Preventing Juvenile Delinquency: Early Intervention and Comprehensiveness as Critical Factors

So do home visitation programs really improve parenting? In fact, the results speak for themselves. The effects of visitation programs include a reduction in maternal substance abuse during pregnancy, a reduction in child maltreatment, a reduction in family size, closely spaced pregnancies, and chronic welfare dependence. The negative effects of cigarette smoking on children’s IQ at ages 3 and 4 were completely eliminated among nurse-visited children (Olds et al. 67).

Other benefits include improved school readiness, school performance, greater employment and educational opportunities for parents, and greater family stability in general. There is evidence that suggests that home visiting programs can pay back program costs as well as produce monetary benefits for the government and for taxpayers. Parents are also taught how to use rewards and punishment effectively (Welsh and Farrington 874). In addition, maternal attitudes toward childrearing improved and there were noticeable enhancements in the home environment (Olds et al. 74). Within four years after the birth of the first child, rates of subsequent pregnancy were lower, participation in the work force was higher, and dependence on the Aid to Families with Dependent Children Program was lower (Olds et al. 75). From this extensive list of positive outcomes, it can be concluded that home visitation programs decrease the occurrence of prominent risk factors, and consequently reduce delinquent behavior later in life.

One specific program, the University of Rochester Nurse Home-Visitation Program was particularly successful. It was conducted with 400 women, and home visits emphasized the mother's health throughout pregnancy, the child's health and development, and enrichment of the family's support systems within the community. The most striking result of the program was the decline of child abuse and neglect among high-risk mothers, a major risk factor in future deviant and violent behavior (Zigler and Taussig 1002).

Juvenile delinquency is a serious problem in our society that needs to receive serious attention. Even those who are not directly affected end up being touched by this issue through governmental allocation of tax dollars and the general safety of our communities. This crisis is not managed by simply throwing money at programs expecting them to work. There has been enough research in this field done to conclude what works and what does not. Early interventions have proven to be effective. These programs focus not on reducing crime, since at this point children are too young to commit crimes. Rather, the focus is on targeting risk factors that later predict delinquent behavior. If these risk factors are properly dealt with, they will decrease the chances of this future negative behavior. Comprehensive programs also have high success rates. By working with various aspects of a child’s life – including the ecological systems surrounding a child – these programs are able to mitigate more risk factors than solely working with one or two aspects. An early start and a broad approach are signs of a good program, and many programs out there successfully integrate these two concepts.

The Head Start program aims to prepare kids for school and by doing so alleviates risk factors for delinquency. The main Head Start program works with three and four-year-olds in the classroom and in the home. In addition to offering educational services, it provides health services as well as social services for the parents. The program has been very popular and successful, and has expanded a great deal since its creation in the 1960s. Today, Head Start is considered an educational achievement program as well as an early intervention delinquency program. Home visitation has also been hugely successful in mediating risk factors. Nurses or trained professionals visit the homes of low-income and high-risk soon-to-be mothers and offer advice, counseling, support, and social and health services. These services continue until the second year after the child’s birth. Once again, this program not only helps foster healthy childhood development, but it sets children up for future success and deters them from committing crimes in the future.

While these two programs have been beacons of light within the fog of an assortment of programs, there is always room for improvement. Research shows that truly successful programs continue beyond childhood years to provide support to at-risk youth (Zigler and Taussig 1003). The best programs do not end once a child enters school. They instead continue to provide support for as long as the particular child requires it. The key is continuity of intervention, and that is a goal all prevention programs should strive for (Zigler and Taussig 1003). Both Head Start and early childhood home visitation programs that combine early intervention with comprehensive curriculums provide very strong examples of programs that decrease the rates of delinquent behavior in the future. However, they are only the beginning, and our society must turn to research and investigation to create programs that will bring us closer to finding an end to this far-reaching problem of juvenile delinquency.

Koffman, Stephen, et al. "Impact of a Comprehensive Whole Child Intervention and Prevention Program among Youths at Risk of Gang Involvement and Other Forms of Delinquency." Children & Schools 31.4 (2009): 239-45. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 8 Nov. 2009.

Mills, Kay. Something Better for My Children: The History and People of Head Start. New York: Dutton, 1998. Print.

Nation, Maury, et al. "What Works in Prevention." American Psychologist 58.6/7 (2003): 449- 57. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 8 Nov. 2009.

Olds, David, et al. "Reducing Risks for Antisocial Behavior with a Program of Prenatal and Early Childhood Home Visitation." Journal of Community Psychology 26.1 (1998): 65-83. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 11 Nov. 2009.

Wasik, Barbara Hanna, and Donna M. Bryant. Home Visiting: Procedures for Helping Families. 2nd ed. California: Sage, 2001. Print.

Welsh, Brandon C., and David P. Farrington. “Save Children From a Life of Crime.” Criminology & Public Policy 6.4 (2007): 871-79. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 9 Nov. 2009.

Zagar, Robert John, Kenneth G. Busch, and John Russell Hughes. "Empirical Risk Factors for Delinquency and Best Treatments: Where Do We Go from Here?" Psychological Reports 104.1 (2009): 279-308. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 8 Nov. 2009.

Zigler, Edward. "Early Intervention to Prevent Juvenile Delinquency." Harvard Mental Health Letter 11.3 (1994): 5-8. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 9 Nov. 2009. 

Zigler, Edward, and Cara Taussig. "Early Childhood Intervention." American Psychologist 47.8 (1992): 997-1007. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 9 Nov. 2009.

Zigler, Edward, and Susan Muenchow. Head Start: The Inside Story of America's Most Successful Educational Experiment. New York: BasicBooks, 1992. Print.