Understanding Unaccompanied Minors in the Juvenile Justice System
Unaccompanied Minors in the Juvenile Justice System
When children, whether Spanish or foreign, enter the juvenile justice system for having committed a crime, the judge may impose measures based not only on the type of crime committed but also on personal, family, and social factors. Recently, both the number of measures and the number of them imposed have increased. This is consistent with the expansion of material and human resources for the implementation of these measures across the country. Judges, having more resources at their disposal, are not only increasing internment measures but are also significantly utilizing open-environment measures. This suggests that the criminality of minors is not serious in a generalized manner, but rather it is a group that may have this account, as most criminal activity is not out of the ordinary.
Explanation of Juvenile Crime Among Immigrants
a) The Theory of Cultural Conflict (Sellin)
Crime is caused by the conflict between different cultural groups and arises in three different situations: when the codes of two distinct cultural groups overlap in areas that “divide” them, when the norms of one cultural group extend over another, or when members of one cultural group migrate to another. Immigrants may commit crimes as a result of the conflict between the rules of conduct and the new cultural norms they encounter in their host country, the shift from a rural to an urban environment, and the change from one society to another, whether organized or unorganized, homogeneous or heterogeneous. The culture clash could be either internal or external.
The external cultural conflict occurs when the same situation is regulated differently in the country of origin and the host country. This leads to external cultural conflict when the immigrant resolves the situation using the cultural norms prevailing in their country of origin. The internal cultural conflict, or mental conflict, occurs in those who design their behavioral patterns based on the conflicting norms of two different groups.
Two important aspects emerge: First, young people with a lower incidence of crime are found in two groups—immigrants and indigenous individuals—who are more attached to or have family ties. Secondly, what is truly important is not merely being attached to the values of one culture or another, but rather the adherence to these values through suitable channels for transmission, most notably a healthy and affectionate family environment.
b) The Theory of Hirschi’s Social Ties
The premise of this theory is that it explains obedience to the laws through the individual’s interest in conforming to the expectations imposed by the social order. If your links with society are strong, the commission of criminal activity would cost you dearly, jeopardizing the progress already achieved. Hirschi concluded that people who commit crimes are motivated by fear of the harm that would ensue in their personal and institutional relationships, which deters them from committing criminal acts.
Hirschi attaches the greatest importance to the emotional attachment of parents. According to his research, young offenders are less tied to their parents than young non-offenders. The emotional bonds between parents and children facilitate the socialization process through which children receive ideas, expectations, and values. Therefore, for Hirschi, the most important variable in the etiology of crime is the emotional attachment to the family. From the above, we can deduce that an inhibiting factor to criminal behavior is the transmission of values through conventional parental channels, provided the child feels a connection to their family.