In my opinion, I find tittle 's control-balance theory to be a little bit off. In the book, it states, “Tittle argued that a person is least likely to offend when he or she has a balance of controlling and being controlled” (Tittle, 1995 ). The thing that I don 't understand is: How can the balance of controlling and being controlled determine whether or not a person will offend or not? I believe that a person could offend on other circumstances, such as how they grow up. By this, I mean if the mother or father was in their life, the environment, or it can be the fact that the person may have a better conscious if they would commit some type of crime. He may have had some vaild points with this theory, but I feel as though he should break his
…show more content…
Hagan 's theory says, “The primary focus of this theory is on the level of control and patriarchal attitudes, as well as structure in the household, which are influenced by parental positions in the workforce” (Hagan). I can believe that when a mother and father have some form of an equal power at work, then there is nothing that could possibly go wrong. The children will understand this concept and assume that being a male/female does not make a difference. Some households can deal with the fact of a mother staying home to take care of the children and the father going out to find any type of work he can. In today 's world, there is nothing wrong with women wanting to be outside the house and bring home money as well. Women may feel like it is not all up to the man because there are some things that men do and women can too, or it becomes on the level of being better. Also, there was another statement to this. It said, “However, households in which mothers and fathers have dissimilar levels of power in the workplace (i.e., unbalanced households) are more likely to suppress criminal activity in daughters” (Hagan). Whatt if it was the other way around and the criminal activity were in sons? To me, the gender is something that should not come to mind; it is the fact that criminal activity can be done by
Hagan 's theory says, “The primary focus of this theory is on the level of control and patriarchal attitudes, as well as structure in the household, which are influenced by parental positions in the workforce” (Hagan). I can believe that when a mother and father have some form of an equal power at work, then there is nothing that could possibly go wrong. The children will understand this concept and assume that being a male/female does not make a difference. Some households can deal with the fact of a mother staying home to take care of the children and the father going out to find any type of work he can. In today 's world, there is nothing wrong with women wanting to be outside the house and bring home money as well. Women may feel like it is not all up to the man because there are some things that men do and women can too, or it becomes on the level of being better. Also, there was another statement to this. It said, “However, households in which mothers and fathers have dissimilar levels of power in the workplace (i.e., unbalanced households) are more likely to suppress criminal activity in daughters” (Hagan). Whatt if it was the other way around and the criminal activity were in sons? To me, the gender is something that should not come to mind; it is the fact that criminal activity can be done by