Tom is a 21-year-old male convicted of attempted murder whilst committing a robbery of a
home he believed was unoccupied, Tom has been convicted for numerous offences
throughout his teenage years such as burglary, assault, and drug dealing.
Family
Investigating risk factors associated with the family domain, we may begin to explain Tom’s
behaviour. Tom comes from a single parent household where his mum must work 3 jobs to
support the family. Tom’s father is not present in his life and therefore there is no positive
male role model for him to model his behaviour. There has been research to suggest the
strong effect that a male role model has on teenage desistance from crime (Simmons et al.,
2018; Tarrant et al., 2015), the absence of which can lead to an increased risk of committing
crime (especially in unstable living situations such as Tom’s) (Harper & McLanahan, 2004).
However, the relationship with the mother has also been found to have a crucial effect in
boys delinquency behaviour (Wong, 2017). Tom’s relationship with his mother is poor due to
her having to put him in foster care for a short period when she was made redundant.
Research has suggested that a positive parent-child relationship is essential in preventing
delinquency (Porter & King, 2015) and therefore this absence of a father figure and poor
relationship with his mother leads to an increased risk for Tom to commit crime and search
for these bonds elsewhere in life.
Peers
Tom’s peer group have had a negative influence on his behaviour. His peers mostly consist
of gang members and Tom reports finding a “fatherly role model” in older members of his
gang. It follows that Tom is likely to internalise and normalise the behaviour of these older
gang members (Dong et al., 2015). Tom’s peers are likely to encourage the use of and
dealing of drugs. Tom’s inclination to deal drugs may therefore be described as a use of
illegitimate means to achieve the legitimate goal of aiding his family financially (in line with
Strain theory (Messner & Rosenfield, 2012)) as his mother is unable to financially support
them. He deals drugs because that is what has been highlighted as the only way to make
money. On top of this, Tom’s peer group is likely to normalise hyper-violent, macho
behaviour as well as stressing the need to carry a weapon and always be alert to those who
aren’t part of the gang. Research has suggested that mental health problems such as
anxiety and paranoia are very common amongst gang members as they are in a constant
‘fight or flight state’, whereby they anticipate violence and need to strike first (Coid et al.,
2013; Wood & Dennard, 2017). Looking at the peer factors affecting Tom, his offending
behaviour can be described as brought on by the normalisation of illegal activity as well as
an emphasis being placed on the need to maintain a macho image and trust no one. This
leads to a constant 'always on” state of awareness (Kelly et al., 2012) alongside the
perceived need to carry a weapon and use it if threatened.
School
Regarding factors of the school domain, it is evident that Tom has struggled academically
and failed to obtain any GCSEs. Evidence has suggested that education has a reducing
effect on crime (Machin et al., 2011) due to three factors: income effects, time availability
and patience development. Alongside this, the probability of committing crime decreases
with each year spent in education (Groot & van den Brink, 2015). Elaborating on research
from Machin et al. (2011), education has been found to increase income effects due to the
ability to obtain higher paying jobs. Since Tom has not received any GCSEs, his career
prospects are minimal, causing him to seek other ways to achieve his goal and gain wealth
(in line with Merton’s 1949 Strain Theory). School reduces crime rates as it decreases time
availability of the individual, time that they cannot spend committing crime. Since Tom was
frequently expelled, he has a lot of time with no meaningful activity to fill it with. Research
home he believed was unoccupied, Tom has been convicted for numerous offences
throughout his teenage years such as burglary, assault, and drug dealing.
Family
Investigating risk factors associated with the family domain, we may begin to explain Tom’s
behaviour. Tom comes from a single parent household where his mum must work 3 jobs to
support the family. Tom’s father is not present in his life and therefore there is no positive
male role model for him to model his behaviour. There has been research to suggest the
strong effect that a male role model has on teenage desistance from crime (Simmons et al.,
2018; Tarrant et al., 2015), the absence of which can lead to an increased risk of committing
crime (especially in unstable living situations such as Tom’s) (Harper & McLanahan, 2004).
However, the relationship with the mother has also been found to have a crucial effect in
boys delinquency behaviour (Wong, 2017). Tom’s relationship with his mother is poor due to
her having to put him in foster care for a short period when she was made redundant.
Research has suggested that a positive parent-child relationship is essential in preventing
delinquency (Porter & King, 2015) and therefore this absence of a father figure and poor
relationship with his mother leads to an increased risk for Tom to commit crime and search
for these bonds elsewhere in life.
Peers
Tom’s peer group have had a negative influence on his behaviour. His peers mostly consist
of gang members and Tom reports finding a “fatherly role model” in older members of his
gang. It follows that Tom is likely to internalise and normalise the behaviour of these older
gang members (Dong et al., 2015). Tom’s peers are likely to encourage the use of and
dealing of drugs. Tom’s inclination to deal drugs may therefore be described as a use of
illegitimate means to achieve the legitimate goal of aiding his family financially (in line with
Strain theory (Messner & Rosenfield, 2012)) as his mother is unable to financially support
them. He deals drugs because that is what has been highlighted as the only way to make
money. On top of this, Tom’s peer group is likely to normalise hyper-violent, macho
behaviour as well as stressing the need to carry a weapon and always be alert to those who
aren’t part of the gang. Research has suggested that mental health problems such as
anxiety and paranoia are very common amongst gang members as they are in a constant
‘fight or flight state’, whereby they anticipate violence and need to strike first (Coid et al.,
2013; Wood & Dennard, 2017). Looking at the peer factors affecting Tom, his offending
behaviour can be described as brought on by the normalisation of illegal activity as well as
an emphasis being placed on the need to maintain a macho image and trust no one. This
leads to a constant 'always on” state of awareness (Kelly et al., 2012) alongside the
perceived need to carry a weapon and use it if threatened.
School
Regarding factors of the school domain, it is evident that Tom has struggled academically
and failed to obtain any GCSEs. Evidence has suggested that education has a reducing
effect on crime (Machin et al., 2011) due to three factors: income effects, time availability
and patience development. Alongside this, the probability of committing crime decreases
with each year spent in education (Groot & van den Brink, 2015). Elaborating on research
from Machin et al. (2011), education has been found to increase income effects due to the
ability to obtain higher paying jobs. Since Tom has not received any GCSEs, his career
prospects are minimal, causing him to seek other ways to achieve his goal and gain wealth
(in line with Merton’s 1949 Strain Theory). School reduces crime rates as it decreases time
availability of the individual, time that they cannot spend committing crime. Since Tom was
frequently expelled, he has a lot of time with no meaningful activity to fill it with. Research
