Does the birth of a first child reduce the father's offending?
| DOI | 10.1177/0004865814537840 |
| Date | 01 March 2015 |
| Published date | 01 March 2015 |
| Author | Alex R Piquero,David P Farrington,Delphine Theobald |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Australian & New Zealand
Journal of Criminology
2015, Vol. 48(1) 3–23
!The Author(s) 2014
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0004865814537840
anj.sagepub.com
Article
Does the birth of a first child
reduce the father’s offending?
Delphine Theobald
Institute of Psychiatry, UK
David P Farrington
University of Cambridge, UK
Alex R Piquero
University of Texas, Dallas, USA
Abstract
A little investigated correlate of persistence and desistance is the effect of parenthood.
Research suggests that for females particularly, parenthood plays an important role but the
evidence for males is mixed. Yet, prior studies have not considered potential selection effects.
This paper seeks to overcome this limitation by examining the effects of having a child on
offending using propensity score matching, with data from the Cambridge Study in Delinquent
Development, a longitudinal study of 411 South London males followed since childhood.
Findings indicate that, while there are reductions in offending from several years before
the child’s birth to several years after the child’s birth, the effects are not large. Further
analyses examining ‘shotgun’ marriages show that reductions in offending are larger than for
non-‘shotgun’ marriages. Also, if a man remains with the child for at least five years, then
reductions in convictions are greater than when he does not.
Keywords
Children, longitudinal, offending, propensity score matching
Introduction
The family is one of the most discussed influences on offending and many individual-
level criminological theories have something, usually positive, to say about the import-
ance of families in socializing children and in deterring antisocial behaviour (Agnew,
1992; Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990; Hirschi, 1995; Moffitt, 1993; Patterson et al., 1989).
Not surprisingly, family effects have long been empirically examined in the crimino-
logical literature (Loeber & Stouthamer-Loeber, 1986), with the most recent attention
devoted to the effects of marriage on patterns of desistance – largely on the heels of the
Corresponding author:
Delphine Theobald, King’s College, Institute of Psychiatry, London SE5 8AF.
Email: delphine.theobald@kcl.ac.uk
resurrection and re-analysis of the classic Glueck study of delinquents by Sampson and
Laub. These authors (1993) suggest that marriage can act as a ‘turning point’ in the
criminal career and this finding has been replicated in several studies (Barnes & Beaver,
2012; Beaver et al., 2008; Bersani et al., 2009; Blokland & Nieuwbeerta, 2005; Burt et al.,
2010; King, Massoglia, & MacMillan, 2007; Piquero et al., 2002; Sampson, Laub, &
Wimer, 2006; Theobald & Farrington, 2009; though see Lyngstad & Skardhamar, 2013).
However, one aspect of the family that has received somewhat less empirical attention
has been the effect of having a child on continued or curtailed offending. Several import-
ant questions arise, for example: does having a child somehow alter a parent’s orienta-
tion to their lives and their social network patterns, as might be suggested by age-graded
social control theory (Sampson & Laub, 1993), in much the same way as marriage is
suggested to do? Or does having a child have no substantive impact on offending over
the effect of marriage? To examine these questions, this paper uses longitudinal data
from the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development (CSDD) to examine whether the
birth of a first child reduces the father’s offending.
The birth of a child and desistance from offending
As stated previously, there have been few studies to date that have considered the effect
of the birth of a child on a father’s offending. With a few exceptions (see Monsbakken,
Lyngstad, & Skardhamar, 2013; Zoutewelle-Terovan, van der Geest, Liefbroer, &
Bijleveld, 2012) most report little or no effect (Blokland & Nieuwbeerta, 2005;
Kreager, Matsueda, & Erosheva, 2010; Sampson & Laub, 1993; Skardhamar &
Lyngstad, 2009; Thornberry, Wei, Stouthamer-Loeber, & van Dyke, 2000; Uggen &
Kruttschnitt, 1998; Wakefield & Uggen, 2004; Warr, 1998). These studies include ana-
lyses of males, females and mixed samples, and generally the results are inconsistent.
There may of course, be differential effects for males and females, and to date for mar-
riage at least, it appears that marriage is more beneficial for males compared with
females with regard to reduced offending. As many factors may influence the effect of
marriage, it might also be expected that the effect of having a child would also depend on
many factors, such as whether the child was planned or unplanned, the quality of par-
ental relationships, coping skills, marital status, financial resources, and social support
(Cox, Paley, Burchinal, & Payne, 1999; Ganem & Agnew, 2007; Giordano, Seffrin,
Manning, & Longmore, 2011; Huston & Holmes, 2004; Nomaguchi & Milkie, 2003).
In one study, Thornberry, Wei, Stouthamer-Loeber, and van Dyke (2000) found that
teenage fatherhood was followed by increased offending rates, which might suggest for
example, that age and all the problems surrounding early fatherhood might influence the
effect of having a child, or that these young men were on an increasing offending tra-
jectory. Another study carried out by Blokland and Nieuwbeerta (2005) in the
Netherlands suggested that becoming a parent seemed to increase convictions for
some offenders, notably those who were sporadic offenders, but the authors suggested
that these results may have been affected by the too few offences carried out by these
offenders. In a recent study in Norway, Skardhamar and Lyngstad (2009) found that
men who were in cohabiting and married relationships decreased their offending in the
five years prior to the birth but that this decrease in offending was not permanent, and
increases in offending occurred in the five years after the birth. On the other hand,
4Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology 48(1)
To continue reading
Request your trial