Does a Close Relationship With an Adult Reduce the Risk of Juvenile Offending for Youth With a History of Maltreatment?

Abstract

Social support is frequently cited as a protective factor against juvenile offending. The current study examined whether a close relationship with an adult in childhood decreases the risk for offending among individuals with a history of child maltreatment. This research utilized data from a prospective cohort design study in which children with court-substantiated cases of abuse and neglect and nonmaltreated children matched on age, sex, race, and approximate family social class were followed into adulthood (N = 1,196). Having a close relationship with an adult did not decrease risk for delinquent behavior or arrest, but a close relationship with a parent was associated with lower risk for delinquent behavior. Surprisingly, adults with no history of maltreatment who reported having a close relationship with a peer or sibling were more likely to report engaging in violent behavior in adolescence. In total, these findings point to the complexity of development and suggest that although a close relationship with an adult can be protective, the mere presence of such a relationship, without inquiry into the type of relationship, is not sufficient.

Keywords

childhood maltreatment social support family relationships delinquent behavior juvenile justice

Youth with a history of maltreatment are at increased risk for juvenile justice involvement (Bender, 2010; Fagan, 2003; Grotevant et al., 2006) and serious and violent juvenile offending (Fox, Perez, Cass, Baglivio, & Epps, 2015; Maas, Herrenkohl, & Sousa, 2008). However, not all youth who experience abuse and neglect exhibit later problem behaviors (Fergusson & Horwood, 2003; Haskett, Nears, Ward, & McPherson, 2006). Researchers have identified characteristics that buffer the negative impact of maltreatment including self-esteem (Cicchetti & Rogosch, 2009), self-efficacy (Day & Kearney, 2016), emotion regulation (Langevin, Hébert, & Cossette, 2015), and family cohesion and a stable living environment (DuMont, Widom, & Czaja, 2007; Sagy & Dotan, 2001). Social supports and supportive relationships have also been linked to improved outcomes for individuals with maltreatment histories (Ben-David & Jonson-Reid, 2017; Horan & Widom, 2015; Sperry & Widom, 2013).

A supportive relationship with a trusted adult can provide youth with consolation in difficult times (emotional support), guidance (informational support), practical assistance (instrumental support), and validation (esteem/appraisal support; Sterrett, Jones, McKee, & Kincaid, 2011). A child’s early relationship with a parent or caregiver is particularly important, as this serves as a model for how that child perceives themselves and interacts with others in interpersonal relationships over the course of development (Benoit, 2004; Bowlby, 1982). For youth with a history of maltreatment whose early relationships may have been marked by insecure attachments to caregivers, a relationship with a supportive adult can serve as an opportunity to develop an alternate working model for relationships, enabling them to experience a more secure attachment and form healthier representations of themselves and others (Rhodes, Spencer, Keller, Liang, & Noam, 2006). Positive mentoring relationships can also help youth develop more effective communication skills, as well as skills for effectively regulating emotions and behaviors, all of which are important for decreasing the risk for juvenile offending and violence (Ford & Blaustein, 2013; Kalvin & Bierman, 2017).

Previous work on the impact of close adult relationships for youth with histories of maltreatment has largely focused on relationships with parents or direct caregivers, finding a strong association between having a supportive relationship with a nonoffending caregiver and reduced levels of anxiety, depression, and externalizing behaviors among youth with histories of sexual abuse (Cohen & Mannarino, 2000; Spaccarelli & Kim, 1995; Tremblay, Hérbert, & Piché, 1999). Research on the impact of nonparental adult support for youth with a history of child maltreatment is more limited (Haskett et al., 2006), but existing findings suggest that relationships with nonparental adults should be an important focus, especially for youth in the child welfare system who are residing in out-of-home care. In a prospective study of more than 300 youth with a history of foster care placement, those who reported having a relationship with a nonparental mentor in adolescence were more likely to have positive outcomes in young adulthood, including lower rates of aggressive behavior, compared to youth in foster care with no mentoring relationships (Ahrens, DuBois, Richardson, Fan, & Lozano, 2008). In a systematic review of 25 studies using quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods, including only three longitudinal studies, Thompson, Greeson, and Brunsink (2016) found that a nonparental mentoring relationship was associated with better health, academic, and mental health outcomes for youth in foster care.

Not all studies provide unequivocal support for a link between a close relationship with an adult and improved outcomes following child maltreatment. In a recent study, there were no differences between youth in foster care with a natural mentor and youth with no mentoring relationship with regard to social skills or the perception of future success (Greeson, Weiler, Thompson, & Taussig, 2016). Sagy and Dotan (2001) found that the degree of perceived social support was unrelated to youths’ perceptions of their own competence and somatic complaints. In a meta-analysis of 29 cross-sectional studies, support from a nonoffending caregiver was not related to outcomes such as post-traumatic stress symptoms, externalizing and internalizing behaviors, dissociation, and social competence among youth who disclosed sexual abuse, and caregiver support was only minimally related to youths’ improved self-concept and lower rates of depression and acting out behaviors (Bolen & Gergely, 2015).

Some evidence suggests that results may vary depending upon the role of the individual providing support. Hébert, Lavoie, and Blais (2014) found that youth with a history of sexual abuse who perceived support from their mothers or peers had a lower likelihood of developing clinically elevated post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, but perceived support from siblings, fathers, or nonfamilial adults was not related to PTSD symptoms. These findings suggest that the role of the individual providing support is important for understanding whether social support serves as a protective factor for youth with histories of abuse and neglect.

There is also evidence to suggest that a relationship with a significant adult is associated with decreased risk for juvenile offending and other risky behaviors in adolescence, regardless of maltreatment history (Bond et al., 2007; Malecki & Demaray, 2003; Woolley, Koi, & Bowen, 2009). Zimmerman, Bingenheimer, and Notaro (2002) found that youth with natural mentors had more positive attitudes about school, lower risk for marijuana use, and decreased likelihood of engaging in nonviolent offending compared to youth with no adult mentor. Similarly, Hart, O’Toole, Price-Sharps, and Shaffer (2007) found that a relationship with a caring adult in the community was one of several protective factors that distinguished youth convicted of nonviolent and violent offenses from those who had not engaged in juvenile offending.

Evaluations of formal mentoring programs, such as Big Brothers/Big Sisters, suggest that significant adult relationships can reduce the likelihood of many behaviors associated with juvenile justice involvement (DeWit, DuBois, Erdem, Larose, & Lipman, 2016; DuBois, Portillo, Rhodes, Silverthorn, & Valentine, 2011). However, the findings of these studies have yielded mixed results. In one large-scale study, positive benefits were found for youth of all risk profiles on outcomes such as peer acceptance and academic achievement but not other outcomes related to juvenile justice involvement (e.g., antisocial behaviors and truancy; Herrera, DuBois, & Grossman, 2013). In a meta-analysis focused on youth at risk for engaging in antisocial behavior, Tolan, Henry, Schoeny, Lovegrove, and Nichols (2014) found that mentoring programs, particularly those with an emphasis on emotional support, had a “modest” effect on rates of delinquent behavior and related outcomes. However, the authors pointed out that limitations in the existing literature made it difficult to draw reliable conclusions about significant effects or the mechanisms underlying outcomes.

The quality of the mentoring relationship and characteristics of the significant adult providing support appear to be important factors to consider when examining the effectiveness of an adult mentor on reducing problematic behaviors. Using data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, DuBois and Silverthorn (2005) found that of those participants with a mentor in adolescence, those who reported more closeness and more frequent contact with their mentors reported less drug use, and youth with nonfamilial adult mentors had more positive educational outcomes than those receiving mentorship from adults with a familial connection. Similarly, Ryan, Testa, and Zhai (2008) found that African American males who endorsed positive relationships with caregivers in foster care had a reduced likelihood of involvement in the juvenile justice system, but those in familial versus nonfamilial homes were more likely to be the subject of a delinquency petition.

Research also suggests that youths’ perceptions of their adult mentor’s characteristics may have an impact on outcomes. In one cross-sectional study of both American and Chinese youth, American youth who perceived their adult mentors to be engaging in problem behaviors or experiencing depressive symptoms reported higher rates of those outcomes themselves (Chen, Greenberger, Farruggia, Bush, & Dong, 2003). In another study, youth who perceived their adult mentors to be warm and accepting had fewer symptoms of depression, but perceived warmth and acceptance were not necessarily related to lower rates of problem behaviors (e.g., delinquent behavior; Haddad, Chen, & Greenberger, 2011).

Research that specifically examines the impact of a close relationship with an adult on the link between child maltreatment and juvenile offending has yielded mixed and contradictory results. Some studies have found that a positive relationship with a parent or caregiver is associated with a lower risk for delinquent and violent behavior for youth with a history of maltreatment or exposure to violent victimization (Aceves & Cookston, 2007; Bolen & Lamb, 2007; Grogan-Kaylor, Ruffolo, Ortega, & Clarke, 2008; Kort-Butler, 2010; Maschi, 2006). Relationships with nonfamilial adults have also been linked to a lower risk for arrest among older youth transitioning out of foster care (Munson & McMillen, 2009). In another study of older adolescents with histories of foster care placement, Zinn, Palmer, and Nam (2017) found that youth with more avoidant or anxious attachment styles perceived lower levels of support from others and attachment insecurity appeared to mediate the association between social support and self-reported juvenile offending.

In contrast, other studies have found that a relationship with a significant adult has little to no impact on the risk for offending for youth with maltreatment histories. In Perkins and Jones (2004), a close relationship with an adult outside of the family was unrelated to self-reported delinquent behaviors among adolescents with a history of physical abuse and also increased the likelihood of other risky behaviors such as drug and alcohol use. A recent study of youth with a history of adverse childhood experiences, including maltreatment, found that a “protective” relationship with an adult did not moderate the link between adverse experiences and self-reported delinquent behavior (Brown & Shillington, 2017). In a longitudinal study of youth in foster care, neither parent nor teacher support was related to reduced involvement in risky behaviors, including physical aggression, theft, and violent behavior (Taussig, 2002). Similarly, in another longitudinal study of participants with foster care involvement, Cusick, Havlicek, and Courtney (2012) found that a close relationship to a caregiver, including a nonfamilial caregiver, had no impact on the risk for arrest in young adulthood, and higher levels of perceived support from friends and family members (noncaregivers) increased the risk for arrest.

In sum, prior studies have found that a close relationship with an adult reduces the risk for juvenile offending and can also protect youth with a history of maltreatment from the negative consequences of abuse and neglect. However, many studies have focused on exploring the impact of relationships with nonoffending parents or caregivers, which excludes nonfamilial adults who may be just as important to youth, particularly youth in the child welfare system whose parents or other familial caregivers are not available as resources. In addition, there is still limited and inconclusive evidence as to whether a relationship with a significant adult reduces the likelihood of juvenile offending for youth who have experienced abuse and/or neglect. It is also difficult to draw causal inferences from the existing literature in this area, as the majority of studies utilize cross-sectional designs. Given the growing recognition of the needs and vulnerabilities of youth with simultaneous involvement in the child welfare and juvenile justice systems (i.e., crossover youth), it is important to gain a better understanding of how a close relationship with an adult impacts juvenile justice–related outcomes for these youth.

Current Study and Hypotheses

In an effort to expand upon existing research, this study uses data from a prospective cohort design study to examine the impact of having a close relationship with an adult, including a nonparent adult, on the risk for juvenile offending among youth with a history of child abuse and neglect. We have the following three main hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1: Youth with a history of child abuse and/or neglect will be less likely to report having a close relationship with an adult.

Hypothesis 2: Youth with a close relationship with an adult will be less likely to engage in delinquent behavior than youth with no close relationships, regardless of maltreatment history.

Hypothesis 3: Youth with a history of maltreatment and a close relationship with an adult will be less likely to engage in delinquent behavior than youth with a maltreatment history and no close relationship.

Method

Participants and Procedure

The current research utilized data from a larger, prospective cohort design study that matched children with court-substantiated cases of abuse and neglect prior to age 11 with nonmaltreated children on the basis of age, sex, race, and approximate socioeconomic background (Widom, 1989a). All cases of physical and sexual abuse and neglect processed during the years 1967–1971 in the county family court (situated in a metropolitan area in the Midwest) and validated and substantiated by the court were included in the original study (Widom, 1989b). Both maltreated and nonmaltreated participants were then followed into adulthood.

During the initial phase of the original study, official criminal histories for the abused and/or neglected children were compared with those of the matched comparison group (Widom, 1989b). Criminal history checks were also updated in 1994 (Maxfield & Widom, 1996). During the second phase of the study (1989–1995), participants were located and interviewed using structured and semistructured questionnaires and rating scales to assess outcomes across a variety of psychiatric and psychosocial domains (Widom, 1999). Of the original 1,575 participants, 1,307 (83%) were located and 1,196 (76%) were interviewed in the second phase (Widom, 1999). There were no significant differences between those interviewed and the initial sample with regard to percentage of male, White, abuse or neglect, age, or poverty in childhood census tract, but those interviewed were more likely to have an official criminal arrest record as compared to the original sample (50% vs. 45%).

The current study included the 1,196 participants interviewed during the second phase of the study. The average age of these participants was 28.72 years (SD = 3.84, range = 18–40; Widom, 1999). Approximately, half were female (48.7%), two thirds were White (62.9%), and more than half had an official history of child abuse and neglect (56.5%). The sample was skewed toward the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum.

Variables and Measures

Childhood abuse and neglect

Childhood abuse and neglect refers to court-documented cases of childhood (ages 0–11) physical and sexual abuse and neglect. Physical abuse cases included injuries such as bruises, welts, burns, abrasions, lacerations, wounds, cuts, bone and skull fractures, and other evidence of physical injury to the child (Widom, 1989a). Sexual abuse charges varied from felony sexual assault to fondling or touching, sodomy, incest, and rape. Neglect cases reflected a judgment that the parents’ deficiencies in childcare were beyond those found acceptable by community and professional standards at the time. These cases represented extreme failure to provide adequate food, clothing, shelter, and medical attention to children.

Close relationship with an adult (CRA)

During the 1989–1995 interviews, participants were asked to report whether there “was any adult in your childhood with whom you felt really close.” If participants responded yes to this question, they were asked if that adult was their mother, father, or both. They were then asked to identify any other adult with whom they felt close. More than three quarters of the overall sample (n = 925) reported having a CRA in childhood. Overall, participants identified almost 40 different categories of people. These categories were then grouped into smaller categories using frequency counts and an iterative process that included consensus from at least three doctoral students in psychology. This process resulted in seven nonmutually exclusive categories. Within these categories, the most frequently reported close relationship was with a relative (other than a parent; see Table 1).

Table 1.

Frequency of Reported Close Relationships With Adults for Entire Sample.

Relationship	%	n
No relationship with a significant adult	22.5	269
Any relationship with a significant adult	77.3	925
Categories of significant adults
Parent	33.9	406
Other relative	35.4	423
Sibling	11.5	137
Nonrelative	5.4	64
Foster parent	3.3	40
Peer	3.1	37

Juvenile Justice Involvement

Juvenile arrest

Information on delinquency and juvenile arrests was gathered from law enforcement records searches in 1987–1988 and 1994 from local, state, and federal agencies (Maxfield & Widom, 1996; Widom, 1989b). An “arrest as a juvenile” included delinquency offenses as well as arrests for any other nontraffic offense while the person was 17 years old or younger. Violent and nonviolent crimes were examined together and separately. Participants with substantiated histories of abuse and neglect were more likely to have a juvenile arrest (66.4% vs. 33.6%), χ²(1, 1196) = 2.21, p < .001, and a juvenile arrest for a violent crime (67.3% vs. 32.7%), χ²(1, 1196) = 2.57, p = .11, as compared to those with no maltreatment history, although the latter was not significant.

Self-reported delinquent behavior

Participants were asked to self-report delinquent behavior with a series of questions that asked about a variety of behaviors that the person might have engaged in prior to age 18, including status offenses, using a measure adapted from Wolfgang and Weiner (1989). Delinquent behaviors included both nonviolent and violent behaviors, for example, sexual and physical assault, carrying and/or using weapons, stealing, property damage, breaking and entering, auto theft, disruption of neighborhood. Nonviolent and violent self-reported behaviors were examined together and separately. Youth with and without a history of maltreatment did not differ significantly in terms of self-reported delinquent behavior (57.6% vs. 42.4%, not significant); however, individuals with histories of maltreatment reported significantly higher levels of violent behavior in adolescence compared to those who were not maltreated (62.8% vs. 37.2%), χ²(1, 1196) = 3.85, p = .05.

Control variables

Sex, age at first interview, and race/ethnicity were used as control variables in the current study.

Data Analysis

χ² analyses were conducted to evaluate differences between youth with and without maltreatment histories in the extent to which they reported having a close relationship with an adult. A series of logistic regressions were conducted to determine whether a close relationship with an adult predicted the likelihood of a juvenile arrest, arrest for a violent crime, self-reported delinquent behavior, and/or self-reported violent behavior, controlling for sex, age, and race/ethnicity. Relationship category was also examined as a predictor of delinquent and violent behaviors. In order to test for moderation, logistic regressions included an interaction term of Child Abuse/Neglect × Close Relationship With an Adult. Statistical analyses were run with SPSS Version 21 using 1,194 participants, as 2 participants had incomplete data.

Results

As hypothesized, individuals with a documented history of child abuse/neglect were less likely to report having a CRA in childhood compared to those with no documented history of abuse/neglect, and this difference was statistically significant (see Table 2). When examined by relationship category, individuals with a history of child maltreatment were significantly less likely to have a relationship with a parent or a nonparental relative than those with no history of maltreatment. However, there were no significant differences between individuals with child maltreatment histories and individuals without a history of child maltreatment on relationships with siblings, peers, or adults outside of the family.

Table 2.

χ² Analyses for the Association Between Child Abuse/Neglect and Having a Close Relationship With an Adult for Abused and Neglected and Control Youth.

Relationship	Abuse/Neglect (N = 674)		Controls (N = 520)		χ²
Relationship	%	n	%	n	χ²
Any relationship	73.1	493	83.1	432	16.6***
Parent	49.2	175	72.4	231	38.0***
Other relative	56.1	231	68.6	192	11.0***
Sibling	30.7	80	39.3	57	3.1
Nonrelative	16.2	35	24.8	29	3.6
Foster parent	18.1	40	0	0	—
Peer	11.3	23	13.7	14	0.38

Note. All degrees of freedom were 1.

***p ≤ .001.

Contrary to expectation, there were no significant differences between individuals with a CRA and those with no close relationship to any adult on any of the juvenile delinquency outcome variables (juvenile arrest, arrest for a violent delinquent act, self-reported delinquent behavior, or self-reported violent behavior; see Table 3). When the results were examined for relationship category, individuals who reported a close relationship with a parent had a significantly lower rate of self-reported delinquent behavior than those with no close relationship to any adult. In contrast, individuals who reported a close relationship with an adult sibling had a significantly higher rate of juvenile arrest than those with no close relationship to any adult (see Table 3). After controlling for age, race, and sex, having a close relationship with a parent continued to reduce risk for self-reported delinquent behavior, whereas a close relationship with an adult sibling no longer increased the risk for juvenile arrest (see Table 3).

Table 3.

The Impact of Having a Close Relationship With an Adult on Juvenile Justice Outcomes for Entire Sample.

Relationship	Any Arrest				Any Arrest for Violence				Any Self-Reported Delinquency				Any Self-Reported Violence
Relationship	%	χ2	AOR	95% CI	%	χ2	AOR	95% CI	%	χ2	AOR	95% CI	%	χ2	AOR	95% CI
Any relationship	22.8	0.03	0.89	[0.63, 1.25]	4.6	0.85	1.12	[0.53, 2.36]	78.8	2.60	0.76	[0.53, 1.10]	17.1	0.51	1.07	[0.73, 1.57]
No relationship	22.3				3.3				83.3				15.2
Parent	21.9	0.01	0.82	[0.56, 1.22]	4.2	0.31	1.03	[0.44, 2.39]	75.9	5.3*	0.63*	[0.42, 0.95]	15.8	0.03	0.97	[0.62, 1.50]
Other relative	23.4	0.11	0.90	[0.61, 1.32]	4.7	0.78	1.13	[0.50, 2.58]	82.3	0.11	0.94	[0.62, 1.43]	17.5	0.49	1.03	[0.67, 1.58]
Sibling	31.4	3.90*	1.36	[0.82, 2.27]	4.4	0.27	0.89	[0.29, 2.73]	78.8	1.20	0.93	[0.53, 1.62]	16.8	0.16	1.29	[0.70, 2.36]
Nonrelative	18.8	0.39	0.74	[0.14, 1.52]	7.8	2.60	2.31	[0.73, 7.25]	78.1	0.9	0.74	[0.37, 1.49]	20.3	0.98	1.46	[0.72, 2.98]
Foster parent	12.5	2.00	0.49	[0.18, 1.36]	2.5	0.08	0.79	[0.09, 6.48]	77.5	0.80	0.73	[0.32, 1.68]	15.0	0.002	1.08	[0.41, 2.83]
Peer	13.5	1.50	0.48	[0.17, 1.37]	2.7	0.04	0.69	[0.08, 5.88]	75.7	1.3	0.65	[0.28, 1.51]	13.5	0.08	0.93	[0.33, 2.61]

Note. AOR = adjusted odds ratio, controlling for age, race, and sex; CI = confidence interval.

*p < .05.

Contrary to the third hypothesis, a CRA did not moderate the link between child abuse and neglect and risk for a juvenile arrest, an arrest for a violent crime, or self-reported delinquent behavior (see Table 4). However, there was a significant interaction between child abuse and neglect and CRA for self-reported violence (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.14, 1.00], p = .05). Follow-up analyses revealed that individuals with no history of child maltreatment who reported a CRA were significantly more likely to report engaging in violent delinquent behavior, but having a CRA did not influence the likelihood of self-reported violent behavior for those who had experienced abuse and/or neglect (see Figure 1). When we further examined this by type of relationship, individuals with no history of child maltreatment who reported a close relationship with an adult sibling were 10 times more likely to report engaging in violent delinquent behavior as compared to those with no close relationship to an adult (odds ratio [OR] = 10.07, 95% CI = [2.41, 42.03], p < .001), and those who reported a close relationship with a peer were almost 9 times more likely to report engaging in violent delinquent behavior as compared to those with no close relationship to an adult (OR = 8.91, 95% CI = [1.15, 69.01], p < .05).

Table 4.

Interaction Between Child Abuse and Neglect and Having a Close Relationship With an Adult on Juvenile Justice Outcomes.

Variables	Any Arrest		Any Arrest for Violence		Any Self-Reported Delinquent Behavior		Any Self-Reported Violence
Variables	AOR	95% CI	AOR	95% CI	AOR	95% CI	AOR	95% CI
Child abuse/neglect	1.51	[0.77, 2.95]	1.51	[0.30, 7.61]	1.38	[0.70, 2.71]	3.38**	[1.34, 8.49]
Sex	0.33***	[0.25, 0.45]	0.19***	[0.09, 0.41]	0.42***	[0.31, 0.56]	0.27***	[0.19, 0.39]
Race	0.53***	[0.40, 0.71]	0.32***	[0.18, 0.58]	1.75***	[1.31, 2.35]	0.97	[0.70, 1.34]
Age	0.96*	[0.93, 1.00]	0.99	[0.92, 1.07]	0.99	[0.96, 1.03]	0.99	[0.95, 1.04]
Close relationship with an adult	0.83	[0.44, 1.55]	1.08	[0.24, 4.95]	0.85	[0.47, 1.53]	2.37*	[0.98, 5.73]
Child Abuse/Neglect × Close Relationship With an Adult	1.25	[0.59, 2.64]	1.18	[0.21, 6.71]	0.88	[0.42, 1.88]	0.37*	[0.14, 1.00]

Note. AOR = adjusted odds ratio, controlling for age, race, and sex; CI = confidence interval.

*p .05. **p .01. ***p < .001.

Figure 1.

Having a close relationship with an adult and self-reported violence. Significant interaction between child abuse and neglect and having a close relationship with an adult (adjusted odds ratio = 0.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.14, 1.00]), p < .05). Youth with no substantiated history of abuse or neglect who reported having a close relationship with an adult were more likely to report violent behavior than those who did not report a close relationship (odds ratio = 0.39, 95% CI = [0.16, 0.93], p < .05). The difference in self-reported violent behavior was not significant for youth with substantiated histories of maltreatment.

Discussion

Support from adult mentors or other adults is often cited as a protective factor for youth at risk for engaging in delinquent behaviors. However, few studies have empirically investigated whether certain characteristics of the relationships, such as the role of the adult, have a differential impact on outcomes for at-risk youth. Much less is known about the impact of a close relationship with an adult on juvenile justice outcomes for youth with histories of maltreatment.

Individuals with a documented history of maltreatment were less likely than those without a history of maltreatment to report having a close relationship with an adult as a child, but this relationship did not reduce the risk for juvenile arrest or self-reported offending. Despite the widely held belief that social support reduces risk for delinquent behavior, our findings indicate that adults who reported having a close relationship in childhood were not necessarily protected against the risk for juvenile offending or justice involvement. However, certain characteristics of the overall sample may have increased the risk for arrest and self-reported offending, irrespective of the close relationship variable. Due to the well-established differences in rates of arrest by sex, race, and socioeconomic status (Tapia, 2010; Tracy, Kempf-Leonard, & Abramoske-James, 2009), the original design of the study included a control group that was matched with the child maltreatment group on these variables. As a result, the entire sample is skewed toward the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum, and this characteristic would be expected to be associated with an increased risk of juvenile justice involvement.

When we examined the role of the adult in the close relationship, we found that a relationship with a parent was protective against self-reported delinquent behavior. This is in line with prior studies demonstrating the importance of parental support for youth across a variety of outcomes, including outcomes related to maltreatment (Eisman, Stoddard, Heinze, Caldwell, & Zimmerman, 2015; Rueger, Malecki, Pyun, Aycock, & Coyle, 2016). The close relationship variable may also be a substitute for parental monitoring, which has been linked to a decreased risk for juvenile justice involvement (Hoeve et al., 2009). Nonetheless, this finding suggests that the assumption that any close relationship with an adult in childhood is protective is not warranted. The exclusive emergence of parental support as a protective factor may also present challenges for youth in the child welfare system, especially when parental support is limited, absent, or even harmful. However, even a youth with no supportive parental or other familial relationship can still build a secure attachment in a healthy, supportive relationship with a nonfamilial mentor. These findings point to the importance of fostering such opportunities.

A close relationship with an adult was also expected to have a moderating impact on the link between child maltreatment and juvenile offending, but we did not find this result. Our results showed that having a close relationship with certain types of adults (e.g., adult siblings and peers) was related to a greater risk for self-reported violent delinquent behavior among individuals with no maltreatment history. Prior studies have found that youth with a family history of offending, including older siblings with juvenile or criminal justice involvement, are at higher risk for offending and juvenile justice involvement (Fagan & Najman, 2003; Walters, 2017). This finding is also consistent with the iatrogenic effect of peer relationships on adolescent offending (Gifford-Smith, Dodge, Dishion, & McCord, 2005; Sullivan, 2006). Consequently, having a close relationship with an adult sibling or older peer could increase the risk for delinquency if that adult sibling or peer is justice-involved or the relationship involves exposure to antisocial activities or attitudes. Exposure to adult antisocial peer networks could make youth more vulnerable to peer pressure to engage in violent behavior, and this risk may be heightened if a youth’s affiliation with older peers includes exposure to gang involvement. This could not be examined in the current study, but it warrants further investigation.

The different pattern of findings for self-reported offending and official arrests is also worth noting. We found that parental support was protective against self-reported delinquent behavior for the entire sample, whereas having a close relationship with an adult sibling or peer increased the risk of self-reported violence for those without a substantiated maltreatment history. A close relationship did not impact the risk for arrest. These are surprising findings, but there is a long-standing controversy in criminology about which indicator is the best method (self-report or arrest) to measure crime. A prior study using the same sample found that official arrest data may underestimate offending when compared to self-report (Maxfield, Weiler, & Widom, 2000). The findings here also suggest that utilizing only one source is problematic, and multiple sources are needed to obtain a more comprehensive picture.

Previous research has demonstrated a link between child maltreatment and an increased risk for violence (Duke, Pettingell, McMorris, & Borowsky, 2010; Widom, 1989b). Here, adults with histories of child maltreatment had significantly higher rates of self-reported violence. However, there was no significant difference in the extent of self-reported violence for individuals with histories of maltreatment who reported a CRA compared with those who reported no close relationship. What might explain these findings? It is possible that there is a ceiling effect for reports of self-reported violence for individuals with a maltreatment history. It is also possible that one mentoring relationship may be insufficient to overcome the impact of maltreatment. Additional factors associated with antisocial peer networks and violence, such as community violence exposure, may have had an impact and warrant investigation.

Despite the numerous strengths of the current study, including the use of a prospective design, there are limitations. First, this study represents the experiences of children growing up in the late 1960s and early 1970s in the Midwestern part of the United States, and this may raise concerns about the relevance of the court-substantiated child abuse/neglect cases in this study as compared to current cases. However, the cases here are quite similar to current cases being processed by the child protection system and the courts. One difference is that these children were not provided with the more extensive services and treatment options that are available today and, thereby, the results of this study represent the natural history of the development of children whose cases have come to the attention of the courts. Compared to current times, formal mentoring programs were less prevalent in participants’ childhoods, as were opportunities for connection and communication through social media (Schwartz et al., 2014). Second, the “close relationship” variable relies upon adult participants’ retrospective reporting of relationships from childhood. Although retrospective reports are the most commonly used method of data collection in survey research, this introduces the possibility of recall bias in participants’ responses. Third, there is some ambiguity in participants’ reporting of close relationships with peers, which included siblings’ friends and other foster children, as the question asked about relationships with adults. Participants were also not provided with a definition of “close” and they were asked to provide only one close relationship beyond a parent, making it impossible to examine the impact of multiple close relationships on outcomes.

The nature, quality, and characteristics of the close relationship could not be examined in the current study, but these factors should be included in future studies as they may shed more light on the types of mentoring relationships that are most helpful for improving outcomes for at-risk youth. The impact of multiple relationships, and/or different types of relationships, in relation to juvenile justice outcomes is also an area in need of further exploration (Zinn, Palmer, & Nam, 2017). Future studies should also evaluate whether different types of maltreatment have a differential impact on the link between social support and juvenile justice outcomes and whether results differ by sex, race, and ethnicity.

Taken together, the current study’s findings suggest that while social support and a close relationship are important protective factors, understanding the development of youth within the context of supportive relationships is more complex than earlier believed. The mere presence of a close relationship with an adult, without inquiry into the type of relationship, may not be sufficient for decreasing the risk for offending and involvement in the juvenile justice system. Consequently, when identifying mentors, it is crucial to consider the type of relationship, role of the adult, and exposure to prosocial versus antisocial attitudes and behaviors within that relationship. These findings further suggest that for youth with histories of abuse and neglect and no supportive familial relationships, one close relationship with an adult may not be enough to overcome the negative impact of maltreatment on the risk for juvenile justice involvement.

Footnotes

Authors’ Note

Points of view are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the position of the U.S. Department of Justice. A portion of these findings were presented at the 2012 Annual Meeting of the American Society for Criminology in Chicago, IL, November 14–17, 2012.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research was supported in part by grants (principal investigator: Widom) from NIJ (86-IJ-CX-0033 and 89-IJ-CX-0007), NIMH (MH49467 and MH58386), Eunice Kennedy Shriver NICHD (HD40774), NIDA (DA17842 and DA10060), NIAAA (AA09238 and AA11108), and the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation.

ORCID iD

Carly Lyn Baetz

References

Aceves

M. J.

Cookston

J. T.

(2007). Violent victimization, aggression, and parent-adolescent relationship: Quality parenting as a buffer for violently victimized youth. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36, 635–647.

Ahrens

DuBois

Richardson

Fan

Lozano

(2008). Youth in foster care with adult mentors during adolescence have improved adult outcomes. Pediatrics, 121, 246–252.

Ben-David

Jonson-Reid

(2017). Resilience among adult survivors of childhood neglect: A missing piece in the resilience literature. Children and Youth Services Review, 78, 93–103. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2017.05.014

Bender

(2010). Why do some maltreated youth become juvenile offenders? A call for further investigation and adaptation of youth services Children and Youth Services Review, 32, 466–473. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2009.10.022

Benoit

D. B.

(2004). Infant-parent attachment: Definition, types, antecedents, measurement and outcome. Paediatrics & Child Health, 9, 541–545.

Bolen

R. M.

Gergely

(2015). Meta-analysis of the relationship between parental support and outcomes of sexually abused children. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 16, 258–279.

Bolen

R. M.

Lamb

J. L.

(2007). Parental support and outcome in sexually abused children. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 16, 33–54.

Bond

Butler

Thomas

Carlin

Glover

Bowes

Patton

(2007). Social and school connectedness in early secondary school as predictors of late teenage substance use, mental health, and academic outcomes. Journal of Adolescent Health, 40, 357.e9–357.e18. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2006.10.013

Bowlby

(1982). Attachment and loss, Volume 1: Attachment (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Basic Books.

10.

Brown

S. M.

Shillington

A. M.

(2017). Childhood adversity and the risk of substance use and delinquency: The role of protective adult relationships. Child Abuse & Neglect, 63, 211–221. doi:10.1016/J.CHIABU.2016.11.006

11.

Chen

Greenberger

Farruggia

Bush

Dong

(2003). Beyond parents and peers: The role of important non-parental adults (VIPS) in adolescent development in China and the United States. Psychology in the Schools, 40, 35–50. doi:10.1002/pits.10068

12.

Cicchetti

Rogosch

(2009). Adaptive coping under conditions of extreme stress: Multilevel influences on the determinants of resilience in maltreated children. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 124, 47–59.

13.

Cohen

Mannarino

(2000). Predictors of treatment outcome in sexually abused children. Child Abuse & Neglect, 24, 983–994.

14.

Cusick

G. R.

Havlicek

J. R.

Courtney

M. E.

(2012). Risk for arrest: The role of social bonds in protecting foster youth making the transition to adulthood. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 82, 19–31. doi:j.1939-0025.2011.01136.x

15.

Day

Kearney

C. A.

(2016). Resilience variables and posttraumatic symptoms among maltreated youth. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment and Trauma, 25, 991–1005. doi:10.1080/10926771.2016.1236358

16.

DeWit

D. J.

DuBois

Erdem

Larose

Lipman

E. L.

(2016). The role of program-supported mentoring relationships in promoting youth mental health, behavioral and developmental outcomes. Prevention Science, 17, 646–657. doi:10.1007/s11121-016-0663-2

17.

DuBois

D. L.

Portillo

Rhodes

J. E.

Silverthorn

Valentine

J. C.

(2011). How effective are mentoring programs for youth? A systematic assessment of the evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 12, 57–91. doi:10.1177/1529100611414806

18.

DuBois

D. L.

Silverthorn

(2005). Natural mentoring relationships and adolescent health: Evidence from a national study. American Journal of Public Health, 95, 518–524. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2003.031476

19.

Duke

N. N.

Pettingell

S. L.

McMorris

B. J.

Borowsky

I. W.

(2010). Adolescent violence perpetration: Associations with multiple types of childhood experiences. Pediatrics, 125, 778–786.

20.

DuMont

K. A.

Widom

C. S.

Czaja

S. J.

(2007). Predictors of resilience in abused and neglected children grown-up: The role of individual and neighborhood characteristics. Child Abuse and Neglect, 31, 255–274. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2005.11.015

21.

Eisman

A. B.

Stoddard

S. A.

Heinze

Caldwell

C. H.

Zimmerman

M. A.

(2015). Depressive symptoms, social support, and violence exposure among urban youth: A longitudinal study of resilience. Developmental Psychology, 51, 1307–1316. doi:10.1037/a0039501

22.

Fagan

A. A.

(2003). The short-and long-term effects of adolescent violent victimization experienced within the family and community. Violence and Victims, 18, 445–459.

23.

Fagan

A. A.

Najman

J. M.

(2003). Sibling influences on adolescent delinquent behaviour: An Australian longitudinal study. Journal of Adolescence, 26, 547–559. doi:10.1016/S0140-1971(03)00055-1

24.

Fergusson

D. M.

Horwood

J. L.

(2003). Resilience to childhood adversity: Results of a 21-year study. In Luthar

S. S.

(Ed.), Resilience and vulnerability: Adaptation in the context of childhood adversities (pp. 130–155). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511615788.008

25.

Ford

J. D.

Blaustein

M. E.

(2013). Systemic self-regulation: A framework for trauma-informed services in residential juvenile justice programs. Journal of Family Violence, 28, 665–677. doi:10.1007/s10896-013-9538-5

26.

Fox

B. H.

Perez

Cass

Baglivio

M. T.

Epps

(2015). Trauma changes everything: Examining the relationship between adverse childhood experiences and serious, violent and chronic juvenile offenders. Child Abuse & Neglect, 46, 163–173. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.01.011

27.

Gifford-Smith

Dodge

K. A.

Dishion

T. J.

McCord

(2005). Peer influence in children and adolescents: Crossing the bridge from developmental to intervention science. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33, 255–265. doi:10.1007/s10802-005-3563-7

28.

Greeson

J. K. P.

Weiler

L. M.

Thompson

A. E.

Taussig

H. N.

(2016). A first look at natural mentoring among preadolescent foster children. Journal of Community Psychology, 44, 586–601. doi:10.1002/jcop

29.

Grogan-Kaylor

Ruffolo

M. C.

Ortega

R. M.

Clarke

(2008). Behaviors of youth involved in the child welfare system. Child Abuse and Neglect, 32, 35–49. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2007.09.004

30.

Grotevant

H. D.

Van Dulmen

M. H. M.

Dunbar

Nelson-Christinedaughter

Christensen

Fan

Miller

B. C.

(2006). Antisocial behavior of adoptees and nonadoptees: Prediction from early history and adolescent relationships. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 16, 105–131. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2006.00124.x

31.

Haddad

Chen

Greenberger

(2011). The role of important non-parental adults (VIPs) in the lives of older adolescents: A comparison of three ethnic groups. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 40, 310–319. doi:10.1007/s10964-010-9543-4

32.

Hart

J. L.

O’Toole

S. K.

Price-Sharps

J. L.

Shaffer

T. W.

(2007). The risk and protective factors of violent juvenile offending: An examination of gender differences. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 5, 367–384. doi:10.1177/1541204006297367

33.

Haskett

M. E.

Nears

Ward

C. S.

McPherson

A. V.

(2006). Diversity in adjustment of maltreated children: Factors associated with resilient functioning. Clinical Psychology Review, 26, 796–812. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2006.03.005

34.

Hébert

Lavoie

Blais

(2014). Post Traumatic Stress Disorder/PTSD in adolescent victims of sexual abuse: Resilience and social support as protection factors. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 19, 685–694. doi:10.1590/1413-81232014193.15972013

35.

Herrera

DuBois

D. L.

Grossman

J. B.

(2013). The role of risk: Mentoring experiences and outcomes for youth with varying risk profiles. New York, NY: A Public/Private Ventures project distributed by MDRC. Retrieved from https://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/Role%20of%20Risk_Final-web%20PDF.pdf

36.

Hoeve

Dubas

J. S.

Eichelsheim

V. I.

van der Laan

P. H.

Smeenk

Gerris

J. R. M.

(2009). The relationship between parenting and delinquency: A meta-analysis. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 37, 749–775. doi:10.1007/s10802-011-9608-1

37.

Horan

J. M.

Widom

C. S.

(2015). From childhood maltreatment to allostatic load in adulthood: The role of social support. Child Maltreatment, 20, 229–239. doi:10.1177/1077559515597063

38.

Kalvin

C. B.

Bierman

K. L.

(2017). Violent versus nonviolent crime. Aggressive Behavior, 43, 568–577. doi:10.1002/ab.21715

39.

Kort-Butler

(2010). Experienced and vicarious victimization: Do social support and self-esteem prevent delinquent responses? Journal of Criminal Justice, 38, 496–505. doi:10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2010.04.019

40.

Langevin

Hébert

Cossette

(2015). Emotion regulation as a mediator of the relation between sexual abuse and behavior problems in preschoolers. Child Abuse and Neglect, 46, 16–26. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.02.001

41.

Maas

Herrenkohl

T. I.

Sousa

(2008). Review of research on child maltreatment and violence in youth. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 9, 56–67. doi:10.1177/1524838007311105

42.

Malecki

C. K.

Demaray

M. K.

(2003). Carrying a weapon to school and perceptions of social support in an urban middle school. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 11, 169–178. doi:10.1177/10634266030110030401

43.

Maschi

(2006). Trauma and violent delinquent behavior among males: The moderating role of social support. Stress, Trauma, and Crisis, 9, 45–72. doi:10.1080/15434610500506233

44.

Maxfield

M. G.

Weiler

B. L.

Widom

C. S.

(2000). Comparing self-reports and official records of arrests. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 16, 87–110. doi:10.1023/A:1007577512038

45.

Maxfield

M. G.

Widom

(1996). The cycle of violence: Revisited 6 years later. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 150, 390–395. doi:10.1001/archpedi.1996.02170290056009

46.

Munson

M. R.

McMillen

J. C.

(2009). Natural mentoring and psychosocial outcomes among older youth transitioning from foster care. Children and Youth Services Review, 31, 104–111.

47.

Perkins

D. F.

Jones

K. R.

(2004). Risk behaviors and resiliency within physically abused adolescents. Child Abuse & Neglect, 28, 547–563.

48.

Rhodes

J. E.

Spencer

Keller

T. E.

Liang

Noam

(2006). A model for the influence of mentoring relationships on youth development. Journal of Community Psychology, 34, 691–707. doi:10.1002/jcop

49.

Rueger

S. Y.

Malecki

C. K.

Pyun

Aycock

Coyle

(2016). A meta-analytic review of the association between perceived social support and depression in childhood and adolescence. Psychological Bulletin, 142, 1017–1067. doi:10.1037/bul0000058

50.

Ryan

J. P.

Testa

M. F.

Zhai

(2008). African American males in foster care and the risk of delinquency: The value of social bonds and permanence. Child Welfare, 87, 115–140.

51.

Sagy

Dotan

(2001). Coping resources of maltreated children in the family: A salutogenic approach. Child Abuse and Neglect, 25, 1463–1480. doi:10.1016/S0145-2134(01)00285-X

52.

Schwartz

S. E. O.

Rhodes

J. E.

Liang

Sánchez

Spencer

Kremer

Kanchewa

(2014). Mentoring in the digital age: Social media use in adult-youth relationships. Children and Youth Services Review, 47, 205–213. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.09.004

53.

Spaccarelli

Kim

(1995). Resilience criteria and factors associated with resilience in sexually abused girls. Child Abuse & Neglect, 19, 1171–1182.

54.

Sperry

D. M.

Widom

C. S.

(2013). Child abuse and neglect, social support, and psychopathology in adulthood: A prospective investigation. Child Abuse & Neglect, 37, 415–425. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.02.006

55.

Sterrett

E. M.

Jones

D. J.

McKee

L. G.

Kincaid

(2011). Supportive non-parental adults and adolescent psychosocial functioning: Using social support as a theoretical framework. American Journal of Community Psychology, 48, 284–295. doi:10.1007/s10464-011-9429-y

56.

Sullivan

C. J.

(2006). Early adolescent delinquency. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 4, 291–313. doi:10.1177/1541204006292656

57.

Tapia

(2010). Untangling race and class effects on juvenile arrests. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38, 255–265. doi:10.1016/j.crimjus.2010.03.002

58.

Taussig

H. N.

(2002). Risk behaviors in maltreated youth placed in foster care: A longitudinal study of protective and vulnerability factors. Child Abuse & Neglect, 26, 1179–1199.

59.

Thompson

A. E.

Greeson

J. K. P.

Brunsink

A. M.

(2016). Natural mentoring among older youth in and aging out of foster care: A systematic review. Children and Youth Services Review, 61, 40–50. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2015.12.006

60.

Tolan

P. H.

Henry

D. B.

Schoeny

M. S.

Lovegrove

Nichols

(2014). Mentoring programs to affect delinquency and associated outcomes of youth at risk: A comprehensive meta-analytic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 10, 179–206. doi:10.1007/s11292-013-9181-4

61.

Tracy

P. E.

Kempf-Leonard

Abramoske-James

(2009). Gender differences in delinquency and juvenile justice processing. Crime & Delinquency, 55, 171–215. doi:10.1177/0011128708330628

62.

Tremblay

Hébert

Piché

(1999). Coping strategies and social support as mediators of consequences in child sexual abuse victims. Child Abuse & Neglect, 23, 929–945. doi:10.1016/S0145-2134(99)00056-3

63.

Walters

G. D.

(2017). Sibling delinquency as a risk factor for future offending. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 1–15. doi:10.1177/1541204017713255

64.

Widom

C. S.

(1989a). Child abuse, neglect and adult behavior: Research design and findings on criminality, violence, and child abuse. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 59, 355–367.

65.

Widom

C. S.

(1989b). The cycle of violence. Science, 244, 160–166. doi:10.1126/science.2704995

66.

Widom

C. S.

(1999). Posttraumatic stress disorder in abused and neglected children grown up. American Journal of Psychiatry, 156, 1223–1229.

67.

Wolfgang

M. E.

Weiner

(1989). University of Pennsylvania Greater Philadelphia Area Study, Unpublished interview protocol.

68.

Woolley

M. E.

Koi

Bowen

G. L.

(2009). The social context of school success for Latino middle school students: Direct and indirect influences of teachers, family, and friends. Journal of Early Adolescence, 29, 43–70.

69.

Zimmerman

M. A.

Bingenheimer

J. B.

Notaro

P. C.

(2002). Natural mentors and adolescent resiliency: A study with urban youth. American Journal of Community Psychology, 30, 221–243. doi:10.1023/A:1014632911622

70.

Zinn

Palmer

A. N.

Nam

(2017). The predictors of perceived social support among former foster youth. Child Abuse and Neglect, 72, 172–183. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2017.07.015