Throughout this paper I will be discussing the use of Moffitt’s developmental theory within the article Onset of Offending and Life Course of Men Convicted of Murder. First I will be defining Moffitt’s developmental theory and explaining the two types of offenders presented in this theory. Following this definition I will then examine the authors’ use of this theory by summarizing, addressing any differences in understanding as well as whether I believe the theory to have been appropriately used or not. To draw this paper to a close I will be comparing the findings presented in the article to the rest of findings from this theory as well as evaluating the goodness of the theory as a whole. Terrie Moffitt’s developmental theory, or taxonomy
…show more content…
To find an appropriate place for those who commit homicide three groups were identified: early onset, late onset, and no prior offending. This study found that early onset offenders were more likely to have grown up in poverty as well as having many changes in caregivers and have been abused both sexually and physically. They were said to be found disruptive before the age of thirteen. The late onset group and the no-offending group were very similar, the members of this group had very few problems in their youth, their problems began in adulthood. This study found that murderers would most likely belong to the late-onset group (Dobash et al. 2007). The main difference in understanding is that I only have knowledge of Moffitt’s taxonomy and Dobash et al (2007) have a more in depth understanding of developmental taxonomies. Even though they are using other developmental theories as well as Moffitt’s a lot of the information they provide can still fit into Moffitt’s explanation of what makes a life-course-persistent offender. Their use of Moffitt’s developmental theory as a base is a great way to start because it allows somebody with only a vague understanding of developmental theories, like myself, to still understand the basis of what they are talking …show more content…
Moffitt’s developmental taxonomy is extremely parsimonious, you either fall into one category or the other and the categories are rather self explanatory. The scope of this theory is very wide and can be used to explain all types of crime. It has a very high level of logical consistency, the categories of criminal behavior make sense as does the idea that a disadvantaged environment paired with neurological deficits would make a person more likely to become a life-course-persistent offender. The testability of this theory is a little difficult because, even though it would make it more likely for a person to become a life-course-persistent offender when they meet the previously addressed criteria, it is not necessary. Developmental taxonomies in general are an empirically validated group of theories, although this one is not quite as relevant to crime as it once was it is still valid enough to be used as a basis for newer taxonomies (Tibbetts
To find an appropriate place for those who commit homicide three groups were identified: early onset, late onset, and no prior offending. This study found that early onset offenders were more likely to have grown up in poverty as well as having many changes in caregivers and have been abused both sexually and physically. They were said to be found disruptive before the age of thirteen. The late onset group and the no-offending group were very similar, the members of this group had very few problems in their youth, their problems began in adulthood. This study found that murderers would most likely belong to the late-onset group (Dobash et al. 2007). The main difference in understanding is that I only have knowledge of Moffitt’s taxonomy and Dobash et al (2007) have a more in depth understanding of developmental taxonomies. Even though they are using other developmental theories as well as Moffitt’s a lot of the information they provide can still fit into Moffitt’s explanation of what makes a life-course-persistent offender. Their use of Moffitt’s developmental theory as a base is a great way to start because it allows somebody with only a vague understanding of developmental theories, like myself, to still understand the basis of what they are talking …show more content…
Moffitt’s developmental taxonomy is extremely parsimonious, you either fall into one category or the other and the categories are rather self explanatory. The scope of this theory is very wide and can be used to explain all types of crime. It has a very high level of logical consistency, the categories of criminal behavior make sense as does the idea that a disadvantaged environment paired with neurological deficits would make a person more likely to become a life-course-persistent offender. The testability of this theory is a little difficult because, even though it would make it more likely for a person to become a life-course-persistent offender when they meet the previously addressed criteria, it is not necessary. Developmental taxonomies in general are an empirically validated group of theories, although this one is not quite as relevant to crime as it once was it is still valid enough to be used as a basis for newer taxonomies (Tibbetts