Parents are being held responsible for their kids’ crimes

When young children and teenagers get into trouble, the question often comes quickly: Where were their parents? That question is again shaping public policy in communities across the country, as state and local lawmakers and prosecutors increasingly look for ways to respond to concerns about youth crime and public disorder.

Some proposals would strengthen enforcement of existing laws that allow parents to be fined or otherwise held responsible for their children’s conduct. Others would impose youth curfews or establish new requirements for parents to perform community service or pay fines — measures considered in places such as Albany County, New York; Chicago; and Columbus, Ohio. But experts note there’s little proof the laws work.

A new law in Louisiana, which went into effect earlier this month, allows courts to fine parents or guardians up to $5,000 if a youth age 14 or older is convicted of making a school threat.

State lawmakers also recently requested a study on the link between parenting, discipline and juvenile delinquency. Louisiana already has one of the nation’s toughest laws, allowing parents to be prosecuted when their child under 17 is involved in a violent felony, with penalties of up to 10 years in prison.

A new law in New Jersey that went into effect earlier this year makes parents liable when their child incites a public brawl that causes property damage. Parents of children who commit the most serious offenses could face up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine. Parents and guardians can have enormous influence over the children in their care, some proponents argue, so holding them accountable could give them another incentive to keep their children in school, enforce rules and steer them away from crime.

Every state has some form of parental responsibility law. But there is little empirical evidence showing that the laws actually reduce youth crime. “We just don’t know,” said Eve Brank, a psychology professor at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Brank has spent decades studying the implementation and effectiveness of those laws, and said there have not been any gold-standard empirical research studies on the subject. Her research also suggests that these laws are not commonly enforced.

The renewed interest is also playing out in Washington, DC, where US Attorney Jeanine Pirro announced in May that district parents may face up to six months in jail if they knowingly allow their children to commit crimes. The move came in response to “teen takeovers,” or large, unruly gatherings of teens. The day after Pirro announced the policy change, a group of teenagers got into a violent brawl at a Chipotle in the Navy Yard neighborhood. Video of the fight quickly spread online, and Pirro later used the incident to underscore her warning to parents. “We’re looking at the parents to make sure that they understand that they are responsible for the upheaval that is going on,” Pirro said at a news conference. The idea of holding parents responsible for their children’s criminal behavior has resurfaced repeatedly over the past several decades, often during periods when public concern about youth crime is high.

The current debate echoes an earlier wave of parental responsibility laws in the 1990s, when concerns about “superpredator” teens spread.

By 1995, more than 40 states had enacted some form of parental responsibility law, according to a 2000 research article published in The Social Science Journal. The laws varied widely, from requiring parents to attend counseling or parenting classes to imposing fines and, in some cases, imprisonment.

In a study published online in 2014, Brank and several colleagues at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln surveyed police chiefs and prosecuting attorneys about parental responsibility laws. They found that the legal professionals generally did not view the laws as effective, which could help explain why the laws are common but rarely enforced.

Brank told Stateline that there’s some potential for the laws to be disproportionately applied to single parent households, low-income families and families of colour. But research also suggests parental monitoring, supervision and the quality of parent-child relationships can all play a role in adolescent delinquency. Some experts and advocates say the question, then, is whether punishment is the best way to change behaviour — or whether resources would be better spent preventing problems before they start.

“We need a pretty comprehensive view, and thinking seriously about whether punishment will actually garner the outcomes that we want,” Brank said. “Are there ways we could instead focus our attention and resources on prevention?”

Experts who study parental responsibility laws say their appeal may be largely political. They’re a way for lawmakers to signal that they are responding to concerns about youth crime, while tapping into the familiar idea that parents should be held responsible when their children get into trouble.