (1982) In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Hall, Tom. Coffrey, Amanda, Lashua, Brett. (2009) Steps and stages: rethinking transitions in youth and place. Journal of Youth Studies, Volume 12, Issue 5, 2009 Special Issue: YOUNG PEOPLE, CLASS AND PLACE Holland, J., Reynolds, T. and Weller, S. (2007) ‘Transitions, Networks and Communities: The Significance of Social Capital in the Lives of Children and Young People’, Journal of Youth Studies, Vol. 10, No. 1: 97-116. Jones, G. (1996) Deferred Citizenship: A coherent policy of exclusion?, Young People Now, 26 March. Jones, Gil 2009. Youth. Published 2009 by Polity Press. MacDonald, R. (1997) ‘Youth, social exclusion and the millennium’ in R. MacDonald (Ed), Youth, the ‘underclass’ and social exclusion, London: Routledge. Roberts, H. and Sachdev, D. (1996) Young People’s Social Attitudes: Having Their Say - The Views of 12-19 Year Olds, Ilford: Barnardo’s. Roberts, K. (2003) ‘Problems and Priorities for the Sociology of Youth’ in A. Bennett, M. Cieslik and S. Miles (eds) Researching Youth, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Thomson, Rachel (2009). Unfolding lives: Youth, gender, change. Bristol: Policy Press. Read More