Factors Influencing Juvenile Delinquencies Among Juvenile
[A CASE STUDY OF BORSTAL TRAINING INSTITUTE GANMO, KWARA STATE.]

CHAPTER FIVE
DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Introduction
    The purpose of this study was to investigate the factors influencing juvenile delinquency as expressed by delinquent juveniles in Borstal Training Institute, Ganmo, Ilorin, Kwara State. One hundred and fourty respondents were involved in the conduct of the study. An instrument tagged “Factors Influencing Juvenile Delinquency (FIJDQ) was used to collect the required data for the investigation with respect to religion, age, sex and class level. Four null hypotheses were formulated and tested in the course of this study. This chapter, therefore, contains the discussion of findings, conclusion, implications of the findings, recommendations and suggestions for further studies.
Discussion of Findings
    The analysis of responses to the twenty items revealed that item 8 ranked 1st and states that juvenile delinquency is influenced by parents not paying adequate attention to their children. This supports the findings of Bowlby (1969) that infant’s first attachment experience (initially to his or her mother) profoundly shapes the social, cognitive and emotional developments that follow. This responsiveness helps the infant learn the important developmental skill of self-regulation as distress is soothed, needs are met, and alertness enhanced (Bridges 2002).
    Item 9 is ranked 2nd and states that lack of parental control influence juvenile delinquency. Several researchers beginning with Baumrind herself have noted that the optimal combination is not high warmth-high control, but rather high warmth-moderate control. Indeed, extremely high levels of parental control create a curvilinear effect – that is, the benefits of control erode of the level of control is too high (Miller 1986; Miller, 2001). In part, researcher believes that moderate control, combined with warmth, allows for incremental and appropriate granting of psychological autonomy to children and adolescents so that they can become more competent (Steinberg, 1994).
    Item 4 ranked 3rd and states that exposure of children to drug usage influences juvenile delinquency. This is supported by the studies conducted by NHSDA in 2003. According to NHSDA (2003), in 2001, over six million children lived with at least one parent who abused alcohol or illicit drugs or was dependent on them in the previous year; substance abuse by parents involved up to 10 percent of children aged 5 and younger. In addition, in a longitudinal study of 248 young adults, Brook et.al assessed parental personality, upbringing, and marijuana use in terms of their links to parent – child attachment (Brook, 2000).
    Item 16 is ranked 4th and states that the parents socio-economic position influences juvenile delinquencies. Both family and neughbourhood poverty have the potential to affect juvenile behaviour by increasing family stress, forcing a family to more or remain in more dangerous neighbourhood, or requiring a parent to work more hours and thus be less available for family activities and supervision (Taylor et.al, 2002; Klebanor et.al 1994; Paschalt and Hubbard 1998; Voydanoff, 1998). As one researcher put it, reflecting the views of many, “the key process by which economic hardship affects children is via the effects on parenting (McVery, 2002).
    Item 18 is ranked 5th and states that dropping out of school influences juvenile delinquency. This is corroborated by Gonzalez (2002) who said that parent involvement – as perceived by the student – predicted a mastery orientation to learning, characterized by persistence, seeking new challenges and overall satisfaction. Not surprisingly, the neglected children repeated grades and had low educational aspirations (Kurtz, Gaudin et.al, 1993).