Youth Violence: Do Parents and Families Make a Difference?
By Laurence Steinberg
What follows is an adaptation of Dr. Steinbergrsquo;s insightful and thought-provoking statement to the U.S. House of Representativesrsquo; Bipartisan Working Group on Youth Violence on September 15, 1999, described below. The Working Group asked Dr. Steinberg to address issues concerning the role of parents and families in the genesis and prevention of youth violence. I am pleased to be able to address the Bipartisan Working Group on Youth Violence—a matter of national importance. (See “The Bipartisan Working Group on Youth Violence.”) I want to commend the committee for taking on this task, for doing so within a climate of bipartisanship, and for selecting a range of briefing topics that reflects the complicated and multifaceted nature of the phenomenon of youth violence in America. You have asked me to address issues concerning the role of parents and families in the genesis and prevention of youth violence. I shall do this, but before I do, Irsquo;d like to make a few introductory comments that will place my remarks in a broader context. I do this because I can think of very few topics that inspire more heated, or more misinformed, debate than that of juvenile violence, and I want to make sure that whatever this group recommends is based on solid evidence and not inflamed rhetoric.
Youth Violence— Increasing or Decreasing?
Let me begin by correcting a commonly held misconception. In your statement about the purpose of the working group, you indicate that the grouprsquo;s goal is to identify causes and advance solutions to fight the rise of youth violence in our Nation today. I think it is important to point out, however, that youth violence is not on the rise in America today. According to reports from the U.S. Department of Justice, the juvenile homicide arrest rate has dropped steadily and dramatically since 1993. This occurred, as you know, along with a steady decline in violent crime among all age groups.1 But the steepest decline in violence during the 1990rsquo;s, and especially during the last 5 years, has been among young people. The percentage of violent crimes attributed to youth is lower today than it was 25 years ago.
This welcome decline in youth violence in America also includes a decline in school-related violence. Despite the attention given to school violence by the mass media over the past year, the number of violent school-related deaths in the United States is lower today than it was in 1992.2 Statistically speaking, schools are among the safest places for children to be. Yes, 12 children were killed at Columbine High School in one horrific incident. But more than 12 children die from gunfire in the United States every single day—not in school, but in their homes and neighborhoods. So if we are concerned about preventing youth violence in America, we need to focus on settings other than schools. We can put security systems inside each and every school in America, but this will barely affect the overall rate of youth violence because only a very small portion of violence committed by or against young people occurs in schools. In terms of preventing youth violence, there are better ways to spend our tax dollars than equipping schools with security systems and metal detectors.
My intent is not to minimize the extent or seriousness of the problem of youth violence in America. No level of violence against Americarsquo;s children is acceptable. At the same time, however, one of the most important functions this committee can serve is to make sure that the record is set straight and that the American public is not unduly alarmed by incendiary remarks about “superpredators” and unsafe schools. Youth crime is declining. Youth violence is declining. School violence is declining. American schools, by and large, are safe places for children.
Restricting Young Peoplersquo;s Access to Firearms
I understand that the committee has been asked specifically to look at issues beyond gun control, perhaps in an effort to stimulate, or simulate, bipartisanship. Yes, the problem of youth violence in America is attributable to many factors in addition to the easy access that young people have to lethal weapons. But I would be remiss as a social scientist if I did not say that there is overwhelming evidence that the availability of guns is the single most important factor that distinguishes youth violence in this country from youth violence in other parts of the world.3 Our young people are no more violent than young people from other nations. What is different about youth violence in America is not that the violence our young people commit is more frequent, but that it is more lethal, and this is because of the weapons they use. Analyses of crime trends from FBI data show quite clearly that the rate of nongun-related violence among American youth has remained constant over time and that all of the increase in youthful violence during the past 25 years has been in gun-related incidents. It is the nature of youth violence, not its prevalence, that has changed.
This does not mean that we should ignore other factors, like those you will be discussing over the coming weeks. They are important, too. But it does call for some truth-inadvertising in the committeersquo;s report. If we are serious about reducing youth violence in America, we need to restrict the access that young people have to guns. I know it, you know it, and the American people know it.
The Role of the Family
I doubt that there is an influence on the development of antisocial behavior among young people that is stronger than that of the family. My goal in this presentation is to share with you what social scientists have learned about the role of the family in the genesis of youth violence and to suggest some possible ways of using parents and communities to help prevent violent incidents among our young
剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料
英语译文共 6 页，剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料
资料编号：[422918]，资料为PDF文档或Word文档，PDF文档可免费转换为Word
以上是毕业论文外文翻译，课题毕业论文、任务书、文献综述、开题报告、程序设计、图纸设计等资料可联系客服协助查找。
