Childhood trauma is a more complex problem than some people realize. Thus, understanding it, or rather attempting to understand it, often gives rise to similar experiences with different results. The factors explaining such a difference could be due to the difference between parents, neighborhoods or simply misunderstood stereotypes. As times change, experiences change. As a result, the understanding of such a delicate subject becomes deeper, thus leading to different results, despite the similarity of experiences. For decades, the question has been whether childhood trauma actually has a serious impact on a person's likelihood of committing a crime. Some even wondered if it had any impact, or rather if it had other ways of harming people's emotional states. A sensitive subject that sought harsh answers. However, over decades of research, one thing has become clear. The connection between childhood trauma and the possibility that a person's past will affect their future in ways that make them more likely to commit violent acts is more complex. Because many factors play a role in determining a person's outcome. However, these factors may be the result of childhood trauma. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay The problem with child abuse is that it is one of the few horrors in which color is not limited. Unfortunately, it is also a horror that often begins with the parents, the main aggressors. For example, in an article titled Abuse-Resistant Youth: Some Factors That May Inhibit Violent Criminal Behavior, which focused on factors that may well influence violent behavior, he discussed the likelihood that abused children would become abusive parents (Kruttschnitt, Ward, Sheble, 1987). They agreed that this cycle of violence was instilled in the parents' minds when they were children and that as they grew up, they viewed their actions as parental acts rather than abuse. So the theory of the time followed a simple rubric, which gave a very simple result. The conclusion at the time was that if a parent was violent towards a child, it was because their parents were violent towards said parent. Therefore, the question was not asked whether the child would be associated with the crime, as this was in their view inevitable. The question adapted to when they would become violent. A 2015 article titled Early Life Risks, Antisocial Tendencies, and Preadolescent Delinquency focused on just that. They concluded that it was not just the age at which parents were warned to pay close attention to their child's aggression that changed (Staff, Whichard, Siennick, Maggs 2015). The age at which children falling into these categories were likely to have police contact and/or a criminal record also changed. For example, research showed that children who were aggressive at age 3 were not only at high risk of exhibiting antisocial behavior at age 11, but were also likely to have contact with the police as early as age 15. years (White et al. 1990). However, Murray et al. (2010) looked at data from a British cohort study (born 1970) and came to the conclusion that if a child had "conduct problems" at age 5, one could expect no only that heshows aggression at age 10, but also has adult criminal convictions. Over time, the ages have only increased, albeit slightly. The interval between the two studies was 20 years. In both cases, the ages that would determine the adolescents' criminal behavior were not only extremely close together since there was only a 2-year difference, but they were also very young. This is an interesting finding because it implies, if not proves, that the age factor in determining whether a child will become a criminal is only questionable when talking about a specific age. This proves that the specific age can only be between 0 and 10 years old. Parents have always been a factor considered when analyzing a child's behavior. The study of parents therefore aimed to determine to what extent the parents' bond with their child influenced their child's future. In an article entitled General Strain, Street Youth And Crime: A Test Of Agnew's RevisedTheory, Agnew in 2001, for example, suggested that child abuse was a type of strain that should be linked to criminal activity (Baron 2004) . He suggested that parental violence, along with sexual hostility and abuse, often leads to "undermining attachments and commitments", which would inevitably lead to poor social skills and, later, criminality. Like Kruttschnitt (et al. 1987), Baron (2004) also agreed that children from violent homes would model such behavior. However, unlike in 1987, the research was more thorough. They found that in many cases, children not only modeled abusive behavior, but used it as a form of problem-solving. This would then be analyzed even further and it would be suggested that children with such mannerisms would seek out peers who acted in the same way (Baron 2004). The connection between the two journals is important because they not only achieved an extremely similar result when analyzing the data. Over time, they were able to complement the previous hypothesis that children act the way they do, and add more depth to it. While many have simply studied what would happen in an abusive home, studies have also been done to support these claims. most of which studied homes that were not violent. The article that studied this topic in detail was entitled Family Relations, Juvenile Delinquency, And Adult Criminality. After investigating how changes in delinquency were related to children's interaction with their parents, Liska and Reed (1985) noted that children who had a strong relationship with their parents were less likely to commit crime ( McCord, 1991). Upon further examination, they were also able to conclude that not only would a close relationship with parents reduce the child's involvement in crime, but it would also strengthen their attachment to school. A strong relationship with parents would also make socializing and creating friendships a much more recreational task. Although a child's bond with their parents remains an important factor in determining their likelihood of committing a crime during their adolescent or adult life, other important factors come into play. Not all factors are not their own seed, however, some are branches of the same tree. An important factor that was added to better understand child abuse was the study of the definition itself. Cases of child abuse are more often reported in urban communities. In an article titled Child Abuse, Neglect, and Violent Criminal Behavior, theysaid those who were reported for child abuse in poorer areas were not necessarily abusing their children. This could simply mean that they did not have enough money to make ends meet or that they were unemployed (Widom et al., 1989). In other words, the poorer a person was, the more likely they were to be reported for child abuse. The fear of being reported could very well encourage a parent, or even a child who is afraid of being taken from their parents, to commit a certain type of crime (theft, burglary), in order to make ends meet. Widom (et al., 1989) even pointed out that "many of these same family and demographic characteristics are linked to delinquency and, later, criminality." The relationship between child abuse cases and crimes committed by children, highlighted by this review, contradicts what many other reviews have been asserting for decades. In this case, it may be the fear of being reported for abuse that pushes children to commit crimes they wouldn't have even thought about if they weren't afraid of being taken away from home. them. This would then add another factor to study when it came to childhood trauma. This meant that childhood trauma was not limited to child abuse, but that neighborhoods could also have a traumatic effect on a child. Given the inexplicit definition of childhood trauma, it was important to study how people, both non-criminals and criminals, visited certain neighborhoods (Carter, Hill 1978). . An article titled Criminal and Non-Criminal Perceptions of Urban Crime did just that. What they did was take random non-criminal residents of Oklahoma City, black and white, and ask them a series of questions. The questions mainly focused on 15 poor and wealthy neighborhoods. They had to categorize them and give their perception about them. They found that noncriminals rated other parts of the city as more dangerous than criminals. This was considered normal, since “criminals perceive the city as more crime-ridden, better protected, and more difficult to commit crimes” (Carter et al., 1997). The reason this is important is because it ties into other research and how non-criminals view more than just other parts of the city. Specifically, criminals' perception of their own neighborhood and how that neighborhood itself may shape their opinions. For example, some studies show that certain lifestyles/routines could put children at risk and increase their chances of committing crime later in the future (Hindelang et al., 1978). For example, if a child grows up in a poor neighborhood, then whether their influences are drug dealers, gangsters, or drug users will be significant in determining the path they follow. The previous paragraphs have discussed child abuse, the definition of said child abuse, and the many different factors that can coincide when added together. In a paper titled How Child Abuse Affects the Dimensions of Juvenile Delinquency in a Cohort of Low-Income Urban Youth, they found that when it came to crime, one study showed that if one assumed that it actually existed a link between maltreatment and delinquency, then crime among young people would be inevitable, this theory was subsequently confirmed (Lemmon, 1999). This conclusion was similar to that of Carter (et al., 1997) becauseit concluded that youth crime was particularly prevalent in urban communities, particularly among the poor. To further prove their point, they conducted another study in which 908 children with a proven history of abuse and neglect were compared to 667 children who had not suffered such abuse. They were identical in terms of gender, age, race, and even social class in 73% of all cases (Lemmon, 1999). They found that maltreatment played a significant role in future delinquency. For the majority of studies, it appears that not only are parents a strong indicator of whether a child will commit crime in the future, but also that where they live could influence maltreatment. Therefore, this influenced the child's later connection to crime. Not only did crime seem inevitable based on the studies conducted, but they also previously hypothesized that childhood trauma is not necessarily viewed as serious by children themselves. For example, when Baron (2004) found that in many cases where children used aggression, they used it to solve problems. In other words, for them, it was normal. These actions were what they saw at home and therefore considered this behavior not only normal, but something that should be practiced in other homes as well. Similarly, an article titled The Cycle Of Violence In Context: Exploring The Moderating Roles Of Neighborhood Disadvantage And Cultural Norms suggests that if children grow up in neighborhoods where fights and shootings are commonplace, they become accustomed to such violence after a while. In fact, they normalize such violence and become impassive in the face of it (Wright, Fagan, 2013). This conclusion is extremely similar to that of Baron (2004) and that of Kruttschnitt (et al., 1987), where Kruttschnitt (et al., 1987) concluded that those who grow up with abusive parents later become abusive themselves. abusive parents. However, they do not consider this mistreatment as abuse, but rather as simple discipline. It is the normalization and numbness to these kinds of issues that have been proven time and time again by studies to be one of, if not the main reason why crime does not stop. Or, more importantly, why children continue to be subjected to such horrific abuse and trauma. Another factor to consider when establishing the link between maltreatment and delinquency would be the child's ethnicity. For example, in an article titled Incarceration and Intergenerational Social Exclusion, Hispanic immigrants are reported to be healthier than native-born U.S. citizens. Not only could they be healthier, but they would also have a better social life and a better emotional state (Foster, Hagan, 2007). Their explanation for this finding was that immigrants, particularly Hispanics, not only have stronger family ties, but also have an overall stronger community heritage. Again, much like the paper written by Liska and Reed (1985) and Mccord (1991) who both concluded that a strong family foundation would significantly decrease later in delinquency. These studies were not only extremely substantial in their own right, but they were also beneficial to other studies that concluded that children living in violent homes or in difficult neighborhoods were at increased risk of wrongdoing later in life. A topic that always seemed to surface when analyzing someone's childhood. the traumawas their home life and how that factored into their overall risk of becoming a criminal later in life. A study was conducted in which they compared homes where the parents were very strict about the home and the children were raised in a more passive home (Welsh, 1978). The psychological data from his research favored homes where children were raised passively. He concluded that children from more submissive backgrounds were more creative and more social. Additionally, children were also more independent and expressed more "positive feelings toward others and were less likely to express hostility" (Welsh, 1978). This research finding is similar to that of Liska and Reed (1985) as well as Mccord (1991). Unfortunately, this was not the case for all American households. In an article titled Delinquency, Corporal Punishment, and the Schools, in 1968, a decade before this research was conducted, Louis Harris conducted a survey on child discipline in the United States (Welsh, 1978). Its poll showed that 86% of respondents agreed that children should be strongly disciplined by their parents, and 49% considered that a teacher hitting a child was not abuse, but a form of discipline. From these polls alone, it would appear that not only did Americans approve of strict households, but most of them practiced them in their own homes. The stereotype of Americans being passive at home was contrary to what Americans actually practiced at home. A perception that many people have about criminals is that once they are put in prison, they are likely to return once they are released. This thought process is no different when dealing with mental patients. In an article titled Trends In Violent Crime Among Ex-Mental Patients, the main goal of the study was to see if it was indeed more likely that a mental patient would commit a crime than anyone in the general population (Cocozza, Melick, Steadman, 1978). ). They used data from patients released in 1947 in New York State and found that mental patients were actually more likely to be arrested than the general population. That being said, it would not be a stretch to assume that mental patients experienced something traumatic in their childhood. It could also be, as the paper states, a "shift in the relationship between the mental health and criminal justice systems that may be more responsible for increasing violent crime rates." former patients” (Cocozza et al., 1978). This could be related to the definition of child abuse and why it is incredibly prevalent in urban communities. Since being unable to make ends meet or being currently unemployed can also result in a person being reported for child abuse (Widom et al., 1989). The question then arises as to whether the justice system is really there to reduce crime or to increase it among certain groups of people. The more the subject is analyzed, the clearer it becomes that childhood trauma takes many directions. Not all of these directions lead to a criminal future. To support those who concluded that a strong relationship with significant others would reduce the risk of delinquency, in an article entitled Parents And Drugs Revisited: Some Further Evidence In Support Of Social Learning Theory, Hirschi's (1969) social control theory is committed to explaining why instead of breaking social norms, people follow these norms (Dembo, Grandon, Le Voie, Schmeidler,.