PREVENTION OF
ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOUR
AND JUVENILE
DELINQUENCY
FiA 2.4
Maastricht University
Faculty of Health, Medicine and Lifesciences
Health Sciences
GZW2024
10-02-2020
, Juvenile delinquency has been decreasing since 2007 in the Netherlands. This decrease
concerns both the crime registered by the police and the judiciary, as delinquency reported by
young people themselves. Despite the fact that the decrease is not the same or as strong in
certain regions or for certain types of crimes and the decrease is sometimes not continuous or
yearly, the general trend is that juvenile crime is still decreasing (Ministerie van Justitie en
Veiligheid, 2017). In the battle against juvenile delinquency, the most important thing is to
prevent juvenile delinquents from ending up in a long-term criminal career. In most cases,
there is not much reason for concern, as for most teenagers or young adults who occasionally
interact with the police and the judiciary it stays the same and it does not develop into
something more serious. Nevertheless, there are also youngsters who are considered at risk of
developing a continuing and permanent criminal career, for example if they belong to a
specific social group or if they have used violence more often. If the possibility of further
recidivism is considered especially high, it is justified and necessary to intervene before
accidental criminal behaviour develops into a pattern and at times even in a lifestyle
(Openbaar Ministerie , z.d.). At-risk teenagers need to be identified in order to be able to
prevent them from enrolling in the criminal circuit. This can be achieved by using markers for
certain risk factors, that focus both on genetic and environmental influences. These markers
can vary from having concentration issues to a delayed language development and from signs
of aggressions to a low and shallow attachment with the caregivers. The mentioned markers,
among others, have been linked to juvenile delinquency. Though it is important to keep in
mind that one single marker is not enough to predict anti-social behaviour or juvenile
delinquency, markers are considered stronger and more trustworthy when there are multiple
detected (Singh & Rose, 2009). Besides environmental and genetic markers, the existence of
juvenile delinquency and antisocial behaviour by youngsters is often enclosed and blamed by
mental disorders. It also works the other way around, children or teenagers who show
troubled behaviour are often diagnosed with mental disorders, such as conduct disorder or
oppositional defiant disorder. These new turn of events has caused different responses. On the
one hand, these new developments are seen as a positive improvement since it would provide
a better prediction and more effective preventive interventions for juvenile delinquency.
Contrarily, the is message spread in many debates about bioethics, they describe and discuss
an assortment of concerns and possible obstacles that come with the biological approach to
antisocial behaviour and juvenile delinquency (Horskötter, Berghmans, Feron, & de Wert,
2014). What are the possible consequences of this specific approach to the issue of antisocial
and criminal behaviour among young people will be discussed further on in this paper.
1
ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOUR
AND JUVENILE
DELINQUENCY
FiA 2.4
Maastricht University
Faculty of Health, Medicine and Lifesciences
Health Sciences
GZW2024
10-02-2020
, Juvenile delinquency has been decreasing since 2007 in the Netherlands. This decrease
concerns both the crime registered by the police and the judiciary, as delinquency reported by
young people themselves. Despite the fact that the decrease is not the same or as strong in
certain regions or for certain types of crimes and the decrease is sometimes not continuous or
yearly, the general trend is that juvenile crime is still decreasing (Ministerie van Justitie en
Veiligheid, 2017). In the battle against juvenile delinquency, the most important thing is to
prevent juvenile delinquents from ending up in a long-term criminal career. In most cases,
there is not much reason for concern, as for most teenagers or young adults who occasionally
interact with the police and the judiciary it stays the same and it does not develop into
something more serious. Nevertheless, there are also youngsters who are considered at risk of
developing a continuing and permanent criminal career, for example if they belong to a
specific social group or if they have used violence more often. If the possibility of further
recidivism is considered especially high, it is justified and necessary to intervene before
accidental criminal behaviour develops into a pattern and at times even in a lifestyle
(Openbaar Ministerie , z.d.). At-risk teenagers need to be identified in order to be able to
prevent them from enrolling in the criminal circuit. This can be achieved by using markers for
certain risk factors, that focus both on genetic and environmental influences. These markers
can vary from having concentration issues to a delayed language development and from signs
of aggressions to a low and shallow attachment with the caregivers. The mentioned markers,
among others, have been linked to juvenile delinquency. Though it is important to keep in
mind that one single marker is not enough to predict anti-social behaviour or juvenile
delinquency, markers are considered stronger and more trustworthy when there are multiple
detected (Singh & Rose, 2009). Besides environmental and genetic markers, the existence of
juvenile delinquency and antisocial behaviour by youngsters is often enclosed and blamed by
mental disorders. It also works the other way around, children or teenagers who show
troubled behaviour are often diagnosed with mental disorders, such as conduct disorder or
oppositional defiant disorder. These new turn of events has caused different responses. On the
one hand, these new developments are seen as a positive improvement since it would provide
a better prediction and more effective preventive interventions for juvenile delinquency.
Contrarily, the is message spread in many debates about bioethics, they describe and discuss
an assortment of concerns and possible obstacles that come with the biological approach to
antisocial behaviour and juvenile delinquency (Horskötter, Berghmans, Feron, & de Wert,
2014). What are the possible consequences of this specific approach to the issue of antisocial
and criminal behaviour among young people will be discussed further on in this paper.
1
