Childhood Development Essay

Introduction Patterson and Bronfenbrenner came up with a comprehensive write up of the habit that a tykes context black markets in their developingal operation. These two sociologists assert that childrens culture, pargonnting style, social network among opposite circumstanceors tremendously affect their boilersuit verbotencome as adults. The essay shall rise the last menti aned antecedents theories with regard to ungodliness.Role of contextual analysis in determining bedraggled digits The agricultural is under tremendous gouge owing to the high rates of juvenile wickedness. It would indeed be very useful to bottom this pattern of bearing under context. Kennedy and Swenson (1995) explained that the country needed a total of adept billion dollars to deal with the juvenile establishment which is commonly brought on by delinquency factors. more or less of the presumptions made by these experts allow the fact that juvenile decrepits atomic number 18 a lot kindredly than other individuals to depend on welf be as adults or to be unemployed in the future. It is whence exigent to detect some of the possible causes of these behaviors and sneak them in the bud. DeBaryshe, Patterson and Ramsey (1989) explain that the moveions which children constitute with their families go for a major(ip) role to play in impairment of the way children dig push through in the future. It should be famed that those children with minimal guidance from their various(prenominal) families digest high chances of marching deserted behavior. Additionally, these negative works experienced by much(prenominal) children atomic number 18 probably to trickle d throw to their overall behavior within the indoctrinate environment. much than than than(prenominal) very much than non, much(prenominal) children feel rejected by their p bents be thus futile to give their all within the coach environment. The overall issuing of this is tumbleure. On acquit of the latter, it is possible to find that most children who are exposed to negative family influences or those who give been rejected by their families tend to pairing socially deviant groups. The main explanation for this is that those children are looking for some smorgasbord of acceptance. while the socially deviant groups whitethorn not be pleasing by other members of the community, most of them make leave away children feel at home. When a rejected child joins such a socially deviant group, they are likely to aper the behaviors of their peers and engage in delinquent behavior. Patterson (1996) explains that in order to understand or tear d witness determine whether a child ordain exhibit delinquent behavior, one ought to examine whether that various(prenominal) child is exposed to good family management. Additionally, it was alike necessary to look at some of the solutions revolving around their parents. This factors include availableness of parents , nature of agnatic interactions and whether those individual(prenominal) individuals nookie understand the nature of the childs respective challenges. The latter mentioned authors overly insist that it was necessary to asses whether a childs school environment was a confirmatory influence upon their rattlings. This way that more often than not, children who perform poorly in school or those who feel out of graze in school are more likely to exhibit delinquent behavior than their expect fragmentizes in other types of schools. Consequently, it is necessary fro such childrens parent to take founder in overseeing their childrens behavior. It should be noted that the latter authors were trying to run into away from the traditional explanations of delinquency. In other words, they supposed that delinquency is more a result of family interactions rather than family structures. Traditionally, it was thought that children brought up in single parent homes were more vulnerable to delinquent behavior than those children who rent been embossed by both parents. However, contextual development adherents believe that a child stinker be brought up in a single parent home and fail to sire a juvenile delinquent if the nature of their family relationships is strong enough. Additionally, Patterson asserts that when parents continually monitor their children, and so(prenominal) chances of delinquency are drastically reduced. This is something that Patterson (1996) believes can occur even at slightly younger ages. The latter assertion indicates just how closely related this possibleness is to Pia survives child development theory. fit to the latter author, children get word through the processes of fitting and assimilation. Assimilation is the process by which a child takes up certain(prenominal) habits or issues from their respective environments through changes in their own perceptions. On the other hand, accommodation is the process by which certain el ements in a childs minds change as a result of the assimilative processes. It should be noted that there is one major factor that is common between these respective components.It is the fact that most of the information that changes a childs perceptions of their environment is obtained from their respective contexts. This means that context has a elephantine role to play according to Piaget. If a childs family, social circles or school does not stimulate certain assimilation or accommodation processes, then that child will miss out on a crucial part of their development. This therefore implies that such children have higher(prenominal) chances of exhibiting delinquent behavior. Some other authors in like manner harbor with Patterson and Bronfenbrenner in cost of the causes of delinquency. Examples of such authors include Megens and Weerman (2007). They assert that the nature of a childs social interactions have an inherent effect on their likelihood to exhibit delinquency. The l atter authors believe that when children interact with peers who are likely to affect them negatively, then chances are those children will take up negative influences and hence change by reversal more deviant. DeBaryshe, Patterson and Ramsey (1989) explain that children who become delinquents are those ones that get negative influence from their respective schools. They believe that when certain children achieve academically, then they are more likely to be peremptory in their present and future lives. This means that some of the assertions made with regard to Patterson concur with these explanations.The authors believe that academic achievement acts as a go between for a respective child in terms of the nature of their parents role and similarly in terms of delinquency. Their studies envisioned that when children performed comfortably in school, they were less likely to become delinquents even when their parents did not monitor them effectively. Their findings also showed tha t when children did not perform puff up in school but received control from their parents, then they were less likely to show delinquent behavior just like the latter mentioned category of children. In terms of explaining the nature of social networks amongst children, Dishion and Loeber (1983) explain that belong to deviant groups can make children more vulnerable to delinquency because it teaches children how to become delinquents. The latter authors elaborate this further by explaining that children with higher cases of conflicts between themselves are also more likely to receive less financial backing from their corresponding peers. The overall result of this icon is exhibition of delinquent behavior. These social groups usually engage in substance cry and may show negative tendencies towards one another. The overall result of this is that children then become delinquents. During discussion of delinquency, one cannot ignore the effect of SES as many individuals have suggeste d this as a causative factor. However, research in the area has indicated that most individuals can counter the effect of SES status through maternal(p) involvement in a childs life. These studies as indicated by Patterson et al (1989) show that most individuals may exhibit patterns of juvenile behavior if they do not have any sort of enate reinforcement regardless of their SES status. Despite the fact that most juvenile cases happen to be individuals with lower SES status, the latter authors explain that this is as a result of poor agnate or family management. Had those children been exposed to greater parental even up, their SES status would not have mattered. Some authors explain that juvenile casers are also caused by biological factors. There are certain instances in which exhibition of wild or criminal behavior may be brought on by ones respective biological make-up. For instance, it has been shown that most cases of juvenile behavior occur amongst boys than it does among girls. Also, it has been found that juvenile delinquency increases as a child gets older.While one may not be able to link these biological factors to a childs context, it is imperative to make headway that certain social factors are conjugated to biological factors. For instance, society requires that girls should be well behaved and engage in socially acceptable behavior. This is a concept which they learn at an early age and they learn to live with it for their entire childhood. Consequently, social context has a role in determining why potents exhibit greater cases of delinquency than females because boys are taught about these roles through their interactions with family, friends, school span etc. Additionally, it can also be asserted that the issue of age as a biological prerequisite to delinquency can also be examined in a contextual environment. Most children learn about their world as they plow older. Consequently, the older they get, the more likely those respective individuals are to be affected by their respective environments and also the higher their chances of piquant in delinquent behavior. Children or adolescents who overhaul more time with other individuals who are non-family members may exhibit delinquency. Research shows that winning children away to religious or development institutions for long periods of time deprives them, off the much needed parental guidance and lastly causes deviant behavior which may be manifested as delinquency. Others theories also bring out the fact that children who experience excessive discipline measures usually record greater instances of delinquent behavior than those who are exposed to correct levels of discipline. The reason for this is that children have greater tendencies to go up against their parents or caretakers in cases where they receive argillaceous punishments because such children may feel that their penalties do not befit their wrongs and may therefore feel unfairly treated. Theref ore, such children may have pent up choler and may therefore vent it out through delinquent behavior.Conclusion It has been shown that when parents form greater control of their childs whereabouts, then they are more likely to prevent delinquent behavior. This same pattern may also be find when parents exercise consistent discipline and also when they have supportive relationships. Biological factors have little influence on their own but they matter when analyzed contextually. Also, the issue of SES status can be minify through effective family management.ReferencePatterson, G., DeBaryshe, B., and Ramsey, E. (1989) A developmental perspective on asocial behavior American Psychologist, 44, 2, 330Patterson, G. (1996) Some characteristics of a developmental theory for early-onset delinquency Oxford University foreshortenSwenson, C. & Kennedy, W. (1995) Perceived control and treatment outcomes with inveterate adolescent offenders Journal of Adolescence, 30, 565-560Loeber, R. and D ishion, T. (1983) Early predictors of male delinquency Psychological Bulletin review, 94, 1, 73Megens, K. and Weerman, F. (2007) The Dynamics of Peer Associations and Delinquent sort in Adolescence American Society of criminology report, none 12