¶¶Òõ¾«Æ·

CRIMINOLOGY offers a lens through which we can understand the motivations behind criminal behaviour and the psychological traits that predispose individuals to crime. A recent Netflix series, Adolescence, dramatises the story of a 13-year-old who commits murder. However, such portrayals are no longer confined to fiction. Bangladesh is witnessing a disturbing rise in juvenile delinquency — one that is increasingly violent and alarmingly frequent.

On May, 9, a 14-year-old boy in Shewrapara, Dhaka, murdered his two aunts after being caught stealing Tk 3,000 from one of their handbags. The boy was their nephew. Just weeks earlier, in April, a seventh-grade student in Chattogram was murdered by four classmates over a dispute. The brutality of the act shocked the nation: how could children, not yet in their teens, commit such calculated violence? During Ramadan, another case emerged from Chuadanga, where a 17-year-old stabbed his father to death after a quarrel over a mobile phone. The list grows longer. In Satkhira, a fourth-grade boy was recently sent to a juvenile correction centre for allegedly raping a second-grade girl. These incidents are not anomalies, they represent a pattern.

Criminological theories offer useful frameworks to make sense of this troubling trend. One of the most relevant is Lawrence Kohlberg’s theory of moral development, which outlines three stages: pre-conventional (ages 3–7), conventional (8–13), and post-conventional (14 and beyond). These stages reflect how children’s reasoning about right and wrong evolves with age. A child operating within the pre-conventional or early conventional stages may be more likely to act impulsively or without a full understanding of consequences, especially in an environment where morality is inconsistently modelled or enforced.

The classic ‘nature versus nurture’ debate also remains central to understanding juvenile crime. Are children inherently predisposed to criminality, or does their environment shape them into delinquents? Johannes Lange’s twin studies in the early 20th century showed a high concordance of criminal behaviour among identical twins, suggesting a biological component. Conversely, a 1975 adoption study revealed that children raised by criminal adoptive fathers were more likely to become criminals themselves, even when their biological parents had no such history. The implication is clear: both genetic and environmental factors contribute to delinquent tendencies.

John Bowlby’s ‘attachment theory’ further illustrates the significance of early familial bonds. Bowlby found that the emotional bond between a parent and child profoundly shapes the child’s psychological development. In support, Harry Harlow’s experiments with infant monkeys demonstrated that comfort and emotional security outweighed even the need for food. A lack of parental affection, neglect, or emotional abandonment can erode a child’s moral compass, increasing the likelihood of antisocial behaviour. Many of the young offenders in recent Bangladeshi cases appeared to come from unstable homes, characterised by conflict, absentee parenting, or outright violence.

Adolescence itself is a vulnerable phase. Hormonal fluctuations, identity crises and social pressures complicate the teen experience. A 2019 study by Adesh University found that over half of the surveyed teenagers exhibited signs of aggression, with a higher prevalence in urban settings. When this volatility is met with poor parental engagement, peer pressure, or exposure to violence, the outcomes can be catastrophic. In case after case in Bangladesh, the young perpetrators demonstrated extreme emotional sensitivity, underdeveloped conflict resolution skills and a skewed sense of justice — all exacerbated by environmental neglect.

Philosopher Aristippus’ ‘hedonistic principle’ posits that people are driven to seek pleasure and avoid pain. In adolescents, this often translates to immediate gratification, even at great cost. Many teenage offenders act impulsively, fuelled by rage, shame, or a desire for revenge. Their brains are not fully developed — particularly the prefrontal cortex, which governs judgement and self-control. This neurological immaturity, when paired with emotional instability, can culminate in violent outbursts.

The theories of ‘social learning’ and ‘differential association’ further explain how criminal behaviours are learned. Albert Bandura’s ‘social learning theory’ highlights how children model behaviour by observing others, especially role models in their immediate environment. Edward Sutherland’s ‘differential association theory’ reinforces this by arguing that criminality is learned through close interaction with delinquent peers. When children grow up surrounded by violence, manipulation, or disregard for law and ethics, they are more likely to replicate these behaviours themselves.

Each of the aforementioned incidents aligns with a specific criminological theory. The Shewrapara double murder exemplifies ‘control theory’ — the teen lacked self-regulation and acted on impulse, likely envisioning short-term gain. The murder in Chattogram, carried out by a group of classmates, reflects the influence of peer dynamics, as explained by ‘social learning’ and ‘differential association’ theories. In Chuadanga, the son’s violent attack on his father suggests unresolved familial tension and a possible emotional breakdown triggered by cumulative stress. The Satkhira rape case involving a fourth-grader indicates an alarming failure in moral development, likely shaped by early exposure to harmful influences and a lack of ethical guidance.

This rising tide of juvenile crime in Bangladesh points to deeper systemic failures. The problem is not merely legal, it is social, psychological and moral. Children are not born with an inherent urge to kill, steal, or assault. They are shaped by what they see, what they are denied, and how they are raised. A child’s mind is a mirror of their surroundings. When that mirror reflects violence, rejection and emotional deprivation, it distorts their understanding of right and wrong.

Preventing juvenile delinquency requires a collective response. Families must play an active role in nurturing emotional intelligence and ethical behaviour in children. Schools should integrate mental health support and values education into their curriculum, identifying at-risk students early. Policymakers must ensure that juvenile correction centres are rehabilitative rather than punitive and that community-based programmes support both parents and children.

Most importantly, society must shift its gaze — from condemnation to comprehension. Without understanding the roots of juvenile crime, we are doomed to treat only its symptoms. And by then, it may already be too late.

Ìý

Nusiba Hasan Ohee is a law student at the Bangladesh University of Professionals.