CYIL 2012

“SUCCEEDING GENERATIONS“ IN THE UNITED NATIONS CHARTER…

The social findings In the 1930s dissatisfaction with the above legacy led to a development of a sociological understanding of intergenerational transmission of crime. It started with the publication of a study on criminal traditions of certain tribes in India. 18 These tribes were hereditary groups that specialized in different types of crime. They had a population of 100,000 or more. These large tribes were divided into a number of subgroups. Since many of them had abandoned criminal activities and had become generally law-abiding, the conclusion was drawn that crime may not be a problem of individual demoralization, but of group traditions. In addressing this conclusion, Thorsten Sellin (1938 19 ) and Edwin H. Sutherland (1942/1973 20 ) started working on a project on culture conflict and crime. They noted that in certain tribes in India, traditional religious culture clashed with the legal culture. The religious culture required killing certain outsiders, whereas the legal culture proscribed all killings. They concluded that conflicting cultures, particularly resulting from immigration in the United States, generated criminal behaviour. Thus, following one cultural code meant violating the other. Sutherland asked whether this conflict underlies all criminal behaviour. The Riyadh Guidelines answered in paragraph 15 that juvenile delinquency may indeed be a result of the conflict of cultures. But whether this is the case or not, for the sake of the United Nations Criminal Justice Studies it is important to know how the transmission of criminal traditions occurs. According to Sutherland it takes place in small groups (“primary”, “intimate”). Among such groups, family is the most important. This was documented by the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development (1961 – 1981). 21 It addressed the transmission of criminal traditions between three generations (grandparents-parents children) of 411 south London males, followed from the age of 8 to 48. These males (generation 2, G2) were compared with their fathers and mothers (G1), and with their biological sons and daughters (G3). The obtained results suggested that there was significant intergenerational transmission of convictions from G1 males to G2 males, and from G2 males to G3 males. Convictions of fathers still predicted convictions of sons, but the predictive efficiency was reduced. Transmission was less from G1 females to G2 males, and from G2 males to G3 females. There was little evidence of intergenerational transmission from G1 to G3, except from grandmothers to granddaughters. The degree of intergenerational transmission decreased after accounting for family, socio-economic and individual risk factors. This suggests that these factors may be links in the chain 18 Cressey, P., The Criminal Tribes of India ,Sociology and Social Research , Vol. 20, 1936, pp. 503-511. 19 Sellin, T., Social Science Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Personality and Culture 1938. 20 Sutherland, E. H., Development of the Theory, in: Karl Schuessler (ed.) Edwin H. Sutherland on Analyzing Crime , University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 13-29. 21 Farrington, D. P., Coid, J. W. & Murray J., Family factors in the intergenerational transmission of offending, Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health 19 (2009), pp. 109-124.

161