Evening star., 1953-11-20
Study Shakes
Easy Theories
On Delinquency
Senute Probers Hear
Results of 10-Yeur
Survey Of Problem
By Miriom Ottenberq

OeIldCe prODerS OF juvenile de-
linquency today ditched theories
and turned to 10-year SCI
entific investigation to find out
what makes a delinquent.
The Senate Juvenile Delin-
quency subcommittee called Drs.
Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck, of
Harvard Law School, who ana
lyzed 500 true" delinquents and
500 true non-delinquents from
the city slum area of Boston to
get the answers themselves.
The GlueckS found it wasn't
one cause but a multitude of
them-all building up pressures
that exploded in unlawful acts.
They also found that many Of
the aforementioned factors in de-
linquency from the domination
of mothers to proverty applied
as often to the non-delinquents
as to the delinuuents.
Make Major Points.
Here are some of the main
points they made:
/. There's nothing wrong with
physical punishment provided it
is given in calmness and without
anger by a loving parent, but it's
value is questionable. The
Gluecks found that 10. per cent
of the fathers of the delinquents
resorted to physical punishment
compared with BAT per cent Of
the fathers of the non-delin-
quents.
2. Consistent discipline so a
boy knows where he stands is
one of the most important ele-
ments in making a boy a delin-
quent or a non-delinquent. The
Gluecks found that in only 81
of the 500 delinquent cases the
mothers were consistently firm
but kindly" rather than over
strict, lax or erratic. Among the
n-delinquents seven out Of
every 10 mothers were consist
emily firm but kind.
''Big Brother" Values.
3. The need for Big Brother
organizations and similar groups
to substitute for fathers was ap-
parent The Gluecks found that
six out of 10 fathers of the de-
linquent boys either didn't care
about their boys or openly dis
liked them, compared with hos
5 tile fathers in two out of 10
cases of the non-delinquents.
The Gluecks also found that
seven out of 10 of the delinquent
boys didn't like their fathers.
: compared with three out of 10
, non delinquent boys.
4. The family unit as an all.
for -and-one-for-all group
didn't exist in 8 out of 10 of the
families of delinquent boys,
whereas 4 out of 10 of the nom
delinquent boys families were
not a closely Knit group.
S. The fact that the mother
worked was true among the same
number of delinquent and nom
delinquent boys-one out of five
in each group. The GlueckS
found that working mothers was
; not an issue, but what was i'm
portant was the arrangements
the mothers made for supervi-
sion in their absence. The
Gluecks found that 7 out of 10
of the delinquent boys were al
lowed to run the streets in their
mothers absence. compared with
l out of 10 non-delinquents.
Broken Homes Important.
6. On the score of broken
homes, the Gluecks found that
6 out of 10 of the delinquents
were products of divorce and
deSertion. compared with 3 out
of 10 of the on-delinquents.
Analyzing the personality traits
of the two groups, the GlueckS
found that the deliquents showed
some characteristics which. If
, directed right, would make them
leaders of men. Some of these
traits which were put more
prominent among the delin-
quentS than the non- -dclinquentS
were: Adventuresomeness, live
, illness, more confidence in sue
cess and less fear of defeat.
Both the Gluecks emphasized
) that recreation is being devel-
oped without considering the
; needs of the delinquentS. They
testified delinquents dislik d
, Fairgrounds and supervised rec
reation, preferred older COM
panionS and adventurous activi-
; ties, travelled to distant neigh
borhoods and went to the movies
three or more times a week.
Their testimony, based on in
tenSive boy-by-boy case study
(See. DELINQUENCY. Pg, A-4.)