Home⇛International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research⇛vol. 5 no. 8 (2024)

Factors Affecting the Children in Conflict with The Law in Soccsksargen, Philippines

Ma. Odeza A. Rendaje | Ludivico Villa Rendaje Jr. | Cristine Fajanibo Cariño | Ronnie Rendon Pua | Apolinario Caballes Salas Jr. | Elizabeth Buena-Villa

Discipline: social sciences (non-specific)

 

Abstract:

The study aimed to evaluate the factors influencing children involved in legal conflicts in the SOCCSKSARGEN region. The local government of SOCCSKSARGEN is adopting various strategies to address the problem of Children in Conflict with the Law (CICLs) in South Cotabato, Cotabato Province, Sultan Kudarat, Sarangani, and General Santos City. One of the procedures entails establishing the Bahay Pag-asa, a rehabilitation center for children in conflict with the law (CICLs) and at-risk youth. The study participants were of juveniles involved in criminal activities residing at St. Marcelline in General Santos City. These children were placed in the institution to redirect their focus and provide them with a safe haven while their case is being decided. This study employed a quantitative-descriptive design. This study employed the survey approach to gather information about the demographic profile and factors influencing youth involved in criminal activities, such as family relationships, peer influence, and external environmental factors. The conclusions drawn are based on the collected data. 1. Children in Conflict with the Law were of various ages, ranging from 9 to 21 years old, at the time of committing the crime. 2. The majority of these children were influenced by their family dynamics, which led them to engage in criminal activities. 3. The objective is to facilitate the reintegration of children in conflict with the law into society after their case is resolved. The aforementioned programs and services encompassed residential care services, including caring, healing, life skills intervention program, and teaching, as well as a juvenile justice program, technical skills program, and independent living program. This study examines the impact of several influences in the community on youngsters involved in criminal activities. Additionally, it might be inferred that the societal standards in their previous place of residence had ingrained a certain psychological impact on them, causing their sense of wrongdoing to be hindered.



References:

  1. Abrams,  L.S.,  Barnert,  E.S.,  Mizel,  M.L., Bedros,A.,  Webster,  E.,  and  Bryan,  I. 2020.  When is  a  child  too  young  for juvenile  court?  A comparative  case study  of  state  law  and implementation in  six  major  metropoli-tan     areas.     Crime andDelinquency 66(2):219–249.
  2. Age  boundaries  of  the  juvenile  justice  system. Model  Programs  Guide.    Literature re-view. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Of-fice of Juvenile Justice and Delin-quencyPrevention. https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/model-programs-guide/literature-reviews/age-bounda-ries-of-the-juvenile-justice-system
  3. Battjes,  K.,  &  Kaplan,  L.  Z.  (2023).  Zero Toler-ance  vs  Restorative  Justice  in  the United States. Center for Educational Policy Stud-iesJournal. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1414
  4. Casey,  B.J.,  Simmons,  C.,  Somerville,  L.H.,  and Baskin–Sommers,   A.   2022.   Making   the sentencing case: Psychological and neuro-scientific  evidence  for  expanding  the  age of  youthful  offenders.  Annual  Review  of Criminology 5:321–343.
  5. Casey,    B.J.,    Taylor–Thompson,    K.,    Rubien–Thomas, E., Robbins, M., and Baskin–Som-mers,  A.  2020.  Healthy  development  as  a human  right:  Insights  from  developmen-tal neuroscience for youth justice. Annual Review of Law and Social Science 16:203–222.
  6. Cauffman, E., Fine, A., Mahler, A., and Simmons, C. 2018. How developmental science influ-ences  juvenile  justice  reform.  U.C.  Irvine Law Review 8(2):21–40.
  7. Cavanaugh,  C.  2022.  Healthy  adolescent  devel-opment  and  the  juvenile  justice  system: Challenges  and  solutions.  Child  Develop-ment Perspectives 16(3):141–147.
  8. Cohen, A.O., Bonnie, R.J., Taylor–Thompson, K., and Casey, B.J. 2016. When does a juvenile become an adult? Implication for law and policy.  Temple  Law  Review  88(4):769–788.ñ on Rendajeet al., 2024 /Factors Affecting the Children in Conflict with The Law in Soccsksargen, PhilippinesIJMABER 3245Volume 5| Number 8| August | 2024
  9. Cherry,  Kendra.  (2022).  How  Social  Learning Works.   Verywell   mind.   DotdashMedia, Inc. https://www.verywellmind.com/so-cial-learning-theory-2795074#a-few-ap-plications-for-social-learning-theory.
  10. Dempsey, A. 2021. Transfer law and today’s youth:  Rehabilitating  or  creating  lifetime criminals? A comparative analysis of juve-nile transfer law in Kentucky, Florida, and New  York.  University  of  Louisville  Law Review 59:519–548.
  11. De Ramos, CJ E., Regalado, Ma. A. C. D., & Teno-rio,  N.C.  (2015).  An  Assessment  on  the Factors  that  Influence  the  Commission  of Crimes  among  Selected  male  Children  in Conflict with the Law. LPU Laguna Journal of   Arts   and   Science   Psychological   Re-search Vol. 2 No. 2.
  12. Development Services Group, Inc. 2015. Status offenders.  Model  Programs  Guide.  Litera-ture review. Washington, DC: U.S. Depart-ment of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/model-programs-guide/literature-reviews/status_offend-ers.pdf
  13. Dudovsky,  John.  (n.d.)  Puposive  Sampling.  The Ultimate  Guide  to  Writing  a  Dissertation in  Business  Studies:  A  Step  by  Step  Ap-proach.  Business  Research  Methodology. https://research-methodology.net/sam-pling-in-primary-data-collection/purpos-ive-sampling/.
  14. Farrington,  D.  P.,  &  Jonkman,  H.  (2021).  Delin-quency and Substance Use in Europe. Un-derstanding  Risk  and  Protective  Factors (F.  G.  Roth  (Ed.)).  Springer  Nature  Swit-zerland AG 2021. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58442-9.
  15. Farrington,  D.  P.,  & Welsh,  B.  C.  (2007).  Saving Children  From  a  Life  of  Crime.  Early  Risk Factors and Effective Interventions. In Ox-ford University Press, Inc. Oxford Univer-sity Press.
  16. Fisher  N  (2013)  Factors  Leading  to  Bad  Juve-nile Behavior.
  17. Fitriani, W., & Hastuti, D. (2016). Pengaruh Kel-ekatan  Remaja  dengan  Ibu,  Ayah  dan  Te-man  Sebaya  terhadap  Kenakalan  Remaja di   Lembaga   Pembinaan   Khusus   Anak (LPKA)   Kelas   II   Bandung.   Jurnal   Ilmu Keluarga  Dan  Konsumen,  9(3),  206–217. https://doi.org/10.24156/jikk.2016.9.3.20.
  18. Krohn, M. D., Lane, J.,  Smit, P. R., Bijleveld,  C.  C. J.  .,  Filho,  P.  R.  D.,  Lopez,  G.,  Bystrova,  E., Tcherni, M., Kakar, S., Cooper, A., Dong, B., Gardner,  K.,  &  Kaduce,  L.  L.  (2015).  The Handbook of Juvenile Delinquency and Ju-venile  Justice.  In  M.  D.  Krohn  &  J.  Lane (Eds.)  The  Handbook  of  Juvenile  Delin-quency and Juvenile Justice. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118513217.
  19. Loomis, A. M. (2020). Pathways from family vi-olence  exposure  to  disruptive  behavior and   suspension   in   elementary   school. Journal  of  Family  Trauma,  Child  Custody &    Child    Development,    17(1),    21–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/26904586.2020.1734516
  20. Luna,  E.,  ed.  2017.  Reforming  Criminal  Justice: Introduction and Criminalization (Vol. 1). Phoenix, AZ: Arizona State University
  21. .Mennis  J  (2011)  Contagion  and  repeat  oٴوend-ing among urban juvenile delinquents.
  22. National Research Council. 2013. Reforming Ju-venile    Justice:    A    Developmental    Ap-proach, edited by R.J. Bonnie, R.L. Johnson, B.M. Chemers, and J.A. Schuck. Committee on Law and Justice, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Wash-ington, DC: National Academies Press.
  23. Nickerson, C. (2023). Merton’s Strain Theory of Deviance and Anomie in Sociology. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychol-ogy.org/mertons-strain-theory-devi-ance.html#:~:text=Mer-ton's%20Strain%20Theory%20pos-its%20that,they%20pursue%20suc-cess%20through%20crime.
  24. Purpura,  P.P.  (2013).  Routine  Activity  Theory. Foundations of Security and Loss Preven-tion.  6thEdition. https://www.sciencedi-rect.com/topics/social-sciences/routine-activity-theory#:~:text=Routine%20ac-tivity%20theory%2C%20from%20Co-hen,of%20both%20of-fender%20and%20victim.
  25. Renn, K.A. & Arnold, KD. (2023). Reconceptual-izing  Research  on  College.  Student  Peer Culture.  The  Journal  of  Higher  Education, 74 (3), 261-293. https://www.scu.edu/oml/about-us/the-oretical-framework/#:~:text=Bron-fenbrenner's%20ecological%20sys-tems%20the-ory%20is,every%20facet%20of%20your%20life.
  26. Robinson, K., and Kurlychek, N. 2019. Differ-ences  in  justice,  differences  in outcomes: A  DID  approach  to  studying outcomes  in juvenile and adult court processing.  Jus-tice Evaluation Journal 2(1):35-49.
  27. Setiawan, H. H., Wardianti, A., Yusuf, I., & Azikin, A. (2020). Anak Sebagai Pelaku Terorisme Dalam Perspektif Ekologi Sosial.  Sosio In-forma, 6(3), 252–263. https://doi.org/10.33007/inf.v6i3.2400.
  28. (SBB)  Statistical  Briefing  Book.  2014.  Courts With Both Delinquency and Status Offense Jurisdiction,  2013. Washington,  DC:  De-partment of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs  (OJP),  Office  of  Juvenile Justice and DelinquencyPrevention (OJJDP). https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/struc-ture_process/qa04123.asp?qa-Date=2013.
  29. (SBB)  Statistical  Briefing  Book.  2021a. Delin-quency Lower Age, 2019. Washington, DC: DOJ, OJP, OJJDP.https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/struc-ture_process/qa04102.asp?qa-Date=2019.
  30. (SBB)  Statistical  Briefing  Book.  2021b. Delin-quency Upper Age, 2019. Washington, DC: DOJ, OJP, OJJDP.https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/struc-ture_process/qa04102.asp?qa-Date=2019&text=no&maplink=link2
  31. (SBB)   Statistical   Briefing   Book.   2021c. Ex-tended  Age  of  Juvenile  Court Jurisdiction, 2019. Washington, DC: DOJ, OJP, OJJDP.https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/statistical-briefing-book/structure_process/faqs/qa04106
  32. (SBB)Statistical Briefing Book. 2021d. Jurisdic-tional Boundaries. Washington, DC:  DOJ, OJP, OJJDP.https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/struc-ture_process/qa04101.asp?qa-Date=2019.
  33. (SBB)  Statistical  Briefing  Book.  2021e.  Status Lower  Age,  2019.  Washington,  DC: DOJ, OJP, OJJDP. https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/struc-ture_process/qa04102.asp?qa-Date=2019&text=no&maplink=link3.
  34. (SBB)  Statistical  Briefing  Book.  2021f.  Status Upper  Age,  2019.  Washington,  DC: DOJ, OJP, OJJDP.https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/struc-ture_process/qa04102.asp?qa-Date=2019&text=no&maplink=link4

Tools


Copyright © 2024  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic