Delinquency prevention using family-based interventions

Abstract

This paper reviews 24 evaluations of prevention programmes including some kind of family-based intervention (usually parent training or parent education), an outcome measure of offending or disruptive child behaviour, a high quality experimental design and a minimum sample size of 100. Programmes are divided into seven categories according to the context of the intervention: home visiting, day care, pre-school, school, clinic, community or multi-systemic therapy. Most interventions were effective in reducing childhood antisocial behaviour and later delinquency, and in some cases their monetary benefits exceeded their monetary costs. General parent education and more formal parent training are both effective prevention techniques. Research is needed to identify the active ingredients of successful programmes, and to establish why some large-scale programmes were not successful.

Legitimate family violence as represented in the print media: textual analysis

“…Whittaker and Cowley (2003) firmly place parenting support within the public health agenda, and draw attention to evidence that childhood experience can have an impact upon mental and physical health, educational attainment and involvement in crime and violence in adult life (Farrington & Welsh 1999).…”

The concentration of offenders in families, and family criminality in the prediction of boys' delinquency

“…The second is that the child and family risk factors that probably intervene between criminal parents and delinquent children should be targeted in these intervention programmes. The most hopeful programmes include parent education in home visits (Olds et al, 1998), parent management training and child skills training (Tremblay et al, 1995, Hawkins et al, 1999, and pre-school intellectual enrichment programmes with home visits (Schweinhart et al, 1993); for a review of family-based intervention programmes, see Farrington and Welsh (1999).…”

Drug and violence prevention: Rediscovering the critical rational dimension of evaluation research

“…In describing the most recent account of the SSDP to focus on drug use and delinquency, Farrington and Welsh (1999) note that Hawkins and colleagues found that, at age 18, the full intervention group reported less violence, less alcohol abuse and fewer sexual partners than either the controls or the late intervention group (Hawkins et al 1999). Again, however, this is an overly optimistic assessment of the study, not only because it focuses on isolated positive program effects but also because it ignores the high level of attrition evident in the full intervention group over the course of the study.…”