NEWS STORY

The Mountain of Youth
A draft report to state officials makes an alarming prediction about juvenile crime and points to a controversial source of the problem.


BY CHRIS LYDGATE

clydgate@wweek.com

Illustration by
Chad Crowe

 

Although forecast to rise over the next decade, the number of juvenile arrests has declined slightly since 1996, dropping from 50,720 to 48,596
in 1997.

 

Although violent juvenile crimes are declining, they make up a very small percentage of overall juvenile crime.

 

The best-known example of an index of social capital is the Fordham Index, which combines 16 separate factors into a single number.

 

 

As a devastated nation searches for answers in the wake of the deadly shooting spree in Colorado, a report commissioned by the Oregon state government offers an unsettling prediction: The juvenile-crime rate is likely to get worse before it gets better. In a draft report to the Oregon Progress Board, due to be released next week, researchers Karmen Fore and Jerry Kissler forecast a 40 percent surge in state juvenile arrests in the next decade, from 50,000 today to 70,000 in 2010.

"It's a substantial increase," says Kissler, a professor of planning, public policy and management at the University of Oregon.

To arrive at this prediction, Kissler and Fore constructed a statistical model to examine previous trends. They found that in each year since 1980 Oregon's juvenile arrests have been highly correlated to three factors: "cohort size" (i.e., the number of 15- to 19-year-olds compared with the rest of the population); the divorce rate 15 years earlier; and the percentage of births to unwed mothers 15 years earlier.

Using these three factors, Kissler and Fore were able to predict the number of juvenile arrests in any given year with 94 percent accuracy. "It's an amazing statistical relationship," Kissler says. "I've done a lot of models, and I've never seen models this accurate."

In a nutshell, the theory is that teens are more likely to get into trouble when grown-ups aren't paying attention to them. Large teenage cohorts imply less supervision--there just aren't enough adults to go around. In addition, children of divorce and children born out of wedlock are more likely to be raised by single parents, who typically have less time to watch their kids.

If Kissler and Fore are right, policy-makers interested in curbing youth crime should forget about jail cells and concentrate on wedding bells. Here's why: While divorce rates have stabilized since 1975 and the rise in teenage population is slowing, these two trends are outweighed by the dramatic increase in the number of babies born out of wedlock. "Our study suggests that the substantial and sustained increase in births to unwed mothers is a serious social problem," the report concludes.

The notion of linking single parents (usually moms) with juvenile crime seems likely to excite controversy, especially among liberals. Multnomah County Commissioner Serena Cruz, for example, calls this approach an "oversimplification."

"It doesn't work for me," Cruz says of the report's logic. "It's nice to show these correlations, but you haven't proven anything."

Kissler is quick to say he is not trying to pin the blame on unwed mothers. For starters, as the report wryly points out, "procreation requires both males and females." In addition, Kissler says, there's nothing magic about a marriage certificate; it's just that single parents have to work harder to make ends meet. "The point is not that unwed births are the sole factor," he says. "The point is there's more stress on families. That leads to less parental attention, and that leads to poor outcomes."

In fact, the report does not claim that children of single parents are more likely to get into trouble. But statistically speaking, the rise of single parenthood is linked to the jump in juvenile arrests, a phenomenon the authors attempt to explain in terms of "social capital": resources such as parental attention, neighborliness and social trust, which sociologists describe as a sort of intangible wealth possessed in varying degrees by different families and communities.

While the link between single parenthood and subsequent juvenile crime is likely to draw the most attention, the bulk of the report, To Improve the Well-Being of Oregonians, is an effort to explore the concept of social capital, particularly in reference to a puzzling social phenomenon. Over the last two decades, the state's economic output grew by a muscular 32 percent. During that same period, however, social conditions stagnated. Poverty and crime rates, for example, remain stubbornly high.

Policy-makers, both liberal and conservative, have long assumed that a buoyant economy would cure most of society's ills. In the words of John F. Kennedy, "A rising tide lifts all boats." But a central thesis of the report is that, in Oregon at least, economic growth is no panacea; on the contrary, it seems to have aggravated some social problems, such as stress on families, as hard-pressed parents struggle to balance their obligations at work and at home.

To get a better handle on Oregon's social capital, the authors developed a well-being index composed of six separate factors: average earnings, poverty, unemployment, reported crimes, juvenile arrests and teen pregnancies.

These particular measures were chosen for several reasons, Kissler says. First, the state has reliable annual figures for each factor going back to 1965. Second, these indicators reflect key public concerns such as crime, unemployment and purchasing power. Finally, each is statistically more or less independent of the other.

Using these factors, the authors calculated Oregon's well-being index for every year since 1980. Unemployment and teen pregnancy both showed significant improvement, lifting the index. Earnings, poverty and reported crime showed little overall change. Juvenile arrests increased 22 percent, dragging the index back down.

How, then, to improve matters in the future? The report argues that policy-makers should try to prevent the loss of social capital in three ways. First, find ways to ease stress on families, with a particular eye on reducing the number of children born to single mothers; second, concentrate on early-childhood intervention through programs such as Head Start. Finally, expand programs that target at-risk youth, such as structured after-school activities.

Kissler denies that the results suggest the future is set in stone. "It would be easy to infer there's nothing you can do about this," he says. "But this isn't all preordained. Social factors and policies do matter."


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Willamette Week | originally published May 19, 1999



Blue Plate: Cheap Eats Guide file:///Sangfroid/#Web%20Pages/pages-archive/Portland%20Travel%20Specials! file:///Sangfroid/#Web%20Pages/pages-archive/Full%20Sail%20Brewing

file:///Sangfroid/#Web%20Pages/pages-archive/Advertiser

 

search site rogue of the week scoreboard news buzz 500 words News Stories Lead Story feedback site map search site personals classified webxtra culture news