Much research has already been done into the motivation for criminal behavior. Can crime be explained on the basis of a single theory? It is precisely for that reason that many researchers, scholars and experts have wondered about it. One of the scholars who has conducted research into criminal behavior is Hirschi. He has an explanation for antisocial and criminal behavior: the social bond theory.
The social bond theory
The founder of social bond theory is the scholar Hirschi (1969). The premise of this theory is that humans are naturally inclined to antisocial behavior. Bindings can prevent that behavior and in any case have an inhibitory effect on it; for example, on criminal behavior. A young person who meets characteristics such as having a
positive relationship with their parents, having a positive relationship with school, a positive attitude towards society, etc. has a smaller chance of ending up in the criminal circuit.
How does this actually work in practice? To make this a little clearer, a case study is given below.
A case
Lenny is a 16-year-old girl who lives with her parents in a medium-sized city in the West. She is training at the ROC where she goes to school for two days and does an internship for three days. As far as we know, things are going well at school.
Lenny’s parents work very hard and are materially well off. Father has his own successful company in the technical sector. This business takes him a lot of time and attention, so the upbringing largely falls to his mother. It is not that father has no contact with the children, but he has too little time for them. The contact between father and the children is described as good, but somewhat distant. The parents are very involved with the children and the mother also accompanies Lenny on consultation hours with the social worker for the first time. The social worker describes the upbringing as involved, but cramped.
Lenny has been arrested three times for theft of mobile phones and money from fellow students at school. Lenny smokes cannabis regularly and actually has no friends. However, she wants to fit in and the social worker has the impression that Lenny is trying to buy friendship. She committed the crime alone, but the loot belonged to others.
The social bond theory and the case
According to Hirschi, the chance of ending up in the criminal circuit is greater when there are no positive ties. These are, for example, positive bonds with parents, positive bonds with school, positive bonds with work/a job, a positive attitude towards society, a positive bond with a non-criminal group of friends, etc. In Lenny’s case, I notice that there is a positive bond with the parents; even though father has too little time for her and the upbringing is often strained. Regarding ties with school, it is said that as far as is known, Lenny is doing well at school and the results are good. From this it can be concluded that she also has a positive bond with school. As for a group of friends, after reading the case it can be said that she does not yet have a group of friends, neither normal nor criminal. This bond is therefore not necessarily present.
Compared to the theory, it can be concluded that the theory is too one-sided; Lenny clearly falls into criminal behavior, but in her case the motivation is not due to the lack of positive bonds. In fact; there are indeed positive connections present in her life. Wanting to belong in particular was most likely a reason for falling into criminal behavior.
Conclusion
It can be concluded that the theory does indeed seem to be correct in practice, but it is too one-sided. The power of explaining criminal behavior lies in combining different theories because if you only rely on this theory you can be disappointed because there are aspects that are not taken into account here. A psychological disorder may well precede criminal behavior.