According to Elrod and Ryder (1999), "overall arrest data (provided by the 1996 UCR) provided little support for the contention that juvenile crime is much worse or much better now than at any period in the last 20 years." Explaining crime and delinquency is a complex and problematic task. A multitude of factors exists that contribute to the understanding of what leads youths to engage in aberrant behavior. There are many theories of variant human manners that target defective genes, racial inferiority, character defects, and deficiencies in mothering, inadequate controls, as well as any number of deep psychological structures.
Juvenile delinquency affects everyone. It puts a strain on the family, as well as the taxpayers that provide programs for the impoverished families. Law-abiding citizens see their money going for detention facilities and to lawyers who represent the delinquents whom, for the most part, probably come from indigent families. Today we have to take into account the victims involved as well. Yet even more of taxpayer dollars go for treatment of the victims, whether the treatment be physical or psychological. It is not uncommon for taxpayers to feel the brunt of delinquency.
This paper will examine the many theories that although differ by name, seem to overlap one another in attempting to explain or predict delinquency. It will address reasons due to cultural and structural differences within communities. Societal factors, such as demographics, and structural factors such as the family unit and peer associations, will also be discussed. .
With so many theories, how can societies decide which ones are most applicable? All theories presented here, as well as numerous others that exist explain various causes of juvenile delinquency. The key concept is that when trying to understand the various theories, one must realize that they could, and in many circumstances should be used in conjunction with one another.