GROWING UP AND OUT OF CRIME
Developmental norms and expectations for young people aged 18–25 have diverged from previous generations, shifting the role of maturation that prompts us to examine if and how this maturation can influence desistance from crime.
Utilizing evidence from the narratives of justice-involved emerging adults, this book details key turning points for young people trying to desist from crime. Building on evidence from researchers and theorists as well as from the author's own narrative interviews, this book offers a brief and approachable review of the extant literature, summarizing work across the fields of developmental psychology, sociology, and criminology to provide the reader with an understanding of the maturation of young people in their late teens and 20s before concluding with considerations for policy and practice building from this evidence.
GrowingUpandOutofCrimeis perfect for students, scholars, and academics who study young people and behavior across the life course and maturation, deviance, and desistance as well as for practitioners working on desistance or working with young people engaged in deviance.
Elias S. Nader, PhD, is an assistant professor in the Department of Sociology and Criminology at Kent State University. He is a criminologist who studies two main topic areas: the transition to adulthood among justice-involved young people and the practices, policies, and initiatives of police departments.
“Nader has produced a top-notch study that advances the field of desistance and maturation in several important ways. Written in engaging and vivid prose, Nader sheds light on not only the importance of identity transformation in emerging adulthood but also on the mechanisms through which identity shifts. The research participants' voices tell the story throughout, with Nader's deft analytic hand guiding the analysis, resulting in a vital contribution to life-course criminology and one that is sure to be a staple in classrooms for years to come.”
Michael Rocque, BatesCollege
“Nader deftly integrates theory and research to address a major problem in criminology: as many of the well-known turning points supporting desistance from offending become increasingly rare, how do today's emerging adults form law-abiding identities? If marriage and employment spurred conformity for the generation after World War 2, what are the hooks for change that young people employ in the contemporary context? In answering these questions, Growing Up and Out of Crime advances the field of life course and developmental criminology and has important implications for crime policy.”
Jamie J. Fader, TempleUniversityCollegeofLiberalArts
Growing Up and Out of Crime
Desistance, Maturation, and Emerging Adulthood
Elias S. Nader
Designed cover image: Getty, #171248465 zodebala
First published 2024 by Routledge
4 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158
Routledge is an imprintofthe Taylor &Francis Group, an informa business
© 2024 Elias S. Nader
The right of Elias S. Nader to be identified as author of this work has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Trademarknotice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
BritishLibrary Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
ISBN: 978-0-367-69858-4 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-0-367-69857-7 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-1-003-14358-1 (ebk)
DOI: 10.4324/9781003143581
Typeset in Sabon by KnowledgeWorks Global Ltd.
This bookis dedicatedto alloftheyoung people who have sharedtheir stories with me over theyears, for thisprojectand others. Whether or notyour stories were includedin this text, your experiences matter andplayeda role in helping to shape how Iunderstandthe hurdles andbarriers our socialsystems create for theprocess of growing up.
CONTENTS
Introduction
1 The Life Course and Emerging Adulthood Theory
2 Theorizing Identity and Maturation
3 Methodological Approach
4 Identity and Psychological Maturation
5 Relationships and Social Supports
6 Social Institutions
7 Implications for Policy and Practice
Bibliography Index
INTRODUCTION
DOI: 10.4324/9781003143581-1
Criminologists have spent decades theorizing the developmental process and its influence on deviance and desistance. Over the years, developmental and life course criminologists have effectively utilized evidence across disciplines to help develop and refine these theories. As this subfield focuses on development through the life course, these theories leverage work in the fields of psychology, biology, and sociology to advance criminological thought. To date, most of the work within developmental and life course criminology has been focused on adolescence, youth, and the youngest of adults (ages 13–21). This focus has been driven largely in conjunction with policy, centered around the juvenile justice system and its purview over youth under the age of 18 and recent examinations of raising the age of coverage under the juvenile justice system.
In this book, I work to extend this theorization beyond juveniles into adulthood – specifically emerging adulthood. Within developmental psychology, emerging adulthood has become a burgeoning subfield examining the transition to adulthood in society among younger adults aged 18–29. Importantly, this subfield engages the changes in society and social dynamics for young
people, largely Millennials and Generation Z, that diverge from previous generations. These include an emphasis on higher education, increased average age of marriage and parenting, and increased age of first-time home ownership (Arnett, 2000, 2016). These traditional markers of adulthood have facilitated an opportunity for Millennials, and now Generation Z, to engage in identity and role exploration that previously was indicative of adolescence.
Emerging adulthood theory argues that traditional turning points alone, such as marriage, parenthood, and employment, are not enough to facilitate a transition into the identity of an adult in modern society. This theory argues that values relating to the quality of character are important markers in the transition to adulthood. These include accepting responsibility for oneself, making independent decisions, establishing a unique set of values, and becoming financially independent (Arnett, 1997, 1998, 2000; Greene et al., 1992; Scheer et al., 1996). The life phase of emerging adulthood, thus, is focused on establishing one's quality of character and values within the context of the transition into adulthood. These qualities of character are especially important for those who face barriers in accessing traditional markers of adulthood (Arnett, 1998, 2000; Nader, 2019). When young people are restricted from, or perceive they are restricted from, certain adult roles in society, the recognition of their own development and maturation is necessary to overcome any obstructions they face. This recognition is grounded in one's perception of who they are – or their identity (Bamberg, 2011). Establishing one's identity is central to the developmental process, particularly for emerging adults. This life phase is one where young people are expected to engage in identity change and exploration toward a finalized adult version of themselves. Identity change and development thus offer a mechanism for emerging adults to latch onto adult roles. This identity transformation is central to the life course and progression through it (Côté, 2002; Klimstra et al., 2010). Young people naturally engage in a process of cognitive transformation
where they explore the possibilities of themselves, of the world around them, and of their role in that world (Piaget, 1951). Emerging adulthood is a time where this occurs naturally and uniquely for modern-day young people because of how this life phase is characterized by role exploration and experimentation (Arnett, 2000; Luyckx et al., 2006). Emerging adults are exploring “who they are” both psychologically and socially, trying out various roles and behaviors in an effort to settle into a finalized version of their adult self.
Identity is a key concept in the criminological literature on desistance. Identity change and development offer a path for people involved in crime to desist as they separate their past, criminal selves from their current or future law-abiding selves (Maruna, 2001; see also Giordano et al., 2002, 2007). This occurs through a series of cognitive transformations where one adapts their views of “who they are” both personally and socially. These transformations then can couple with “hooks” for change and “scaffolds” toward new social roles to allow people to latch onto accessible prosocial opportunities to embrace desistance (Giordano et al., 2002). This may be especially pivotal for those who have experienced justice-system contact or incarceration, as they may be forced to assess their own role in society and the consequences of their engagement in deviance (Paternoster & Bushway, 2009; Shover, 1996).
Criminologists have recently argued for the application of perspectives focused on the unique characteristics of modern-day young people to traditional life course theories. These works (e.g., Bersani & Doherty, 2018; Laub & Sampson, 2020; Nguyen & Loughran, 2018; Salvatore, 2017) were pivotal in my own reflection on life course theory and its consequences in empirical research on today's desisting young person. In examining how criminologists can learn from the field of emerging adulthood, I have found a lot of very convenient overlaps in foundational theories. Many developmental psychology, identity, and emerging adult scholars are thinking in line with developmental and life course criminologists. Theories under the umbrella of emerging adulthood often offer an
extension of traditional developmental theories focused on adolescence, extending them to and modifying them for younger people beyond the age of 18. Throughout this book, I will present some background on the fields of emerging adulthood and developmental and life course criminology, highlighting where these two subfields can intersect and (theoretically) build upon one another.
Is This Actually “Emerging” Adulthood?
While the term emergingadulthood, signifying an emergence into the life stage of adulthood, works well generally for the subfields of developmental psychology, it may not be the most aptly used term within the context of criminology. As originally presented by Arnett (2000, 2016), this stage is not to be confused with youngadulthood, as emerging adults do not view themselves as reaching adulthood. The term young adulthood comes with an implication that adulthood has been reached. Instead, the emergingterm encompasses the dynamic quality of this stage where the transition into adulthood occurs gradually (Arnett, 2000). Young people are emerging into adulthood by exploring what being an adult means and how they can become one while balancing their personal, social, and environmental contexts.
Although the age distinctions between adolescence (up to age 18), emerging adulthood (age 18 into the late 20s), and young adulthood (late 20s to 30s) exist, they are meant to be rough markers, with every individual transitioning between these developmental stages at their own rate (Arnett, 2000, 2016). For example, emerging adulthood was originally grounded in a certain age group (18–25 years old), although in more recent theorizations Arnett and others have acknowledged that it expands beyond age 25 and into the late 20s (e.g., Arnett, 2015, 2016). Since his original theorization, Arnett has argued that emerging adulthood does not necessarily end at a specific age and that progression through this life stage is often an individualized process (Arnett, 2016). It may be that certain markers for the transition out of emerging adulthood
may be met while others have not, differentiating the timeline under which a young person matures out of this life stage.
Considering the needs and barriers young people involved in the justice system often face, emergingadulthood may not be the ideal term to characterize their engagement with this life stage. Many variations exist across culture and class regarding what makes an adult, translating into different definitions and perspectives for individuals in what this term means and how adulthood manifests. Certainly, as with many concepts, emerging adulthood theory has received its share of critiques (e.g., Côté, 2014). In particular, DeLuca and colleagues (2016) provide a discussion of the transition to adulthood worth recognizing here as it acknowledges this disconnect in theoretically defined life stages and the lived experiences of many young people.
In their book “Coming of Age in the Other America”, DeLuca and colleagues (2016) engaged in ten years of fieldwork in Baltimore with people who lived in public housing. In this research, they study low-income families and the process of growing up for young people born into circumstances of structural inequality and poverty. They find that those born into Baltimore's lowest-income families, and especially Black children in these families, had difficulties with entering the middle class as they grew up. The disadvantages they faced, including racial inequality, dangerous neighborhoods, and poorly resourced public schools, contributed to this cycle of intergenerational marginalization. Despite this, their research found that those young people “at the cusp of adulthood” were comparable to their more affluent peers in terms of hopes and aspirations for the future (DeLuca et al., 2016, p. 5). “Most were, in fact, doing exactly what young people their age are supposed to be doing – discovering what they were ‘about,’ cultivating dreams, and engaging in a quest to ‘become somebody.’” (DeLuca et al., 2016, p. 5).
These young people had the same hopes and aspirations as peers from other socioeconomic groups, in line with what we define as culturally acceptable futures – going to college, building a career, owning a home, and having a family. Yet, in their research, Deluca
and colleagues found that young people were often on an “expedited path to adulthood” as a result of their difficult economic circumstances. While much of their sample of youth did not become involved in delinquency, they often ended up working lower-wage, unstable jobs, relegating them to remain in their same socioeconomic class even if their ambitions were aimed elsewhere. Thus, they ended up in a cycle of performing this type of expedited adulthood, adjusting their emergence into this life stage, and not affording them the luxuries of limitless or unconditional selfexploration and experimentation indicative of their emergingadult peers in higher socioeconomic groups.
Young people in this expedited path to adulthood, however, still yearn to emerge into a different type of adulthood. Here, this takes the form of an identity project, which serves as a “virtual bridge between challenging present circumstances and an uncertain, but hoped-for, future” (DeLuca et al., 2016, p. 9). These identity projects were often related to school, career, or specific interests, such as artistic endeavors (e.g., writing poetry, writing music). Identity projects provided a blueprint for young people to engage in new activities and keep them away from delinquency or risky behaviors. The projects allowed the young people to distance themselves from relationships (e.g., family, neighborhoods) that did not match their aspirations and instead cling to other relationships or contexts to support them (e.g., teachers).
As Chapter 1 will outline, those on the expedited path exhibit many of the characteristics theorized of emerging adults. They are invested in their own personal growth and want to discover themselves and who they are in society. This growth also centers around the key areas of emerging adulthood: relationships, employment and education, and worldviews. The key difference for young people on the expedited path is their access to the type of role exploration and experimentation they want to do.
The discussion presented by DeLuca and colleagues produces an important point for reflection for criminologists (including me!) to consider. As we engage with emerging adulthood theory and the
arguments it presents, we must examine how well the population of justice-involved young people fit into the baseline expectations and experiences of the theorized emerging adult. Surely, young people in this population may out of necessity be on the “expedited path to adulthood” within some contexts of their lives. Additionally, many are likely to be delayed in their path to adulthood because of the barriers created by justice-system involvement (e.g., Halsey & Deegan, 2015; Massoglia & Uggen, 2010; Salvatore, 2017; Salvatore et al., 2012).
With these considerations, where does that leave the role of emerging adulthood theory and the term “emerging adult” within criminology? In this text, I work to examine if and how the components of emerging adulthood theory can and do apply to justice-involved young people. As evidence in this text will demonstrate, sometimes these young people are on either an expedited path or a delayed path for their emergence into adulthood. Some of these young people also fall within the theorized emerging adulthood path. While all these emerging adults may be emerging at different rates (expedited, delayed, or “on time”), what all these young people have in common is identity projects, and often ones connected with their own desistance process (Maruna, 2001). While these projects are individualized, they all serve as the mechanism for allowing young people to emerge into adulthood. They serve as a bridge in the story of one's maturation between a younger, current, and future self – and as a mechanism for embracing one's desistance.
What Is Desistance?
Criminologists tend to define desistance in one of two ways: either as a process that lasts a while or as the point when someone has ceased engagement in crime. In this text, I favor the former – in that desistance is considered a process by which people begin limiting or ceasing engagement in crime well before their final engagement in crime (Bersani & Doherty, 2018; Bottoms & Shapland, 2011). This text is aimed at understanding the
mechanisms that affect emerging adults within their process of desisting. To do this, I explore both the existing literature and provide evidence from qualitative interviews with justice-involved emerging adults (see Chapter 3 for a description of the methods). I work to weave together the empirical data I have gathered with the theorizations, perspectives, and evidence of other scholars to facilitate an interdisciplinary approach to desistance within emerging adulthood.
The desistance process for participants is examined through the changes in behavior they express during their interviews. Thus, participants are self-reporting their own engagement in deviance and crime as well as their desistance from these behaviors. Their desistance processes include their transition out of antisocial, risky, or criminal behaviors and into more prosocial behaviors, identities, and roles. Specifically, for these emerging adults, they express transitioning out of these antisocial or deviant behaviors and into more prosocial behaviors as central to their transition into adulthood. Thus, as these participants are embracing desistance and engaging in various prosocial identity projects, they are limiting their engagement in these antisocial behaviors and instead embracing prosocial adult roles.
Summary of Chapters
Chapter 1 introduces the topic of crime across the life course and outlines the influence of emerging adult theory on life course criminology. This chapter also discusses classical turning points out of crime within the life course and explains how these turning points have changed as a result of structural and cultural shifts in society. Finally, this chapter sets the stage for the need to rethink turning points for emerging adults and introduces this content for the subsequent chapters.
Chapter 2 provides a review of theories of identity and its role in the life course and in desistance. The focus of this chapter is to understand identity theory and the mechanisms behind the identity project and its role in maturation over the life course. This chapter
outlines concepts of identity theory across the disciplines of emerging adulthood, developmental psychology, and criminology. These concepts integrate to inform the theoretical framework for the research in this text examining turning points for justice-involved emerging adults.
Chapter 3 presents the methodological approach of this study, which includes a description of the sample, the process of qualitative data collection, and the analytical approach. This chapter also discusses the framework of data collection and analysis under narrative criminology.
Chapter 4 discusses the theoretical concept of maturation and its potential role in bridging the strings of theory across sociology, developmental psychology, and criminology for desistance within emerging adulthood. Further, it also discusses the role of psychological maturation and the identity project in the transition to adulthood and desistance.
Chapters 5 and 6 focus on the social components of maturation. Chapter 5 discusses how relationships and social support function within emerging adulthood. This includes shifts emerging adults experience from adolescence in areas such as romance, family, parenting, and friendship. Chapter 6 examines the shifts in expectations and desires for engaging with social institutions. This includes a discussion on how justice-involved emerging adults perceive the role of employment and civic engagement in their maturation and desistance processes.
The text will conclude with Chapter 7, which offers a discussion of the policy and practice implications of the work presented. The book will conclude by identifying empirically based turning points and strategies to facilitate the success of transitioning out of crime for emerging adults. This chapter will include recommendations for practitioners and policy makers working to serve emerging adults entangled in the justice system to promote successful desistance.
1 THE LIFE COURSE AND EMERGING ADULTHOOD THEORY
DOI: 10.4324/9781003143581-2
The life course perspective was built out of an interdisciplinary understanding that theoretical and empirical contributions from a range of fields were important in studying the process of aging and maturation. There are four overarching stages across the life course: childhood, adolescence, adulthood, and older age. While additional distinctions exist within each of these stages (e.g., infancy as a part of childhood), these four stages represent important categories for socialization and the expectations of social roles that often cross generational and cultural barriers in Western society and research.1
Childhood (approximately ages 0–12) is one of the most important stages of the life course as it encompasses some of the most crucial development socially, cognitively, and physically. This stage includes infancy, early childhood, and school-aged childhood. The next major stage is adolescence (approximately ages 13–18) where an individual's biological development parallels the exploration
of their self, personal identity, and independence. Often, this development is individualized in that it may occur earlier or later for some youth. Adolescence is typically characterized as a transitional stage between puberty and adulthood, where an emphasis lies on preparation for adulthood through risk-taking, exploration, and experimentation.
The longest stage of the life course is adulthood, lasting approximately from ages 18 to 64. Adulthood is characterized by establishing stability as an individual embraces their role(s) in society to “settle down”, such as starting a career, getting married, and becoming a parent. This stability is facilitated by social, cognitive, and physical development. As young people mature into adulthood, they can embrace the roles typical of an adult and maintain their general position in those roles throughout this stage in the life course. Importantly, there are several phases within adulthood, including emerging adulthood, young adulthood, and middle age.
The final stage of the life course is older age (approximately ages 65 and above). This is classically understood to be a fulfilling point in the life course, where one can reap the benefits of the decisions and stability established throughout the life course. Yet, this stage also welcomes new social, cognitive, and physical challenges as one ages.
The work in this text focuses on emerging adulthood (approximately ages 18–29), a transitional stage between adolescence and adulthood characterized by prolonged engagement in adolescent-type behaviors (e.g., risk-taking, exploration, and experimentation) within the realm of adulthood (Arnett, 2000, 2015, 2016). As this chapter will discuss, emerging adulthood creates a unique opportunity for prolonged engagement in deviance and its crucial effects on how young people can engage in desistance. To set the context for the rest of this text, this chapter will provide a introduction to the fundamental perspectives within developmental and life course criminology as well as emerging adulthood theory.
But First, a Primer on Structure Versus Agency
As a field, developmental and life course criminology focuses on the engagement in offending and desistance across one's life course. Theories under this perspective tend to favor either structurallybased factors, agentic-based factors, or an integration between the two. Structurally-based perspectives in criminology are typically concerned with theorizing the role of social factors, including social structure and life events, in the offending and desistance processes. Theoretical frameworks under this perspective argue that desistance from crime is a result of changes in social, structural, or environmental factors. Crime (and behaviors in general) are affected by the social-structural factors that an individual may be exposed to, such as socioeconomic stratifications, social institutions (e.g., government, education), communities and social (or peer) networks, and cultural norms (Laub & Sampson, 2003; Lopez & Scott, 2000; Murdock, 1949; Sampson & Laub, 1993).
Agentic-based perspectives in criminology are typically concerned with theorizing the role of individual factors, including psychological and biological factors, in the developmental process and engagement of crime. Theoretical frameworks under this perspective argue that desistance from crime is a result of an individual realizing that involvement in criminal or antisocial activities is no longer worth the costs. A person then begins to fear for their future and subsequently works to embrace a prosocial pathway for their life course (Giordano et al., 2002; Maruna, 2001). Agentic-based theories argue that people believe they are in control of their own decisions, the outcomes of said decisions, the course of their lives, and how they react to obstacles that may arise (Côté & Levine, 2002; Schwartz et al., 2005).
Developmental and Life Course Criminology
The relationship between age and crime is considered one of the most established features in the field of criminology. Typically, the age-crime curve presents an aggregate view of crime rates or crime counts by age, visualizing a peak in the occurrence of crime during the mid- to late-teens followed by a swift decline in the early
to mid-20s. In their work, Hirschi and Gottfredson (1983; Gottfredson & Hirschi 1990) argue that this peak is approximately similar across various crime types and types of data (e.g., arrest and victimization). This curvilinear relationship, which peaks within late adolescence or early adulthood, persists across demographic characteristics and across time (Rocque, 2017).
Since the identification of this curve, many scholars have dedicated their life's work to theorizing why this age-crime curve exists and identifying the mechanisms behind it. Two of the most influential theoretical approaches in the field are those of Moffitt's Dual Taxonomy and Sampson and Laub's age-graded informal social control theory:
1. Moffitt's Dual Taxonomy (1993) is a developmental perspective that argues that deviance begins and peaks within the life stage of adolescence. Once a young person ages out of adolescence, they reduce or stop their engagement in deviance.
2. Sampson and Laub (1993; Laub & Sampson 2003) take a life course perspective connecting social controls (e.g., attachment to family and friends; involvement in school or work; belief in the law) to a change in behaviors across the life course. Under this perspective, social controls are the key to understanding when the risk of deviance is highest for young people.
Moffitt's DualTaxonomy
Moffit's (1993) dual taxonomy of offending presents two trajectories for deviance: the adolescent-limitedand the lifecoursepersistent.2 The adolescent-limited trajectory is typically defined by engagement in lower-level crimes, such as shoplifting and vandalism, or status offenses such as underage drinking. The majority of young people engaging in deviance or crime are theorized to fall into this trajectory, where they generally desist from deviance and crime once they reach adulthood in their late-teens and early 20s. Moffitt explains that this adolescent-limited trajectory results from the delay between biological and social maturation,
where adolescents engage in offending and other antisocial behaviors due to the frustration experienced by being biologically mature but not socially mature.
This gap between biological and social maturation creates a dissonance between how young people may feel and how they are viewed by others in society. As biological maturity is reached in adolescence, young people are asked to delay their engagement in conventional adult roles, such as marriage, parenting, establishing a career, voting and civic engagement, or alcohol use. Thus, adolescents seek alternative ways to mimic or engage in adult behaviors (Moffitt, 1993; see Greenberg, 1977). Adolescents eventually can reconcile the maturity gap that exists between their biological maturity and their social status through their engagement in conventional adult roles, decreasing the need to engage in risky behaviors like criminal offending (Moffitt, 1993; see also Barnes & Beaver, 2010; Piquero & Brezina, 2001).
While young people who fall into the life course persistent trajectory also engage in lower-level crimes and status offenses, they additionally engage in more serious crimes such as violence or illegal drug use. Moffitt (1993) explains that those in the life course persistent trajectory may start engagement in deviance and crime at a younger age and continue to do so throughout adulthood. This engagement can be amplified by “high-risk” social environments, including poverty/economic hardship and poor relationships with family, peers, teachers, partners, and employers (Moffitt et al., 2002). The antisocial or risky behaviors of the life course persistent group will manifest and thus compound across several domains (e.g., relationships, workplace, community), affecting the transitions out of adolescence and into adulthood (Elder, 1998; Moffit et al., 2002). Young people in this trajectory, thus, may face greater barriers in their desistance processes compared to their peers in the adolescent-limited trajectory.
Sampson andLaub's Age-GradedSocialControls
Sampson and Laub's work on the life course over the years (Laub et al., 2018; Laub & Sampson, 2003; Sampson & Laub, 1993) builds from the theoretical understanding that the life course is sectioned across developmental stages, with variations in formal and informal social controls across these stages. Through their age-graded theory, Sampson and Laub argue that as an individual ages through society, their (formal and informal) bonds to society change. Salient life events (i.e., turning points) and socialization across the life course can impact one's trajectory of behavior, potentially pushing them toward or away from crime. Thus, theoretical turning points in the life course stem from creating formal and informal social bonds through prosocial institutions such as marriage, employment, joining the military, or parenting (see Laub et al., 2018; Laub & Sampson, 2003; Sampson & Laub, 1993).
Similar to Moffitt's taxonomy, and many other life course perspectives, Sampson and Laub acknowledge that adolescents are in a phase of the life course that is optimal for engagement in risky behaviors, deviance, and low-level crime. As adolescents age into adulthood, they are able to embrace turning points. These turning points serve as mechanisms for desistance, providing young people with a framework for and opportunities to engage with social controls that facilitate the aging out of risky behaviors and investing in prosocial adulthood (Farrington & West, 1995; Sampson & Laub, 1993). Conversely, those who do not experience turning points and do not establish prosocial bonds with formal institutions and informal bonds within social networks are at a greater risk of engaging in risky behaviors as adults.
Turning Points as “Hooks for Change”
Turning points function as “hooks for change” in that they serve as catalysts for changes within the life course (Giordano et al., 2002, 2007). Turning points present an opportunity to move away from previous behaviors (e.g., crime) and statuses (e.g., juvenile delinquent) to embrace new pathways and behaviors in the life course (Elder, 1986; Sampson & Laub, 1993). As young people age
and mature, their place in society shifts allowing for transitions in and out of risky behaviors. Under this perspective, desistance from deviant behaviors functions as a process across the life course (Bersani & Doherty, 2018; Bushway et al., 2003; Kazemian, 2007; Laub & Sampson, 2001; Maruna, 2001). As a young person moves through the life course, new turning points and contexts for social bonds can facilitate the processes of desistance. These turning points simultaneously facilitate the transition into adulthood, allowing young people to see themselves in adult roles in society (Arnett, 1998, 2006; Tanner & Arnett, 2009). Those who are open to the “hooks for change” can build a new identity through the turning points they embrace (Giordano et al., 2002). Therefore, turning points provide an opportunity for young people to create a new beginning, with the possibility for new experiences and personal growth.
While there are several possibilities of what encompasses turning points, the literature identifies five common categories that are used to codify the transition into adulthood: (1) establishing an independent household from parents/family, (2) completion of education, (3) employment, (4) marriage/relationships, and (5) having children (Berlin et al., 2010; Furstenberg, 2006, 2008, 2010; Furstenberg et al., 2005; Lee & Waithaka, 2017; Settersten & Ray, 2010). Additionally, literature within developmental psychology has argued that certain “qualities” can function as turning points for the transition into adulthood. Often when young people embrace these “qualities”, such as accepting responsibility for one's actions, making independent decisions, and gaining financial independence, they can similarly mark the transition into adulthood (Arnett, 1998, 2006).
One classic example of a turning point is joining the military, where young people can sever themselves from the adult social role expectation of entering a traditional career in the efforts of establishing a new beginning (see Elder, 1986, 1998). This developmental turning point provides a specific opportunity in which young people can embrace personal change, taking a break from societal expectations (e.g., entering the workforce at 18) to develop
a new trajectory for their life course (Laub & Sampson, 2003). However, several contemporary tests have found more limited support for this turning point in facilitating desistance (Bouffard, 2005; Craig & Foster, 2013). This emphasizes that turning points are not necessarily universal to all youth, and especially not across generational contexts.
The availability of turning points is also constrained by the structural factors (e.g., relationships, gender, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status) that interact with them, limiting the availability of social identities, and thus the opportunity to transition into new identities (Giordano et al., 2002, 2007). The timing of these turning points in the life course, as well as the severity of deviance, may also play an important role in how turning points function within the desistance processes of young people (Uggen, 2000). Ultimately, it is important to understand what influences the transition into adulthood for justice-involved young people (Arnett, 2007; Furstenberg et al., 2005; Massoglia & Uggen, 2010) and if the nature of adult roles (i.e., turning points) for this population can successfully facilitate desistance for modern-day young people (Hill et al., 2016).
Socio-Structural Changes in Society
As a result of socio-structural changes in society, how young people access or are expected to access turning points has shifted. Changes to the economy, job market, and social norms (e.g., the average age of marriage or parenthood) influence when turning points are experienced and how their importance is interpreted. These shifts include a delayed onset of marriage and parenting, seeking a meaningful career, an emphasis on pursuing higher education, and embracing identity exploration (e.g., Arnett, 2000, 2016; Shanahan, 2000; Vespa, 2017). As a result, scholars acknowledge that traditional adulthood markers (e.g., marriage, parenting, employment) are not reached until the later 20s and early 30s (Furstenberg et al., 2005).
Consequently, the understanding of the relationship between age, turning points, and desistance must shift accordingly (Massoglia & Uggen, 2010). Young people may not be able to age out of crime as previously conceptualized because of the structural changes (e.g., changes in the economy, emphasis on higher education, shifts in cultural norms) and demographic shifts (e.g., increased age of marriage, increased age of parenthood) within Western society. Many of these structural changes notably impede the agency young people have in society and the expectations of when and what markers are achieved to facilitate a transition into adult roles.
Ultimately, this has led to a prolonged engagement in adolescenttype behaviors within the life course stage of adulthood. This creates new contexts for how young people work to reconcile the maturity gap that inhibits their full participation in conventional adult society. For example, young people are considered legal adults at the age of 18 and given certain rights and responsibilities, like being able to vote. However, young people are still asked to delay other aspects of adult life, such as alcohol use at age 21, the expectation of continuing education until around age 22, and waiting to get married and raise children until after education is completed and a career has been secured. Thus, young people are often forced to remain financially and socially dependent on their family or parents into the beginning of this phase of adulthood. However, they want to engage in their own intimate relationships, establish their own homes and collect their own belongings, make their own decisions, and be viewed and accepted as adults (Moffitt, 1993). For emerging adults, the turning points they can access are often only considered temporary, threatening the successful transition into adulthood. Consequently, these emerging adults are still “trapped in a maturity gap, chronological hostages of a time warp between biological age and social age” (Moffitt, 1993, p. 687).
As discussed in the introduction, research on the impact of these socio-structural shifts on adolescent development has led scholars to delineate the period of emerging adulthood. The life course phase of emerging adulthood is characterized by role exploration
throughout the late teens and 20s, whereby young people can investigate the potential trajectories of their lives prior to committing to finalized adult roles (Arnett, 2000). Emerging adults, thus, view traditional adulthood markers as temporary roles through which they can explore and experiment, including in the contexts of relationships, careers, and worldviews. This affords emerging adults an opportunity of normalized identity exploration and transformation so that they can discover “who they are” (Arnett, 1997; Mayseless & Scharf, 2003; Vignoles, 2018).
Emerging Adulthood Theory
Arnett, in his seminal work (2000), developed emerging adulthood theory to understand how socio-structural changes in society have influenced development across the life course for modern-day young people. Arnett presents emerging adulthood as a developmental stage from the late teens through the late 20s, where the transition into adult roles continues into the late 20s and even early 30s (Arnett, 2000; 2016). Emerging adulthood theory proposes that this stage in the life course for young people is characterized by their engagement in identity exploration, instability, self-focus, and embracement of possibility for their futures. While within this stage, young people often feel in-between adolescence and adulthood, recognizing that they have left the stage of adolescence behind but not quite feeling like a complete adult (Arnett, 2000; 2016). Therefore, this stage is one where young people have “left the dependency of childhood and adolescence” but have “not yet entered the enduring responsibilities that are normative of adulthood” (Arnett, 2000, p. 469).
Throughout emerging adulthood, young people are actively engaging in role exploration and identity transformation in order to establish an adult self (Luyckx et al., 2006). As a result of delayed expectations of when traditional adulthood markers are to be reached, emerging adults, thus, view roles in this life stage as temporary—or ones they can explore and experiment with. This affords emerging adults an opportunity for normalized identity
Another random document with no related content on Scribd:
in tabes dorsalis, 831
Stammering, 571
Starvation as a cause of cerebral anæmia, 781
condition of brain in, 781 , 782
Status epilepticus, prognosis of, 498
Vertiginosus, the,
426
Treatment of, 428
Stigmatization, 348-351
Theories concerning origin, 350
Stimulants, use, in heat-exhaustion, 388 in collapse in opium habit, 673 ,
in thermic fever, 397
Stomach, disorders of and changes in, in chronic alcoholism, 600
Strabismus in chronic hydrocephalus, 743 in tubercular meningitis, 727
Strychnia, use, in alcoholism, 641 ,
643 , 646 in chorea,
455 in infantile spinal paralysis, 1157 in intracranial hemorrhage and apoplexy, 978 in labio-glosso-laryngeal paralysis, 1175 in paralysis agitans, 438 in spinal hyperæmia,
in writers' cramp, 538 Myelitis, acute, 822 , 823
Stupor in tubercular meningitis, 727 , 728
Melancholia with, 158
Stuttering, 569 , 571
Suicidal insanity, 146 tendency, in general paralysis of the insane, 191
Sumbul, use, in hysteria, 278
Sun, exposure to, as a cause of acute meningitis, 716
Sunstroke (see Thermic Fever ). headache from, 390 , 404
Influence on causation of cerebral hyperæmia, 764
Superficial neuralgia, 1211
Supposed discharge as a cause of cerebral hyperæmia, 766
of spinal hyperæmia, 802
Supraorbital nerve, intermittent neuralgia of, 1233
Surgical treatment of abscess of the brain, 800 of facial neuralgia, 1234 of tumors of the brain, 1067
Sweating, absence of, in progressive unilateral facial atrophy,
in the opium habit, 657 , 658
Swedish movement, use, in hysteria, 280 in infantile spinal paralysis, 1157
Sympathetic cervical, diseases of, 1263 headache, 404
neuralgias, 1220
Symmetrical gangrene, 1257
Symptoms of abscess of the brain, 795 of acute alcoholism, 587 et seq. of acute cerebral anæmia, 776 , 782
of acute myelitis, 816
of acute simple meningitis,
717 of acute spinal meningitis,
750 pachymeningitis,
747 of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, 868 of angina pectoris, 1238 of apoplexy,
733 of athetosis, 459 of atrophy of the brain, 994 , 995 of Bell's palsy, 1203 of capillary embolism, 981 of catalepsy, 320 of cerebral anæmia,
of cerebral hyperæmia,
768 of cerebral meningeal hemorrhage, 712 of cerebral softening, 981 , 989 of cerebral syphilis, 1003 of chorea, 445 of chronic alcoholism,
598-633 of chronic cerebral meningitis, 721 of chronic hydrocephalus,
741 of chronic lead-poisoning, 682 of chronic spinal meningitis, 752 of chronic spinal pachymeningitis, 749 of combined forms of sclerosis, 870
of concussion of the brain, 908 of concussion of the spine, 915 of congestion of cerebral dura mater, 704 of spinal membranes, 747 of the pia mater, 716 of delirium tremens, 627 of diffuse spinal sclerosis, 888
of disease of cervical sympathetic, 1264 of disseminated (cerebro-spinal) sclerosis, 874 of ecstasy, 342 of epilepsy, 477 of external pachymeningitis, 704 of family form of tabes dorsalis, 871 of gastralgia,
of general paralysis of the insane,
178 of hæmatoma of dura mater,
707 of headache,
402 of heat-exhaustion,
387 of hebephrenia,
172 of hypertrophy of the brain, 944-946
of injuries to nerves, 1183 , 1185 , 1186 of insanity, 120 of insomnia, 379-382 of intermittent neuralgia of supraorbital, 1233 of internal pachymeningitis, 706
of intracranial hemorrhage and apoplexy, 733 of labio-glosso-laryngeal paralysis, 1170 of melancholia, 155 , 156 of migraine, 407 , 1230 of moral insanity, 143-146 of multiple neuritis,
