Modern society is facing an increase in juvenile delinquency, which makes studying its causes particularly important. According to data from the Office of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation cited in the study by A. A. Dolmatova [3], a significant proportion of juvenile offenders have experienced social orphanhood, emotional deprivation, or upbringing in dysfunctional families. This highlights the need to analyze the role of the family as a key institution of primary socialization and to identify the mechanisms through which disturbances in family relationships may contribute to the development of deviant behavior.

My future professional activity is related to studying the causes of criminal behavior, preventing recidivism, and providing psychological rehabilitation for offenders. This determines the necessity of a deep understanding of the factors that precede deviant behavior, particularly the role of the parental figure in the process of socialization. An analysis of contemporary scientific literature and judicial practice suggests that many cases of juvenile delinquency stem from early childhood experiences, during which fundamental attitudes toward relationships, authority, and adherence to social norms are formed [3].

The aim of this study is to identify the relationship between the absence of a parental figure and adolescents’ propensity for deviant and criminal behavior. To achieve this goal, the following objectives were defined:

1. to analyze the psychological characteristics of children deprived of parental care that influence deviant behavior;
2. to conduct interviews with psychologists and educators from orphanages and social organizations;
3. to compare the findings with international studies on the influence of family structure on juvenile delinquency;
4. to formulate recommendations for the prevention of deviant behavior and support of children without parental care.

Before analyzing the factors contributing to the formation of unlawful behavior, it is necessary to clarify the meaning of the key concept—“criminal tendencies.” In academic literature, this term is not always used as a strictly defined concept and is often replaced by synonyms such as “propensity for offenses,” “predisposition to criminal behavior,” or “deviant motivation.” Nevertheless, in the context of criminal psychology, criminal tendencies are understood as a stable psychological attitude characterized by an individual’s readiness to violate legal and moral norms, as well as to commit socially dangerous acts [5].

According to A. O. Panfilov, criminal tendencies include three main components:

1. Cognitive – the presence of antisocial attitudes, justification of criminal behavior, and a reduced sense of responsibility;
2. Emotional-volitional – increased aggressiveness, impulsivity, lack of empathy, and a desire for dominance;
3. Behavioral – participation in minor offenses, attempts at criminal experience (e.g., theft, hooliganism), and involvement in antisocial groups [5].

It is important to emphasize that criminal tendencies are not crimes themselves but predictors of their commission. They may manifest even in the absence of formal offenses, particularly during adolescence, when value orientations and social attitudes are being formed. Therefore, their early diagnosis and prevention are of paramount importance.

In this study, criminal tendencies are understood as a set of psychological characteristics (aggression, low self-esteem, attachment disorders, conflict-oriented attitudes) identified through empirical research, which correlate with the risk of adolescents becoming involved in criminal activities. This approach makes it possible to consider criminal tendencies not only as a behavioral phenomenon but also as the result of profound personal and social dysfunctions, including those caused by the absence of a parental figure.

The family serves as a key institution of socialization, where personality formation, the acquisition of social roles, and the development of the ability to adapt to society take place. Ya. S. Vinokurova emphasizes that it is within the family that the foundations of morality, behavioral norms, and an individual’s inner world are established [2]. The absence or distortion of these processes can lead to the development of deviant attitudes, which in adolescence manifest as aggressiveness, the use of psychoactive substances, the commission of offenses, and other forms of antisocial behavior.

The absence of a parental figure, which may be either physical (loss of parents) or emotional (parental deprivation), is of particular importance. A. A. Dolmatova introduces the concept of “inadequate parenting,” which refers to the behavior of parents or guardians that violates the rights and interests of the child and hinders their normal psychophysical development [3]. Such behavior may manifest in the form of neglecting the child’s needs, abuse, emotional rejection, or excessive control. Even when formal care is present, these forms create conditions that foster a sense of insecurity, anxiety, and aggression in adolescents. A. A. Dolmatova’s concept of “inadequate parenting” is especially relevant in the context of contemporary social realities, as it allows researchers to move beyond the binary distinction of “family present – family absent” and focus on the quality of parental relationships. Indeed, the physical presence of parents does not guarantee a child’s emotional security: many adolescents raised in intact families experience deep deprivation due to indifference, overcontrol, or a toxic atmosphere. Such children are psychologically as vulnerable as orphans.

Yu. P. Kurganovich notes that the emotional rigidity of parental figures negatively affects an adolescent’s self-concept, fostering feelings of inferiority and distrust toward others [4]. These attitudes become prerequisites for conflict behavior, especially under external pressure or social maladaptation. E. O. Chernova points out that children raised in families with parents suffering from alcohol or drug addiction display higher levels of anxiety, poorly developed communication skills, and a tendency toward early use of psychoactive substances [6].

Dysfunctional families can be classified into several types, each carrying criminogenic potential. These include conflict families, where constant quarrels and physical violence create a toxic emotional environment; morally dysfunctional families, where parents suffer from addictions; criminal families, where criminal behavior is legitimized; and pedagogically incompetent families, where there is no systematic approach to upbringing [2]. In all these cases, the main functions of the family—protective, educational, and emotional—are disrupted.

Particular attention should be paid to disharmonious parenting styles, which, even in the presence of both parents, may lead to deviant behavior. Hyperprotection, characterized by excessive control, results in dependency and an inability to make independent decisions. Hypoprotection, on the contrary, manifests as emotional indifference and lack of supervision, contributing to the development of impulsivity and social maladaptation [4]. Emotional rejection, harsh relationships, and excessive moral demands also contribute to the emergence of internal conflict and protest behavior in adolescents.

1. O. Chernova, in her research, demonstrates that adolescents involved in gangs often have a history of emotional rejection by their parents, which makes them particularly susceptible to the influence of peers and criminal group leaders [6]. For them, the gang becomes a “substitute family,” a place where they receive recognition, attention, and a sense of belonging—things they lacked in their own family.
2. N. Vasyagina and Yu. G. Taktueva emphasize the connection between intrafamilial conflicts and adolescents’ self-destructive behaviors, including suicide attempts, drug use, and involvement in prostitution [1]. These forms of behavior are viewed as attempts to cope with unbearable internal tension caused by the absence of a secure attachment.

International research also confirms the importance of the parental figure. A meta-analysis conducted by M. Hoeve and J. S. Dubas revealed that positive parental involvement, warm relationships, and consistent supervision reduce the risk of juvenile delinquency by 30–50% [7]. Conversely, lack of parental monitoring, emotional coldness, and harsh punishment significantly increase the likelihood of deviant behavior.

Thus, theoretical analysis allows the conclusion that the absence of a parental figure, whether physical or emotional, is one of the key factors contributing to the formation of criminal tendencies in adolescents. While it is not the only factor, it creates a predisposition that, when combined with other unfavorable conditions, may lead to criminal behavior.

To test the hypothesis about the relationship between the absence of a parental figure and criminal tendencies, an empirical study was conducted in an orphanage and a temporary detention center for juvenile offenders in the Central Federal District. The participants were 20 adolescents aged 13 to 17, of whom 12 lived in a residential institution and 8 were under investigation for theft and acts of hooliganism.

The study employed a set of methods including questionnaires, expert interviews, and analysis of secondary data. The primary diagnostic tool used was a modified Buss–Durkee Hostility Inventory to assess the level of aggression. To analyze self-concept, Harter’s Self-Perception Profile was applied. In addition, semi-structured interviews were conducted with psychologists and educators (n=6) to identify behavioral characteristics, family history, and responses to stress. The collected data were compared with international research findings, including the meta-analysis by M. Hoeve and J. S. Dubas [7].

Among adolescents deprived of parental care, the average aggression score was 80 out of 100, significantly exceeding the normative range (50–60 points). The most prominent forms were hostility and physical aggression. In 65% of participants, signs of latent aggression were recorded, such as sabotage, refusal to cooperate, and passive disobedience.

According to Harter’s scale, the average self-esteem score was 2.2 out of 5, indicating low self-acceptance. The lowest values were observed in the categories “love and acceptance” and “academic competence.” Most adolescents reported that they did not feel needed or significant.

An analysis of family background revealed that 40% of participants lost their parents in early childhood (before age six), 35% reported abuse within the family, and 15% grew up in families with parents who had criminal records. Only 10% maintained stable contact with biological relatives.

Interviews with experts revealed that most adolescents exhibited attachment disorders: they either avoided closeness or showed excessive dependence on adults. Educators noted frequent instances of provocative behavior aimed at testing boundaries, such as petty theft, property damage, and verbal insults. Psychologists emphasized that many adolescents lacked experience in constructive conflict resolution, which complicates their social adaptation.

Comparison with international research demonstrated a high degree of consistency. Adolescents without parental care showed higher levels of aggression, lower self-esteem, and a greater tendency toward risky behavior, consistent with the findings of the meta-analysis by M. Hoeve and J. S. Dubas [7]. However, unlike Western countries where therapeutic and mentorship programs are widely implemented, such practices in Russia remain fragmented and lack large-scale application.

The empirical study established that the absence of a parental figure correlates with an increased propensity for deviant and criminal behavior. Adolescents who lacked stable emotional attachment in childhood exhibited signs of psychological trauma: aggression, low self-esteem, and difficulties in forming trusting relationships. These traits serve as the foundation for the development of a deviant identity, particularly under conditions of social isolation.

At the same time, even the presence of a substitute family does not always compensate for the lack of parental love if the adoptive parents lack sufficient psychological preparedness. In several cases, adolescents described their guardians as “strict but indifferent,” which only reinforced their feelings of rejection. This aligns with A. A. Dolmatova’s concept that what matters is not the form of the family but the quality of the relationship with the child [3].

The study showed that the absence of a parental figure is not merely a social issue but a profound psychological trauma that can become the starting point of a criminal path. Adolescents deprived of love, care, and stability in childhood face a deficit of basic human needs—security, acceptance, and meaning. In an attempt to compensate for this deficit, they may resort to deviant forms of behavior—aggression, substance use, or crime—which, though destructive, provide a sense of control and significance.

Theoretical and empirical analysis led to the following conclusions. First, the absence of a parental figure—physical or emotional—is a significant risk factor for the formation of criminal tendencies in adolescents. Second, the psychological consequences of this deprivation—low self-esteem, aggression, and attachment disorders—require systematic psychological support. Third, modern institutions (orphanages, schools, and social services) are not fully capable of compensating for the parental deficit.

Based on the findings, the following recommendations are proposed:

1. Develop therapeutic education programs for orphans and adolescents from disadvantaged families. These programs should include regular individual and group psychotherapy (including art therapy, play therapy, and body-oriented therapy) aimed at processing loss, forming secure attachment, and developing emotional self-regulation. An essential component should be training in constructive communication, conflict resolution, and positive self-determination. Such programs should be implemented in orphanages, temporary detention centers, and rehabilitation facilities under the guidance of qualified psychologists and social educators.
2. Introduce mandatory psychological support for guardians and adoptive parents both at the preparation stage and throughout the upbringing period. This support should include training in developmental psychology, understanding the characteristics of children with signs of emotional deprivation and attachment disorders, and mastering techniques of empathetic parenting, trust-building, and effective, non-violent discipline. Regular consultations with psychologists will help guardians cope with the child’s adaptation challenges, prevent burnout, and reduce the risk of re-abandonment.
3. Expand mentorship programs by creating a system of volunteer support in which trained and vetted adults can serve as “substitute parental figures.” Mentors should meet with adolescents regularly, participate in their daily lives, provide emotional support, and assist in building life goals and social connections. Mentorship programs should be developed with the support of NGOs, educational institutions, and child welfare authorities, ensuring clear selection criteria, volunteer training, and continuous supervision.
4. Include emotional literacy and deviant behavior prevention courses in school curricula. These courses should cover topics such as self-awareness and self-esteem, emotion management, empathy development, assertive communication, resistance to peer pressure, relationship ethics, and the consequences of substance use and delinquency. Methodologically, interactive forms such as training sessions, role-playing, group discussions, and case studies should be used. Such classes should be conducted by psychologists or specially trained educators at least once a week and integrated into the school’s educational program.

Only a comprehensive approach that unites the efforts of the state, society, and professionals can prevent the transformation of a traumatized child into an offender. Juvenile delinquency is not only a violation of the law but also a consequence of unmet needs formed under conditions of inadequate parenting.