Cohabiting, Family and Community Stressors, Selection, and Juvenile Delinquency

• Published date: 01 December 2010
• DOI: 10.1177/0734016810379338
• Date: 01 December 2010
• Subject Matter: Articles

Articles

Cohabiting, Family and

Community Stressors,

Selection, and Juvenile

Delinquency

Christopher A. Kierkus

1

, Brian R. Johnson

1

, and John D. Hewitt

1

Abstract

Prior research has established that children from traditional, two-parent nuclear families experience

a lower risk of delinquency than children raised in alternative family structures. However, many

studies have ignored the effect of parental cohabiting on delinquent development. A growing body

of research suggests that cohabiting (even among biological parents) may be harmful to children. This

study tests the hypothesis that cohabiting is associated with four different types of delinquent beha-

vior. It examines two theoretical models, a family stress model and a community stress/selection model,

as possible explanations of ‘‘the cohabiting effect.’’ The analysis reveals that cohabiting is generally

associated with increased risk of misbehavior (although the effects do vary somewhat by type of

delinquency). Although the theoretical models could not completely explain ‘‘the cohabiting effect,’’

substantial evidence of both mediation and moderation is found. The implications of the findings are

discussed.

Keywords

family structure, cohabiting, delinquency, theory

Introduction

Although there has been a great deal of research conducted on family structure and delinquency,

our understanding of the family–delinquency relationship remains incomplete. The primary reason

for this may be attributed to the fact that the family is not a static institution. Since 1950, for

example, the American nuclear family has arguably undergone more change than at any other time

in history. While the two-parent, married family still accounts for about half of all households, other

nontraditional family structures have become increasingly numerous and culturally normative

(America’s families, 2001; Lugalia & Overturf, 2004; Wilson, 2002). Of these, the ‘‘cohabiting

family’’ has emerged as a relatively common nontraditional family structure in the United States.

1

School of Criminal Justice, Grand Valley State University, Grand Rapids, MI, USA

Corresponding Author:

Christopher A. Kierkus, School of Criminal Justice, Grand Valley State University, Grand Rapids, MI 49504, USA

Email: kierkusc@gvsu.edu

Criminal Justice Review

35(4) 393-411

ª2010 Georgia State University

Reprints and permission:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0734016810379338

http://cjr.sagepub.com

393

Cohabiting is defined as two people living together as a couple without being married (Stets,

1991). It is one of the fastest growing family structures in the United States. For example, between

1990 and 2007, there was an 88%increase in cohabiting couples (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2008a),

with a tenfold increase since 1960 (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2001), leading to approximately

12 million unmarried partners currently living together (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2008b). It is esti-

mated that 40%of cohabiting households have children under the age of 18 living in these family

structures (Simmons & O’Connell, 2003) with some researchers estimating that one in four children

will live in a cohabiting household before they reach the age of 18 (Graefe & Lichter, 1999). In spite

of its growing popularity, some theorists posit that ‘‘cohabiting is an unstable family form’’ (Raley &

Wildsmith, 2004, p. 210).

Couples cohabiting raise a number of social issues. Cohabiting has been examined in the context

of victimization (Turner, Finkelhor, & Ormrod, 2007), domestic violence (Stets, 1991), as a precur-

sor to divorce (Teachman, 2003), as an explanation of increased divorce rates upon marriage (Axinn

& Thorton, 1992; Hall & Zhao, 1995), decreased levels of happiness and commitment (Nock, 1995),

and higher levels of marital disagreement (Brines & Joyner, 1999). Research has also examined

cohabiting among the elderly for financial security (Chevan, 1996), in terms of childbearing

practices (Loomis & Landale, 1994), and examined the potential negative impact on children when

transitioning into, and out of, cohabiting relationships (Raley & Wildsmith, 2004). Of the many

social issues that cohabiting raises, one of the most important involves the increased risk of

delinquency for children living in such families.

Notwithstanding the extensive research literature on juvenile delinquency, in general, little is

known about how, and why, contemporary family forms, such as cohabiting unions, influence the

development of delinquency. Therefore, this study attempts to improve the discipline’s understand-

ing of the family structure/delinquency relationship by empirically assessing the relationship

between parental cohabiting and several different types of delinquent behavior. The analysis also

explores several plausible theoretical explanations for how the causal sequence operates.

Literature Review

The relationship between family structure and delinquent behavior is arguably one of the most

well-researched topics in the discipline of criminology. Studies on this issue cover nearly 100 years,

beginning with the pioneering work of Breckinridge and Abbott (1912), Healy and Bronner (1926),

Shaw and McKay (1932), Hodgkiss (1933), and Glueck and Glueck (1950). Many studies have been

published over the decades assessing the strength of this association. Researchers have also

described the key methodological issues in this area of research, evaluated whether the importance

of family structure varies according to circumstances, and have tried to explain the causal nature of

the relationship by drawing upon prominent criminological theories (see Apel & Kaukinen, 2008;

Free, 1991; Kierkus & Baer, 2002; and Wells & Rankin, 1991, for overviews).

The literature is in general agreement that children from nontraditional families are at an elevated

risk of delinquency when compared to children residing with both biological parents (Free, 1991;

Wells & Rankin, 1991). The literature also shows that it is empirically and conceptually inadequate

to measure family structure as a ‘‘broken/intact’’ dichotomy (Apel & Kaukinen, 2008; Kierkus &

Baer, 2002; Wells & Rankin, 1986, 1991) and that the criminogenic influence of familial disruption

may vary by circumstances (Kierkus & Baer, 2003; Kierkus & Hewitt, 2009; Price & Kunz, 2003).

In addition, theoretical constructs drawn from social control and learning theories (Adlaf & Ivis,

1997; Apel & Kaukinen, 2008; Demuth & Brown, 2004; Kierkus & Baer, 2002; Rebellon, 2002;

Sampson & Laub, 1993) may help explain why family structure is related to misbehavior.

Some research has been conducted on the deleterious effects of cohabiting on children. Raley,

Frisco, and Wildsmith (2005), for example, concluded that children living in maternal cohabiting

394 Criminal Justice Review 35(4)

394