HOJAT, MAHSA — GANG MEMBERS' EXPERIENCES OF CHILDHOOD CARE AND GANG INVOLVEMENT

The Institute for Clinical Social Work

Gang Members' Experiences of Childhood Care and Gang Involvement

A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the Institute for Clinical Social Work in Partial Fulfillment for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

By Mahsa Hojat

Chicago, Illinois February 2016

Abstract This phenomenological study offers an in-depth exploration of eight former gang members’ experiences with caregivers, significant adults, and other gang members and how those relationships affected decisions to join gangs. New findings emerged about the effect of relationships and exposure to trauma and violence on one’s sense of self and self-deficit formation. These findings present clinical as well as policy opportunities for gang prevention, intervention, and rehabilitation. The seven major findings in this study include: 1. Family relationships impact gang membership.

2. Gangs attract people in search of self-object need fulfillment.

3. Feelings of rejection and social alienation lead to searching for this fulfillment from other avenues, including gangs.

4. Exposure to violence leads gang members to perpetuate violence.

5. Unresolved trauma increases the appeal of gangs as a means of coping.

6. Some gang members cope by disconnecting from emotions and acting out internal states.

7. The presence of limited positive relationships with significant adults, although helpful, is not enough to provide needed missing self-object functions that can decrease vulnerability to gang involvement.

ii

For my family who inspired me to have dreams, and for Roozbeh who made my dreams come true with his support and unwavering love, sacrifices, kindness, support, positivity, and hope.

iii

Acknowledgements

I want to thank my committee for their tireless efforts, patience, wisdom, and considerable kindness in guiding me through this journey from day one. Dr. Denise Duval Tsioles deserves my gratitude for her calm, peaceful manner, organized thinking, and wisdom. I appreciate her continuous efforts, guidance, and support. So many times when I struggled, she gave me new hope. Her assistance at every step of the way made this project possible.

I appreciate Dr. Dennis Shelby for being a guiding force through the last 6 years, always present, always kind, and always so wise. Without his kindness, deep understanding of the population studied, knowledge of human behavior, and overall guidance regarding my dissertation, I would not have been able to make it.

I am thankful for Dr. James Lampe for his teachings, support, knowledge, and depth of understanding. I am forever grateful to him for guiding me through my methodology, the data-gathering and analysis processes, and for giving me a sense of stability. I thank Dr. Michael McNulty and Kevin McMahon for their support, understanding, and everpresent kindness.

My sincere appreciation to my cohort who stood by me along this road. My deepest gratitude goes to R.K, for being my rock and launching point, for supporting me and not allowing me to lose hope. He made this journey possible.

MH iv

Table of Contents Page Abstract…………………………………..………………………………………………ii Acknowledgments……………………………..………………………………………...iv List of Tables…………………………………………………………………………….ix List of Figures…………………………………………...………………………………..x Chapter I. Introduction………………………………………........................………………..1 General Statement of Purpose Statement of the Problem to be Studied and Specific Objectives to Be Achieved Significance of Study for Clinical Social Work II. Literature Review…………………… ……………………...….......…………..15 Demographics of Gangs Criminological Perspective about Gangs Social and Psychological Perspective on Gangs Psychodynamic Perspective on Gangs Theoretical and Conceptual Framework of the Proposed Study Hypotheses to Be Tested or Questions to Be Explored

v

Table of Contents—Continued

Chapter

Page Theoretical and Operational Definitions of Major Concepts Concept of the Self from Self-Psychology Perspective Statement of Assumptions

III. Research Strategy……………………………………………………………..76 Type of Study and Design Scope of Study, Setting, Population and Sampling, Sources, and Nature of Data Data Collection Methods and Instruments Plan for Data Analysis Statement on Protecting the Rights of Human Subjects Limitation of the Research Plan IV. Introduction to Results…………………………………………………….97 Participant Summaries Participant Population: Demographics Summary of the Results of the Participant Population (Demographic and Contextual) Raw Data

vi

Table of Contents—Continued

Chapter

Page

V. Results: Seven Themes……………………….......…………………………..111 Introduction: Seven Themes Theme One: Family Theme Two: Gang Theme Three: Peers Theme Four: Trauma Theme Five: Violence Theme Six: Coping Theme Seven: World VI. Findings and Theoretical Implications ………………………………….195 Summary of Results and Analysis of Themes: The Essence of the Phenomenon Family Dynamics Gang Dynamics Trauma VII. Implication and Conclusion……………………………..........................239 Further Research Implications Clinical Implications Research Limitations

vii

Table of Contents—Continued

Appendices

Page

A: Recruitment Flyer……………………………………………………….....247 B: Support Letters..............................................................................................249 C: Initial Phone Interview Script…………………..…….………………...…255 D: Consent Forms…………….……………………………………………....258 E: Mental Health Resources…………………………….………………….....264 F: Establishing Participant’s Understanding of Consent Form...............….267 G: Demographic Survey....................................................................................269 H: Interview Questions......................................................................................272 References……………...................……………………………………………276

viii

List of Tables

Table

Page

1. Length and Range of Time Active and Inactive in the Gang…..…………..……102 2. Frequency of Meaning Units Mentioned…………………….…….…………….109 3. Frequency of Meaning Units Mentioned Continued…………….………………110

ix

List Figures

Figure

Page

1. Family Construct, Relationships, and Psychological Impact................................232 2. Gang Constructs and Relationships……………………………………………...233 3. Peers Relationships and Their Psychological Impact……………………………234 4. Experiences and Impact of Trauma …..................................................................235 5. Experience and Impact of Violence ….….............................................................236 6. Attempts to Cope………………………………………………………………...237 7. Relations with Others in the World …..................................................................238

x

1

Chapter I

Formulation of the Problem General Statement of Purpose—Introduction From working with gang members incarcerated in Los Angeles County Twin Towers Correctional Facility, I formed the opinion that there is a connection between childhood significant relationships and gang involvement. Many of the gang members I have worked appeared to strive for recognition, care, attunement, belonging, worth, value, and many other primary psychological needs that seem to have gone unmet in their childhood relationships with caregivers and significant adults.

Sanyik Shakur (1993), a former Los Angeles gang member known as Monster Cody Scott, tells a story of returning home in the middle of the night after his release from juvenile hall and being greeted by his mother. Believing that her son had run away from juvenile hall, Cody’s mother said, “You know they are going to come and get you, don’t you?” (p. 172) Instead of greeting him with the love that he desired, his mother scolded him for using drugs and making bad decisions in his life. Cody states, “I knew she meant well, but I was not up to it (that night). I wanted to be loved, to be missed, to be wanted, not scolded” (p. 173). He continues to say that after the conversation with his mother, he went out and shot at rival gang members because he was angry.

2

This case exemplifies how a gang member may turn to a state of violence and reactivity to overcome feelings of disappointment and hurt in the face of un-mirrored and dismissive responses from caregivers. Based on stories like these and my own experiences, I began to think that self-object functions such as mirroring, idealization, and twinship may have not been met by gang members’ caregivers or other important adults during childhood. Therefore, potential gang members may be searching for the fulfillment of these needs, thus making them more vulnerable to joining gangs.

Contributing factors to gang involvement demand understanding and attention, especially because gang members’ criminal activities not only influence other gang members, but entire communities, and even society at large. These are the ideas I hope to illuminate in this study.

Scope of the problem.

Childhood maltreatment and gang involvement.

Many researchers have shown that childhood maltreatment increases the risk of delinquency and gang involvement in adolescence and young adulthood. Many researchers have explored the importance of childhood relationships, namely maltreatment, showing that violence in childhood correlates with higher risk of delinquency in adolescence and adulthood (Heck & Walsh, 2000; Pfeiffer, Wetzels, & Enzmann, 1999; Smith & Thornberry, 1995). A longitudinal study by Widom (1989, 1992) showed that maltreated and neglected children have a higher risk of becoming

3

delinquent in adolescence. In addition, Kelley, Thornberry, and Smith (1997) found that 70% of child-abuse victims reported engaging in violent behavior as teenagers, compared to 56% of non-abused children (as stated in Hosser, Raddatz and Windzio, 2007).

According to this research, childhood experiences of abuse and neglect correlate with an increased likelihood for delinquent behavior during adolescence and adulthood.

Thompson and Braaten-Antrim (1998) explored the relationship between physical and sexual abuse and gang involvement. They found that being abused increases the odds of joining a gang by 13% and that frequency of abuse does not affect these odds. Rather, being abused in general increases the odds of delinquency. Hosser, Raddatz, and Windzio (2007) found that children who are maltreated are twice as likely to become victimized as adolescents. Furthermore, repetitive victimization in adolescence increases the likelihood of later violence and delinquency. Therefore, being a victim increases the chance of becoming a victimizer.

Other studies have explored the effect of maltreatment on physical and relational aggression and found that boys who have been maltreated become more physically aggressive, find aggression as a solution to their problems, and interpret social cues as hostile. Girls who have been maltreated show more relational aggression. Both girls and boys who have been abused find themselves having difficulty with emotional regulation as a result of the internalized fear, hostility, and rejection they experienced through abuse.

This is because abused children form an internal working model in which they view themselves as not worthy or competent and view others as not caring or responsive. They find love and care as conditional, sporadic, and likely to be taken away (Cullerton-Sen,

4

Cassidy, Murray-Close, Cicchetti, & Crick, 2008). Considering that there is a strong link between childhood maltreatment and violence in adolescent and adulthood, one can understand the significance of childhood experiences in later life. It is possible to conclude that emotional support and a sense of belonging to family, neighbors, or friends can act as a protective factor against the risk of delinquency and violence.

Trauma, adversity and gang involvement.

Stress, trauma, and adversity are a part of everyone’s development to varying degrees.

However, the intensity, quantity, and responses to such experiences can lead to protective stress responses. These responses either increase one’s resilience or have a damaging effect. An individual who experiences chronic toxic stress, trauma, and violence can manage and tolerate such experiences more effectively when caregivers offer supportive and nurturing responses, which can help make sense of the events. “Toxic stress can result from strong, frequent, and prolonged activation of the body’s stress system in an absence of buffering protection of a supportive adult relationship” (Shonkoff et al., 2012, p. 227).

Exposure to toxic stress changes brain structure and functioning, which leads to increased anxiety, impaired memory, hyper-vigilance, and problems with executive functioning of the brain, including self-regulation and impulse control. It is reasonable to assume that some inner-city gang members, having been raised in poor, violent, gangridden neighborhoods, have been exposed to chronic trauma and are likely to have

5

experienced toxic stress. One can understand how many gang members’ impulsive behaviors and emotional dysregulation can result from exposure to violence and a toxic environment. Understanding gang members’ childhood experiences in relation to significant adults can shed light on the level of support and buffering protection they received during exposure to toxic stress.

One has to remember that gang members were once children who, at some point in their lives, experienced forces beyond their control. These forces may have set them on a path towards violence and delinquency. Although the effect of childhood maltreatment and trauma has been studied in regards to both delinquency and gang membership, there is a gap in research regarding the potential of missing self-object functions. I studied the idea that some vital emotional component was missing or compromised in the childhood history of some gang members, which could have affected their decision to join a gang.

History of the Problem.

Throughout history, scores of people got together and formed groups to provide security, protection, and a sense of identity and belonging. However, some of these groups became known as gangs when they participated in criminal activity. According to National Criminal Justice Reference Services, “A gang is a group of three or more individuals who engage in criminal activity and identify themselves with a common name or sign” (National Criminal Justice Reference Services, 2011, para. 2). Other definitions

6

of gangs highlight the gang organization and members’ desire for power in relation to their peers.

A youth gang is an organization of tightly bonded youth who are joined together and controlled by a criminal leader. A gang is often conceived and nurtured by an individual who uses it as a vehicle to raise himself or herself to a position of power among his or her peers. (Burns, 2003, p. 1)

Gang’s violence and criminal behavior.

Gangs engage in both social and criminal activities. The risk of violence is still high among gang members and rival gangs even when they are engaged in social activities.

During social events or other interactions with outsiders, gangs attempt to intimidate, instill fear, vandalize, and bully (http://www.lapdonline.org). Gangs in the United States represent a large group of youth and young adults who engage in criminal activity such as drug and weapons trafficking, drive-by shootings, and homicides, in order to protect “turf,” meaning the geographical area under a gang’s control. Gang-related homicides in the United States are significantly higher than other types of homicides. According to Egley Jr. and Howell (2012), Among the very large cities, the number of reported gang-related homicides increased 13% from 2009 to 2010. Of the more than 700 total homicides that occurred in Chicago, IL, and Los Angeles, CA, more than half were reported to be gang-related. (p. 2)

7

The continuous threat and increasing violence of youth gangs presents an evergrowing problem in the United States. Every year during the past decade, there has been an average of 27,000 gangs and 770,000 gang members nationally. The most recent estimate of gang members in 2012 showed that there are 850,000 gang members, an increase of 8.6% in comparison to 2011 (National Youth Gang Survey Analysis, 2014).

Youth gangs have changed from being mostly adult males in inner cities to younger individuals including adolescents, females, and increased numbers of African American and Caucasian members (Howell, Egley Jr., & Gleason, 2002). In 2009, there were 92.6% male gang members and 7.4% female gang members (National Youth Gang Survey Analysis, 2012). The Federal Bureau of Investigations reported that 90% of juvenile boys in a correctional facility have gang affiliations (National Gang Threat Assessment, 2011). Additionally, findings from the National Youth Gang Center Analysis (2011) illustrate that the gang population appears to be becoming younger, as out of every five gang members, two are youth or children.

Some researchers have studied the individual and social characteristics of gang members. In a study conducted by Craig, Gagnon, and Tremblay (2002), 142 children between the ages of 10 and 14 were interviewed. Among them, gang members shared two specific characteristics. First, they expressed behavioral problems in different settings as reported by parents, teachers, and peers. Secondly, they had been pushed away from prosocial groups. Therefore, the gang members were friends with others who engaged in delinquent behaviors. This shows that gangs are gaining younger members who experience difficulties in different individual and social settings.

8

For many people, gangs are viewed as groups of violent, delinquent youth who destroy property and lives. And gang statistics do indeed demonstrate a soaring level of criminal activity, violence, and homicide among gang members. However, while these statistics provide a general picture of gang violence, they fail to show the lives of the youth who form the core membership. The children and young adults involved in gangs are often regarded as statistics, mere criminals to be taken out of society and locked away. However, one has to remember that these children and young adults were once children. Factors during their development may have set them on a path to violence and delinquency.

Childhood relationships and gangs.

Studies have also looked at the impact of parenting and parent involvement on gang involvement. Researchers found that the quality of parent relationships with their children can either be a protective factor or a risk factor in youth delinquency or gang involvement. Walker-Barnes and Mason (2001) explored the effects of peers and parenting behaviors on gang involvement and delinquency among young people in different ethnic groups. They found that in African American families, “[a] higher level of behavioral control and lower level lax and psychological control were related to decrease in gang involvement . . . � (p. 1826).

Research has clearly established a relationship between parental behaviors and children’s outcomes in adolescence and later life, while not counting the effects of

9

parental personality on the emotional environment they provide for their children.

Gorman-Smith, Tolan, and Henry (2000) found that family dynamics, characterized by a lack of emotional closeness and dependability, will increase the risk for delinquency even if there is a high level of “discipline consistency, parental monitoring, and structure in family roles� (p. 192). The authors also suspected that in such families, if the need for belonging and emotional support is met in the neighborhood, children are less likely to engage in delinquent behavior.

Parental behaviors and relationships with their children, along with maltreatment and exposure to violence, are some of the main factors impacting young people’s gravitation toward delinquency and gang involvement. It is reasonable to conclude that emotional support and a sense of belonging with family, neighbors, or friends can act as a protective factor against delinquency and violence.

Foregrounding.

My interest in this study was born from being "warned" about gang members by an extended family member, who had lived in the United States for many years, when I migrated to U.S. as a young adult. Although I did not have any personal experiences with gang members as a college student in Santa Monica College, I was told that African American males might be gang members, and I was warned to steer clear of them. This came from the prejudice of people around me who perceived individuals from other ethnic groups, especially African Americans or Latinos, as potential gang members. This

10

prejudice troubled me because I am a woman who grew up in a country whose government dismisses, devalues, and discriminates against women. Therefore, women are treated poorly, considered as less than men, have fewer rights, and are abused, maltreated, and kept in a disadvantaged position in society. The laws and judicial system work against women’s rights and keeps women in a disadvantaged position.

I found it hard to believe that in the United States, where I had migrated for a better life, people experienced what I had experienced as a woman based on race and ethnicity.

I felt a connection to those who were from a different, non-dominant culture and occupied a disadvantaged position in the society. It was especially bothersome to me that people still suffer disenfranchisement in the same country that offers me choice and equal rights, as well as the freedom to express myself and pursue my goals and dreams. I felt a need to understand the dynamics that would lead someone to join a gang, thus fuel the stereotype about African American males.

As Pope John Paul II said, It is essential for every human being to have a sense of participating, of being a part of the decisions and endeavors that shape the destiny of the world. Violence and injustice have often in the past found their root causes in people’s sense of being deprived of the right to shape their own lives. Future violence and injustice cannot be avoided when the basic right to participate in the choices of society is denied. (Pope John Paul II, 1985 as stated in Gordon, 2009, p. 43)

11

Through research and literature review of different topics regarding gang involvement and characteristics of gang members, I formed the opinion that gangs, as an initially misunderstood group, were formed of hurt individuals who were getting together to protect themselves. Reading about the history of gang formation, I realized that the first gangs were formed as groups of friends attempting to protect each other from prejudice and discrimination. Additionally, I came to understand the importance of childhood experiences, victimization and trauma on later delinquency. I developed a strong empathy for children in gangs and wanted to know more about how and why they joined gangs.

While working with gang members at the Department of Children and Family Services and at Twin Towers Correctional Facility, I discovered that the majority of gang members I met had experiences with violence in the home or in the neighborhood prior to their gang involvement. I realized that early relationships, experiences of trauma, and childhood maltreatment in the form of abuse or neglect have a significant impact on children. I do not mean to make the assumption that every child who has experienced childhood maltreatment will become a gang member. However, the gang members I worked with, whether actively involved in the gang or former gang members, all shared histories of childhood maltreatment, abandonment, violence in the community, and witnessing others being victims of violence. Childhood relationships impact one’s development throughout life, and I wanted to better understand the nature of those relationships as experienced by gang members.

12

Statement of the Problem to Be Studied and Specific Objectives to Be Achieved The purpose of the study.

This study was designed to explore male former gang members' early childhood relationships with their caregivers and how their perceived care or lack thereof may have influenced their gang involvement. The purpose of this study was to gain an in-depth, narrative understanding of the nature of childhood relationships with caregivers and significant adults, based on the participants’ descriptions. The overall objective was to examine the emotional dynamics, feelings, and thoughts of gang members in relation to significant adults and caregivers during childhood, and to understand their reasons for joining a gang.

I achieved this via the following: 1. Observing how former gang members talk about their caregivers and families of origin 2. Examining their early emotional environment 3. Getting a sense of what emotional needs were met or unmet 4. Seeing if unmet needs may have been a contributing factor in gang involvement The results of this study shed light on the childhood histories, stories, and felt experiences of a sample of gang members. These results also offer knowledge and insight to professionals, community workers, and policy makers who work with this population and those affected by it.

13

Objectives of current research.

1. To listen to how gang members talk about their caregivers and family of origin, specifically their early relationships 2. To examine gang members' early emotional environments 3. To obtain a sense of what emotional needs were met or unmet 4. To see if unmet needs may have been a contributing factor to seeking gang involvement

Significance of Study for Clinical Work Gangs and criminal activity committed by gangs is a widespread problem in the United States, one which researchers from varying disciplines have analyzed. Previous research has shown that gangs serve “the interest and the need of certain vulnerable youths, particularly during adolescence and young adult period when existing social, economic, and even religious institutions do not function properly� (Spergel, 1995, p.

90).

The knowledge gathered from my study of gang members' childhood relationships with significant adults provides a deeper understanding of this population. This understanding can impact social-work research, practice, and policymaking. The effects of childhood maltreatment and trauma have been studied in regards to both delinquency and gang membership, particularly from a quantitative perspective. The addition of qualitative, narrative accounts of early gang-member experiences with caregivers can

14

potentially add depth to the literature. Only a few qualitative studies have delved into this topic, particularly from the approach of firsthand accounts of former gang members.

Further, no studies have attempted to consider these experiences from a selfpsychological perspective.

I studied the idea that perhaps some vital emotional component was missing or compromised in the childhood history of a number of gang members, which could have affected their decisions to join a gang. Developing this idea, I uncovered new knowledge of gang members' early relationships and experiences, as well as emotional and psychological needs. This knowledge has the potential to influence the development of programs—in schools, communities, child welfare, etc.—that work toward gang prevention, intervention, and rehabilitation.

The phenomenological nature of this study gave the participants a chance to share their histories. By reflecting on their stories, the participants may have experienced a sense of relief and gained a different understanding of their own pasts. Some of the participants may have felt pride or a sense of achievement, as their stories will affect the knowledge and understanding of others. Potentially, these stories can help those who work with other at-risk youth and gang members, and ultimately even affect policy changes.

15

Chapter II

Literature Review The literature on gangs is vast and includes many different perspectives. For the purpose of this study, a summary of the relevant literature regarding gang members’ childhood relationships with family and other significant adults is presented. This summary is by no means all-inclusive. It provides a synopsis of the gang studies that are most relevant to this specific project.

I acknowledge that the gang phenomenon is multifaceted. What is offered here attempts to shed light on one aspect of the gang issue, namely gang member’s childhood experiences. The complexity of gang membership lends itself to study across disciplines.

In addition to descriptive information, my research addresses four major areas: criminology, sociology, psychology, and psychology from a psychodynamic perspective.

Demographics of Gangs Groups have always existed in human history, starting with family, kinship, and later on, larger social groups. In societies dealing with environmental and individual struggles, limited resources, and the presence of adversaries, groups were formed to provide protection, a means of gathering resources, and survival. Groups became known as gangs when they participated in criminal activity. The federal law defines gangs as:

16

An ongoing group, club, organization, or association of five or more persons: (a) that has as one of its primary purposes the commission of one or more of the criminal offenses . . . (b) the members of which engage, or have engaged within the past 5 years, in a continuing series of offenses . . . and (c) the activities of which affect interstate or foreign commerce. (National Gang Center, 2013, p. 1) The definition of gang varies at a state-by-state level. The State of California defines a gang as: An organization, association, or group [of] three or more persons, [who] formal[ly] or informal[ly] have as one of its primary activities the commission of one or more criminal acts . . . and whose members individually or collectively engage in or have engaged in a pattern of gang activity [and identify themselves by] a common name, common identifying sign, or symbol. (National Gang Center, 2013, p. 10) Gangs are organized groups that identify with a specific area, name, sign and dress code. They also have their own specific rules and codes of conduct, and engage in different forms and levels of criminal activity.

Prevalence of gangs.

An ever-growing problem in the United States is the continuous rise of youth gangs.

According to the latest National Gang Threat Assessment, conducted in 2011 by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, there are 33,000 gangs—including street, prison, and

17

outlaw motorcycle gangs—with an estimated 1.4 million active members (National Gang Threat Assessment, 2011). There is a significant increase of gang membership in the Northeast and Southeast regions of the United States. Neighborhood-based gangs, ethnic based-gangs (African American, Asian, Caribbean, and Eurasian gangs), and nationallevel gangs are all rapidly growing (National Gang Intelligence Center [NGIC], 2011).

Gangs continue to increase in numbers and members. In 2011, the National Youth Gang Survey collected data from a large sample of law enforcement agencies and found an increase of about 3.1% in gangs and an increase of about 3.5% in gang members from 2010 to 2011, while surveying 200 fewer law enforcement jurisdictions (Egley Jr. & Howell, 2013). In the last decade, there has been a 9% increase in gang activity. The National Gang Center Quarterly Newsletter reports that gang activity has increased from 25% to 34% and is more widespread than a decade ago (National Youth Gang Survey Analysis, 2012). The most significant change in the last decade was the increase in the number of gangs by more than 13% (Egley Jr. & Howell, 2013).

Gangs also continue to be widespread among different communities. Gangs have become identified as a social problem that has extended to many communities in the United States (Gilbertson, 2009). The National Youth Gang Center estimated that “32.4% of all cities, suburban areas, towns, and rural counties experienced a gang problem in 2008� (Egley, Howell, & Moore, 2010, p. 1). Gangs continue to grow and become more prevalent in large cities, increasing the number of gangs and their members each year.

18

Characteristics of gang members.

Youth gangs have changed from adult males in inner cities to younger individuals including adolescents, female members, and increased number of African American and Caucasian members (Howell, Egley Jr., & Gleason, 2002). In 2009 there were 92.6% male gang members and 7.4% female gang members (National Youth Gang Survey Analysis, 2012). “The most recent figures provided by law enforcement are 46% Hispanic/Latino gang members, 35% African American/black gang members, over 11% white gang members, and 7% other race/ethnicity of gang members” (National youth gang center analysis, 2011, p. 1). The Federal Bureau of Investigation reported that 90% of juvenile boys in a correctional facility have a gang affiliation (National Gang Threat Assessment, 2011). The National Youth Gang Center Analysis (2011) report illustrates that the gang population appears to becoming younger, as out of every five gang members, two are youth or children. Larger cities with more established gang problems report more adult gang members, while smaller cities and rural communities—having experienced more recent gang emergence—report equal proportions of juvenile and adult gang members. Female gang members have become more common, with half of the gangs outside large cities and one in four gangs in large cities having female gang members (National Gang Center Analysis, 2011).

Some researchers have studied the individual and social characteristics of gang members. In a study conducted by Craig, Gagnon, and Tremblay (2002), gang members between the ages of 10 and 14 were interviewed and found to struggle with behavioral problems in different settings, as reported by parents, teachers, and peers. Furthermore,

19

they were found to have been pushed away from pro-social groups. Therefore, these gang members became friends with others who engaged in delinquent behaviors (Craig, Gagnon, & Tremblay, 2002). This shows that gangs are gathering younger members who have difficulties in different individual and social settings.

Criminological Perspective about Gangs Gang members versus non-gang members.

Poverty, maltreatment, trauma, and violence all influence a child’s healthy development. However, research has shown that those who join gangs have different characteristics compared to their counterparts who have experienced similar adversities.

Gang members are more likely to be males from ethnic minorities who experience depression and repeated suicidal ideation. Also, these gang members have engaged in alcohol and drug use, been involved in delinquency, and have been victimized by peers (McDaniel, 2012).

The difference between gang members and delinquent youth is in the level of delinquency, as delinquent youth increase their criminal activity dramatically when they are a part of the gang. Yet their level of delinquency decreases after leaving the gang.

(Bendixen, Endersen, & Olweus, 2006).

Gang members also are more likely to participate in criminal behavior and carry a gun. White and Mason (2006) found that although joining a group of friends and participating in antisocial behavior is common among Australian youth, there is a

20

significant difference between the gangs and non-gang youth groups. The authors found that gangs are usually formed of larger groups, and although they engage in substance abuse and fighting, as do other youth groups, gangs also engage in more criminal activities. These criminal activities are more likely to involve weapons and related injuries. Gang activities are also more street-based in comparison to other youth groups, which often gather in public places such as the mall or at their homes (White & Mason, 2006). In addition, gang members are more likely to carry weapons to school, and own a gun and use it while committing crime (Miller & Decker, 2001; Decker & Curry, 2002).

Gang members are more likely to form an in-group / out-group dynamic to rationalize their violent and aggressive behavior. In comparison to non-gang members and “peripheral youth” who associate with the gangs, gang members are more anti-authority and more likely to blame their victims.

Both gang members and peripheral youth are more delinquent and place more value on social status in comparison to non-gang members (Alleyne & Wood, 2010). Gang members take responsibility for their actions among their peer gang members, but due to the in-group / out-group distinction, gang members can blame the out-group, and by extension their victims. This is because the gang becomes a collective identity for its members.

Gang members form a community or society for themselves, in which the members are responsible for their actions toward their “homies” (gang members from the same gang) but not others in the society (Alleyne & Wood, 2010). In a study by White and Mason (2006), gang members stated that the main reasons for joining were to “gain

21

status, protection, money, and get away with illegal behavior� while their non-gangmember peers joined groups “to make friends, to belong, and to engage in group activities� (p. 61). Gangs provide members with a shelter in which to express their violent and aggressive emotions by demeaning victims who are outside the group.

Reasons for gang membership.

Research indicates that gang members join gangs for different reasons than members of other youth groups. Familial, peer-related, social, economical and racial marginalization, along with lack of suitable opportunities for success and achievement, play a role in gang membership. Some gang members express that they were attracted to gangs as a result of peer pressure, abuse in the family or lack of family bonds, monetary gain, and a sense of having an ethnic and economical marginal status (Gordon, 2000).

Others have also found that in an environment where family and community organizations, including school and church, fail to provide the necessary social support for youth, young people form gangs to gain the support they desire (Lane & Meeker, 2004). Many social, familial, and environmental factors affect gang membership, including: 1. Availability of marijuana 2. The number of troubled neighborhood youth 3. Single-parent households 4. Lack of supervision and parental control

22

5. Antisocial and pro-violent attitudes of siblings and parents 6. Learning disabilities 7. Poor school achievement, commitment, and aspiration in elementary school, which predicted an increased risk of future gang membership (Hill, Howell, Hawkins, & Battin-Pearson, 1999).

Some researchers believe that gang members gain honor and reputation through expressing anger at society for their lack of social success (Cloward & Ohlin, 1960).

Therefore, the gang presents itself as a valid option to counteract the effects of marginalization, poverty, and lack of resources.

Impact of family.

The family environment has been repeatedly implicated in playing a role in gang involvement. When children are born and raised in toxic environments—which often include substance abuse, mental illness, violence, and an inability to cope positively and appropriately—they are more vulnerable to gangs. Inadequate parental monitoring and supervision predict gang affiliation (O’Brien, Daffern, Chu, & Thomas, 2013). According to Alleyne and Wood (2014), specific neighborhood struggles (e.g., social disorganization and disadvantage, high rates of delinquency and crime, poverty, and negative interactions with the police) reduce the family’s chances to form pro-social bonds and protect young people from the negative effects of both neighborhood and peers. Therefore, “a lack of parental management leaves young people without an

23

opportunity to depend on pro-social bonds; instead they are left vulnerable to the influences of their neighborhood and peers” (p. 560).

Additionally, Alleyne and Wood (2014) state that gang membership is a complex matter, and no one factor can explain this phenomenon. However, certain social and environmental factors, including neighborhood and family dynamics, can influence prosocial or antisocial development and produce an overall environment that is more or less conducive to gang involvement. This context in turn affects how a person responds in school and to peers.

Finally, individuals’ own tendencies and personalities play a significant role in the extent to which social and environmental factors affect gang involvement (Alleyne and Wood, 2014, p. 561). The family is not a direct predictor of gang membership, but does mitigate the effect of the neighborhood factors on children and young people. Family members may also struggle with the effects of neighborhood disadvantage, thus becoming either protective factors or risk factors in a child or youth’s gang-involvement tendencies. One of the many factors that play a role in gang membership is the relationship with family, which I explored in this study.

Intergenerational structure of the gang.

Many gang members speak about the intergenerational effects of gang membership, in which family members—including parents, uncles, aunts, siblings, cousins and others— are a part of the gang. The criminal perspective and gang mentality is passed on from

24

generation to generation as young people are socialized to stray from societal norms (Wood & Alleyne, 2010). Research illustrates that there is a positive relationship between gang membership and having family members who are criminally involved (Eitle, Gunkel, & Van Gundy, 2004; Maxson, Whitlock, & Klein, 1998; Sirpal, 2002), or who are gang members themselves (Spergel, 1995).

One can assume that the presence of pro-violent and pro-gang attitudes among family members influences the child to seek the ideals, values, and possible gang membership expectations that are consciously or unconsciously set by the family or significant people in the child’s life.

Gang as an alternative family.

According to previous research, gang members expressed that the gang is their family.

However, from an observer’s perspective, listening to the wiretaps used to collect evidence against gang members by the police, the gang does not act as a supportive family. Rather, gangs are characterized by “tension, violence, and betrayal, both from rival gangs and from fellow gang members” (Beare & Hogg, 2013, p. 421). One can see that gangs lure individuals who are vulnerable. For example, gangs might appear particularly enticing to individuals searching for a family, someone to care for, protection, supervision, and guidance.

However, in reality, even if these needs are met at some level in the gang, gang members are forced to pay a significant price for receiving any confirmation, validation,

25

or fulfillment of these needs. Many times, gang members achieve the apparent fulfillment of emotional needs only by giving up their own hopes, dreams, future, and in some instances even their lives.

Relationship with other gang members.

The gang follows a code that is centered upon the gang’s survival. “Rather than any agreed upon list of rules for gang members, the code is, instead, more akin to a maze of contradictory expectations that pit the importance of individual reputation, image, and status against the advancement of gang interests” (Beare & Hogg, 2013, p. 429). Beare and Hogg (2013) report on the conversation of a gang leader whose gang stole from him, and whose rival gang then attempted to murder him because he was kind and less violent with his gang’s members.

Therefore, as a gang leader, this leader's personal “Mr. Nice Guy” aspiration left him at risk of further victimization by his own gang members and others. A friend told him that he had to establish himself in his position as a gang leader by victimizing others. The gang may offer the mirage of a chance for self-fulfillment, accomplishment, and selfactualization. However, in essence, the gang’s interest and survival overpowers any individual gain for the members.

26

Social and Psychological Perspective on Gangs Research has shown that there are five domains associated with an increased possibility of gang involvement among youth: 1. Individual level 2. Family level 3. Peer / group level 4. School level 5. Community level Since my study focused on former gang members’ relationships with caregivers, I focused primarily on factors at the levels of individual and family. At the individual level, drug use, delinquency, early dating, promiscuous sexual activity, sensation seeking, low self-esteem, and depression have been associated with increased gang involvement. At a family level, “Gang membership has been associated with: poverty, child maltreatment, family structure (e.g., broken home, absence of biological parents), family members involved in gangs, poor parental management (e.g., poor supervision or monitoring of children), and low child-parent attachment” (Goldman, Giles, & Hogg, 2014, p. 816).

Gang membership can also be significantly affected by (a) association with delinquent peers, (b) low achievement in and attachment to school, and (c) school staff members’ beliefs that students will not be successful in school. At a community level, gang involvement increases in communities that are unsafe, poverty-ridden, and that have low community attachment and integration (Goldman, Giles, & Hogg, 2014).

27

Gang members versus non-gang-member youth.

Gang members have experienced more of the negative risk factors in comparison to those who have not joined the gang. “While youth who join gangs share a similar set of risk factors as those who engage only in delinquency and violence, what distinguishes gang members is that they possess more of these factors and generally experience them in multiple developmental domains during childhood and early adolescence (Gilman, Hill, Hawkins, Howell, & Kosterman, 2014, p. 216) In addition to the level of exposure to risk through different developmental stages, many social and psychological factors affect gang membership. At an individual level, Winfree, Bernat, and Esbensen (2001) found that Hispanic children with the following characteristics have a higher likelihood of joining gangs: (a) being male, older, and having pro-gang attitudes, (b) having friends in gangs, and (c) seeing association with gangs as a positive reinforcement.

In addition, the above researchers found that Caucasian children had more pro-police attitudes and had friends who participated in more pro-social activities than their Hispanic counterparts. This holds with research indicating that gang members hold more negative attitudes toward authority and police (Lurigio, Flexon, & Greenleaf, 2008).

Maxson, Whitlock, and Klein (1998) found that gang members are more likely to resort to yelling, making threats, and engaging in violence to resolve conflict. This research also indicates that gang members are more likely to define themselves as troubled, to perceive a greater number of barriers toward a successful future, and to have experienced more negative life events.

28

On the other hand, non-gang members are more likely to use non-aggressive methods to resolve conflict, have a more positive view of self, and are more involved in religiousbased organizations and activities. Having access to more resources and experiencing authority as supportive, versus antagonistic, impacts attitudes towards social systems, including law enforcement. Thus we see how social and environmental factors impact the individual’s experiences and therefore attitudes.

At a social level, gang members tend to come from disadvantaged and disorganized neighborhoods, and have antisocial tendencies such as low pro-social tendencies (Dupere, Lacourse, Williams, Vitaro, & Tremblay, 2007). Goodwill (2009) looked at the perspectives of Aboriginal ex-gang members on joining and leaving gangs. Goodwill found that many gang members joined to prove their worth, as they experienced a sense of displacement and invalidation in both family and social contexts. These contexts included “child welfare removals, the reservations system, and incarceration that may be the outcome, in part, of structural inequality� (Grekul and LaBoucane-Benson, 2008 as stated in Goodwill, 2009, p. 128).

Therefore, in some ways, gangs provide the desired validating experiences one is searching for while providing both material and emotional reinforcement. The material reinforcement is provided through the possibility of material gain such as money, and the social reinforcement includes of possibility of achieving a sense of belonging and identity (Goodwill, 2009). According to Badger and Albright (2003), Aboriginal youth who joined gangs experienced disenfranchisement, trauma, violence, abuse, and maltreatment

29

in different areas of their lives. Additionally, these young people had limited options to meet their basic needs, resulting in the gang becoming a viable option (Goodwill, 2009).

So we see how gangs lure youth who have emotional and social traumas, as well as unmet needs, due to histories of disenfranchisement, violence, maltreatment, and other social and familial dysfunctions. The individual’s attitude toward the law or the gang also plays a significant role in gang membership. Indeed, it is crucial to keep in mind the potential interplay of social and individual factors affecting gang member’s attitudes toward gangs versus the police.

Reasons for gang membership.

Disenfranchised and disorganized communities.

Researchers have established many causes for joining gangs, including: 1. Poverty 2. Low socioeconomic status 3. Dysfunctional family dynamics 4. Lack of adult male role models 5. Substance abuse among parents and peers 6. Family members’ and peers’ participation in antisocial and criminal activities (Howell, 1998; Brownfield, Thompson, & Sorenson, 1997) Community and family and school structures, or lack thereof, were seen as a protective, or risk, factor in youth’s gang membership. Other researchers have

30

highlighted the lack of resources for pro-social activities, institutional breakdown of resources, and lack of opportunities in gang areas. Spergel (1995) states that “gangs form in communities when established institutional and organizational arrangements are weak or breakdown” (p. 89).

In the presence of lack of opportunities, disorganized communities, and absence of viable options in the community, such as family, church and government, the gang becomes a desirable alternative to the unsatisfactory yet legitimate solutions available (Hill, Howell, Hawkins, & Battin-Pearson, 1999; Spergel, 1995; Lane & Meeker, 2004; Brown, 2012). Historically, gang members formed gangs as societies for themselves, in which they could assert their “participation in cooperative action, in hunting, capture, conflict, flight, and escape” (Decker & Winkle, 1996, p. 5).

Tolleson (1996) adds, “Tightly organized and insular, the urban gang is functionally a society, endowed by its members with a clarity, nobility, and independence of purpose which liberated it from the tentacles of ordinary social and moral restraints” (p. 2).

Therefore, the gang becomes a society of its own, not forced to face the perceived disappointment, helplessness, and hopelessness of being unable to cope with the larger society’s unrealistic expectations—that is, the American Dream—due to lack of resources and opportunities. Facing alienation from the larger society and without community support, the gang becomes a “suede society,” promising to compensate for the missing opportunities at an extremely high price, including the lives of those involved.

31

Protection.

Many researchers have found protection from internal or external sources of anxiety, fear, and vulnerability are reasons for joining gangs. Some people join gangs for a sense of protection, safety, and alliance with others. This may be due to a perceived or real threat to oneself, as it pertains to a position of vulnerability (e.g., imprisonment or intimidation) relating to neighborhood affiliation, ethnicity, or race.

Some join the gang to gain protection from other gang members or have allies in the new community, school, or prison while others may join due to in-ethnic or intergenerational pressures as the gang gives the new individuals the perception (true or false) that they will need protection from other ethnic or racial groups in the community. (Spergel, 1995, p. 92) Becoming a gang member becomes a way to survive the effects of violence and victimization. Also, there is the aspect of an inability to avoid the culture of the gang, which is a part of potential members' communities and personal survival.

Other researchers have pointed to gang members’ experience of a lack of support from and mistrust of established agencies, such as law enforcement, which is officially entrusted with protecting all members of society, including gang members. As Morris (2012) stated, gang members value protection for themselves and their families. When they do not feel the protection and monitoring necessary for them to develop “safe, loyal, and trustworthy� support systems, they turn to gangs to provide those needs for themselves and their families. For gang members, a lack of opportunities leads to the

32

need for survival, as opposed to the relative luxury of living a full life. One gang member explained the difference between having an opportunity and survival this way: Not to be raisin’ nothing, but a younger Black person on the street, they’re pushed to the point where there’s nothin’ else for them to do, but to sell drugs if he wants to survive personally. It is the only option he can take, cuz he needs the guys (sic) money (Morris, 2012, p. 266).

Other authors argue that the lure of the gang pertains to more than just survival of environmental influences. Rather, gangs offer prospective members a means to endure internal states of trauma and traumatic memories (Tolleson, 1996). It appears that gangs offer a false sense of protection from internal and external trauma, victimization, and vulnerability.

Belonging, recognition, and comradeship.

Reasons for young people to join groups include: 1. Finding friends 2. Participating in group activities 3. Belonging to a group 4. Feeling important 5. Finding protection 6. Staying out of trouble

33

These are all age-appropriate twinship needs (per Kohut) that persist throughout one’s life. However, it sometimes occurs that an individual cannot fulfill emotional needs through pro-social, structured, healthy means at the level of family, community, and wider society. In this event, the person is likely to search for fulfillment of these emotional needs in any form, including through gangs.

Researchers have found that clinical depression is common among gang members, presenting itself through aggression and antisocial behavior. While the gang can bring a sense of belonging and identity, it also presents enormous peer pressure. As one gang member stated, “You get into the gang because you think it’s going to help you, but then you can’t get out” (Allen, 2013, p. 6). The search for a sense of belonging to a group or family is one of the reasons some gang members give for joining a gang, in addition to support, respect, and status (Joe & Chesney-Lind, 1995).

Gangs provide a sense of being wanted, fitting in, and being a part of something. This is crucial for a person who as a child or youth felt unwanted, possibly due to being in foster homes and having abusive parents (Brown, 2012). Self-affirmation also plays a role in mediating the effect of searching for belonging and joining a gang.

Brown defined self-affirmation as people’s motivation to “maintain self-integrity by preserving a positive, moral, and adaptive self-image” (Brown, 2012, p. 7). Brown (2012) also found that men who were self-affirmed and had high needs for belonging were less likely to be interested in gangs than men who had had high needs for belonging and were not self-affirmed. Therefore, if self-affirmed, participants were potentially able to

34

negotiate their need to belong through more pro-social avenues, without falling prey to gangs.

Others have expressed that they joined gangs to combat a sense of powerlessness or a search for a family. For some, gang membership comes in response to discrimination and alienation from mainstream culture. Others look for a new family that can give them a sense of power, belonging, and closeness (Tapia, Kinnier, & MacKinnon, 2009).

One reason for joining a gang is the search for recognition and power. “Some youth join [the gang] because of needs or wishes for recognition, status, safety or security, power, money, excitement, and/or new experiences, particularly under the conditions of social deprivation, including inadequate adult supervision� (Spergel, 1995, p. 91).

Therefore, battling a sense of powerlessness and helplessness leads some individuals towards gang membership.

Individualization, self-esteem, and self-actualization.

In the absence of positive role models, support and opportunities for success in prosocial activities, and self-development, the gang provides its members a chance to gain a sense of achievement, individuality, and membership. This comes with the possible cost of victimizing and victimization, incarceration, disability, and death. Maclure and Sotelo (2004) studied Nicaragua’s gang membership and how the social environment can interfere with children expressing individuality, thereby leading to gang membership. The researchers found that gang members are interested in gangs for a variety of reasons,

35

including a lack of resources and opportunities in their environments, poverty, as a means of opposing a marginalized class status, violence inside and outside of the home, and societal values that repress individuality.

It is clear that gangs develop in areas where the community suffers from disenfranchisement, alienation, and disorganization. Gangs provide illegal ways to achieve success and status that seem to be unachievable through legal avenues due to limited resources in employment and education (Klemp-North, 2007). In the presence of limited resources, lack of education, support, and facilities, children experience gradual social deprivation, failing in school, and feelings of frustration, low self-esteem, anxiety, guilt, and self-hatred. These children then become interested in gaining status and achievement through alternative means, including those offered by gangs (Cohen, 1955).

Gangs also provide an opportunity for members to feel important, powerful, and worthy—all of which can seemingly be achieved through a sense that “nothing mattered outside of me” (Tolleson, 1996, p. 4).

According to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, individuals search for fulfillment of psychological needs, safety needs, and the need for belonging, esteem, and selfactualization. Gangs may appear a viable option for fulfilling one’s psychological needs, safety needs, and needs for belonging, self-esteem, and self-actualization in the absence of pro-social and positive opportunities for such achievement. (Brown, 2012) However, “Gangs (the active members) do not really care for the welfare of individuals . . . the credo of a gang is to put the gang before anything else, even their belief system and family” (Brown, 2012, p. 13).

36

Impact of family.

Family can act as a protective factor when it is functioning, healthy, and supportive. In such condition, family can defend against the effects of poverty and violence. However, in the absence of family stability, external stressors leave the children vulnerable and decrease their capacity to learn and cope with life situations as adults (Shonkoff, 2010).

These same stressors impact the family’s capacity to provide the healthy, functioning environment where the adults of tomorrow are formed.

Many parents are rendered unable to protect their children from the effects of stressors in the community because of poverty, histories of trauma, community violence, mental illness, substance abuse, serious physical challenges, and a disconnection from the labor market (Getsinger & Popkin, 2010). As research has shown, “Neighborhood disorganization may influence family functioning, and, in turn, poor family functioning may influence the child’s further exposure to antisocial neighborhood influences” (Gilman, Hill, Hawkins, Howell, & Kosterman, 2014, p. 215).

Therefore, children who grow up in these toxic environments become unable to cope or provide a healthy, supportive space for their own children to mature. Thus the intergenerational cycle of poverty, physical and emotional abuse, substance abuse, and gang membership, to name just a few ills, continues unchecked.

Effects of family.

37

Gang members appear to come from families and neighborhoods that struggle with poverty, violence, and disenfranchisement. Although no one factor alone can explain the gang membership phenomenon, family plays a significant role. Per the research of Tapia, Kinnier, and McKinnon (2009), in comparison to non-gang members, gang members more frequently experienced fathers being absent from the home, were from families with lower incomes, and were not as close to their families. As for family dynamics, the authors found that gang members came from families that were inconsistent in punishment and more likely to engage in deviant behavior such as using illicit drugs, keeping weapons in the home, and assaulting family members.

On the other hand, Maxson, Whitlock, and Klein, (1998) found that non-gang members had families that were more cohesive, involved, and that had stronger attachments. The most significant family variables were modeling of criminal behavior, family member’s gang membership, and low self-esteem derived from the family. In addition, family dysfunction and intergenerational family gang membership and involvement also increase gang membership. Gang recruitment occurs along family and ethnic lines, and family ties and loyalty become more important than any legal obligations to the larger society (Badger & Albright, 2003 and Grekul & LaCoucaneBenson 2008, as stated in Goodwill, 2009). Therefore, the impact of family dynamics on gang membership cannot be dismissed.

However, not everyone living in conditions described above will join a gang. Thirtythree percent of youth living in deprived areas who experienced family and social risk factors such as trauma, domestic violence, parental divorce, institutionalization,

38

estrangement from siblings, or involvement with care systems never engaged in criminal activities (Webster, MacDonald, & Simpson, 2006). It appears that a small percentage of the population living in these conditions escapes the allure of the gang. It is reasonable to assume that along with other social and psychological influences, factors such as absent parents, pro-gang attitudes, living in disadvantaged neighborhoods, antisocial tendencies, and a scarcity of attachments and emotional bonds all increase the likelihood of gang membership.

Family dynamics as protective factor versus risk factor.

Considering the presence of environmental adversities, family can be considered as a protective factor, intervening against the impact of the community on the child’s development. Following two different families in low-income, gang-ridden neighborhoods, Reiboldt (2001) assessed the impact of gangs, family, and neighborhood factors on gang involvement among young people in both families.

Of the two young people followed, one joined a gang while the other did not. The youth who joined the gang faced multiple negative influences, including a history of child abuse and family violence, an absent father who left the child’s single mother to care for six children, a violent neighborhood, and having a sibling involved in the gang. This young person's mother was unable to provide the adequate supervision he needed. Unable to control her son’s behavior, she resorted to leaving him in jail out of desperation.

39

Meanwhile, the other family was able to protect its child from negative neighborhoodgang influences, and against poverty as well. They achieved this through parental involvement, help from extended family, close monitoring, and involvement in the boy's life. When the boy became close to getting involved with a gang, his family recognized the danger and intervened. The family changed the boy’s school, monitored his relationships with others, and provided guidance and protection. Not wanting to let his family down, the boy followed instructions and safely negotiated all aspects of the neighborhood (Reiboldt, 2001). The family’s cohesiveness, closeness, attachment, and monitoring affected the boy’s experience of his omnipotence, ideals, and ability to develop self-esteem. This allowed his family to protect him from the influences of the streets.

Relationship with family.

Researchers have clearly established a relationship between parental behaviors and children’s outcomes in adolescence and later life. The family performs a significant role either as a risk factor due to maltreatment, or as a protective factor due to emotional support and supervision against delinquency.

Researchers have found a significant relationship between children’s emotional development and parental behavior such as: 1. Inconsistent supervision, monitoring and discipline 2. Inappropriate use of control

40

3. Development of conflictual relationships 4. Poor attachment between parents and adolescents (Belitz & Valdez, 1994; Keenan, Loeber, Zhang, Stouthamer-Loeber, & Farrington, 1995; Dukes, Martinez, & Stein, 1997; Thornberry, 1998; Walker-Barnes & Mason, 2001) Individual and family risk factors also impact the risk of youth delinquency. Family characteristics including young parents, single parenthood, and poverty—as well as individual factors including difficult temperaments and neuropsychological deficits— increase the likelihood of childhood behaviors related to conduct disorder in adolescence (Lynam et al., 2000 & Raine, Brennan, & Mednick, 1994).

Maltreatment in early life plays a significant role in later gang membership as well.

Goodwill (2009) found that many of the participants reported histories of violence, abuse, and neglect in their early lives, from which they gained skills to survive. Later, they used these skills as gang members. As Goodwill reported, “Participants made statements such as ‘becoming adapted to violence’ and growing up with abuse and that gang life was a normal continuation of these experiences” (Goodwill, 2009, p. 134). Due to early experiences, the violence and trauma involved in gang life appeared normal.

Although research establishes the effect of parenting on delinquency, research on the effect of parenting and caregiving on gang involvement is inconsistent. Studies supporting the impact of family relationships on gang membership have found that the quality of parent-child relationships can be either a protective factor or a risk factor in delinquency or gang involvement.

41

For instance, Gorman-Smith, Tolan, and Henry (2000) found that poor-quality family dynamics—characterized by lack of emotional closeness and dependability—will increase the risk for delinquency even if there is a high level of “discipline consistency, parental monitoring, and structure in family roles” (p. 192). The researchers also suspected that if the neighborhood meets the need for belonging and emotional support, children are less likely to engage in delinquency (Gorman-Smith, Tolan, & Henry, 2000).

Having relationships in which the child or adolescent feels valued, respected, and attended to can protect against gang membership. In addition, many studies posit “warm parental support and encouragement” (p. 1054) as a protective factor against gang involvement (Barnes, Farrell, & Cairns, 1986; Coombs & Landsverk, 1988, Crosnoe, Erickson, & Dornbusch, 2002, as cited in Ryan, Miller-Loessi, & Nieri, 2007, p. 1054).

However, other studies have not found significant differences between family relationships of gang members and non-gang members, concluding that family relationships do not play a significant role in gang involvement (Lyon, Henggeler, & Hall, 1992). Examining more than 2,000 students from sixth to 12th grade, Thompson and Braaten-Antrim (1998) found a non-significant relationship between parental supervision, support, communication and education, and gang involvement, while maltreatment increased the odds of gang involvement.

Sharkey, Shekhtmeyster, Chavez-Lopez, Norris, and Sass (2011), argue that parental factors such as supervision, support, and communication are more strongly related to delinquency than gang affiliation, but gangs may provide a lure for maltreated youth who wish to escape family violence and find a sense of safety and a substitute family. Gang

42

members are more likely to show abnormal behavior, commit more crimes, and are more committed to their antisocial peers in comparison to non-gang member offenders. The authors express that there is a difference between family factors that influence delinquency versus gang affiliation or membership (Jenson & Howard, 1998). Since gang membership includes delinquency, it appears that family factors may influence delinquency and by extension gang involvement, but these factors may not be directly related to gang involvement.

Some authors have found that although family adversity does not cause delinquent behavior, it moderates the effects of neighborhood influences.

An environment of high family adversity might increase the likelihood of coercive parenting styles, lack of rule setting, and poor supervision, which represent an inadequate socialization context for boys with hyperactivity, fearlessness and few pro-social behaviors. Bad neighborhoods, within which these families foster their children, could also increase the risk of early affiliation with structured gangs. (Lacourse et al., 2006, p. 567) Overall family relationships influence the child or adolescent whether through delinquency or gang involvement.

Walker-Barnes and Mason (2001) explored the effects of peers and parenting behaviors on gang-involvement and delinquency among different ethnic groups of young people. They found that in African American families, “[a] higher level of behavioral control and lower-level lax and psychological control were related to decrease in gang involvement� (p. 1826). Based on these findings, it becomes apparent that parents’

43

behaviors and relationships, maltreatment, and exposure to violence are some of the main factors impacting delinquency and possibly gang involvement.

Gang members usually do not have positive role models because of family disorganization, separation, divorce, or death of parents (Klemp-North, 2007).

Additionally, some of the reasons gang members have given for joining gangs include: 1. Dysfunctional family dynamics 2. Abuse 3. Parental adultery 4. Absent fathers, due to work or abandonment, and therefore a lack of role models 5. Negative influence of delinquent friends 6. Loss of favorite person (Robertson, 2008) Many gang members “have been let down by people they looked up to, had no positive male figure in their lives, and saw single mothers struggle [to care for them] . . . [because the mothers] had little time for caring and nurturing probably due to exhaustion from working so hard” (Robertson, 2008, p. 116). Further, Robinson states, “[The children] were let down and they looked for someone to make a difference in their life, and pay attention to them” (p. 117).

Additionally, gang members have experienced parental abandonment, divorce or separation, incarceration, serious injury, and loss of family members during childhood prior to joining their gangs (Eitle, Gunkel, & Van Gundy, 2004 & Placencio, 2009).

44

Therefore, it is clear that family dynamics and relationships have an impact on gang memberships, even if it is an indirect impact, such as a search for a role model, dealing with losses related to family, or looking for a substitute family.

Intergenerational structure of the gang.

Family dynamics, the presence of maltreatment, and family members’ involvement in crime or gangs impact children’s interest in the gang lifestyle. Many gang members join because other family members were involved. Therefore, joining a particular gang becomes a family tradition. Research has established that one reason to join a gang is involvement with a social network of family and friends who already belong to the gang (Thornberry, Krohn, Lizotte, Smith, & Tobin, 2003; Brown, 2012). There is evidence that gangs in Los Angeles have a “strong intergenerational structure” (Vigil, 1988; Moore 1978, 1991 as stated in Decker & Winkle, 1996, p. 232). However, the intergenerational structure of gangs may not be as consistent in different states. While interviewing gang members in St. Louis, Decker and Winkle (1996) observed that many participants were aware that their parents were involved in crime but were unsure about parental gang involvement.

Gang as an alternative family.

Family-related factors that influence the decision among young people to join gangs include:

45

1. Stressful conditions within the family 2. Emotional problems 3. Authoritarian parenting style 4. Lack of attachment and belonging to the family 5. Disorganized family structures (Harris, 1988; Vigil, 1988) Additional factors include protection from family maltreatment, and the experience of a sense of safety and security from the dangers in the home environment (Gordon, 2000; Walker-Barnes & Mason, 2001; Joe & Chesney-Lind, 1995).

Grekul and LaBoucane-Benson (2008) explored the causes of gang involvement among gangs of First Nations young people in Canada. They observed that these individuals became involved in gangs to search for identity, belonging, and to find an alternative life. The researchers also found that family plays a role in gang involvement in two ways: (a) if the family is dysfunctional, the children become interested in gangs, and (b) when family members are involved in gangs, young relatives become interested in gangs. As the researchers stated, “Invariably respondents indicate that the gang acts as, or promises to act as, a substitute family, filling the void left by family backgrounds marked by violence, substance abuse, and crime� (Grekul & Laboucane-Benson, 2008, p.

68).

Some young people join gangs because the gangs promise to provide unmet needs. As one gang member expressed:

46

I joined the gang because they provided all of what I needed to survive on the street: food, clothes, shoes, protection, love, friendship. They [the gang] really cared about me. They gave me what my family, my school, and my neighborhood didn’t.

Nobody except for the gang cared about me (Morris, 2012, p. 262).

With this in mind, “membership in the gang can supply needs that may be missing from [the] home environment” (Brown, 2012, p. 3). Gangs attract children who crave a sense of belonging, identity, and self-worth. When family bonds are compromised and children face the loss of family members, they may believe the gang’s promise to act as a substitute family (Goodwill, 2009).

In families dealing with conditions of extreme poverty and disenfranchisement, family dynamics are compromised as family members struggle with histories of trauma, violence, and hardship in their daily lives. This in turn can impact family members’ ability to provide for their children’s need for belonging, validation, and self-worth in a social environment that is invalidating, disregarding, and dismissive. The gang’s lure of protection from victimization and opportunity for material and social gains becomes particularly attractive to emotionally and socially vulnerable young people.

Researchers have looked at the impact of gangs as surrogate families, as many gang members refer to their gangs as family. The gang promises to provide care, consistency, understanding, recognition, and value. The gang also provides an opportunity to build a reputation, experience oneself as credible, and be respected for gang-related accomplishments (Fleisher, 1998; Harris, 1988; Moore, 1991; Dukes, Joe & Chesney-

47

Lind, 1995; Joe-Laidler & Hunt, 1997; Dukes, Martinez, & Stein, 1997; Carlie, 2002; Stretesky & Pogrebin, 2007).

In addition, many researchers have conducted qualitative studies with gang members who felt the gangs provided love, identity, self-esteem, a sense of belonging, discipline, and protection (Omizo, Omizo, & Honda, 1997; Kallus, 2004; Grekul & LaBoucaneBenson, 2008). Some researchers found that gangs function as substitute families, providing members the self-object functions they wish for and appear to be missing based on their interactions within the family environment.

It appears that gangs appeal to young people because gangs promise to fulfill the need for love, care, attention, belonging, identity, structure, and protection that a child and adolescent requires to develop and form a secure sense of self. There are many consequences associated with these fulfillments, however. These consequences include family alienation, the loss of one’s own values and ethics, and limited affiliation with non-gang members (Omizo, Omizo, & Honda, 1997). Regarding family alienation, research shows that for some gang members, extended family and friends in the gang are their only familial source of support and guidance when in crisis. Otherwise, they rely on non-family support for assistance in times of heightened need. However, these gang members often express a wish to emotionally reconnect with family members, which possibly owes to estranged relationships relating to gang membership (Curotto, 1998).

Decker and Winkle (1996) found that for most gang members, “[A] gang is a place to find protection, companionship, and understanding. . . . Those who chose their family over the gang emphasized the family role in birth, nurturing, and caring� (p. 251). Some

48

older members who had been in the gang longer and were living away from home chose their gang over their families (p. 253). It is possible that gang members who experienced care and love within the family chose their family over their gang. For instance, “D.C., a 16-year-old Disciple [stated]: . . . you gonna need your mother before you need your gang� (Decker & Winkle, 1996, p. 253). D.C. was possibly expressing the internal representation of his mother and his perception of having a dependable relationship with her.

Gangs tempt the individual by promising the mirroring self-object needs of value, selfesteem, recognition, and accomplishment that the child developmentally strives for in the context of a caregiver / child relationship (Ruble & Turner, 2000). Other researchers emphasize the internalization of family values within the gang structure. For example, values such as the collectivistic nature of the gang, reciprocal obligation, and honor come from values that are culturally present within a family structure (Horowitz, 1983; Padilla, 1992).

It is possible that gang members strive to realize values and relationships that they wished to experience within the context of their families. As such, the gang acts as an alternative family and even becomes a de facto family unit when the child’s actual family does not fulfill its role in relation to the gang members (Joe & Chesney-Lind, 1995; Venkatesh & Levitt, 2000). However, other research has shown that some gang members will value the gang as a family but still give their biological family precedence (Nakhid, 2009).

49

Relationship with adults.

The majority of research points to the importance of adult relationships in a child’s life as a protective factor against gang membership. While Ryan, Miller-Loessi, and Niere (2007) found that relationships with adults is not a primary predictor for gang involvement, gang members have stated that relationships with caring adults, despite their own gang membership, significantly affected their lives. Others named teachers, social workers, and their mothers as the most influential people in their lives, because these people were invested in the gang members’ lives and were present and available (Robertson, 2008). Some gang members express the importance of having meaningful personal relationships with adults such as coaches and teachers, and having opportunities to take responsibility, show ability, be proud in pro-social activities, and stay away from gangs (Robertson, 2008).

The loss of important people in one’s life can have significant damaging impact.

Harinsher (2007) assessed the level of loss among 898 juvenile detainees between the ages of 10 and 18 and found that 21.2% had lost at least one caregiver; 13.8% had lost at least a sibling; and 55.5% had lost one other important person (as stated in Placencio, 2009). The presence of a mentor or interested adult is invaluable in fostering resilience and overcoming the effect of loss and environmental adversity. “Competence, confidence, and caring can flourish, even under adverse circumstances, if children encounter persons who provide them with the secure basis for the development of trust, autonomy, and initiative . . .” (Werner & Smith, 1992, p. 209).

50

The experience of a caring relationship—characterized by a sense of compassion, nonjudgment, and love—is crucial in developing resiliency and moving away from gangs (Albert, 2007). Gang members value respect as being listened to and accepted as worthwhile people, even if others do not approve of their behavior. Additionally, respect involves individuals offering guidance, and not being scared of the gang members (Morris, 2012). A respectful, non-judgmental, honest, and guiding relationship with adults can act as a positive factor in idealizing and mirroring self-object responses that an individual may be searching for in the gang.

Relationship with other gang members.

Gangs take advantage of their member’s vulnerability, desire to belong, and underdeveloped sense of self. The gang will encourage members who are capable of cruelty and are willing to rationalize and continue this behavior for the sake of the gang’s code. Mexican-American gangs hold honor, friendships, manliness, hedonism, respect, pride, reputation, recognition, and self-esteem as their core values (Shelden, Tracy, & Brown, 2000). Meanwhile, some gang members are searching for a role model, a way out of poverty, or a sense of belonging (Stretesky & Pogrebin, 2007).

Gangs use these vulnerabilities to recruit members, promising them wealth, power, status, and in-group status. In turn, however, gangs expect cruelty and brutality, as well as risking one’s own life for the sake of the gang. Thus members become willing to risk their lives to uphold and protect their status and the identity they have formed within the

51

gang (Decker & Winkle, 1996). In effect, gangs provide members with an identity that confirms the rules and expectations of the gang.

Stretesky and Pogrebin argued that gangs use this form of socialization to form the member’s identity and sense of self (2007). One of the participants in their study explained how at an early age he was encouraged to show loyalty by participating in a drive-by shooting and how after his first shot, it became easier for him to continue to shot other as “[he] had no concern for anybody” (Stretesky & Pogrebin, 2007, p. 97). Gangs demand a level of self-sacrifice to uphold the values and code of the gang. They place disadvantaged individuals who may have a fragile sense of self at continuous risk of victimization, brutality, and death.

Psychodynamic Perspective On Gangs Dysfunctional family dynamics and delinquency.

Dysfunction in family relationships—as impacted across generations by poverty, trauma, and disenfranchisement—affects children’s developing sense of self, behavior, and internal and external worlds. Anderson (2003) discusses family dynamics among children who are at risk of significant risk-taking and dangerous behavior.

In a no-haven family, there is not a sense of safety for the child, as parents’ “profoundly split feelings of love and hate are managed by focusing hostility on the child, who is criticized and blamed, and for whom there is no haven” (Anderson, 2003, p. 78).

The child’s risk-taking behavior attracts others’ attention to the danger the child is in. It

52

also allows the child to act out against the threat of being expelled from the family, “dicing with death in the hope of being united with the more friendly parent.” Finally, risk-taking gives the child a means of acting out the parents' hostility (Anderson, 2003, p.

80). When experiencing the consistent presence of violent trauma and death, the child is unable to feel a sense of omnipotence and safety. Therefore, the child will pursue death to offset or ignore anxiety, despite the constant presence of anxiety in the family environment (Tolleson, 1996).

This dynamic is similar to that of gangs. It provides an emotional space where there are only two options: become a gang member, or get expelled from the peer group. This situation is exacerbated by the gang’s willingness to use brutality, violence, emotional, physical, and mental abuse, misrepresentation, and distortion to achieve its goals (Anderson, 2003). One can understand how a person from a no-haven family dynamic might fall prey to the false care and kindness presented by a gang.

The effects of poverty, trauma, abuse, violence, and disenfranchisement impact individuals and their families. As children from disadvantaged neighborhoods become adults and have children of their own, they are unlikely to provide self-object functions that they themselves never received. These same parents are less likely to model appropriate ego development, as they never had a chance to learn how to resolve internal and external conflict within their own ego states. Bernabeu (1958) asserts that underlying ego mechanisms in delinquency refer to delinquency as a symptom of the ego’s inability to mediate between the internal conflict and the demands of reality. The author discusses the delinquent child’s depression, passivity, and lack of trusting relationships with adults.

53

These children have unfulfilled needs. What’s more, they experience hostility, tyranny, and at times brutality from the parents who project their own narcissistic needs onto the children. A child who has not experienced opportunities to feel valuable, important, and capable in the family, neighborhood, and community will rely on primary defenses such as denial, repression, and projection. In order to cope with the painful experience of unmet needs of dependency, love, and safety—combined with an experience of adults as hostile and hurtful—children repress their needs, projecting hostility and denying the need for adults. These children will demand and manipulate in order to establish a relationship while seeing the adults as hurtful, hostile, and unneeded.

This allows the children to defend against their own strong need for a dependable, safe adult, who would be seen as a threat (Bernabeu, 1958). The development of delinquency can be understood as follows: There has been no move from the pleasure principle to the reality principle, consequent on either too indulgent or too severe treatment in early life. . . . The importance of object relationships is evident—the capacity of the carers to help the child leave behind the early egocentric, narcissistic way of being and engaging with confidence with the real world. And the malformation of the ego idea and hence the superego. The delinquent is in a highly narcissistic mode of functioning.

(Horne, 2004, p. 337) The delinquent person is unable to achieve the movement toward the reality principle and is trapped defending against feeling a lack of omnipotence.

54

Delinquency as a cry for help.

According to Winnicott (1984), the antisocial behavior of a child represents the hope to gain stability from school or society instead of the family. Winnicott discusses the “link between delinquency and deprivation, the need for a strong and reliable parental function, and to the potentially positive aspects of institutional care” (as stated in Hindle, 1998, p. 38). In essence, the deprived child acts out or engages in delinquency in order to gain attention, support, and a way of gaining unmet self-object needs.

Emotional and physical violence leave a significant impact on children and can influence delinquency. As Sauma points out, “Violence is also seen in betrayal of relationships by adults who lie, who neglect, who undermine, who betray the trust that these young people need to develop a positive association with adults” (Sauma, 2008).

Society’s punishment of the child coincides with the unconscious needs of the child to be punished and contained (Hindle, 1998). One can assume that the child who has been deprived or abused will find punishment as the only form of containment he knows.

Shame and humiliation as presiders to gang membership.

Shame plays a significant role in a person forming bravado, dehumanizing others, and engaging in delinquent or violent behavior to defend against feelings of humiliation rooted in the failure to reach an expected idealized ego. Bilmes (1967) discussed the impact of shame on delinquency, stating that shame is a result of failure to reach one’s own desired image of oneself. An individual may engage in acts of delinquency as means

55

for redemption, dehumanizing others and hiding the dependency needs and passive feelings that gave rise to hidden shame. The person may engage in behavior that is seen as heroic, courageous, and restorative of ones’ pride in certain circles (Bilmes, 1967).

Search for omnipotence among gang members.

The relationship with adults plays a significant role in gang membership. Young people and adults search for meaningful relationships. This can be said about gang members who feel the pressure of many unmet needs and the backlash of hostility, rejection, and disappointment of their own environment, which was unable to provide for their needs. Gang members experienced rejection, anger, hostility, and were taken advantage of when they were in need and asked for help. In addition, when they needed someone, no one was there for them. They accepted that needing someone and dependency are dangerous unacceptable signs of weakness.

In the face of shame and humility, a child might deny the need for love, recognition, and self-worth in order to defend against feeling ashamed. In the absence of opportunities for achievement, pride, identity, and independence, a child is likely to struggle with feelings of inferiority and shame with no chance for integrity. In these situations, gangs and delinquency offer means of relief against shame and failure.

Whereas the initiation rite in primitive society helps the youth become identified with the larger society, gang initiation furthers the separateness of the adolescent from his adult society. Thus, gangs are relatively unstable and cast adrift in the

56

world, their tensions and contained emotion often spilling over into violence, thrill-seeking, and a vague search of adventure. Without real roots, the true source of experience is absent. Pleasure-seeking seems often to be only a substitute for this inability to experience. (Bilmes, 1967, p. 120) Experiencing and observing chronic trauma and violence during childhood causes violence to become a part of the child’s identity (Tolleson, 1996). The active gang members whom Tolleson interviewed experienced the gang as a subject or institution in their psychological lives. As such, gangs allowed their members to derive a sense of identity, morality, and values. The gang members also had formed omnipotence for themselves, making their minds their own subjects in the presence of a hostile and unreliable outer world (Tolleson, 1996).

In the presence of adversity, trauma, loss, neglect and abuse, street violence, and other factors, an individual’s development is interrupted. However, the individual will continue to strive for the fulfillment of these unmet needs. To a vulnerable person who does not have access to another alternative, the gang “provides affirmation, superficial care, and responsiveness, but at a price that can involve physical harm, arrest, or worse, losing one’s life” (Smaller, 2012, p. 141).

Many gang members have experienced or observed violence in childhood. The experience of helplessness in the face of such violence affects how the gang members respond to others. Lefer (1984) observed that some gang members quickly become violent when questioned or when feeling disrespected. This is related to the helplessness gang members felt in childhood when they were unable to obtain acceptance from their

57

peer groups. Some of these individuals will feel visible when getting negative attention because they may have given up on positive attention (Lefer, 1984). When a person has been unable to achieve twinship through belonging to accepted social and peer groups, that person will accept any attention, including negative attention from criminal and antisocial peer groups. That is because the individual wants to fulfill the needs for belonging, identification, and being a part of a group, whether positive or negative.

Gang Identity.

Gangs provide for the universal need for identity, companionship, and status, and resolve the moral conflict that people feel when asked to engage in immoral behaviors (Klein, 1995). People engage in what Bandura (2002) called moral disengagement, defined as “cognitive restructuring of inhumane conduct into benign or worthy behavior” (p. 101). In gang culture, one is rewarded for hostility, violence, brutality, and one’s personal negative traits, which one may not find valuable and acceptable outside of the gang. In response, individuals will negotiate their own distress over the stress of violating others by devaluing the victim.

Search for fulfilling self-object needs.

Children and youth become interested in joining gangs in part because they have unfulfilled self-object needs. As a human species, individuals require an environment that “provides a sense of personal involvement, belonging, responsibility, a sense of

58

challenge, satisfaction, comradeship, love, pleasure, confidence, and security” (Stephen Boyden as stated in Resnick, 2000, p. 160).

Some youths gain their self-object needs through relationships with teachers or coaches who act as protective factors against the influence of negative peers (Ryan, Miller-Loessi, & Nieri, 2007). The relationship with a caring, attentive, and encouraging adult provides self-object needs in a positive, pro-social way and decreases the chances of delinquency. This effect can be from a teacher who takes an interest in a student while recognizing effort and accomplishments (Sander, Sharkey, Olivarri, Tanigawa, & Mauseth, 2010).

Relationships with adults also work as a protective factor by providing opportunities for young people to feel a sense of connectedness with an adult, and to develop selfconfidence and a sense of well-being (Resnick, 2000). Studies have examined the effect of schools on establishing structure, higher expectation of success for students, opportunities for building relationships with adults, and providing the “love [that] youth crave and may seek out through antisocial means” (Sharkey, Shekhtmeyster, ChavezLopez, Norris, & Sass, 2011, p. 51). These researchers point to the importance of mirroring, valuing, and an encouraging relationship with a respected adult as deterrents against childhood and adolescent delinquency.

Tolpin (2002) discusses the idea of the “forward edge” of development, in which an individual continues to search for ways to fulfill unmet, normal needs of mirroring, idealizing an object, and counteracting shame, as well as “the reactivation of these needs in self-object transference that is potentially transforming” (Tolpin, 2002, p. 22). The

59

"forward edge" concept "assumes the internal experiences of self, self-concept, or selfidentity from birth are dynamic and instinctually forward moving� (Smaller, 2012, p.

139). By attending to and recognizing the successes and accomplishments of youth, an adult encourages the growth of the positive, healthy side of the child, even despite violence and gang-activity history.

Gang versus group.

Throughout history, many gangs were formed as the result of a lack of opportunity for positive, responsive, respectable relationships with adults, along with other psychological and social dysfunctions such as poverty, racism, marginalization, and unemployment. In response to experiences of violence, discrimination, and social marginalization, many people turn to others in similar situations, thereby forming gangs to provide sought-after relationships.

However, with a lack of appropriate opportunities to express needs, desires, and frustration, individuals turn their anger on each other (Brown, Vigil, & Taylor, 2012).

The difference between group dynamics versus gang dynamics can be located in the capacities of the individuals who form these groups. Canham (2002) explains that to have a group, the individuals within the group must have the capacity for tolerating, exploring, and valuing difference, as well as being able to tolerate unwanted parts of the self or the group without splitting the unwanted parts of the group off and projecting it into others.

Group members recognize that a part of being human is having both loving and hateful

60

feelings in oneself. Dependency and vulnerability are seen as acceptable and understandable.

On the other hand, a gang is a group of people who defend against feelings of vulnerability, dependence, and need. They will accept a person as a leader even if that person is violent as long as he is perceived as powerful, and who will enforce the gang’s rules through intimidation, fear, and coercion.

Several factors encourage the formation of groups, as opposed to gangs, including the presence of authority figures, parents, teachers, and community members who are considerate and thoughtful to the needs of those for whom they are responsible. However, the absence of considerate adults can impact relationships between individuals and internal objects. When one feels a need but knows it will not be met, it leads to anxiety.

In such cases, individuals will use defenses to numb the pain associated with deprivation, lack of opportunities, or of helpful internal figures, and the disappointment and pain associated with experiences of abuse (Canham, 2002).

Groups are formed of individuals who share similar principles. Some groups, such as gangs, are based on the assumption that they are in danger (“fight-flight assumption”), and that they need to engage with the danger or run from it (Cregeen, 2008). This danger can be externalized or internalized, encompassing dependency, victimization, and vulnerability—that is to say, the combination of common factors that inspire the formation of gangs.

In summary, gangs and gang activity have increased in the last decade. Gangs have become more widespread across both racial and international lines. The gang

61

phenomenon is multifaceted, with many causes and contributing factors beyond the scope of this review. However, it is clear that gangs are on the rise and therefore require further attention.

One aspect of gang membership that has not been sufficiently addressed is the effect of childhood experiences with adults and caregivers, as well as the psychological and psychodynamic understanding of these factors on gang member’s perceived vulnerability and later decision to join a gang. The gang problem continues to exist and is widespread, especially in disenfranchised and disadvantaged communities with fewer resources, increased crime, violence, poverty, and lack of social and community support systems that appropriately address the needs of the children and families living in these neighborhoods.

In conditions of social isolation, limited resources and opportunities, families and children attempt to survive their hostile, toxic environments rather than consider the possibility of transcending those environments. The street code becomes the language spoken and taught in some families. Parents who struggle against the effects of individual, interpersonal, social, and communal pressures often attempt to provide for their children as best they can, but are forced to leave their children unattended and unsupervised in environments that prey on children’s vulnerabilities. Parents battling their own histories of violence, trauma, victimization, poverty, and other social and interpersonal problems find themselves struggling with drugs, gangs, and crime. This latter group of parents is searching to fulfill their own unmet physical and emotional needs, thereby leaving their children vulnerable.

62

Many families are affected by factors including poverty, discrimination, lack of resources, substance abuse, mental illness, lack of healthy coping skills, trauma, and violence in the home and neighborhood. These factors are likely to compromise the ability of caregivers to provide for children's emotional needs. Caregivers in these circumstances are less likely to help children form positive bonds, address the effects of trauma and violence in the family and in the neighborhood, or negotiate the institutional racism and disadvantaged position they hold in society. Additionally, these caregivers are not likely able to mediate the effect that outside factors have on children.

Therefore, children who grow up in conditions of trauma, violence, and poverty find themselves vulnerable. Without fathers, mothers, and positive role models, these children find themselves vulnerable to the unhealthy effects of their environments. This is further complicated by the family’s unhealthy, dysfunctional, and violent and traumatic treatment of children. Family members’ own unmet needs—and their own antisocial and violent perspectives—increase children’s potential for being influenced by gangs.

In turn, children are left to search for fulfillment of their physical and emotional needs outside of the family. When such organizations and support systems are unavailable or unable to provide for the vast needs of so many children, the children may fall prey to gangs and risk their lives for achieving a sense of love, affection, care, protection, acceptance, belonging, power, respect, dignity, identity, value, monetary gain, and power.

They look for an outlet to combat the helplessness and hopelessness they feel by victimizing others and participating in criminal activity. Additionally, drug use and

63

acting-out behavior allow for a false sense of control and reprieve from internal trauma and victimization.

Existing literature on gangs does not explore how gang members reflect on their experiences with caregivers from a personal standpoint. Although some studies discuss the impact of child abuse on gang involvement, they do not document gang members’ personal experiences in terms of identity formation and development of a sense of self.

Of particular interest is how identity formation and sense of self relate to opportunities for fulfilling certain self-object needs—specifically, mirroring and identification—with caregivers, and later with fellow gang members.

I was interested in an in-depth exploration of these early relational issues and experiences, both in general and also from a self-psychology theoretical perspective. I explored how gang members talked about their experiences with caregivers during childhood, any deficiencies they felt as a result of such interactions, and what they wished to have received in those relationships. Also, I hoped to understand participants’ initial interest in gangs and why they joined, bearing in mind their relationships with their families and other gang members. More specifically, I hoped to understand what emotional or relational needs the gang met for them or promised to meet for them.

64

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework of the Study Self-psychology theory.

Self-psychology theory was first discussed by Kohut, who expressed that “the self, the core of our personality, has various constitutes which can acquire in the interplay with those persons in our earliest childhood environment whom we experience as self-objects” (Kohut & Wolf, 1978, p. 414). Kohut explained that the self is constructed of three poles: (a) the omnipotent or narcissistic self, (b) the idealized parent imago, and (c) the twinship. Each of these in turn provide for wishes, goals, strivings, ideals, and a sense of belonging and connectedness with others.

Furthermore, self-psychology discusses the child’s need for a mirroring, validating, and attentive caregiver who values the child’s accomplishments and strivings. Having this type of caregiver leads a child to feel confident and valued, and able to form goals and believe in the possibility of achievement. The child also looks for a caregiver capable of being idealized as a source of inspiration and protection. Those whom the child experiences as self-objects, traditionally assumed to be the primary caregiver, have a significant impact on the child’s emotional well-being.

Pathology happens when self-cohesion and self-development are threatened as a result of the “traumatically frustrating empathic failure on the part of the parents in their role as the mirroring and idealized self-objects” (Tolpin, 1978, p. 175). In this sense, parents are unable to provide the regulatory and containing self-object functions the child requires for developing a firm sense of self and eventual internalization of the “self-sustaining and

65

self-regulating psychic structures” of the parents (p. 170). The traumatic failure could have happened as the part of the caregiver’s empathic failure to provide the needed selfobject functions, or as the result of the environmental failure (e.g., caregivers’ absence or loss due to poverty, substance abuse, mental illness, violence, death, or structural disenfranchisement).

Some parents might want to be available for their children but cannot because they work long hours to provide for their children’s basic needs for food and shelter. These parents would also not be present to provide the self-object needs that children require for healthy self-development. Additionally, the threat to self-cohesion can happen because of traumatically frustrating self-objects and the threat of real or perceived danger regarding loss of vitality or fragmentation (Tolpin, 1978). This is especially true for children living in poverty in inner-cities and in gang-ridden neighborhoods where trauma, violence, and deprivation is commonplace. Children in these environments face the real threat of violence and trauma on a daily basis, and thus more likely to experience threats to their sense of self-vitality and self-cohesion.

When a child grows up without having self-object needs met by caregivers, the child will continue to look for the fulfillment of these needs. Tolpin (2002) comments on this while discussing the forward edge of transference presented in the therapeutic relationship: The deepest layer [of psyche] consists of strivings of the forward edge . . . [which is the] once normal [and unmet] needs of unmirrored self, of the self that suffers from shame and lacks idealized goals, of the self that is chronically enfeebled

66

and/or fragmented and is in search of idealized strengths, of expanding alikeness experiences with a kindred soul [in a new relationship]. (p. 188) The child requires the caregiver to act as a self-object that can contain the child's painful and destructive experiences and that can teach the child how to tolerate these affective states rather than acting them out (Hyatt-Williams, 1998). When a child’s selfobject needs are not met, it triggers a reactive state in which negative experiences cannot be tolerated and the child acts out, often violently, as in the case of gang members. It is important to note that when there is a developmental failure, one can assume that there was a developmental failure at the time of the problem. This is true both in relation to caregivers as well as missed opportunities to “pick up on development at later stages” (Galatzer-Levy & Gohler, 1990, p. 96). These missed opportunities pertain to providing the self-object needs of the child within the community, school, religious organizations, extended family, or among significant individual adults in the child’s life before the child gravitates toward gangs for fulfillment of those needs.

The theory of self-psychology provides a synergizing framework from which to understand common psychological characteristics found among gang members, as well as the commonalities in their developmental processes that led to their character presentations. To facilitate development of a healthy self, self-psychology suggests that individuals require mirroring (validation and tempering of one’s inherent value and ambitions), idealizing (comfort, protection and guidance in times of struggle), twinning (a sense of likeness, in which one feels part of humanity, rather than alone), and responses from the environment (self-objects).

67

Each of these self-object functions serves to emotionally regulate the developing person, allowing for successful engagement in the trial-and-error process of establishing a place in the world. Where these self-object functions are not met, the developing individual is forced to compensate for the deficiency by attempting to self-regulate, that is, to provide self-object functions for the self.

Such compensatory efforts hide the humiliation of neglect. However, neglect often nonetheless manifests itself as: (a) an external overvaluation of self and / or devaluation of others, (b) denial of dependency needs, and (c) a hyper-idealization of certain people and objects affiliated with the self, which is accompanied by the denial of the subjective life of others. To the latter point, the individual cannot bear recognition of others’ subjectivity because such an acknowledgement would expose the individual’s own subjective wounds and developmental deficiencies.

With respect to gang members, research illustrates a pattern of self-object failure on multiple levels, including the home environment, school environment, and community and social environment. It appears that this catastrophic failure in developmental needs generates common themes and characteristics among gang members, similar to those described more broadly in the conceptualization of self psychology. To this point, gang members evidence the following: 1. A tendency to treat people as objects not subjects 2. Extreme processes of power, control and omnipotence to regulate emotions and ward off vulnerability 3. Hyper-idealization and unwavering compliance to gang leaders

68

4. Hyper-allegiance to the gang These extreme positions are best understood through the self-psychological model.

This is because the self-psychological concept links common behaviors and characteristics of gang members with an understanding of those behaviors as reflective of an internal response to extreme deprivation of developmental needs. Further, even through different lenses (e.g., criminal, psychological, social, and psychodynamic perspectives), gang members’ compensatory attempts at filling self-deficits remain evident. Therefore, self-psychology serves as an appropriate theory to better understand this phenomenon.

I explored the effects of unmet needs and whether gang members were attracted to gangs with the hope that gangs would provide the unfulfilled self-object functions that caregivers did not provide. The self-object is a representation of the other—the caregiver or significant adult—which is integrated into the person’s internal world as the selfobject's function is internalized and understood (Goldberg, 2002). Therefore, to a gang member, the gang may have originally appeared as an outside entity that offered the very self-object functions that the gang member desperately desired, while also asking that member to risk everything, including death.

69

Hypotheses to Be Tested or Questions to Be Explored Research questions.

The primary question for this paper was, “What was the experience of gang members with caregivers and how do gang members talk about their caregivers and family of origin?� Although this was the main research question investigated, other questions were also helpful in demonstrating a richer answer to the research topic.

I was interested in exploring the following, from the perspective of former gang members: 1. To what extent did unmet self-object needs and sense of self as formed in early childhood contribute to gang membership?

2. What were their childhood experiences with primary self-objects, parents, parental figures, and people assigned the task of primary care?

3. What were their childhood experiences with significant adults in relation to their self-object needs?

4. What were their childhood memories in relation to caregivers from a selfpsychology perspective? For example, did they trust their caregivers and were there people they could go to for support or to feel safe and cared for?

5. What was their experience of the relationship with such a person?

6. In what way, if applicable, did the parents let them down? If so, how did the parents fail to provide mirroring, idealizing self-object functions, such

70

as valuing accomplishments, encouraging growth and exploration, and providing support and care in face of challenges?

7. What were their best or worst memories in relation to the caregivers?

8. Did gang members feel a longing for care, attention, value, identity, importance, idealization, and other unmet self-object needs in their relationship with their caregivers?

9. How long did it take them to get out of their gangs and how many times did they go back before they completely disconnected from the gangs, if ever at all? How did they go about distancing themselves from that life?

Theoretical and Operational Definitions of Major Concepts Unit of analysis.

I explored gang members’ perspectives and how they talked about their early significant relationships with caregivers, as well as the influence of these relationships on the decision to join a gang. Therefore, the unit of analysis for this research was the individual gang members.

Concepts.

Gang.

71

According to National Criminal Justice Reference Services, “A gang is a group of three or more individuals who engage in criminal activity and identify themselves with a common name or sign” (National Criminal Justice Reference Services, 2011, para. 2).

Other definitions of “gang” highlight organizational structures and the desire of gang members for power in relation to their peers. A youth gang is an organization of tightly bonded youth who are joined together and controlled by a criminal leader. A gang is often conceived and nurtured by an individual who uses it as a vehicle to achieve a position of power among peers (Burns, 2003, para. 4). Gangs are also “defined by their commitment to defending one another, their territory, and the gang name” (Hagedom, 1988).

Former Gang Member.

In my research, "former gang members" are defined as persons that had renounced gang life—or were in the process of making such a renunciation, even if they had not officially exited the gang and were not actively engaging with a gang at the time of the interviews.

Because I used a phenomenology methodology, participants defined gang membership based on their own concepts of the word “gang.” Due to the qualitative nature of this research, I recognized that the concept of "leaving the gang" might have different meanings for different members. Some may have considered themselves out of the gang while still associating with their “homies,” while others may have considered themselves

72

former gang members since they did not associate with their previous friends or family members from the gang. In addition, some may have been hesitant to call themselves former gang members due to possible consequences such as being victimized due to leaving the gang, as some of my clients who were gang members told me. Therefore, I asked participants to state if they felt they were a part of the gang or not. If not, I asked how they defined their status in relation to the gang.

Gang membership initiation.

Some gangs require an initiation ceremony for joining the gang. This initiation can take the form of physical beating (Rees, 1996). Some individuals get invited to the gang, referred to as “courted in.” People who get courted in might include doctors, attorneys, or electricians who are known for their skills, and are willing to assist gang members without reporting them to the police. Others maybe “blessed in” when a family member is already a part of the gang. In this case, the person does not need to go through the initiation ritual. In addition to beatings, initiation rituals often include fighting, committing crime such as burglary or murder, or surviving a game of Russian roulette, to name a few (Carlie, 2002).

Maltreatment.

73

For the purpose of this research, maltreatment is defined as “any act or series of acts of commission or omission by a parent or other caregiver (e.g., clergy, coach, teacher) that results in harm, potential for harm, or threat of harm to a child” (Child Maltreatment: Definition, 2012).

Significant relationships and family dynamics.

Family dynamics are “the forces at work within the family that produce particular behaviors or symptoms” (Mosby, 2009, para. 1). For the purpose of this research, significant relationships were defined as those between participants and caregivers, parents, grandparents, adult siblings, other family members, guardians, or anyone that the participants assumed to be a primary-care provider. This definition was purposefully left vague so the participants could define the childhood relationships they found significant.

Concept of the self from self-psychology perspective self.

The self is the core of the personality that emerges from the interplay between an individual and those in the environment whom one experiences as self-objects. A healthy self is formed from three poles: (a) omnipotent self which “emanates the basic strivings for power and success,” (b) the idealized parent imago that “harbors the basic idealized goals,” and (c) twinship, defined as “ an intermediate area of basic talents and skills that are activated by the tension-arc that establishes itself between ambitions and ideals” (Kohut & Wolf, 1978, p. 414).

74

Self-object functions.

Self-object functions are “psychological representation[s] of others that are experienced as part of the self and that function in a variety of ways to support a person’s sense of liveliness and cohesiveness” (Galatzer-Levy & Gohler, 1990, p. 94).

Statement of Assumptions 1. Based on the literature reviewed, gang members had unmet needs in their early childhood relationships 2. Psychological vulnerabilities increased the chances of inner-city youth turning to gangs 3. These psychological vulnerabilities were born out of family dynamics, structure, and disorganization 4. Gang members turned to gangs in hopes of finding self-psychological functions that were not fully developed in the family environment 5. I would be able to find a sample of former gang members willing and able to talk about their childhood experiences in their families and how they became interested in gang membership

75

6. My methodology would help gather interview data, analyze it, and present it in the form of an in-depth picture of former gang members’ early experiences with their families and eventually gangs 7. The way that former gang members remembered and talked about their family may give clues to specific self-deficits

76

Chapter III

Research Strategy Type of Study and Design This study was designed to understand how former gang members talked about their childhood experiences with significant adults and caregivers. The goal was to explore the impact of childhood relationships on several aspects of each individual gang member’s life. These aspects included the following: 1. Sense of self 2. Identity 3. Mental representation of self and others 4. Internal emotional world 5. Object functions through personal narratives This study used Moustakas' (1994) transcendental phenomenology, described as follows: Transcendental phenomenology is a scientific study of the appearance of things just as we have seen them and as they appear to us in consciousness. Any phenomenon represents a suitable starting point of phenomenological reflection

77

. . . The very challenge is to explicate the phenomenon in terms of its constituents and possible meanings, thus discerning the features of consciousness and arriving at an understanding of the essences of the experience. (Moustakas, 1994, p. 47)

Gang membership is a multifaceted phenomenon with many social, psychological, economical, criminal, political, and dynamic elements. I was interested in an in-depth exploration of one of these constituents, namely the early childhood relationships of gang members. The transcendental phenomenology method allowed me to explore this phenomenon.

The philosophical underpinning of this study was a social-constructivist perspective.

The goal of using this construct was to understand the world one lives in by understanding the subjective experience and the meaning of the situation to participants, recognizing that there were social, historical, emotional, and other points of view that affected participants’ subjective experiences (Creswell, 2007). Each participant and I worked together to learn and unpack the meaning of the participant's experiences, accepting that they were affected by a range of dynamics.

Transcendental phenomenology seeks to abandon past and present thoughts, judgments, and perception in service of gaining a fresh perspective of a participant’s experience of a specific phenomenon. The goal of the researcher is to arrive at an understanding of the phenomenon by “step by step eliminating everything that represents prejudgment, setting aside presuppositions, and reaching a transcendental state of freshness and openness, a readiness to see in an unfettered way” (Moustakas, 1994, p.

78

41). Therefore, I used self-reflection and openness to hear and gain insight into participants’ experiences from their descriptions of those experiences.

The goal of transcendental phenomenology is to understand the underlying meaning of participants’ experiences, thoughts, and behaviors, and thus provide insight into their internal worlds. The transcendental phenomenology method is appropriate to answer the research question, "How do gang members talk about their experiences with caregivers and significant adults in childhood?” Each person’s experience is a unique phenomenon.

In the transcendental phenomenology method, The research participants remain close to depictions of their experience, telling their individual stories with increasing understanding and insight. The depictions themselves achieve layers of depth and meaning through the interactions, explorations, and elucidations that occur between the primary researcher and the other research participants. (Moustakas, 1994, p. 19) Moustakas (1994) states that participants, pulling together different perspectives that they have been exposed to individually and socially, construct the reality of a given phenomenon. Through phenomenological study, we understand the lived meanings of the phenomenon for participants. Each experience includes the participant’s consciousness, actions, perceptions of events, internal experience as a result of the event, and the internal subjective understanding of the experience (Moustakas, 1994). Every phenomenon is perceived through feelings, thoughts, the meaning it represents, and actions taken.

Using transcendental phenomenology, the researcher attempts to understand the meaning of the phenomenon and the cognitions, feelings, and actions related to that

79

phenomenon through three core processes: (a) epoche (suspension of judgment), (b) transcendental-phenomenological reduction (deepening the meaning), and (c) imaginative variation (forming a structural definition) (Moustakas, 1994).

In my research, the phenomenon studied was the gang members’ experiences of childhood relationships with caregivers and significant adults and the related potential impact on gang membership. The following steps were taken to gather and analyze the data: 1. Upon receiving IRB approval for the research project, I provided flyers (Appendix A) to my colleagues, who were familiar with former gang members. My colleagues shared the flyers with trusted former gang members. This was the extent of contact with those colleagues regarding the participants in the study. I informed my colleagues that I could not inform them whether the person they referred had contacted me or was a part of the study. The former gang members who received the flyers in turn shared the flyers with other trusted potential participants, which is why tabs with my contact information were available on the flyers.

2. The potential participants contacted me to schedule a phone interview to establish eligibility.

3. After establishing eligibility, I arranged an initial in-person interview to review, discuss, and sign the consent form, complete the demographic survey, and conduct the first interview.

4. Had a potential participant been unable to meet for an in-person interview,

80

I would have emailed or mailed the consent forms and set up a time to Skype or speak on the phone to discuss the consent form and the interview process, and to conduct the first interview. However, all participants were able to meet in person to review the consent forms and conduct the interviews.

5. At this point, I set up the next interview.

6. During each interview, I summarized my findings of the last interview and shared those findings with the participants to ensure accuracy. A fourth interview was reserved for a final review of accuracy, if needed. During this fourth interview, I would conduct a check-in, sharing the results gathered from all participants as a group, and getting the individual participant’s feedback. This was to increase validity of the findings.

7. I was able to transcribe all the interviews on my own, without needing to hire a transcriptionist to handle the amount of data.

8. Transcripts were read and reread as I located and coded statements by horizontalizing, giving each statement the same amount of value as other statements. In essence, the transcripts were viewed, and statements relevant to the topic were recognized as having the same importance. Then I created codes or “meaning units” categorizing the statements.

9. Themes were formed from the “meaning units,” or categories, by removing similar or repetitive statements.

10. At this stage, based on “what” was experienced, textural descriptions were

81

formed. Textural description was the explanation of events as they took place.

11. Structural descriptions—“how” the phenomenon was experienced—were followed.

12. Finally, the essence of the phenomenon was composed from the integration of both textural and structural descriptions (Moustakas, 1994).

13. From the beginning and throughout the data analysis after the first interview, I engaged in ongoing consultation with my dissertation committee chair and other members of the committee who acted as consultants. They were a part of the process to define meaning units and help develop themes from the data and meaning units. Ongoing consultation throughout the data-analyzing process allowed me to reflect and process the data. This part of the data-analysis process was essential, as it allowed me to maintain as much objectivity as any researcher can.

14. I also noted self-reflections and observations during the interviews. The data gathered from these self-reflections and observations were used to assist me in understanding the underlying meaning of the statements in the transcript and help complete the picture that the transcripts painted of the participants’ experiences.

82

Scope of Study, Setting, Population and Sampling, Sources and Nature of Data I planned to interview 8 to 10 adult males over the age of 18 who identified as former gang members and were willing to talk about their relationships with caregivers and other gang members over the span of multiple interviews. I met with nine participants for the first interview and completed the interview process with eight of them. The ninth person was disqualified from the study due to severe mental illness—specifically, diagnosed schizophrenia—which made it difficult for the participant to reflect and communicate.

For the purpose of this study, former gang members were defined as individuals with a history of gang involvement for a period of more than a year who were considered gang members by their peers. This included individuals who considered themselves former gang members, or inactive gang members. In both instances, the participants were not currently involved in gang activity. Participation in the interviews did not pose a danger to themselves or me.

The sample size was relatively small for two reasons. The transcendental phenomenological study’s purpose was to gain an understanding of the participants’ experiences through in-depth interviews. The goal of this approach was to attain depth through multiple interviews of a smaller sample size. In addition, given the presumed history of violence, loss, and trauma—all common factors among former gang members—participants were likely to take longer to develop a trusting relationship with me and engage in deep conversations about their experiences. As a result, I needed to conduct multiple interviews in which a relationship and a sense of trust were developed

83

in order to gather more meaningful data. The number of interviews and their length were more significant than the number of participants.

Only male gang members were interviewed because literature on gang membership has established that female gang members have different dynamics in their gang membership, and therefore factors affecting their decisions to join gangs may in some ways be different. Female gang membership is a relatively new phenomenon in comparison to male gang membership and requires its own study. A few female former gang members expressed interest in the study. I thanked them for their interest and explained that this study only focused on male gang members.

I asked participants if they had been a part of a gang, experienced an initiation process, and were considered to be gang member by their peers. Also, participants’ appropriateness for research was assessed based on their self-reports of gang inactivity and disengagement from gang lifestyles at the time of the interviews. Individuals who had been a part of a gang for less than a year were excluded, as they may not have had similar experiences to those who had been a part of the gang for longer time periods.

Since the former gang members were asked about their experiences with their caregivers and other gang members, the participants possibly experienced emotional discomfort as they remembered childhood memories and histories of trauma that seemed to be a part of many gang members’ experiences. Participants who had been hospitalized for psychiatric reasons in the last six months were excluded. Those who did not meet the criteria were informed that I was looking for specific characteristics and the interested party unfortunately did not meet the criteria. If a participant was appropriate for research,

84

I requested a commitment to interviewing in a sober state to decrease any potential risk, both to the researcher and the participant, due to the influence of drugs or alcohol.

For safety and to gain more meaningful data, I used purposeful sampling. I utilized help from a few colleagues who were very familiar with gang culture—both personally or professionally—to gather participants. I provided a flyer (see Appendix A) explaining the purpose of the study, the number and length of the interviews, and possible accommodations and small incentives for the participants. My colleagues, who were familiar with former gang members, shared the flyer with trusted former gang members.

This was the extent of contact with my colleagues regarding the participants in the study.

I informed my colleagues that I could not inform them whether the person they referred had contacted me or was a part of the study.

Former gang members who received the flyer in turn shared the flyer with other trusted potential participants, which was why tabs with my contact information were available on the flyer. As an additional safety measure, I met with the participants in a public area such as library with a private room, thereby providing confidentiality, privacy, and safety for the research participant and myself (see Appendix B). Four of the participants requested that I meet them at the drug-and-alcohol rehabilitation facility where they resided. In order to assure confidentiality, I met with the participants outside of the facility’s door and they directed me to a private room provided to us by the program administration. The program administrator was not aware of who participated in the study. A member of my family knew about each interview time and location, and I contacted this person upon safely arriving and leaving the interview site, without

85

disclosing any information about the participant. I had my cell phone available for emergencies, and a family member was able to track my location via my cell-phone GPS, although this did not become necessary.

In summary, the selection criteria for participants was based on the following questions: 1. Have you ever been a part of a gang? Did you have to go through an initiation process? Were you considered a gang member among your peers?

2. Were you part of a gang for more than one year?

3. Are you currently active in the gang and gang lifestyle?

4. Have you been hospitalized in the last six months due to psychiatric reasons?

5. Will you commit to attend the interviews in a sober state?

If a participant qualified for the interviews, I explained the research study, procedures, length of interviews, and roles and expectations for both participants and researcher.

Upon agreeing to participate in the research study, a time and location was set up to meet to review the consent form (see Appendix D) and begin the first interview. During the first interview, participants were clearly notified that they could stop the interview or stop participating in the research at any time if they felt excessive emotional pain.

At any time that I recognized a participant’s discomfort, I stopped the interview, checked in to assess his emotional state, and reminded him that we could stop. If, as I

86

checked participants’ emotional state by asking how he felt about the interview and the topics of discussion, there was any indication of suicidal thoughts, I had access to the Suicide Assessment Five-Step Evaluation and Triage for Mental Health Professionals (SAFE-T) developed by Screening for Mental Health, Inc. and the Suicide Prevention Resource Center, originally created by Douglas Jacobs, M.D. Thus I could assess for suicidality and offer referrals, if warranted. I currently use SAFE-T at my place of employment, the Department of Mental Health, where I work with individuals who have histories of gang affiliation and membership. However, conducting a suicide assessment did not become necessary.

If a participant indicated emotional discomfort and a desire to talk about it more, I would also provide a written list of low-cost and no-cost mental health centers, including directly operated clinics and county-contracted mental health clinics throughout Los Angeles that are affiliated with the Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health. In addition, I had information for crisis centers, hospitals, and emergency hotlines, including the National Suicide Hotline (1-800-273-8255) and the Department of Mental Health (1800-854-7771) available in a written form (see Appendix E). I would review this information and point out resources to the participant, and make sure that the participant understood how to access and utilize the information and resources.

I provided referrals to two of the participants as they appeared to potentially benefit from continued therapeutic services. Both participants stated that they had access to Parole Outpatient Clinic and were able to receive therapy there. Also, due to the effects of mind-altering substances and drugs, the participants would not have been interviewed

87

if they were under the influence of drugs or alcohol. All participants appeared in a sober state during the interviews. For the safety of participants and myself, I only interviewed those who were interested and willing to participate, and whose participation did not increase their chances of victimization by fellow former gang members or others.

Data Collection Methods and Instruments “Evidence from phenomenological research is derived from first-person reports of life experiences� (Moustakas, 1994, p. 84). I gathered data for my transcendentalphenomenology research via participants’ verbal and nonverbal communications during interviews and my own self-reflection of those interviews after the fact.

After the introductory phone interview, if the participant met the criteria and was interested in participating, I set up a time for the first interview. During the first interview, I discussed the consent form and limits of confidentiality, and asked the participant to complete the demographic survey (see Appendix F). At that point, we started the interview. In the event that the participant wished to communicate through email or was unable to attend in-person interviews to review the consent forms, I would have emailed the consent form (see Appendix D) and set up a time to review the form together, but this did not become necessary.

In the first interview, I presented the option of reading the consent form alone or together. If the participant wished to read it together, I read the consent form aloud, allowing the participant to ask questions after each paragraph, and reviewing the full consent at the end. If the participant wished to read it alone, I waited until he had read the

88

form before I reviewed it verbally, explaining each part again. I asked the participant if he had any questions. I also asked the participant to express an understanding of the consent form.

Additionally, I asked participants what they expected from the research, and to name any potential personal dangers that the research posed. I then asked participants if they understood that the interviews were confidential and that they could stop at any time or drop out of research if they felt adverse effects. Once I had established that each participant understood the consent form fully, I asked for a signature on the form. At this point, I asked the participant to complete the demographic survey, and the first interview began.

(Script: “Do you have any questions? Will you please tell me what you understood from this consent form? The goal of these questions is to make sure all information is clear. Is it clear that the information you provide to me is confidential and will stay with me, and that your name and identifying information will be kept separate from the information you provide me? Also, is it clear that you can stop the interview or the research participation at any point if you wish to do so? At any point, if you feel emotional distress, please let me know and I will help you feel more stable. I can also refer you to appropriate treatment centers if needed. Do you have any questions about what I shared with you so far?�).

The data for this study was gathered by conducting three in-depth, voice-recorded interviews with an expected length of at least 60 minutes each. Some interviews were

89

longer than 60 minutes and up to 90 minutes as the participant shared pertinent information.

I expected that each participant would take part in three to four 60-minute interviews.

In the end, each participant took part in three interviews. The fourth interview, which was reserved for any final data checks, as necessary, was not needed. After we established that the participant met the criteria and was willing to participate, I set up the interviews by phone. My plan was to do face-to-face interviews in a secure public location.

I also gathered field notes, thereby documenting the gang member’s body language, affect, and other indicators not captured by the voice recorder, as well as my own countertransference and reflection on the interview process. I selected the approach of multiple, longer interviews because it allowed me to build rapport with the participants, and it allowed participants to feel more comfortable and at ease about revealing personal information such as their experiences with caregivers and other gang members.

Moustakas (1994) states that the data in phenomenological research is gathered through long interviews in which the researcher uses open-ended comments and questions developed in advance to guide the experience. The interview starts with a social conversation, creating a relaxed space. Then the researcher asks the participant to “take a few moments to focus on the experience, [a] moment of particular awareness and impact, and then to describe the experience fully” (Moustakas, 1994, p. 114).

I used broad questions to gain a vibrant and fundamental description of each participant’s experience. I developed several sub-questions to deepen or further the discussion if the primary questions were not eliciting a great deal of information, or if the

90

research participant was not sure what to talk about. (For a complete list of sub-questions, please see Appendix E). Participants were asked to talk about the following:

Family composition, dynamics, and relationship with adults.

From my script: “Tell me what life was like for you as a child and what you remember about growing up as a child. Tell me about your relationships with different family members and any other important adults when you were growing up.�

Examples of sub-questions included: 1.

Whom do you consider to be your family?

2. Who did you grow up with, such as brothers and sisters, cousins, 3. Who did you spend most of your time with?

4. What were your relationships with other adults like in your childhood?

Joining the gang.

Primary questions included the following: 1. How did you decide to join the gang?

2. What were your reasons for joining?

3. What were you hoping to gain or avoid by joining?

4. Was your experience different after you joined?

91

5. What did you learn, gain, and lose as a result of joining?

6. What is your relationship with the gang like now?

Examples of sub-questions for this portion of the interview include, "Why did you join the gang?" and "What were you hoping to get out of the gang?”

Plan for Data Analysis I examined data using Moustakas' (1994) framework for analysis. I transcribed all interviews. As I read and reread transcripts, I searched for and coded statements by horizontaling, giving each statement the same amount of value as others. In essence, I viewed the transcripts and recognized statements relevant to the topic as having the same importance. I then created codes or “meaning units” by categorizing statements that were similar or repetitive. Themes then became apparent within the “meaning units."

Based on “what” was experienced, I formed textural descriptions, explanations of the events as they took place. Structural descriptions—“how” the phenomenon was experienced—then followed. Finally, I composed the essence of phenomenon by integrating the textural and structural descriptions (Moustakas, 1994).

My process included the following steps: 1. I located the invariant horizons or constituents, the unique evidence of the experience, by determining if this component was necessary and adequate in understanding the experience and if it could be labeled.

92

2. I clustered the invariant constitutes into thematic labels, forming core themes of the experience.

3. I assessed to see if the themes were explicitly expressed or compatible with the participant’s experience. If the themes were not explicitly expressed or were not compatible to what the participant stated, they were deleted. In this manner, I assessed for validity of my themes. This stage could be described as the final identification of invariant constituents and themes to gain validation.

4. I developed an individual textural description, by utilizing the themes and transcribed interviews to describe each participant’s experience of childhood relationships with caregivers and significant adults including the situation, the relationships, the thoughts, and the feelings of the participant.

5. I developed an individual structural description. In this step I showed the underlying dynamics of the experience and the themes illustrating how the feelings and thoughts connected to the former gang member’s experience of childhood care in relation to caregivers and other significant adults.

“The structures were brought into the researchers’ awareness through imaginative variation, reflection, and analysis, beyond the appearance and into the real meaning and essences of the experience” (Copen, 1993, P. 65 as stated in Moustakas, 1994, p. 135). I used my clinical skills to decode the underlying dynamics and meaning of the participant’s experience.

93

6. I incorporated the invariant constituents and themes into each participant’s textural structural description.

7.

I developed a composite description of meaning of the experience representing the group using the individual textural-structural descriptions.

In this step I described how the former gang members I interviewed experienced their childhood relationships with caregivers and significant adults as a group.

8. Finally, I provided an understanding of meaning and experience of former gang members’ childhood relationships with caregivers and significant adults through composing an overall view. This was done through incorporating the group’s textural-structural description, forming a textural-structural synthesis (Moustakas, 1994).

Beginning with the first interview and throughout the data analysis, I engaged in ongoing consultation with my dissertation committee chair and other members of the committee, who acted as consultants. They participated in defining meaning units and helped me develop themes from the data and meaning units. Ongoing consultation throughout the process of data analysis allowed me to better consider and process the data. This part of the data analysis was crucial and allowed me to maintain as much objectivity as possible. The data gathered from self-reflections and observations was used to assist me in understanding the underlying meaning of the statements, as well as completing the picture the transcripts are painting of the participants’ experiences.

94

Statement on Protecting the Rights of Human Subjects I provided participants with an informed-consent document, which I asked them to review and respond to with their written consent. The informed-consent document included: 1. The purpose of the study.

2. My name and the names of my dissertation-committee members and readers.

3. An agreement to participate in three interviews (in-person, phone, or Skype, as decided according to the participant’s convenience), which would be taped and transcribed.

4. An explanation of participants’ risk of experiencing emotional harm as a result of discussing and exploring memories from childhood and the past.

The document also explained protocol for such a situation. Specifically, if participants appeared to be experiencing emotional harm, I would stop the interview and assess the need for intervention. While talking with the participant, I would continue to assess the need for further mental-health treatment. If necessary, I could refer the participant to a county mental health agency close to his residence. I would also tell the participant that we could stop the interview and start over later, or the participant could drop out of the research altogether. If the participant decided to continue but appeared to be suffering from severe emotional harm, I would advise

95

that we stop our conversation, and that the participant should access mental-health treatment as soon as possible, with my assistance.

5. Notice of the right to withdraw from the study at any point without any penalty or negative consequence.

6. To ensure participant confidentiality, I provided privacy during the interview. I identified the participants by an ID number and, later on, a pseudonym. I did not disclose their personal identifying information with anyone. All of the tapes, transcribed interviews, and identifying information were kept in a password-protected file in a passwordprotected computer, which only my committee members and I could access.

Limitations of the Research Plan One of the limitations of this study was my own personal biases (reactions to the data provided and the participants). To control for these biases, I took field notes, consulted with my committee members, and analyzed my countertransference toward participants and their stories. Another bias was introduced by my preference to understand the data from a self-psychological theoretical framework instead of other frameworks. It is true that the data can be understood from many different theoretical frameworks including object-relations, ego psychology, relational theory, trauma theory, attachment theory, etc.

However, this project attempted to understand how gang members discuss their relationships with caregivers through a self-psychological lens. This lens places

96

significant importance on the relationship between self-objects and development of the self. Therefore, my results may not clearly have shown the importance of environmental factors on parents’ ability to perform needed self-object functions. This limitation was explored while discussing the results.

Since this project did not include females, the data would not provide information on female gang members’ experiences, how they talked about their parents, or the potential differences between male and female gang members. Also, I only interviewed former gang members, whose ability to leave their gangs might indicate personality characteristics or experiences that differ from active gang members. People still embedded in gangs as active members might have different characteristics. I did not have data about what makes these individuals stay in the gang while others leave.

Further, because of the small sample size, the results of this study may not pertain to the United States gang population as a whole. However, the goal of this study was not to provide a generalization, but rather a specific understanding of how some male gang members discuss their relationships with caregivers. As a result of this project, I hoped to provide insight into gang members’ experiences with their caregivers.

97

Chapter IV

Introduction to Results Fourteen men and two women expressed interest in the study. However, women were not eligible for the study as I was recruiting only male former gang members. Two of the 14 men were found ineligible. (One person was actively involved in a gang at the time he contacted me, and the other person was not eligible because of serious mental illness, a diagnosis of schizophrenia and cognitive difficulty as well as gang affiliation, as opposed to gang membership.) Four of the remaining 12 interested parties completed the initial phone interview. However, three did not respond to my attempts to coordinate interview times, and one did not show up at the interview site. This left eight participants who completed the study in full. Each participant engaged in a phone interview and three inperson interviews, each of which lasted between 60 and 90 minutes. This resulted in a total of 24 interviews.

Participant Summaries Michael.

Michael is a 50-year-old African American man who at the time of our interviews resided in a drug-and-alcohol rehabilitation facility. Michael entered the facility after his release from prison where he was serving a life sentence. Michael joined a gang at age

98

12, was active in the gang for 22 years, and has been out for the past 18 years. At the time of the interviews, Michael had recently gotten married and had a good relationship with his children. He reported that eight of his family members were involved in the gang during his childhood and four of them currently continue to be active in the gang.

Michael added that he started smoking marijuana when he was 8 years old.

David.

David is a 28-year-old African American man. He reported that he was involved in a gang starting around age 11. He was in the gang for 10 years and at the time of our interviews he had been inactive for 10 years. David had many family members who were gang-involved when he was a child. During that period of time, some of his family members suffered from mental illness and drug addiction. He reported his parents did not use drugs. David was looking for a job and wished to work with youth to prevent them from joining gangs.

Malcom X. Malcom X is a 55-year-old African American man who was residing at a drug-andalcohol rehabilitation facility after being released from prison following a life sentence.

Malcom X reported being part of a gang for close to 40 years, beginning when he was 10 or 11 years old. He had been out of the gang for close to 20 years. [While these are the numbers the participant reported, they do no accurately reflect his age]. He also shared that he had family members who were a part of the gang when he was growing up and

99

some family members had problems with drugs and alcohol abuse during his childhood.

Malcom X was getting married during the period in which the interviews took place. He had a good relationship with his children and his father, with whom he talked regularly.

Cedric.

Cedric is a 49-year-old African American man who was residing in a drug-andalcohol rehabilitation facility following release from prison, where he was serving a life sentence. He reported being involved with a gang for 17 years and having left the gang 12 years ago. Cedric had been shot in the face and as a result, he did not have his right eye or right ear. Cedric joined the gang when he was 19 years old. Cedric said that there was no history of gang membership among his maternal family members, who raised him.

However, he mentioned that his father’s family, with whom he did not communicate as a child, was involved in criminal activities. Cedric reported that no one in his family of origin used drugs or suffered from mental illness. Cedric planned to go to school and start his own business, providing youth services related to gang prevention and intervention.

Caliman.

Caliman is a 41-year-old Hispanic man. He works at a plumbing company and is a recovering alcoholic. He was active in a gang for 12 years, starting around 10 to 12 years of age. Caliman reported he has been inactive for over 15 years. He is well-known in his neighborhood but does not associate with other gang members. Caliman reported two of

100

his family members were a part of the gang and his father was an alcoholic, as were generations of men before him. Caliman has one daughter and enjoys spending as much time as possible with her and his family.

Eddie.

Eddie is a 44-year-old Hispanic man. He also works at a plumbing company. He was a part of a gang for 10 years, beginning around the ages of 13 or 14, and has not participated in gang activity for the last 20 years. Eddie reported that one cannot resign from the gang but since he paid his dues, he is not compelled to engage in gang activity.

Eddie reported one family member was a part of the gang for 15 years and some family members struggled with alcoholism. He is a family man and cares for his daughters, whom he holds very dear and considers to be his main motivations in life.

Tudy.

Tudy is a 53-year-old Native American man who is residing in a drug-and-alcohol facility after being released from prison, where he was serving a life sentence. Tudy shared that he was a part of a gang for 12 years and has been out for 5 years. He was not sure at what age he actually got involved. He stated he had three family members who were a part of the gang when he was a child. He added he did not believe his family members caused him to join the gang but that he did spend time around them. He also reported some family members used heroin and were alcoholics. Tudy enjoys his freedom and hopes to find a suitable living condition close to his family.

101

Bill.

Bill is a 46-year-old Native American man. He did not mention at what age he joined the gang but he was a part of it for 16 years and has been out for 7 or 8 years. Bill said his family had no history of gang membership, mental illness, or drug or alcohol abuse. He is a musician and works to raise awareness about the negative impact of gangs. He spends time with children, young adults, and others in the community and discusses his experiences of the gang. He also supports gang-involved young people to help them change their lives.

Participant Population: Demographics Age, gender, and ethnicity.

A total of eight (N=8) former gang members participated in this study. All were male and most were middle-age. (Seven of the eight participants were between the ages of 41 and 55. One was in his late 20s). Half identified as African American, two as Hispanic, and two as Native American.

102

Gang involvement.

The following table represents the amount of time participants reported being both active and inactive in their respective gangs.

Table 1 Length and range of time active and inactive in the gang Gang Involvement

Average Amount of Time

Range of Years

Time Active

17 years

10-40 years

Time Inactive

13 years

5-20 years

On average, participants were active in their gangs for 17 years. All participants (100%) reported having been active in a gang for more than 10 years. While most participants' gang involvement ranged between 10 and 22 years, one reported that he had been a part of a gang for 40 years.

The average amount of time participants reported being inactive, or out of their gangs, was 13 years. Most (seven of eight) had been out from 10 to 20 years. Only one was more recently inactive, as of the last 5 years.

Family dynamics—gang influence, mental health, and substance use.

Six participants (75%) reported they had family members who were part of a gang. All participants denied that gang-involved family members had helped them get into their

103

respective gangs, but two participants stated that they had spent time with these family members.

Of the eight participants, only one reported having a family member who was taking medication for a diagnosed mental illness. Another denied having any mental health problems in the family but acknowledged there being issues with anger. Six participants (75%) reported immediate or extended family members having problems related to substance abuse or alcoholism. All participants reported a history of using alcohol and drugs during their gang memberships. Six participants reported that they had received or were receiving substance-abuse treatment or attending AA or NA meetings.

Summary of the Results of the Participant Population (Demographic and Contextual) The majority of participants were middle-age African American males. All were inactive, or out of the gang, for more than 5 years. The majority had family members who were also a part of a gang at some point. In addition, the majority of the participants reported that substance-abuse problems had affected both themselves and members of their families.

Raw Data In setting up this research, my purpose was to explore early childhood relationships between former gang members and their caregivers and significant adults. In my attempt to specifically explore this subject, I received a breadth of information from all

104

participants, including their wish to share stories from the time they joined the gang up to the time they left the gang, becoming inactive or less involved. The data I received included not only the answer to the questions regarding childhood relationships with caregivers and significant adults. It also provided additional unsolicited information about the participants’ life stories. For the purposes of the study, I am focusing on the data related to childhood relationships with caregivers.

Below is a brief review of the data-analysis process, to highlight how the categories emerged from the raw data. After each interview, and during transcription and coding, I wrote memos. These memos documented non-verbal communication from the participants, my own reaction to the data, and my thoughts provoked by the data itself.

This documentation helped manage my own countertransference, and provided additional information that might be useful in understanding the phenomenon being studied.

After each participant reviewed the consent form and completed the survey, I asked my primary questions. Based on the discussion, when needed, I asked more specific questions. After each interview, I transcribed the interview, reviewed the evident themes, and shared the themes with the participant at the next interview as a means of memberchecking. I attempted to make sure I understood the narratives of each participant and that the themes I derived from the information they communicated to me accurately reflected their stories. This helped ensure the validity of the study. In addition, discussing themes with participants helped establish whether certain experiences were unique to one participant or were a common theme among the group.

105

After transcribing the interviews, I read the interviews and horizontalized the data. In essence, I reviewed the transcripts to find statements relevant to the topic. Then I separated those statements and identified statements with equal importance. I coded the identified statements, looking for meaning units.

I identified the meaning units along two lines: as being textural (entailing a description of the phenomenon or what happened), and as being structural (how the phenomenon was experienced). After identifying the meaning units for each participant, I grouped the textural meaning units, structural meaning units, and textural-structural meaning units for each participant to provide the structural, textural, and textural-structural synthesis for each individual and the group. Originally, I had an extensive list of detailed codes.

Through consultation with my dissertation committee, I was able to merge these codes into the primary, most appropriate meaning units. Then I incorporated the meaning units into themes.

Number of categories that emerged from the raw data.

Twenty-three meaning units merged from the data. There were a total of 12 textural meaning units relating to the description of the participants' experiences. Also, 10 structural meaning units addressed how the phenomenon was experienced. Another meaning unit was created as an "other" category, which related to participants' experiences unrelated to the research study, including their experiences as an adult.

The exception to this rule was that one participant (Cedric) had gang experiences as an adult that I incorporated into the data. This was because Cedric joined the gang when he

106

was 19 years old and was able to explain his reasons for gang involvement and his relationship with the gang in his early adult years. However, I did not code his narrative relating to his gang experiences, as similar experiences were not coded for other participants and were beyond the scope of this study. The 23 meaning units were combined into seven themes.

Type of categories.

Twenty-three overall meaning units were formed based on participants' experiences with caregivers, significant adults, and their relationships to the gang at the time of joining, as well as relationships with gang members. Twenty-two of the meaning units represented data related to the research question, "What was the experience of gang members with caregivers and how do gang members talk about their caregivers and family of origin?"

I identified 12 textural meaning units describing the participants’ experiences as follows, represented by the frequency at which participants discussed meaning unit: 1. My experience of my parents / family (248) 2. Experience of growing up (162) 3. Experience of violence in childhood (124) 4. Relationship to the world outside of the gang (105) 5. Who my parents were (93) 6. What the gang looked like (69) 7. Getting into the gang (58)

107

8. Peer relationships (57) 9. Trauma and developmental experiences (40) 10. My experience of my siblings (35) 11. Description of family experience (31) 12. What I did to cope (5) All of the participants talked about their experience of their parents or family, their experiences of growing up, their experiences of violence in childhood, their relationship with others in the world outside of the gang, who their parents were, what the gang looked like, how they got into the gang, what took place between them and their peers, and their experiences with their siblings. Seven out of the eight participants talked about trauma and developmental experiences and described their family experience. Twentyfive percent of the participants talked about what they did to cope.

Ten structural meaning units expressing how the participants experienced the phenomenon under study were observed as follows, represented by the frequency at which participants discussed the meaning unit: 1. Psychological reaction to family growing up (787) 2. My relationship to the gang (217) 3. What I saw the gang as or what the gang meant to me (143) 4. What I did to cope (93) 5. Emotional impact of developmental trauma (64) 6. How I understand violence (62)

108

7. Relationship to the world outside of the gang (how I felt about others in my environment) (39) 8. My experiences with my siblings (how I felt about those experiences) (37) 9. Reaction to violence (34) 10. Peers (how I felt in relation to peers) (18) All participants commented about the following meaning units: psychological reaction to family growing up, my relationship to the gang, what I saw the gang as or what the gang meant to me, and what did I do to cope. Seven of the eight participants shared how they understood violence.

Seventy-five percent commented on emotional impact of developmental trauma and relationship to the world outside of the gang (how I felt about others in my environment).

More than half of the participants discussed their reaction to violence. Exactly half discussed their experiences with siblings and how they felt about those experiences, as well as peers and related feelings.

109

Table 2

Frequency of Meaning Units Mentioned How I Understand Violence

Emotional Impact Of Developmental Trauma

What I Did To Cope Frequency of Meaning… What I Saw The Gang As Or What The Gang Meant To Me

My Relationship To The Gang

Psychological Reaction to Family Growing Up

0

200

400

600

800

1000

110

Table 3

Frequency Meaning Units Are Mentioned Continued

Peers (How I Felt In Relation To Peers)

Reaction To Violence

My Experiences With My Siblings (How I Felt About Those Experiences)

Relationship to the World Outside of the Gang (How I Felt About Others in My Environment)

0

10

20

30

40

50

111

Chapter V

Results: Seven Themes Introduction: Seven Themes Seven themes emerged from my research results. The original research question aimed at understanding the experience of former gang members with their caregivers and significant adults and whether that experience impacted their decision to join gangs. In the course of the interviews, I asked all participants to describe their experiences and feelings about those experiences with caregivers and significant adults, and to describe their experiences with gangs, including their decisions to join the gang and their emotions related to the gang and gang members.

However, this research provided a more complex and complete picture of the lives of participants than expected. Each participant was interested in sharing his story, starting from the time he joined the gang up to the time he left. The majority of the participants were unaware of the impact of family relationships on their decision to join the gang, while their statements demonstrated significant vulnerabilities formed during childhood and a search for fulfillment of those vulnerabilities in the gang. Many of the participants mentioned a search for acceptance, sense of accomplishment, monetary or emotional gain, camaraderie, and battling a sense of helplessness and hopelessness. Joining a gang served as a way to counteract those latter feelings.

112

In the course of interviews, the participants painted a picture of the complexity of the overall gang phenomenon, including the environmental, social, familial, and individual factors that influence one's decision to join a gang. Ultimately, in the end, all participants rejected the gang and gang lifestyle.

I derived the following seven themes from the data: Family, Gang, Peers, Trauma, Violence, Coping, and World. The Family theme included a description of participants' parents and family experiences. This theme also provided information on participants’ relational experiences with family members and siblings as well as the emotional impact of those experiences. In addition, it demonstrated how participants felt and their psychological reactions to experiences with the family and family dynamics, whether they were positive or negative.

The Gang theme illustrated participants’ experiences with gangs. Information related to this theme included the following: 1. What the gang was like or how it functioned 2. How and why the participant joined the gang 3. The emotional and psychological meaning of the gang to the participant, and how the participant became interested in the gang 4. How the participant experienced his relationships with others in the gang The Peer theme described the impact of peer relationships on the participant. This included both actual experiences with peers—positive or negative—and how the participant felt as a result of those experiences.

113

The Trauma theme shed light on participants’ experiences of trauma growing up and its emotional and behavioral impact. The theme of Violence described participants’ experiences with violence, whether as witness, perpetuator, or victim. In addition, this theme illustrated the effect of violence on participant’s emotional and psychological development, and how the participant reacted to violence and understood violence thereafter. The Coping theme showed the actions and psychological processes it took for participants to be able to cope with their emotional experiences that resulted from trauma and traumatic experiences with the family and the gang.

Finally, the World theme looked at participants' experiences and relationships with others outside of the family and the gang, as well as the emotional and psychological impact of those experiences.

Theme One: Family The impact of family on gang membership has been researched, but these studies did not offer in-depth explorations of family dynamics on gang membership from a psychodynamic perspective. In my study, the Family theme looked at several factors.

These included descriptions of the family and family members, as well as relationships with family members including parents and siblings. Additionally, the Family theme assessed how participants experienced their families, and the psychological impact of those relationships. Of all the themes, participants discussed Family the most, with a frequency of 1231 quotes.

114

The first Family sub-theme—Who my parents were—included the experiences of participants’ parents during their own childhoods and the resulting impact on their ability to parent, experiences as adults in relation to others, and social and economical standing.

The second sub-theme—Participants' experience of siblings in childhood—addressed how siblings impacted participant behavior, whether positively or negatively. Participants also described their relationships with their fathers, which is sub-theme three, Participants' experience of fathers. The fourth sub-theme—Psychological impact of family relationships—captured how participants experienced their families and the psychological impact of family relationships.

Sub-theme one: who my parents were.

All of the participants shared who their parents were and their parents’ different characteristics or circumstances. One of the participants, who had engaged in long-term psychodynamic therapy, described his view of his parents’ childhood relationships and the impact on their functioning as caregivers. In addition, the same participant described the impact of those childhood experiences on the parents' choices, including decisions related to their relationships. Other participants shared their parents’ struggles with social and economical disadvantages. Many mentioned their appreciation for their parents’ hard work to provide for their families.

115

Parents’ experiences during their own childhoods.

Some of the participants discussed their parents’ childhood experiences and the impact of those experiences on their ability to care for their children. Others shared that their parents’ own unmet needs, namely, a lack of love and care during childhood, led to the parents searching for fulfillment of those needs via relationships with their children. In essence, the participants described experiencing a form of conditional love.

Impact of parents’ childhood experiences on their ability to raise children.

Some of the participants described their parents’ history of abuse, trauma, and violence as children, and shared how their parents’ experiences led to an inability, or unawareness, of how to help the participants and provide for emotional needs. In effect, according to these participants, their parents’ lack of knowledge and lack of awareness of their own emotional and psychological traumas and difficulties affected their ability to perform as parents. Consider these comments, taken directly from transcripts of my research interviews:

David.

His father [David’s paternal grandfather] wouldn’t let him [David’s father] take showers or things like this when he was young, so it affected him. He didn’t want to go to school like that. So, he never got to finish school.

116

Michael.

Back then, they were beautiful parents. They just didn't understand cause and effect.

They didn't understand because a lot of times, when you understand stuff, you become responsible for the change. You are not really ready to change it or not ready to understand.

The participants added that their parents’ lack of love, care, and support in their own childhoods led them to depend on their children for fulfillment of those unmet needs.

Those dynamics led to relationships marked by conditional love. The parents asked for love and care from children, and exhibited an inability to understand their children’s feelings. Also, parents showed a lack of acceptance when the participants did not confirm to the parents’ wishes.

Michael.

My grandmother . . . was at a visit out in the [prison] with me. I asked her how she felt about my great-grandmother, her mom, and she said her mom didn’t love her.

Now I heard my mom said that my grandmother didn’t love her. And from what I know, my great grandmother felt her mom didn’t love her. So, I said, “If you all feel you all haven’t been loved, what are you giving me?” So, God showed me that they were extracting. It was confirmed by these conversations that they didn’t feel loved by their parents. So, they confirmed they were extracting love from children, grandchildren and a lot of times.

117

Cedric.

Well, as a child, before I started to mature in age, I can actually say I felt accepted.

Now [as an adolescent] I am older, it is not much interest given to making me feel comfortable, or feel accepted in the household or loved or cared for. All the way up to high school it was a cohesive family union. I look at it in two ways, as I was coming to a more mature adolescent, where I was looking to take, going different directions, or I am developing what my endeavor or aspirations are and that was not respected because I was still looked at as a child, or the resentment from not being treated the same as.

For example, my last birthday, I remember I was 11 or 12 years [old]. While I am witnessing [other family members] when their birthdays come, they are having big birthday parties, big celebrations, they’re getting gifts and things of that nature.

So, for me, I’m processing it in one of two ways, either I am no longer a part of this family anymore, or they are looking at me as the oldest and I am on my way out the door.

Impact of parents’ childhood relationships on their adult relationships.

Others talked about how their parents’ childhood experiences, exposure to violence, and unresolved trauma affected the parents’ relationships with other adults and exposed the participants to further violence. One participant elaborated that when a parent has been a victim of abuse and molestation and has not been defended, taken care of or attended to, the parent will not have the capacity or knowledge necessary to care for

118

children. Therefore, the parent is unable to provide care or support and defend children from harm. This parent is also likely to accept abuse in relationships, unaware of how being abused affects the wellbeing of children who witness it.

Michael.

That is the cycle. My mom being molested by my great-grandfather, being neglected and undermined by my grandmother because they didn't really want to acknowledge that the patriarch was violating the little girl. He was the pastor so she was not being heard. So she did not know how to hear. So when you have a child who is having children, mother doesn’t have her stuff right. So she ain't got the equipment necessary to hear. She is really not being heard.

So this is why the dysfunctional relationship happens. Since she was not heard, she feels not worthy to us. She is accepting abuse in her own relationships because nobody defends her. So she doesn't really know how to defend her [children].

Social and economical standing of my parents.

Some participants reported that their parents struggled with economical and social disadvantages, having to work many hours to provide for their children. Therefore, the parents were not available to supervise their children.

119

David.

My dad didn’t get much of an education. He never finished school because he had some bad things going on with his father who raised him or whatever. So, we had dealt with a lot of situations. My dad [was] always working. But he wasn’t really making that much money. My dad told us all of this to let us know that. I think it was out of love—he wanted to let us know why things hadn’t gotten any better for him or why things were going [a] certain way.

Tudy.

Then my mom got another job, because she was staying home and I guess she thought, “I wouldn’t have to work. I will take care of my kids.” But money, everybody needs it to have things, and, you know, abuse started again.

Eddie.

Because my dad worked a lot, my dad was the sole provider and my mom did what she could. She was kind of a merchant. She was a big gold fanatic. She would buy chains and charms and stuff and pay maybe $30 to $40 and sell it for $60 to $70, and in payments. That was her contribution to the house. That allowed her to contribute some, but it also left me in charge of my younger brother. I had to look out for him.

120

Hard-working parents.

Finally, some of the participants discussed how much they valued their parents and the sacrifices their parents made to provide. All participants shared positive feelings toward their parents for their hard work. They also shared their love and appreciation for their parents’ sacrifices.

Bill.

I was in a single-parent home. My mother worked a lot. She was the closest thing to me. She taught me how to cook. You know, because I was her last. The others weren’t there. My mother was the closest person on earth to me.

Caliman.

My mom, she was the best mom in the world. At first I didn’t understand why she was never around, but she was never around because she was working her ass off for us to have a roof over our heads because my dad didn't take care of us. My dad was drunk. My mom was the sole provider.

Sub-theme two: participants’ experience of siblings in childhood.

The participants shared their experiences with their siblings as a significant part of childhood. Some participants talked about the effect of siblings’ abusive behavior, such as physical hitting that parents or caregivers either did not witness or excused as part of a game, discipline, or sibling rivalry. Some of the participants experienced emotional pain

121

as a result of such abusive behavior, which led to lack of trust toward the abusive siblings. However, some of the participants shared that they felt protected by their siblings, or how they themselves acted to protect their siblings. Others saw siblings’ abusive behavior as simply part of life, a form of preparation for future encounters with hostile people.

Michael.

My brother was older. He tortured me. Stuffed me in the clothes hamper, knock[ed] me out. Beat me up. So, it was all done under the auspice of brotherly relationship. [Adults’ responses were], “Oh, that’s your brother. Brother, stop that.” Not really understanding.

That is how I played. Because that is how I was played with. My brother tortured me. (Imitating his mother) “Oh, that’s just brotherly play.” If that is brotherly play, me hurting these people is play.

David.

One time, we were staying in a three-bedroom. My two brothers and me were sharing a room and my baby sister wasn’t born yet. And my two other sisters were sharing a room. I don’t know who it was, my little brother or my big brother. One of them actually hit me in the jaw (holding and rubbing his jaw) with a hammer.

Well, I was laying face down on the stairs. I was probably like seven. I don’t think they knew what they were doing. It was kind of stupid, but we kind of had a

122

rivalry. I know they were trying to hurt me and I didn't really . . . at the time, I think it did nothing. I’m not sure if it did have any type of affect, but I didn’t think it had any affect.

Tudy.

If I wasn’t getting beat up by my brothers, I was getting beat up by my sisters.

And I told you, I was holding this resentment towards my sister, but you know what, it's nobody's fault. I put myself in prison. It’s just the fact that, how can you be that fucked up, how can you be that way toward your little brothers? How can you hurt them that mean[ly]? You know, I went through that with him . . . I had an older brother and he was the one who is still using drugs, heroin. He was kind of, he didn't care, stealing from the house, stealing from my mom. My mom loved him. Just so he won’t steal, she would give him money so he could go buy his drugs. He really didn't care about us. He cared about his fix. He really didn’t care about nothing else.

No, I always had respect for my brother. I just didn’t like hanging around with him. He was into his sniffing coke and smoking weed, so it was there. And I respect him because he had a job and he would help my mom with the rent.

But you don’t realize that we’re trying to survive out there. I would go home (tearful, voice breaking) and my little sisters. They liked to see me come home because I was able to bring bread, pizza. You know stuff that I bought, so they

123

could eat (choked up, trying to control it), and that was the way my life was going.

Bill.

My anger was more so because—[they used to call me] “Pretty boy, you got pretty hair,” or something, and that would start a fight. So, I was already rebelling before I was in a gang and I had the type of the brother who you’re running in the house from. “I am going to beat you up, so you have to choose who you want to fight. You gonna fight me or you gonna fight them?” His mantra was, “You have to go out there and fight. You can’t let anybody over here punk you because we live in this area.”

Sub-theme three: participants’ experiences of their fathers.

Many of the participants shared that their fathers were not part of their lives. Some of the participants grew up with stepfathers or their mothers’ boyfriends. In the families without a father figure, an older sibling would take on the task of acting as a parent. Only one participant shared positive experiences with his stepfather.

Michael.

There was some physical abuse from my mother's boyfriends, up under her.

124

Bill.

My brother was more of a father figure to me because my father wasn’t there.

Tudy.

Well, my dad was never a part of my life. I had a couple of stepfathers, but they were really not a part. They just can’t come in and change things, and that’s what [it] was. Since I had older brothers, they knew better, you know.

[The stepfathers] knew they couldn’t tell us what to do. They were just there trying to love my mother. They weren’t there trying to be the father because they are not the father. How are they going to be the father? You know, when you come to someone’s life, I think you come to their life as a young kid and then you kind of get attached to that father figure. But when you come to their life at 10, 11, you are like, “Who is this dude right here?” So it’s really nothing to you and all you ask him is not to hit your mother, you understand.

Caliman.

Growing up, as I said, my mom was never there. My dad was an alcoholic and when my stepdad came in to our lives, he was never there because they were always working. I love my stepdad. My stepdad, again, I have nothing bad to say about that man, not one thing. He has been the best father I can imagine.

125

Sub-theme four: psychological impact of family relationships.

“A child comes with a heart of gold, but the weight of the world turns that heart stone cold.” (Earth, Wind & Fire, recited by Michael) Participants who had been through psychodynamically oriented therapy—three out of eight—expressed how their family relationships affected their emotional and psychological well-being, making them more vulnerable to gang involvement. Others shared different experiences with their families, specifically in regard to trusting their families and their families’ understanding of them and their emotional states.

Loss of trust.

Some of the participants shared their feelings about not being able to trust their parents because of the parents’ choices, behaviors, or responses to their disclosures.

Participants shared that the choices the parents made about their own lives, such as reconnecting with an abusive partner, led to doubt regarding the parent’s ability to care and protect the participants, leading to disruption of trust.

Others shared that they did not feel they could trust their parents because of fear of discipline or punishment. One of the participants felt that if he had been able to trust and talk to his father about his struggles, his life would have turned out differently. Another participant shared that he lost trust in his family members because they did not understand him, spoke negatively about him, lied to him, and his parents treated his siblings differently. Another participant shared that he did not feel he was ever put in a

126

situation to trust his parents, but that he felt safe with his grandmother and aunt who had always protected him and given him unconditional love.

Michael.

I mean, it is just, the man just violated you (referring to his mother’s boyfriend who had hit her six months ago). So, if you let him back in now, I lost respect because now my safety is at stake. Your safety is at stake and when your safety is at stake, then I am vulnerable. So my protector has put the situation in this very unsafe position because you let this person [back in], and you ain't probably thinking about or caring about your welfare. I need your welfare to be elevated. I felt that you can’t trust a person’s choices, even as a child. They stop trusting when parents make bad decisions.

Children, their response is, “I can’t trust.” That is why you have disobedient children, and deciding do contrary to what the parent's trying to say because they no longer trust in events. You love them but you can’t trust them. And respect is probably not the right word. I lost trust because I respected the hell out of her. I respected her and still feared her. But trust, I didn’t really.

Malcolm X. Had I got the proper help that society has to offer someone today in that state of mind, I probably would have been all right and many more would have been all right if we had got the proper help. (Asked about what he meant by proper help) I don’t know, maybe a psychologist. You know what I’m saying. Maybe feeling

127

OK enough to tell your mother, not being fearful of your father that you can tell [your father] anything and, you know, that he is your protector and he is going to do the right thing. You are more afraid of what he is going to do or what is his response. So you just bottle all that shit in.

Eddie.

I can’t say I didn't trust my dad, or maybe I can. I don’t know, my dad was the discipline person in the family. So, if I got into a fight in school or problems in school, my dad would be the last person I would go and tell him these things because I would get into trouble.

David.

Honestly, at a young age, I lost trust with everybody. I kind of trusted my mom and my dad. Well, like I was saying, as a kid, I used to try to be quiet.

A lot of times I would get annoyed by my mother. We were driving around in the car. I have to hear her talking to my grandma or somebody that was riding with us [about me]. I’m quiet. She used the word “antisocial.” I didn’t know what it meant. Even though we were kids, we had learned that [being antisocial] was some form of mental problems. And as a child we didn’t want to be associated with any form of mental problem that we know of because, like I said, kids can be rude or heartless at times. So, when we were younger, sometime we were thinking mental problem was like mentally handicapped, special, and we didn’t

128

want to be associated as that. I think that kind of opened up a can of worms.

Certain things like that, kind of realizing that people can lie on accident. You know, learning that as a child kind of led me to believe that if you couldn’t stand me acknowledging the fact that you lied, to me it was something fishy, being as small as that was, it was still something fishy in that, that led me to distrust. And you would think that as parents you would treat everybody the same. But, you know, that kind of broke us up as a family and made more distrust.

Cedric.

I didn't have any feelings till later, till the start of confrontation with my mother.

And I can honestly say I never entertained or had interest in telling anyone what I was going through or why I felt I was going through it. So, it was never significant with me to have to trust with anyone. But generally speaking, did I trust anyone? I have to say no, because I was never placed in a predicament to have to do it per se, maybe—or have to confide in someone and feel comfortable or safe.

(Asked about whether he felt safe with anyone) As a child, probably more so with my aunt. When I was very young, although, you had to remember, when I left home, where did I go? My grandmother, she was protecting. When I say “safe,” I am thinking, “Who will protect you from anything or anyone?” And [that would be] between my grandmother and my aunt.

129

Lack of communication, understanding and acceptance.

In addition to trust, many participants reported a sense of not being understood, validated, or communicated with. They shared how not being able to communicate with parents led to aggression, anger, and resentment, which played a role in forming misplaced anger and aggression towards others. The participants also discussed how a lack of understanding and empathy led to feelings of being victimized. Further, when parents, caregivers, and other adults did not seem to understand the participants and only addressed behavior but not the cause, participants felt “double jeopardized,” as Michael described it. (In such a situation, the child continues to behave in the same way as before.)

Some participants also discussed parents’ lack of empathy towards their interests and wishes. This was experienced by the participants as a lack of love and caring.

Malcolm X. (Speaking with conviction) I was afraid of my father. Although he was a good provider, his parenting (speaking slowly, with moments of silence here and there), when I look back on it, I wish that instead of him beating me, trying to get me to understand, trying to get his point across to me, I wish he would have sat down with me and talked to me. I think we would have had a better relationship and I wouldn’t have been so fearful of him. And also, the resentment, all the anger I held for him, was really, I think somewhere in psychology I read, is called “misplaced aggression” or “misplaced anger.” I think I exhibited that all my life.

130

Yeah, he was probably my biggest fear. Well, he was the only person I feared until I got older.

Michael.

It is hard for children because people are not trying to understand them. When the child is doing something, you have to think the child is being taught. Because he is a child and a child does not know. If you know how to read or don't know how to read, you were taught, or [there was] a lack of teaching.

So if you are to blame him for this here, when he is really the dependent, then you double-jeopardize, double-victimize the child. So the education department double-jeopardized, double-victimized. Tolerance is low, and you should have known, by evidence of my actions, that I don't know that I am acting a fool.

Cedric.

(Referring to an incident when his mother punched him) Yeah, I was dejected, withdrawn, having reservations about how she felt, whether she loved me or not, whether she had understanding about what my views were, progressing into adulthood because I was her first child. I don’t think she really understood how to deal with a male child. For a long time I used to say, “You don’t really care about me or my feelings or things of that nature.” I would always share that she had domineering qualities. If I didn’t do what she said, she would be upset.

131

Tudy.

I remember one day, my mom used to take me everywhere with her. She goes, “Hey, we are going to the store,” and I jumped into the car. It was like 11, 12 [years old].

She said, “Not you.”

I said, “Not me? What do you mean?” She goes, “Get off the car,” and I get off the car and they start taking off. And I start chasing, and that’s when I knew. I found myself running so far that I was lost, so I had to call the police and they took me back home. That’s when I knew that I’m on my own (voice breaking).

Cedric.

Yeah, so, now I don’t have that family structure anymore, the guidance, nurturing, acceptance. I felt like I was accepted with my grandmother and my aunt. The rest of the family, especially in my household, their acceptance was only when I was obedient or I was doing the right thing. If I did something and I made a mistake or something, I would feel the disconnect. It was the same thing when I was playing sports. If I was doing well, doing what the coach told me to do, it was a good acceptance. I was affirmed. I was exalted. But as soon as I make a mistake, it was ridicule.

132

Importance of Validation.

Some of the participants shared the importance of validation in children’s lives. They shared how children are in search of validation from parents and if that validation goes unmet, they will continue to search for it in other areas.

David.

One thing growing up that I used to notice about sports . . . A lot of people used to have trophies in their home. A lot of people I knew didn’t have a lot of things, but the trophies were something that somebody’s mom could be proud of.

Somebody’s mom would have a little trophy case. One day the Boys and Girls Club by my family’s house had a basketball tournament. They would give away trophies and we got to pick our teams. I guess it was the first people that make the shot, they get to pick the team to play with. I think it was four-on-four tournament. I made the first shot and got to pick my team, the people I wanted to play with. We won the whole thing. That was like the first and only sport trophy I had and I gave it to my mom (laughing).

(Asked what his mother did with the trophy) She took it and set it somewhere.

It eventually ended up getting broke. I don’t think it was (forced laughter), I don’t know, usually people put them in a case or something. I don’t know if she really had anywhere to put it. I think she was happy [when I told her how I won the trophy] but I don’t think she understood why I was giving it to her, and why I was telling her about it. I don’t know, she probably understood that part. A lot of

133

times, looking at sports, it is kind of self-rewarding to win a sports game. I don’t think she even knew what was going on. Like I said, this was something I saw when I went to a friend’s house, or something like that, and they got a lot of trophies.

Michael.

I play sports. I was good. I am still good. If your parent doesn’t come to support you, they did not come to a lot of games. If you are good or not good, but you ain't have people rooting you on. Children need cheers. They compliment you.

Children need to be validated. Grown people need to be validators. A lot of us did need validation that we lacked. All of that, when you become of age, there is a part [of one rap song] that says, "When my weight caught up with my hate / You got a little kid with all this pressure and then he gets bigger / Now he can inflict."

Summary of theme one: family.

The following is the summary of what the participants shared and how they experienced their family dynamics.

1. Some of the participants shared that their parents were victims of child maltreatment and violence, which negatively affected their ability to care for the participants and to protect them from abusive partners.

134

2. Some of the participants talked about how parents’ unmet needs led the parents to search for love from their children, making that love conditional.

3. Participants spoke about how many of their parents had to work long hours to provide for their children, leaving participants on their own.

4. Participants were grateful for the sacrifices their parents made to care for them.

5. Participants had positive and negative experiences with their siblings.

Positive experiences included receiving or providing protection from and to siblings. Negative experiences included siblings who were abusive or violent towards the participant, whether as a form of play, discipline, or rivalry.

6. Participants felt their fathers were missing from their lives and usually the older siblings filled the role of a father figure. Only one participant reported positive experiences with his stepfather. For others, there was not a significant relationship with a stepfather (or mother’s boyfriend), or the relationship was abusive.

7. Participants who had received psychodynamic therapy were able to make connections between the impact of family relationships and increased vulnerability to and interest in gangs.

8. Participants disclosed a loss of trust in parents resulting from parental choices that ultimately affected the children. The causes for this loss of

135

trust ranged from fear of parents' potential reaction to the participants’ disclosures to the parents’ apparent lack of consistency and negative views toward children.

9. Participants expressed that a lack of communication, empathy, and understanding by family members and parents led participants to feel unable to speak with their parents, jeopardized, or unloved.

10. Participants reported the importance of validation for children and their search for validation from parents throughout childhood.

Theme Two: Gang The gang phenomenon has been studied from many different perspectives. The purpose of studying gangs in this research was to explore if, and how, childhood relationships of former gang members related to their decision to join gangs. When conducting the interviews, I asked the participants about their decisions to join gangs, as well as what they hoped to gain or lose from their participation. Also, I asked about their experiences and their relationships with other gang members.

Participants provided further information about the construct of the gang and the emotional and psychological meaning of the gang. All participants discussed this theme, with a frequency of 487 times. Each participant provided significant information that helps to understand the gang phenomenon. However, in order to stay focused on the research topic, I will only discuss the themes most related and most frequently shared by the majority of the participants.

136

The first sub-theme—What the gang was like—included overall experiences of the gang, the gang’s foundation, gang members' talents and skills being used in a negative way, and the street code (or the rules and regulations) enforced by the gang.

The second sub-theme—Joining the gang—illustrated participants’ experiences of and reasons for joining the gang, whether through an initiation process, growing up in the gang, or forming a gang with friends.

The third sub-theme—Emotional and psychological meaning of the gang—related to participants’ experience of the gang as a family figure. This included how participants viewed the gang as their family or how participants acted like family members towards other gang members. This sub-theme also included the participants’ experiences of the gang as accepting, validating, and reinforcing participation through approving the gang members’ delinquent and aggressive behavior. Participants who felt the gang provided a sense of belonging and camaraderie among members also discussed comradeship.

Finally, participants shared their experiences of true care and friendship among some of the gang members.

The fourth sub-theme—Experiences with other gang members—included the participants’ experiences with other members. The participants shared their experiences with disloyalty and lack of trust among gang members.

Sub-theme one: What the gang was like.

“Gang got a foundation and it is fear-based. And fear-base produces murder.” (Michael)

137

Participants discussed different aspects of the gang and how the gang functions. Most of the participants shared that many gang members have positive qualities, talents, and skills. However, they use their “gifts� in a negative manner for the purposes of the gang.

That is because the gang is a violent construct and it is based on fear. Therefore, the gang only produces destruction, turmoil, and fear. This fear is, in part, based on the gang’s rules, which are violent, unforgiving, and reactive. The gang rules are known as the "street code." The street code is not discussed or taught to new members. Rather, it is acted out in such a way that the members will learn through experience or watching others suffer the consequences. The street code is passed on through generations, verbally and experientially, without ever being written down.

Michael.

There a lot of good people in these gangs but the foundation of [the] gang is murder and mayhem. . . . Gang got a foundation and it is fear-based. And fear-base produces murder. If you look at Mexican mafia, any gang from the native land, your home . . .

If you look at any gang organization, it is not like the people are real comfortable.

They are real fearful. Because they know if they step out of this order, death is knocking at their door. The foundation is to produce fear because there are a bunch of fearful people in the gang.

Caliman.

(Sharing that he was falsely arrested for attempted murder because of his friend, who

138

had carjacked someone and beat them up badly and ran into Caliman’s house, making it appear that Caliman had carjacked the person) You can’t say it was him. I can’t tell the cops that. If I tell the cops it was him, [the gang] would kill me.

Gifted.

Many of the participants shared that the gang is made of individuals who are talented, skillful, and gifted. However, because of their vulnerabilities, low self-esteem, and lack of knowledge, they are not aware of the value of their own abilities. These individuals have not been made aware of their own “gifts.” They respond to the call of the gang that recognizes and takes advantage of their gifts, even at a price of endangering their lives.

Others elaborated about how gang members have dreams and ambitions that were actualized in the gang in a disparaging and destructive way.

Michael.

So, gang [members are] a bunch of beautiful people that don’t quite understand the essence of their beauty because we are beautiful, but that’s a truth. The other truth is that until you do understand it, you will have to pay the price for your decision and you are hurting the people. So our job is to try to alleviate the pain.

139

Cedric.

I believe that some of my positive core values were flipped into negative core values. Like my ambition, and my being ambitious and being a risk-taker, it became a negative value or attribute. Another example: violence. I am exposed to this gentleman and he is highly assaultive and he has a gun and he [says to someone], “You gonna pay me my money or I am going to kill you.” So, he pistol-up the individual. In order to get his money, he hits him with a gun. He don’t get the money and the guy is saying, “I am going to make sure you will get your money.” and that’s the [resolution] of that.

So, with me taking a risk, which is a positive attribute if you are in the stock market, and you know how to discern. “Oh, I took a risk and I lost. Now, I have to start over.” Or, “I took a risk and I made $20,000 and I got to invest it.” However, in urban America, taking this risk is a negative. I just observed this guy hit this guy over the head with no results. So, now, in me taking a risk, I am going to shoot that individual in the leg and I will tell him, “The next shot [you are] going to take it in the chest. Is your life worth this few thousands dollars?” So, now he gives me all the money that he has, or he gets me to his safe and gives me my money. I may have to kill this guy but I am going to shoot him one time to let him know I am serious. That’s the aggressive part of me taking a risk that’s supposed to be a positive attribute.

140

Bill: And I think gang members all have dreams. They want to do things better, but it’s just harder to find a way out. And just as easy as it is to get into a gang, it’s a lot harder to get away from it. It’s understandable. It wasn’t like I didn't know guys that were incredibly smart and had a chance to do what they wanted to do and they ended up being a gang member.

Street code.

Many of the participants described a street code in which revenge is seen as a rule.

Based on this rule, if someone is hurt or killed, another life, or many lives, must be taken in revenge. Based on this rule, any person who has had interactions with the rival gang, whether a member or not, is considered an enemy. Even the family members of gang members were considered acceptable targets for some gangs. A few of the participants shared that their gang did not victimize innocent individuals or the gang members’ family members. If someone’s life was lost, the gang would take revenge by taking the life of another person from the opposite gang, even if it was not the person who had committed the unacceptable act. Such acts often included shooting, assaulting, or even simply disrespecting the gang or a gang member.

Eddie.

(Sharing how the gang he was affiliated with took revenge after three young adults from the opposite gang assaulted him and his friends at school. In this

141

conversation Eddie’s friend’s is sharing that his older brother sent some gang members to take revenge on their behalf) You know what, I told him what happened the other day in school. The homeboys went and got the payback. They smoked some fools from 111 Deuce.

(Asked if they killed them) Yeah.

Malcolm X. Though it was wrong, it was right because of the street code. I lived like that. An eye for an eye. You know, you violate me, you got to be made example of.

Sub-theme two: joining the gang.

Participants provided different reasons for joining the gang. Some shared that they grew into the gang, meaning they were accepted in the gang because they had associated with the gang members since early childhood. Others said that they had to go through an initiation process. Still others revealed they did not think they were a part of a gang, but that they were just spending time with friends. However, as time passed, their behavior became increasingly similar to that of gang members, as they participated in gang activity. Some of the participants joined gangs as a result of the influence of friends, or as a means of gaining protection from community influences. Others shared that they joined the gang as they followed examples set by friends, or that their friendships with gang members turned into gang membership for themselves.

142

For some, joining the gang was subtle and a part of growing up. However, others joined to gain acceptance, achievement, and recognition, being addicted to the gang and gang’s lifestyle or to combat the effects of traumatic loss.

Malcolm X. Greg got shot Thanksgiving evening and he died Christmas Eve. That was 1971.

All that was instilled in me and my innocence was taken away from me that day. I went and joined the Crips. Washington High School, they had initiation. From one [side of the football] field to another side [of the] field they had boys and girls standing on each side and you had to run down the line. That was your initiation into the Crips.

(Asked if the boys and girls struck him as he ran down the line) Yeah, kicking you, stumping you, fighting you, biting you. This scar upside my head [happened that day]. Me and my best friend from the 3rd grade—his brother was a Crip, an older Crip—he told me, “Malcolm, you go first.” And I said, “You go first.” So we held hands and we ran down. And they bust my head and I went home. The next day we laughed. Then I became a baby Crip.

Michael.

For me, for a lot of us, it is subtle, because they don’t pull you in. It is like a family. That’s why people call it family. That’s why it is so hard because these

143

are [people who are your] friends. These are people who for the most part you have been knowing from elementary [school].

Cedric: I like to think that I used the gangs. However, I understand that the conditioning for me to being exposed or continuously befriend[ing] these individuals or gentlemen was what really molded me or dictated my behavior, my choices, what I asserted, and what I got out of it.

I have to say, first a sense of acceptance, second accomplishment, even though it’s negative, but I see monetary value, I’m seeing results. And last for me it was nurturing. I can’t compare it to the nurturing that I received from my aunt or my grandmother. But as an adult male, not being in a wholesome relationship with a female to really see what nurturing is, this is a last resort to nurturing or empowerment or feeling good about oneself that I can relate to.

So acceptance, accomplishment, and nurturing were probably the drivers. And it wasn’t until I started to educate myself, that I was able to look at these things, and say, “These things are not adequate. They’re not for real. They are not the substance they [are] making out to be, that I am manipulating my mind to think.

This is not real nurturing. I don’t have real accomplishments. And this is not real acceptance.

144

Eddie.

Like I mentioned last time, growing up . . . me and my crimee (best friend) got jumped at the school. And he had let his brother in prison [know] what had happened. [His brother] had to send out some of their homeboys to retaliate. And they had shot a couple of guys. It provided a sense of protection. You know, if something like that happened, I couldn’t go to my mom and dad and say, “Some black guys jumped me in the school.”

Caliman.

Some people join gangs because they get bullied and they are tired of getting bullied. What do they do? They join the gang. Now, they have instant homeboys.

If you don’t have any backup and you are bullying this kid that’s in the gang, now these guys are going to get [you]. It’s plain and simple.

Again it's greed, being greedy, wanting more than what I have. Once you become a gangster, an alcoholic, or a drug addict, you are never satisfied. You are always chasing something that is not there. You are always chasing for alcohol.

You are always chasing that good buzz. Like that good buzz, like the first time you drank. How good it felt. For drugs it’s the same thing. The first sensation that goes through your body when you first do a drug is like, “Damn, wow.” It feels good, very good. You are always after [that sensation] from the first time. But it is never [coming back]. Once you do it repeatedly, you will never get that sensation

145

that you got the first time that you did it. I guess that’s how it works. You know, you just chasing something that you [are] never going to get.

Sub-theme three: emotional and psychological meaning of the gang.

Family figure.

Other researchers have discussed how gang members saw the gang as their family.

“The gang acts as, or promises to act as, a substitute family, filling the void left by family backgrounds marked by violence, substance abuse, and crime” (Grekul & LaboucaneBenson, 2008, p. 68). This finding was confirmed in my research, as some of the gang members shared that the gang acted like a family for them. Participants shared that the gang was, indeed, like a family. They had strong attachments to some of the other gang members, especially if they grew up close to each other. A few participants mentioned that some people join the gang in search of a family and to have someone they can confide in. One participant shared that he acted like a father to other gang members, leaving his own children to suffer.

David.

Sometimes everybody that you deal with, in this area that you represent, might be somewhat like family. You all have history together. It makes it hard to let go.

Yeah, it [is] kind of [like] people turn into your family. And that kind of gets you stuck in it too sometimes. If something happens to your closest [homeboy], it’s different than if something happened to a member of your gang. It becomes

146

deeper than that. It’s more personal when you lose somebody [in] your gang that you grew up with.

Bill.

It’s a lot of, I guess, searching for family when you don’t have any.

Malcolm X. (Asked about what attracted him to the gang There was a combination [of things].

Like I said, I was already molested. So I was angry about that. Being able to talk to [people who] were classified as my big homies, or my father figures, was good for me. It was an outlet because I could never talk to my father. Oh, at the time, I trusted them with my life.

I started listening and recognizing that this gang that I was in always had my attention. But my children never did. So, it was time for somebody to pay. My children had been paying the price. Somebody had to lose. So maybe it was time for the gang to lose and my children win. Because I came to understand my children ain't had no daddy but these dudes always had a gang member and these cats is like my age and what the hell I am doing, babysitting these grown men.

(Asked if he was a father figure to gang members) Yeah, I was. Because I had that type of cali[ber]. I cared and I showed concern for people and always did what was right for the people. And I didn’t want to come out to the yard fighting for a 19-year-old kid, and my child had no body fighting for him or her.

147

Caliman.

(Asked if he felt loved by the gang members) Yeah, that was my family. I did everything for my neighborhood. Everything I did was for my neighborhood and for my homies.

Acceptance / reinforcement / validation.

All participants shared experiences of being accepted, respected, approved, and validated in the gang. The individuals I interviewed acknowledged that they received acceptance from other gang members while most felt they were not accepted in other areas of their lives. Receiving acceptance, and being respected and validated, increased gang members' dedication to the gang. Some of the participants expressed that they felt they received positive reinforcement and approval for their criminal and violent behavior.

Some shared that their self-esteem increased as they were able to function well and make a name for themselves in the gang.

Cedric.

I think originally what made me so dedicated was because [of] the reinforcement.

I can remember individuals calling a meeting, and at this time I had shot two people, and I had been shot, too. I think I may have been 20. And one of the individuals who was highly reputable and had been in the neighborhood all [his] life says, “You seven or eight guys [are] going to go with Cedric. You gonna do what he says and tells you to do.� And that was empowering for me.

148

Right, now, let’s talk about gangs. I make a mistake in the gang, [the reaction of my fellow members was,] “OK man, don’t worry about it. It’s good. We will knock that nigga down.” So, you are looking at a negative reinforcement. That’s acceptability regardless [if] you are wrong or right. You are gonna be empowered.

So, if the individual is uneducated, mentally or emotionally, he or she is saying, “This is where I am going to be, because regardless if I make a mistake, it is OK.” So when I am saying my impacting gangs has impacted me, [it is] not from a place of fear or resentment or being hurt. [It was] more so through acceptance [that I became dedicated]. Because when I shot this guy and I got three or four thousand dollars. They were like, “Yeah, we send Cedric to get the money from now on. Because when we sent him to get the money, he got the money.”

(Asked if he ever felt accepted in any other area of his life) In any other way, nah, I can’t say [that I did]. As I progress and [start] moving up ranks, more acceptance or reputation because that’s what happens.

Bill.

But for a gang I don’t have to have any pieces [valuables or talents] and [I will] be accepted. So, it’s more of being accepted type of situation that makes us go together.

Caliman.

149

I took the gang opportunity. That was my opportunity to be somebody. That’s the way I looked at it and for me it meant a lot. You know, being in the gang, being respected, being feared, making a name for myself—that meant a lot for me. It’s gang-banging. They welcome you. They want to be around you, especially when you start putting in work, doing things for the gang. Once you start doing things, oh yeah, now you are respected. Now it's like, “He is down. We got his back no matter what. He is down for the hood.” That’s plain and simple.

Eddie.

Acceptance I would say maybe is a good word. Because you get involved with the neighborhood and you belong to something. Something with a greater power, [and not just anybody is] going to mess with you. And if they do, then there will be consequences and you will not just deal with me.

Michael.

It was the lifestyle I loved. It was a lifestyle I grew into. It was a lifestyle I function very well in because I had very low self-esteem. And all I needed to do was not care to get kudos, approval, pat on the back. So, it is the perfect lifestyle for people who don’t care.

(Sharing how gangs approve the person) He is not just a Crip. But he is of aggressive nature. He can fight. He will stab you. He ain't just a Crip. But his aggression makes his Cripping much more valuable. Now I got friends. They [are]

150

making you feel valid. Like when you step up to the neighborhood or be around them, we just roll with each other. We cling to each other because we actually need each other. So they [are] happy to see you . . . That’ s what gang(s) do. We pay for each other’s validation, I am gonna pay. If I kill this person, that’s gonna prove to you that I love you. That’s gonna prove to you that I am down. So, when I prove to you that I’m down, guess what? I actually get respect from you. I get acceptance from you.

Comradeship.

Participants shared the importance of camaraderie among gang members. They said that many gang members join and stay in gangs because fellow members were there for them when the participants were in need. At the same time, gang members keep their friendships while not truly trusting each other. The gang provides an opportunity for its members to be included without having to trust one another. This, in turn, increases members’ attachment and reliance on each other. For the participants in this study, this dynamic took shape partly because other gang members had similar experiences and participants were able to connect with them, and to support each other—at least on the surface. However, as time passed, it became clear that there were many conflictual relationships among gang members, to the point that participants felt that members tolerated each other more than actually being close to each other.

151

Michael.

It is naturally so subtle and then they become important. Because when you were hanging out, you needed someone to hang out with. So the person who stayed late with you will become your ace, your people and it just grows. Then this is the gang. Everybody is trying to keep people out. So, gangs allow you to be a part of, and at the same time be able to keep people out, and it looks cool. I don’t trust that fool. Feels like you are part of something back then. [There] is a lot of lack in a gang member.

Tudy.

Well, growing up with these people, my friends, I felt a sense of belonging. They were my friends and we grew up together, barefooted walking around playing in the mud, going to the ditches and catching those little frogs. And when you do those type of things with people, with your little friends, you become as one.

Cedric.

The money was just the crutch or excuse or instrument to justify and not look at what was really going on internally. (Asked if gangs attract people by recognizing someone’s vulnerability) That’s true. I don’t know if it’s done directly or indirectly. I think [other gang members] know more or less [what to say] because of their own personal experiences, where or what needs to be asserted, what is needed to be said, or what actions are needed to be displayed, camaraderie.

152

Bill.

It’s kind of hard. People say, “You don’t have to be [in] a gang. You shouldn’t be in a gang.” [They] don’t understand why you are in a gang, but what they really don’t understand is the unity and the dynamics that the gangs work [to their advantage]. It’s always a camaraderie with gangs and gang members. We might all be from the same gang but everybody doesn’t get along cause this person doesn’t like that [person and] that person doesn’t like that one. You have that kind of behavior going on. So, it’s difficult to judge, because you say, “This one is my friend,” but they will run back to the others saying something that will cause problems.

I guess the best way I learned to alleviate it was to tell [those] around me, “I would tolerate you.” I guess wanting to belong, wanting to fit in somewhere, more so [than] being alone. You kind of want others around. You see what they are doing might not be the ideal thing to do, but for some reason you want to belong no matter if everything you both think actually don’t coincide. So I guess it was that.

Care / true friendship.

Many of the participants shared that they truly cared about some of their fellow gang members and had strong friendships with those individuals. Participants discussed how feelings of love for certain fellow members stayed consistent even after participants had left their gangs. At times, this became problematic, as participants would want to go back

153

to gang activity just to retaliate against the way a close friend might have been mistreated. I also heard multiple times that gang members who truly cared about the participants encouraged the participants to leave the gang and better themselves.

Michael.

I still love them. A lot of them are still my friends. And they love me and they respect me. You know but I had to—I didn’t talk to them for a couple of years.

That’s how I got my authority outside of being violent. I would outrank people based on my concern. Like, “I hear what you say man but that ain't gonna [happen]. No, all you ain't going to be treating fellas wrong.” Whatever little influence I had, I made sure people are being treated nice.

Caliman.

But again, I had a lot of love for the circle, that inner circle. I never did anything. I never hurt anybody in that inner circle.

Bill.

I guess love for the people or having a group of people that respect you—I guess that’s what it is for everyone. But from the time I started [gang banging], gangs had [existed]. But actually it wasn’t a gang. It was a group of people that believed in the same thing, because gangs weren’t supposed to fight against other gangs. It just happened to venture that way.

154

Cedric: I had some [gang members] that I befriended and they were like, “Man, you should go back to school.” You know, they knew I played football. They knew I played sports. They knew I worked out. They knew I lifted weights. And they were like, “Hey man, you should go back to school. Why you messing up your life like this?” [That was said by] one of my close friends who I talk to today. He was like, “Man, you will end up dead or in prison.” Man, I ain’t gonna go to prison. I ain't gonna get killed. And I remember the first time I got shot he was like, “See, man, I told you.” But he was one of the better associates that I befriended.

David.

Sometimes it gets like that. It is more like being in bad relationships, bad love.

You can’t help the way you feel if you hear this person got shot or this person went to jail or this person got jumped or somebody got robbed. Sometimes you can’t help but feel a certain type of way. You might feel angry. Sometimes you may actually feel like doing something that you don’t (really want to). You may have stopped doing things that you have done in the past. You may still get the urge to do that due to situations like that.

155

Sub-theme four: experiences with other gang members.

Loyalty / Disloyalty / Lack of trust Loyalty and trust were concepts discussed by most of the participants. They shared that although on the surface gang members were trusting and loyal to each other, this was only a façade. Participants revealed that as gang members, they were told and pressured to believe that the gang and other gang members were loyal to them. This helped the gang keep its members. However, at the core, the participants did not feel trusting of their fellow gang members. At times, the mistrust was present from the start. Otherwise, mistrust began as participants were left alone during incarceration. Some participants shared that they lost trust in their fellow gang members when they were betrayed, whether it was because of conflict, monetary gain, or lack of care and love among gang members.

Cedric.

Because for the most part, the average individual you befriend, they usually don’t really care about you. That was my experience. I remember the first time I got robbed, I was set up by an individual that I thought was my friend. And that’s when I got shot in my wrist and I lost a lot blood and they wanted to amputate.

It was easy for me to break away from the gang once I went to prison because I saw loyalty of the individuals inside the prison system but the loyalty of the individuals that were within society was not there. So, for me, as I progress in age, I see [that] I took all this risk to establish this and make sure these guys are

156

well set economically, and now I am incarcerated and unable to provide for myself. I am unable to rely on them to assist me with my financial needs within incarceration.

So, I am looking at the disloyalty and this is not acceptance now. But acceptance is still going on with the gang members within incarceration. It has been psychologically repetitively believed that they loyal to you. These are your confidants. These are you comrades. If it wasn’t for them, you [wouldn't] have this accomplishment. You [wouldn’t have been] able to obtain this. You [would have] never be in a position to buy a house or you [would] never had a business, and you never would have been able to purchase a BMW. No, it’s not true, but these are the actual things that [the gang says].

Bill.

I lived the life of a gang member and I thought like a gang member. You know, you might say, “You are my friend,” but you are not my friend. I didn't have anybody. So it was me or them. Since they accepted me and I didn’t really trust them, it was really me.

Caliman.

That’s why now I look at it [like], “Your homies are not really your homies.” You know, like my friends that I grew up with as little kids [we] grew up in the same neighborhood. Those are still my friends. We are childhood friends, since we

157

were babies. But my friends that I met [who] became my friends when I joined the gang, those friends that I met here, those are not my friends. Those are, I would say, like friends, but friends you got to watch out for. Because they are going to backstab you or whatever, but [my childhood friends] would never set me up.

David.

A lot of friends [were] stabbing each other in the back, stealing stuff from each other. I went through a lot of that in my history, like trusting people close to me and [then] stuff come missing.

Michael.

It plays out where now the love is based upon not caring. Like while it looked like we care about each other, the reality is that we just agree that we just don’t care.

So, that’s what makes gangs a bunch of people that come together that they don’t care. But it’s again the same cycle because they can’t give you what they don’t got. It plays out where now the love is based upon not caring.

Summary of theme two: gang The following is a summary of the meaning of the gang for the participants: 1. Some of the participants shared that the gang is based on fear and founded upon mayhem and destruction.

158

2. Many of the participants shared the gang is made of talented, skillful, and gifted individuals who are using their abilities for negative causes.

3. The participants discussed the “street code,� or rules based on retaliation and violence.

4. Participants discussed how they joined the gang, whether by initiation, growing into the gang, or following the examples of friends and community members by joining the gang.

5. Participants shared that the gang was like a family to them. They had strong attachments toward some of the gang members, protected and cared about each other, and confided in each other.

6. All of the participants shared that originally they felt the gang provided a sense of acceptance. Therefore, they wanted to be a gang member partially to be accepted, validated, and encouraged.

7. The participants also shared that, at some point, they felt a sense of camaraderie with other members. They were allowed to be a part of the gang without having to trust each other.

8. All participants had few friends who were truly close to them and thought about their best interests. Feelings for these groups of friends stayed consistent even after participants left the gang.

159

9. Participants shared that gang members, except their true friends, were disloyal and untrustworthy.

Theme Three: Peers Previous research has discussed the effect of peer influence on gang involvement.

Some gang members express that they were attracted to gangs as a result of peer pressure, abuse in the family or lack of family bonds, monetary gain, and a sense of having an ethnic and economical marginal status (Gordon, 2000). My research looked more closely at the actual relationships between former gang members and their peers. I wanted to see if and how relationships with peers differed from relationships with gang members, and if this information can foster a better understanding of participants' motivations to join gangs. All participants discussed this theme, with a frequency of 75 times.

In the first sub-theme—Influence of peers on gang involvement—some participants discussed how their peers played a role in their decisions to join gangs. In essence, these participants shared that through their friendships and being exposed to gang activity through friends, they became gang-involved.

The second sub-theme—Lack of acceptance and belonging to a peer group—revealed that some of the participants felt they were conditionally accepted by their peers outside of the gang, based on their skills. However, they were rejected if they were not able to meet their peers' expectations, such as being criticized by their teams when playing sports. Others said their peers outside of the gang rejected them because participants’

160

friends were gang members and violent. Some shared that they were bullied by their peers outside of the gang and felt like outcasts, or that they were rejected by their peers due to the behavior of gang-affiliated friends.

Sub-theme one: influence of peers on gang involvement.

Participants shared that they were highly influenced by their peers. Some participants reported they were more receptive to following their peers into antisocial behavior, including delinquency or gang memberships. Others shared that the strongest influence was the neighborhood and older gang members with whom participants spent time during childhood. One participant disclosed that the larger neighborhood and individuals in the neighborhood pressured, and even bullied, those who were not interested in joining the gang.

David.

It was kind of like, the influence of other people. I would let other people get [me] in trouble. They would probably be like, “Do this, do that,” [and] I would probably [be] saying, “No,” but after so many nudges and, “Come on, come on, let’s go,” mentally I [would] give in a lot of times. I didn't want to get into the gang-banging lifestyle anyway. It was just I was kind of already in it. I just didn't know what it was or what I was doing. Yeah, [gang members] were around and that could have easily been the influence.

161

Caliman.

Me, growing up, I was always friendly. I used to talk to a lot of people. I used to know a lot of people. Like I said, as a child I was a follower because I followed my older friends [into the gang].

Cedric.

I believe [the gang’s] greatest concern was influence. For me, for the longest time, I said gangs did not influence me. I like to think that I used the gangs. However, I understand that the conditioning for me to being exposed or continuously befriend these individuals or gentlemen was what really molded me or dictated my behavior, my choices, what I asserted.

Sub-theme two: lack of acceptance and belonging to the peer group.

Some of the participants shared that they were conditionally accepted or rejected from their peer groups. The participants said that if they were accepted, it was because of a skill or ability. However, as soon as they made a mistake, their peers made fun of them or pushed them away. Others revealed that their peers rejected them because of their association with gang members. Another participant related his experience of how being bullied by his peers later led him to associate with gang members.

The first sub-theme—Influence of peers on gang involvement—illustrated how peers, older gang members, and gang members in the community influenced participants’ decision to join gangs. The second sub-theme—Lack of acceptance and belonging to a

162

peer group—suggested that some participants ultimately joined a gang because they did not feel they truly had a secure place among their peers.

Cedric.

Even in playing sports, if I make a mistake, the whole team turns on [me]. Like if I am playing free safety and I get beat deep, and somebody catches the ball and somebody scores a touchdown. Right away, “Man, you are fucking up. Man, what the fuck? Man, what the hell [is] wrong with you? Man, bench this dude. Get this dude out of here.” Right, now, let’s talk about gangs. I make a mistake in [the] gang, “OK, man, don’t worry about it. It’s good.” And like I gave the example through playing sports. Everything is good as long as you are good. I mean you are accepted and you are praised. But as soon as you make a mistake, you are ridiculed. You are no longer accepted.

Tudy.

Growing up, I met a lot of friends, but a lot of my friends shut the door on that stuff because my friends were too crazy. Sometimes I would find myself going to a party and [I would] watch my friends how they act, you know. I felt stupid being there, because I felt embarrassed because these other people see me with [my friends].

163

Summary of theme three: peers.

The following is the summary of participants’ experiences regarding peers: 1. Some participants admitted that they followed their peers' delinquent behaviors.

2. Spending time with gang-involved older peers influenced some participants.

3. Individuals in the neighborhood and other gang members pressured participants to join the gang.

4. Some participants shared that they did not feel accepted by their peers.

5. Others believed they were only conditionally accepted by peers—accepted when they were performing well, such as in sports, and rejected as soon as they were not.

6. Some felt rejected because they kept the company of gang members.

7. Finally, some of the participants disclosed that they were bullied by their peers and felt more comfortable with gang members.

Theme Four: Trauma Trauma and the impact of trauma on childhood development is a topic that has been studied at length for quite some time. Although not specifically asked about traumatic experiences during childhood, all of the participants shared experiences of trauma that

164

occurred during their formative years. Some participants reported histories of sexual or physical abuse, while others shared exposure to domestic violence during childhood. In addition, the majority of participants experienced traumatic losses during childhood. This theme was discussed by all of the participants with the frequency of 104 times.

Sub-theme one—Experience of trauma within the family—illustrated participants’ experiences of childhood maltreatment and exposure to violence within the family. The second sub-theme—Traumatic losses—discussed participants’ experiences of losing friends or close associates, and how participants and their and families reacted to these losses.

Sub-theme one: experience of trauma within the family.

“I grew up in a very abusive family. I remember getting myself in trouble, so I would go from [home] to the juvenile halls, since I was 10 years old.” (Tudy) All of the participants shared occasional or consistent experiences of maltreatment in the form of physical or sexual abuse. Some participants shared experiences with domestic violence within the family.

Childhood maltreatment and psychological reaction to maltreatment.

Participants shared histories of physical and sexual abuse by their parents or other family members. I asked participants to discuss how they were treated, forms of punishment, consequences for bad behavior, and how their families resolved conflict.

Participants spontaneously shared their experiences of maltreatment without specifically

165

being asked about it. A few participants described the impact of such experiences on their emotional and psychological well-being. Participants shared that the physical abuse and sexual abuse affected them to the point that they attempted to stay out of the house or be institutionalized. As victims of childhood maltreatment, participants felt disconnected from their parents and family members and were not able to trust or confide in family when needing help. Others reported feelings of severe anger, which they took out on those around them. Participants talked about feelings of anger, shame, and hypervigilance in relation to their experiences of victimization. They expected to be victimized in their environments outside of the home as well. Therefore, they acted aggressively as a way of protecting themselves. According to some of the study participants, these experiences led them to be aggressive towards others, even to the point of participating in taking a life.

Physical abuse.

Tudy: I grew up in a very abusive family. [There was] a lot of cussing, fighting. If I wasn’t getting beat up by my brothers, I was getting beat up by my sisters. It was not a good situation and I remember getting myself in trouble so I would go from there to the juvenile halls, since I was 10 years old.

Malcolm X: I got a heavy-handed father, abusive father, physically abusive father. About the

166

same time, my friend got killed. I got mama over here saying, “Jesus, Jesus.”

Then I got some pedophile [priests and members of the church]. These same people that my mother pay tithes to, [who] have me reciting source out of Enjil (Muslim name for Bible), are molesting me. I was afraid of my father.

(Speaking with conviction) Although he was a good provider, his parenting (speaking slowly, with moments of silence here and there), when I look back on it, I wish that, instead of him beating me trying to get me to understand, trying to get his point across to me, I wish he would have sat down with me and talked to me. I think we would have had a better relationship and I wouldn’t have been so fearful of him. Also, the resentment, all the anger I held for him, was really, I think somewhere in psychology I read, is called “misplaced aggression” or “misplaced anger.” I think I exhibited that all my life.

Sexual abuse.

Michael: Probably around 6 to 7 [years old, I would] try to get up early in the morning, be outside, and try to play. Woke up before dawn. I feel more comfortable outside than I did inside my house. (Asked why) That is the unknown. I mean, if I tell you now, I was molested when I was 2, I only found [that] out after I did research on myself when I was in the penitentiary. So I think that when I was scared in the dark, I peed in the bed. So I had all of them little nervous conditions going on, which was at the time normal for me.

167

Caliman: (Told that a lot of people interviewed for this study said they joined the gang to combat their feelings about histories of sexual and physical abuse, Caliman gave his opinion ) For a lot of gang members, yes. They were physically abused by their parent, by their dad, by whomever, by their uncles, their aunts. I remember, I wasn’t sexually abused by males but I was sexually abused by my aunt. I say like about 7, 8 [years old]. She would make me sleep with her. She would make me do things that I didn't want to do as a kid, you know.

Malcolm X: (Sharing his experiences with sexual abuse and the duration of it) Maybe 9 to 14 [years old]. I hated church as I [began] to get older. When I was younger, I didn't really grasp what was going on. Because I still I [was] trying to understand life and the lessons in life but by the time I was 14, I was so angry that I end up participating in taking someone’s life.

When I really go over my life, I know that was a motivating [factor] because I was so angry at the fact that these people were someone that my family trusted their most precious possession and they violated it. And I was just angry and would hurt you to the point of death. Psychologists I was seeing at a young age. I really didn’t understand what they were saying to me. They weren't the psychologists of today that can get down to the core of the child. I don’t know if

168

they were just making money or whatever they were doing. They never . . . I never opened up to them. They may have gotten some surface shit out of me but not that icky stuff.

Not until I think 2010, 2008 was I even able to talk about it with my psychologist [in prison]. I felt more shame than I did anger. I mean, maybe it was supposed to go that other way around. But as a warrior, as a soldier, to be violated by another man, it just didn't happen, especially with me being raised in the streets and me climbing the ladder of . . . I am trying to use a proper word . . . I use “merit ladder.” Merit—climbing the steps to certain level as a gang member.

I know for a fact that some of the same people that climbed those ladders with me, to captains and lieutenants or even general status, went through the same things. But nobody spoke about it because we kept that [in] really. We will be called a sissy or, “You are gay,” or, “You less than” because you let somebody violate you.” That was the culture I was raised in. In general, I come from a strong lineage of men and I come from a strong lineage of men in the street. And we just don’t tolerate being weak or being taken advantage of. You couldn’t even be [around me]. You may become the prey if you [had] those kind of tendencies [or were homosexual].

Domestic violence.

Participants also shared exposure to domestic violence. They discussed their feelings of helplessness, anger, and resentment towards their fathers or mother’s boyfriends who

169

abused their mothers. One of the participants stated that he lost respect and trust in his mother’s choices when she allowed her abusive boyfriend back in their lives. In order to cope with his feelings, the participant admitted that he became abusive toward other kids.

A few participants disclosed that they became aggressive, even willing to hurt their fathers, in order to protect their mothers from domestic violence. All the participants who had been exposed to domestic violence in childhood denied being abusive towards women.

Michael: Once, we lived in the projects, Nixon Gardens. My mom’s boyfriend beat her up.

And I am sitting at the bottom of the stairs, he beating her up. I am looking. [I was] 4 or 5. Man, that is powerlessness. I can't defend my mom.

(Continues to reveal the story of how his mother’s cousins took the kids to a neighbors' house and later one of the cousins went back and shot the boyfriend) Yeah, female cousin that shot him. It kind of rebuilt my OK-ness. Not so much retaliation, but vindication-type thing. As a little kid I just remember hearing that she shot him and I was like, “Good.” About 6 months later, we moved to projects, over there to Compton, California. I come home one day and go to the back patio and there is the boyfriend, the same guy. So mom is back with the boyfriend.

Now, I lost all respect.

But that was one of the things I had to suppress. Like you know, people don't recognize sometimes how their choices impact people looking. So, as soon as I

170

saw the two of them, I had to repress the pain. Especially young adults, but parents that are so caught up in their lives but having children, [they] don’t understand the cause and effect, the importance of their conduct. The disappointment of my mom letting this guy that was not in our best interest back in our lives. Her choices, you know, our life was lived through her. So, however she carried herself, depends on how we view ourselves. I had to suppress that she is not loving herself and respecting herself, for in turn, not loving or respecting us.

When we repress things, they have a way of showing themselves.

(Asked how it would show up) By me beating kids at school. Pulling them off monkey bars, ditching school, start smoking weed when I was 8 years old. Now you become the predator, because you are so busy trying to protect yourself that you have to strike first.

That is how it comes now, being aggressive. And what is going on inside the house, I have come to see, I made sure it did not go on [in the] street. I will be damned if what happens in my house happens in this street. I have to be the aggressor.

Eddie: I think I might have been 10 or 11 when there was an argument between my mom and dad. They were arguing about something. And I think my mom was washing dishes and my dad came to the kitchen. My mom asked me to take out the trash.

So I went out the back door. As I am coming in the back door, something was

171

said. My dad was angry and he throw a glass at the direction [of] my mom. My mom got mad and she grabbed a plate and she throw it and hit him with it. My dad removed his belt. I reached over and I pulled a kitchen knife. I told him, “If you touch my mom, I will put this in you.”

My dad was shocked, and my younger brother ran off. My dad thought about it. I remember the look in his eyes. I think he was lost, but also maybe surprised.

And I remember him telling me, “You know what, I will whip your and her ass.”

I said, “Go ahead, but you know there will be consequences. I will stick you.”

I would have stabbed him.

So at that point, my mom got involved and said, “Put [the knife] down.” I remember she started yelling at him—“You see the type of problems that you caused?” And he was a little more lost and confused than anything. He was pacing back and forth. I ran over and I grabbed the phone and called 911. When he came back and looked, I am on the phone. Yeah, my dad is trying to hit my mom. He left and the cops showed up. And that was the last time he ever tried to hit my mom, though. As far as I can recall, that’s when all of that ended.

(Asked about his relationship with his dad . . .) I guess somewhat distant. I felt that at least now, he understood that I was no longer a child that he could ground in his room. I was willing to do whatever it took to protect my mom. Because my father worked a lot, he wasn’t really around, but it did create a distance in the time that he was. It didn't really make a difference for me. It didn't really matter for me.

172

I didn't really approve of his views on hitting my mom, so it really didn't matter to me.

Sub-theme two: traumatic losses.

Many of the participants shared that they lost friends in childhood. They said they continued to be affected, as adults, by the feelings of sadness associated with these childhood losses. Some of the participants indicated that the loss of a friend led them to join a gang. The participants felt anger, rage, and devastation that was never resolved or addressed. The gang members responded to the participants’ feelings by taking revenge or giving the participants an avenue to act out their feelings. Some of the participants shared that they joined the gang to combat feelings of helplessness and pain associated with losing a loved one, and to never have to face the loss of someone they cared about.

Most participants acknowledged that their families were not aware of their losses. Even if the parents were aware, they did not assist the participants in processing their losses or getting outside help. Participants used the gang and gang-retaliation mentalities to overcome their feelings of anger and devastation.

Bill.

I have a friend that got killed. I remember this one incident and, at this time, I was 15. One of my friends, his name was Brains, happened to be selling drugs out of a hotel, which was on the wrong side of town in the first place. And the guys came in and they started shooting at us and he got killed. That’s something that I still

173

carry with me to this day because he was a very intelligent young man. He was actually a straight-A student and he just wanted to be in the gang and we let him hang with us and he got killed.

Well, we wanted to kill. Basically, when we lost someone, we had to go and retaliate. They had to pay for our loss. Well, the whole community and particular gang I was in, was family. The adults would actually help us in that way. One of us did something wrong, they would actually hide us from the police and stuff like that, so it was harder to get out than to actually get in.

Caliman.

I [lost] my best friend when I was 15. I guess he was a year older than me. He was my close friend. You know, [we] went to elementary [school and] junior-high together. He got killed when he was in junior-high. In a sense, when he got killed, I was upset. I was pissed off. I was somewhere around 12, 13 when I got into the gang and that’s when everything started. I was pissed off at the guys that killed him so I wanted revenge. I wanted to hurt those guys. I didn’t want to see nobody that I loved get hurt. This is my little country. This is my little town. I am going to defend it. Whoever gets hurt in my inner circle, I’m gonna hurt them back 10 times more. Ten times more.

174

Malcolm X. (Sharing when his friend was killed over a dispute about letting someone play with them in a football game ) And George, one of my best friends, told Derrick, “Let us play. Let us finish this game.” Derrick told him, “Shut up.” And when he told him to shut up he had a .38 and he hit George upside his temple, on his right side.

It took me about 25 to 36 years [to] even talk about this. It had hurt me so much that I had suppressed the thought, blocked it out of my mind. But Derrick had his hand on the trigger. Derrick wasn't trying to kill George, but by him having his hand on that trigger, when hitting against his temple, his hand shot George against his temple. (Very emotional, silence, choked up, trying to hold back tears) George touched his head. (He) was OK until he touched beside his head and then he saw the blood. He fell down, and Derrick, he saw on all of our faces that one day he will be out of jail [and we will get revenge]. But George got shot Thanksgiving evening and he died Christmas Eve. That was 1971. And all that was instilled in me and my innocence was taken away from me that day. I went and joined the Crips. But that day . . . I have a book and I have a chapter in the book called “Stolen Innocence.” That day my innocence was stolen because I never again loved Christmas, Easter, and all these [presents] that were given to you as an adolescence. I just rejected them.

175

What's weird, now that I embrace Islam, when I look back on that day, I had rejected Issah (Muslim name for Jesus). Like I say, I was raised in a Christian household where the church was from sunrise to sundown but I rejected everything. I just became anti- as a kid.

(Asked how he and his friends grieved) We grieved, in our own little ways. Each one of us grieved and we grieved together. When I look back at it, everyone became a gang member. We didn't want to become victims anymore. We didn't want to ever lose a brother like that, a friend like that ever again. That’s what I used to pride myself on—“Never, ever again will I feel that kind of pain that I felt when George died.” That’s all I used to think about.

Tudy.

(Talking about his reaction when his friend, who was not gang-involved, got shot and his murderers were not imprisoned ) Nothing was done for that. These guys got away with murder and my brother [is] telling me, “Why did you take that so personal?” And I go, “Because he was like my brother.” Even though [my brother] sees me with [my friend] a lot in his car, he didn't know that we were real close.

[My friends and I] used to wait outside [the] house [of people who murdered my friend] and wait for these people to come out so we can see them and murder them like they murdered our friend. But we could never see them. They were

176

gone. Because they knew the way we were. So, moving forward, I was shooting at people. They were shooting at me. But I really didn't consider myself in a gang until my best friend got killed and I started doing bad things to people and trying to catch people, and trying to find people that killed my friend, and that’s what made me act out even more.

I never carried a gun. I carried a knife. I carried a knife a couple of times but I really didn’t use it. I just used to carry it for some reason. And then I started carrying guns. And, you know, I got tired of running and people shooting at me. I started shooting back at them. It took on a whole different lifestyle, but I never tried to really get anything out of it. I guess I was trying to stay alive out there. I had a lot of friends but they didn't really trust me anymore because I started carrying guns. I started going across town, where I didn't belong. … I was a good person but I started changing my ways because of my friend getting killed and my sister-in-law getting shot. I just took on a different personality.

Summary of theme four—trauma.

The following is the summary of the participants’ experiences and emotional reaction to trauma.

1. The majority of the participants shared histories of childhood maltreatment, including physical and sexual abuse.

2. As a result of childhood maltreatment, participants stayed out of the home or behaved in ways that would get them incarcerated.

177

3. Participants reported feelings of shame and anger as a result of sexual abuse.

4. Participants became hyper-vigilant and aggressive, victimizing others in an effort to protect themselves from perceived threats of trauma.

5. Participants felt disconnected from family members and were unable to confide in parents or other relatives when needed.

6. Many of the participants had been exposed to domestic violence in the home.

7. Participants felt helplessness, anger, and resentment towards their fathers or their mother’s abusive boyfriends.

8. One of the participants shared that he lost respect and trust in his mother’s decision-making after she continued a relationship with an abusive boyfriend.

Theme Five: Violence Violence, in the family and the neighborhood, is part of gang life. The gang is a violent construct. Past research has shown that many people who joined gangs had been victimized and exposed to violence in the family and neighborhood while growing up.

According to Badger and Albright (2003), Aboriginal youth who joined gangs experienced disenfranchisement, trauma, violence, abuse, and maltreatment in different areas of their lives and had limited options to meet their basic needs, resulting in the gang becoming a viable option (Goodwill, 2009).

178

Participants in my study shared that they had been victims as well as perpetuators of violence. This idea was discussed by all of the participants, with a frequency of 220 comments. Sub-theme one—Experience of violence—exemplified how many of the participants saw violence within the family or in the neighborhood during their childhood. Sub-theme two—Being a victim of violence—illustrated how the participants were victimized themselves in their family or environment. Sub-theme three—Reaction to violence—looked at how participants reacted to being exposed to violence or being a victim of it. Finally, sub-theme four—Understanding of violence—revealed what the violence meant to participants and how they used violence to avoid facing their own feelings such as helplessness, grief, and loss.

Sub-theme one: experience of violence.

Many of the participants witnessed violence within the context of their own families or environments. Participants reported that they responded to exposure to violence by leaving the house and avoiding the family.

David.

A lot of times, we got into a lot of pointless arguments at home. I got a big brother that is 2 years older than me and I got a younger brother that is 2 years younger than me. I got two older sisters and a baby sister. There was always some type of sibling altercations, physical fights, and arguments. Somebody stole that, or somebody ate this, or did this. It was a lot of back and forth. Then sometimes [my

179

siblings were] arguing with either both of [my parents] or one of them. I didn’t like to argue like that. As a child, when I was younger, I used to be real quiet. I really didn't like to argue like that, so I would leave and go hang out.

Malcolm X. (Talking about witnessing riots) But as a young boy, 5 [or] 6 years old, witnessing fire and the National Guard and the shooting and the families who didn't have anything. These stores were owned by, let me see what kind of word I want to use by people that’s carved a living for themselves other than Latino, Black, Asians, Iranians. These were Europeans. And you got to remember the era. The movement was very strong as far as the Black Panther movement. They had a Latino, Caesar Chavez, [who] had some young men that came as Latinos and they united with the Black Panthers . . . Around the same era they took to guns. I think not really knowing that at the time, I think, my life changed that day. [I didn’t know] that a few years later, maybe 4 or 5 years later, I will get introduced to the Crips.

Sub-theme two: being a victim of violence.

Many of the participants shared that they were victims of violence in the family and in the neighborhood. As a result, the participants reported that they became aggressive, fighting others from an early age.

180

Bill.

The older guys, they would, I guess, abuse us. The older guys used to always beat on us, saying, “You will be from the hood,” and hit us and kick us and trip us.

And we are just trying to get home from school. It’s a lot [of] . . . I can’t say happy memories, because all I can remember is during school, I fought a lot.

From elementary all the way up, I fought. It just got less than in high school. Still I caused a couple of riots. It wasn’t like I was picked on or even [that] I was bullied or anything like that. I didn't have those types of experiences. I used to help people who were being bullied versus me being bullied. So that would start a lot of fights. “OK, you don’t want to fight, but I do.” So I just fought a lot.

Caliman.

One day my mom got really tired of getting beat up. She got really tired of it. All of those years, my dad would get drunk, come home and beat us up. We didn’t know whether he was gonna go to sleep or whether he was just gonna come and beat us up. I was around 7 years old when my mom just got fed up with him.

Finally she did something. She knew he was going to come home drunk and beat us up. She was waiting for him and when he came into the home yelling, my mom grabbed the vase and cracked him across the head with it, knocked him out, and called the cops. And that was the last time he ever stepped foot in our house.

181

Sub-theme three: reaction to violence.

Participants shared that exposure to and being victims of violence impacted their psychological development. Participants said they became aggressive in many areas of their lives, such as play or in interaction with others. Participants also acknowledged that being a victim of violence disrupted their relationship with family members. In addition, the cycle of violence continued across generations.

Michael.

But now I have to think how it impacted me as a child on the part of my mom's indiscretion. How that affected me was that it made me a violent person, overly aggressive and not thinking anything of it. [My mother saw my behavior as] normal and natural. [She would say] to people, “What is the problem? He is just playing.” But I play rougher than others. You may think it is playing, but I am trying to hurt you.

Bill.

(Asked where he think his violence came from) My brother. I think that’s where my violence came from. He was a mean person in a lot of ways because he was older and he wanted to do his own thing.

My grandmother bought us [a set of] gloves and baseball stuff. Since he was older, he wanted to play with his friends. He didn’t want to let me play. I remember telling my mom, “He isn’t going to let me play with our bats and our

182

balls. This is our stuff but he is playing with his friends and he won’t let me play.”

She brought me outside and said, “You better let him play.” He said, “OK, you are the first one with the bat.” He gave me the bat, got the ball, [and] hit me right on the head with it. Boom. Then I am on the ground. [My brother said to my mom], “See, I told you he would get hurt.” My brother used to do things like this and for him being my mom’s first [child], she let him get away with everything.

Cedric.

(Talking about an incident when his mom punched him when he was about 16 years old because he didn’t obey her) Yeah I was dejected, withdrawn, having reservations about how she felt, whether she loved me or not, whether she had understanding about what my views were [as I was] progressing into adulthood. Because I was her first child, I don’t think she really understood how to deal with a male child. For a long time I used to say, “You don’t really care about me or my feelings,” or things of that nature.

Tudy.

I really never had [a father]. One of my brothers kind of like [was] trying to act like he was our father, but he was fathering by beating us. You know violence makes you go away. Violence don’t keep you there. That’s one thing that is about learning, it’s breaking the cycle [of] violence. Having kids and treating them like

183

they are supposed to be treated. I wish I could have a kid. I know I would not treat him the way I was treated and I know I would be a good father. But that’s not here nor there.

Sub-theme four: understanding of violence.

Many of the participants shared that they resorted to violence as a way to avoid feelings and emotions including grief, loss, and helplessness. Participants also disclosed that violence was normal to them. One participant stated that he idealized his friend who was violent and that he started turning his anger onto other children.

Michael.

Violence comes from hurt people. Hurt people hurt people.

Malcolm X. I never looked at it as feeling powerful. It all relays back to George getting killed.

I said, “I [will] never ever lose another friend [on] my watch.” I went into battle, looking for the head of the snake, looking for the head of this particular set, [thinking,] “Knock his ass down and everybody else will run.” That’s what I always looked for. That was my high. I always used to like to go in the front. “We go against who? OK.” Everybody knew if I am there, I’m looking for whoever [is] first. And I [will] come out firing.

184

When I was little, I used to fight. When I got older, I started shooting. So, I just come out firing, like, “Hurry up and end this shit. Make these motherfuckers run. Make them tuck their tail and get the fuck up out of here. Let me knock somebody down so they will never ever challenge us and don’t [you] think about coming back,” and all that.

That’s how I viewed that life. After the confrontation, I would feel relived because I [would] look at everybody and they were right there with me. Nobody was lost and nobody got shot. That’s what I used to pride myself on—“Never, ever again will I feel that kind of pain that I felt when George died.” That’s all I used to think about.

Bill.

Because it’s something, I don’t know if there will ever be a way to solve it because it's something that starts when you are more young and you are in that vulnerable point in your life and you are searching for someone to, I guess, cry out to. And if you don’t have that, it turns into violence and other things and eventually death.

Caliman.

We had one of the biggest kids you could ever imagine. I would say we were about 4 feet [tall]. This kid was about 6 feet tall, in elementary [school]. And he was our friend. He grew up with us. In a sense, I looked up to him. He was my

185

age but I looked up to him because he [took] out [his] aggression at somebody else. I would look up to that and say, “I am not going to let him fight all of the fights.”

When I would fight, I would take all my aggression on that kid, on whomever [I was fighting]. When it came [to] junior high or high school, that’s when guns had a big part. Guns were all over. Why fight if I have a gun? I rather shoot you and not waste my energy on you. My energy was shooting my enemies. That gave me a big rush. It made me happy, because, like I said, I am making a name for my neighborhood and myself.

Summary of theme five—violence.

The following is the summary of the participants’ experiences and emotional reaction to violence: 1. Many participants were exposed to violence in the home and in the neighborhood.

2. Participants left their home or avoided family members as a result of exposure to violence.

3. Many participants were victims of violence at home or in the neighborhood.

4. Participants shared that being a victim of violence led to them becoming violent.

5. Violence continued across generations.

186

6. Being a victim of violence changed the relationship between family members, causing distance and mistrust.

7. Participants resorted to violence to avoid feelings of helplessness, grief, and loss.

8. Some participants idealized others who were aggressive.

Theme Six: Coping Participants shared that they used different methods in order to cope with the emotional and psychological impact of their experiences of victimization and trauma.

This theme was discussed by most of the participants, for a total of 98 times. Sub-theme one—What actions I took—illustrated that the participants used substances and moving or staying away from their family as a way to cope with unwanted feelings. Sub-theme two—Emotional and psychological attempts to cope—shows how participants suppressed and disconnected from their emotions, leading them to become aggressive toward others and lose empathy.

Sub-theme one: what actions I took.

Many of the participants shared that they used substances, such as alcohol and drugs, to avoid feelings and emotions related to trauma they experienced in the context of the family and neighborhood. In addition, participants stayed away from home or acted out to be placed in institutions.

187

Caliman.

I started smoking weed. At first I was smoking weed, then I started smoking weed with crack cocaine in it. And then I started smoking crack cocaine by itself. I started robbing people. Every time I get loaded, I go rob somebody or [go] gangbanging. I mean, go shoot at other gangs. I think that was my trigger. Me getting high and loaded was my trigger to go and hurt other people.

Tudy.

I grew up in a very abusive family, it was not a good situation, and I remember getting myself in trouble so I would go from there to the juvenile halls, since I was 10 years old. And I was using drugs. Well, not drugs. Let’s say, sniffing paint. (In disgust) Who does that? PCP . I never did no hard drugs. I never did heroin or stuff like that.

Michael.

Probably around 6 to 7 years old, [I would] try to get up early in the morning, be outside, and try to play. Woke up before dawn. I [felt] more comfortable outside than I did inside my house.

David.

I lived in a Crip area and I was raised in an area that was Piru. So, when I started gang banging, I started to represent Piru. And I stayed in the Crip area and I really

188

just tried to keep everything away from my house. I stayed away from my home as much as I could.

Sub-theme two: emotional and psychological attempts to cope.

Participants shared that they had to suppress or disconnect from their negative emotions as children in order to block out feelings of disappointment, helplessness, and mistrust toward their parents. They talked about even trying to physically move away from family in an effort to avoid these feelings. However, they would then displace these feelings and become aggressive towards others to avoid feeling rejected. Participants expressed remorse for having acted out violently and for the many people they hurt as a result.

Michael.

The disappointment of my mom letting this guy that was not in our best interest back in our lives. So, her choices, you know, our life was lived through her. So, however she carried herself, depends on how we view ourselves. I had to suppress that she is not loving herself and respecting herself, for in turn, not loving or respecting us.

You have to suppress that. You depend on your parents to have your best interest. That is why children are not supposed to worry. But there was a lot of worrying in my happy childhood. You know what I mean? So, repressing would come out. When we repress things, they have a way of showing themselves. By

189

me beating kids at school. Whatever you had to suppress, you suppressed. That's just to be able to live life.

It felt like I always had to defend myself. When people tried to correct me, defend yourself because ain't nobody defends you. When you constantly defending yourself, it is like you have to constantly think about how you will protect yourself. It is a lot of energy. You're constantly thinking, “OK that woman, I ain't letting her in my heart.” I am going to defend that. I might push you down. I talk about you.

There is a guy bigger than me. How am I going to defend against that? I will hit him in the back of the head by a two-by-four. I am creating the environment [where] I am accustomed to justify[ing] the actions I am about to take. So the [rejection] I was getting externally was a manifestation of an internal reality. We perpetuate what we know because the more I see you do what I feel, the more it justifies what I feel. No matter how many killings, how many tattoos, how many tear drops, you [are] able to see they are vulnerable, and they are covering it with all that shell because they don’t want to be hurt no more.

Cedric.

Well, I had some resentment because at the time, I was just trying to escape. I don’t know what I was running to, but I was trying to get away from something.

Today, I process it as me feeling that I wasn’t really accepted, or my views as a

190

child weren’t really supported. And it was like I was being dictated to be something someone else wanted me to be.

Malcolm X. My emotions were turned off a long time ago. Emotionally I was dead. I had suppressed my emotions. I didn’t have no emotions. I didn’t realize how dead emotionally I was till I went to therapy, really. I started to go to therapy [and] my emotions just started flooding out of me.

Tudy.

(Asked if he suppressed his feelings during his childhood ) Uh-huh. Oh man, there was so much happening in my life, I think that’s why I became heartless. Like I didn’t give a fuck about nothing. I didn't care about nothing. I mean, how do you hurt someone and not care what you do? It’s because we lived it. And when you live it, you lose it.

And I know I’m not that way no more, but it made me be an ugly person. [It was] something I really never wanted to be, but that’s the way I grew up and it took, what, 40-something, 50 years to grow up? To know that I affected a lot of people, that impact was bigger than I ever thought because when I hurt someone, I’m thinking that I am just hurting them. No, it’s [hurting] many [people] mothers, brothers, fathers.

191

Summary of theme six: coping.

The following is the summary of the participants’ feelings and attempts to cope with their experiences: 1. Participants used drugs and alcohol to cope with their emotions.

2. Participants repressed and denied feelings they were not able to process, understand, or tolerate in regard to their early relational experiences and traumas.

3. Participants removed themselves, leaving family behind, in order to avoid unwanted, painful feelings.

4. When participants disconnected from their own emotions, it led to them acting aggressively and violently.

Theme Seven: World Participants discussed their relationships with others outside of the gang and family and the emotional and psychological impact on the participants. All of the participants discussed this theme, with the frequency of 144 times.

Sub-theme one: Emotional and psychological relationships to the world.

Participants shared that they constructed an environment that would confirm their internal realities. As such, participants acted in ways that would bring on victimization.

192

Other participants said they had experiences with adults in the community that were more confirming and encouraging. Participants identified adults in the community they looked up to and remembered. However, as one participant put it, the participants’ need for emotional confirmation and care was more than could be provided by the kindness of one adult. Another participant discussed his perspective about a lack of opportunities and the way he felt minorities were targeted and discriminated against by the outside world—that is, by police and authorities.

Michael.

I played a lot of sports, always active. If we were to go to camp to play some sports, they would kick me out because I already did something. I started a fight or I touched a girl on her booty or cussed a camp personal or stole something. I always gave them a reason to kick me out. It was never like they wanted to kick me out. A lot of times they didn’t want to kick me out but I would insist. If they let me go, it was not different. Because I was about to do something else anyway, so before it was over, I would get kicked out anyway.

Tudy.

I remember this one officer, his name was Frank. Me and like three of my friends, he saw us walking. He had one of those big fat motorcycles. He used to get us and put us on his tank (saying it firmly) and drop us off down the alley.

Then he would tell us, “Why don’t you go to our house? There’s a swimming

193

pool. [My wife] is going to make you sandwiches.”

See, that was something we never felt, we never had, and I used to like that.

We did that like about 15 times. We were always looking for more, but we couldn’t find nothing more. He was doing what he could do. Because he had a family, he knew what a father was, how a father should treat a kid. Instead of having you sell drugs or, “Hey man, you are selling that? Hey, let me buy some,” it was, “Hey you are not supposed to be selling that. You could go to jail for that.

You’re not supposed to be carrying a gun or knife or screwdriver.” You see, that’s what we needed in our life.

Bill.

I have seen programs of different people that I have participated in and it changed their lives. But, out of five people that went through the same program, maybe only two changed their lives, but there is no one there to advocate for the other three that didn't make it. So did we really solve the problem by helping two and sending three back? Because what are these three going to do that didn’t really fit our criteria or whatever we were doing? They didn't fit in our mode, or our way of thinking.

As a society we should be more open-minded to where everybody’s thoughts are important, not just one general group. I can kind of understand the male point of it because it’s like everywhere you go, someone is knocking you down. If you did make a mistake, there is no one there to say, “I can understand you made a

194

mistake but we can do better.” They just [harp] on that mistake. The minute I get pulled over by the police, [it’s] “Are you on probation or parole?” When I go try to get this job, I am here early in the morning and I am dressed and I’ve done my resume. I signed every paper, [but,] “You can’t work here because of your record.”

Summary of theme seven–world.

The following is the summary of participants’ experiences and emotional reaction towards others outside of family and peers: 1. Some of the participants revealed that they brought trouble to themselves, assuming it would find them anyway, therein creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.

2. Some participants were fortunate enough to have people in their childhoods whom they looked up to and felt encouraged by. However, these people were few, and they were unable to provide for the participants’ many emotional needs.

3. Participants also expressed a belief that there was discrimination by the police and a lack of opportunities to change.

195

Chapter VI

Findings and Theoretical Implications

Summary of Results and Analysis of Themes: The Essence of the Phenomenon In this chapter, I will be discussing the findings and elaborating on theoretical implications of these findings. Gang involvement is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon. Previous research has established that gang membership is something that no one factor can explain. However, certain social and environmental factors, as well as neighborhood and family dynamics, influence the pro-social or antisocial development of children, producing an environment that is more or less conducive to gang involvement.

This context, in turn, affects how a child responds in school and to peers. Finally, individual tendencies and personalities play a significant role in the extent to which social and environmental factors affect gang involvement (Alleyne & Wood, 2014, p. 561).

While my research does, in fact, confirm much of what is known about gang involvement, its purpose was to deepen the understanding of a particular aspect of the gang phenomenon: childhood experiences and relational dynamics, and the related impact on gang involvement. The aspect of gang phenomena studied here includes: 1. Family dynamics and relationships 2. Gang constructs and relationships

196

3. Effect of trauma and violence on the individual’s psychological development 4. One’s efforts to cope with the experiences within the family and outside 5. Impact of peers and other adults on the individual’s life The essence of the phenomenon in this research was to understand how each of these factors—familial, social, and contextual—influences one's development, sense of self, and vulnerabilities.

I will discuss the three most central themes that emerged from the data (family, gang, and trauma) in relation to existing literature, and I will incorporate four other themes that arose in the research (violence, coping, peers, and the world) as they relate to the three central themes.

Individuals search for fulfillment of self-object needs, including mirroring, idealized parent imago, and twinship throughout life. As Maslow’s hierarchy of needs illustrates, individuals search for fulfillment of psychological needs, safety needs, and the need for belonging, esteem, and self-actualization (Brown, 2012). Kohut’s self-psychology model illuminates that children need to experience a sense of nurturance, consistency, reliability, and dependability in a safe, secure, predictable environment in order to grow and develop in healthy ways. Supportive relationships with parents who are caring, loving, and physically and emotionally safe and available ultimately provide children with feelings of emotional well-being, self-worth, and value.

When parents are responsive to the needs of their children and help them learn to understand and manage their emotions, while simultaneously providing a safe, protective

197

environment, children develop a positive sense of self. Then they are able to tolerate frustration and handle disappointment and have healthy relationships. In essence, the parents mirror and support their children's feelings, serving as idealizable role models.

Children need to feel they belong to a group of people, peers, or others who value them.

A child will continue to search for this sense of belonging throughout development to fulfill twinship needs.

Family dynamics.

Parents’ childhood experiences.

According to self-psychology, children need to feel a sense of safety and security, value, and worth in an environment that is validating and accepting of their emotions and needs. They need emotionally and psychologically strong caregivers and others, whom the children can idealize and who serve as models. Additionally, children need to feel a sense of belonging to a peer group. Essentially, in an ideal situation, the psychological milieu of family positively responds to these mirroring, idealizing, and twinship needs during early childhood.

Family members’ individual characteristics, family dynamics, and relationships all impact a child's sense of stability and vulnerability. Through experiences with family members, children form an understanding of themselves. This understanding affects the way a child will behave in the larger society and in relation to others. The child requires caregivers to serve the self-object function of containing the child’s painful and

198

destructive experiences and helping the child learn to tolerate these affective states, rather than acting them out (Hyatt-Williams, 1998).

In my study, some participants reported a sense of neglect. These participants shared that their parents were unable to express love or provide care and protection.

Additionally, parents were unable to provide validation and acceptance of their children’s feelings, needs, goals, and hopes for the future. Participants related that this was, in part, because of their parents’ own histories of childhood trauma, victimization, lack of response to mirroring needs, validation, care, love, and protection from abuse. This left the parents unable to provide for their children’s mirroring needs. As one of the participants, Michael, stated, “If you all (mother, grandmother, great grandmother) feel you haven’t been loved, what are you giving me?”

The parents’ self-deficits were passed down from generation to generation. In other words, a parent whose sense of self was incoherent, non-cohesive, or deficient was unable to provide psychological structure for their children. This is a significant finding, one that adds to existing literature, illuminating the effects of parents’ childhood experiences on the ability to provide a safe environment for their children. Previous research has established the importance of parental engagement and support as a protective factor against delinquency. “Warm parental support and encouragement” is seen as a protective factor against gang involvement in many studies (Barnes, Farrell, & Cairns, 1986; Coombs & Landsverk, 1988, Crosnoe, Erickson, & Dornbusch, 2002, as cited in Ryan, Miller-Loessi, & Nieri, 2007, p. 1054).

199

Further, Gorman-Smith, Tolan, and Henry (2000) found that family dynamics, characterized by a lack of emotional closeness and dependability, will increase the risk for delinquency even if there is a high level of “discipline consistency, parental monitoring, and structure in family roles” (p. 192). The authors also suspected that if the need for belonging and emotional support is met in the neighborhood, children are less likely to engage in delinquency (Gorman-Smith, Tolan, & Henry, 2000).

The findings in my study also introduced new aspects to previous research in that participants shared how their parents searched for fulfillment of their own self-object needs such as validation, acceptance, and love through their relationship with their children. This led the parents to interact with their children in ways that would affirm the parents. As a result, parents’ relationships with their children were based on the parents’ needs, not the children’s needs.

Previous research illuminates the importance of meeting self-object needs during childhood. It is important to note that when there is a developmental failure, one can assume that there was a developmental failure at the time of the problem (in relation to caregivers), as well as missed opportunities to “pick up on development at later stages” (Galatzer-Levy & Gohler, 1990, p. 96). Therefore, caregivers and others did not meet self-object needs during the course of the child’s development. When there is a developmental failure, the child continues to search for fulfillment of the missing selfobject functions.

Participants’ parents did not have their self-object needs met by caregivers or others through their development into adulthood. Therefore, the parents searched for the self-

200

object functions in their own children, the participants. As the participants in this study revealed, the love they experienced from their parents—including valuing and confirming the participants’ importance and worth, and inspiring the participants to strive for future endeavors—was only expressed by the parents as long as the behavior of the participants confirmed their parents' views and wants.

Conversely, participants felt that their parents dismissed, questioned, and rejected their wants and aspirations when they conflicted with their parents’ ideas and, ultimately, selfobject needs. Cedric made this point well when he stated, “As I was coming up to a more mature adolescent, where I was . . . going different directions or . . . developing what my endeavors or aspirations were . . . that was not respected.”

Another distinctive finding in my research shows that parents who were abused, violated, and devalued—or who experienced faulty responses to mirroring needs—were more likely to place themselves, and by extension their children, in dangerous situations.

This seemed to result from the parents’ inability to value, respect, and protect themselves because of the chaotic, abusive parenting they received. Therefore, parents allowing abusive partners in their lives unintentionally sent a message to their children that they were not valuable and respectable, either. For instance, one participant shared the impact of his mother’s decision to reconnect with an abusive boyfriend: “Our life was lived through her. . . . She is not like loving herself and respecting herself and, in turn, not loving and respecting us” (Michael).

201

Parents’ socioeconomic struggles.

Supporting prior research, many of the participants’ parents struggled with economical and social disadvantages. Previous studies have illustrated that poverty, history of trauma, community violence, mental illness, substance abuse, serious physical challenges, and disconnection from the labor market negatively influenced parents, rendering them unable to protect their children from the effects of stressors in the community (Getsinger & Popkin, 2010). Negatively impacted by poverty, a lack of opportunities, and social marginalization, these parents struggled to meet their children’s basic physical needs such as food, shelter, and clothing.

Important corollary to this finding was that emotional and psychological needs of the children became secondary. Parents were forced to leave their children at home with older siblings responsible to care for them while the parents worked. This in turn exposed children to gangs and the negative impact of the neighborhood without parental supervision or guidance. Working many hours, some of the parents may have not been emotionally available to provide the needed mirroring, encouragement, and positive reinforcement for the child’s budding aspirations.

My study also confirms previous research findings that many gang members “have been let down by people they looked up to, had no positive male figure in their lives, and saw single mothers struggle [to care for them] . . . [and] had little time for caring and nurturing, probably due to exhaustion from working so hard” (Robertson, 2008, p. 116).

Many of the participants shared that during childhood they wished to have a more positive connection with the family and were able to enjoy activities with their families.

202

My study stands out from previous research in that all participants shared strong feelings of appreciation for their parents’ sacrifices to provide for them. Caliman expressed this when he said, “My mom, she was the best mom in the world. At first I didn’t understand why she was never around, but she was never around because she was working her ass off for us to have a roof over our heads because my dad didn't take care of us. My dad was drunk. My mom was the sole provider.”

Missing fathers.

An important self-object function during childhood is the idealized parent imago. A child needs to be able to idealize parents, look up to them, and depend on them. This provides a sense of safety and security, and helps children develop the internal strength and drive to thrive and regulate emotions. As Siegel (2012) stated, “Self-regulation is fundamentally related to the modulation of emotion and self-organization. Emotional regulation is initially developed from within interpersonal experiences in a process that establishes self-organizational abilities” (p. 13). Therefore, in this study, parents with regulatory deficits seemed to have affected the participants’ ability to self-regulate.

Prior research has established many causes for joining gangs, including poverty, low socioeconomic status, dysfunctional family dynamics, lack of adult male role-models, substance abuse among parents and peers, and participation in antisocial and criminal activities among family members and peers (Howell, 1998; Brownfield, Thompson, & Sorenson, 1997).

Many of the participants shared that their fathers were absent. Those participants who

203

had fathers in their lives reported distant relationships. Even though some of the participants’ fathers worked and were present in their lives, some fathers abused alcohol or drugs, or were abusive towards the children and their mothers. A distinctive finding was that distant or abusive relationships with fathers led participants to feel alone, unable to depend and rely on their fathers and idealize them.

For instance, one of the participants shared his feelings towards a member of community who had taken an interest in him. Tudy said, “He knew what a father was, how a father should treat a kid. Instead of having you sell drugs or, Hey man. You are selling that? Let me buy some, . . . [it was,] Hey you are not supposed to be selling that.

You could go to jail for that. You’re not supposed to be carrying a gun or knife or screwdriver. That’s what we needed in our life. [But we] . . . didn’t have that. Everything [we were] doing was [seen as] cool.” Tudy was looking for a father who would guide, support, and encourage him towards positive activities, fulfilling the need for an idealized parent imago, experiencing what Herzog would call “father hunger.”

“Children without fathers suffer father hunger, an affective state of considerable tenacity and force. They feel they lack something they vitally need.” (Herzog, 1943, p.

34). Herzog discussed the importance of fathers in helping children, especially boys, to integrate and manage their anger based on the examples provided by their fathers: Boys struggling to integrate and manage their anger as they were missing the father’s careful use of his own aggression as a part of his parental function constituted an opportunity for the consolidations of the boys’ masculine sense of self and a beginning for his own management of drive and fantasy. . . . One

204

sometimes sees in older children other symptom pictures, including the hypertrophied attempts to manifest and manage aggression and an inner deadness resulting from defeat (Herzog, 1943, p. 22).

Sibling influence.

Another remarkable finding in this study was the aggression in sibling relationships and its impact on those relationships. Participants shared that their relationships with siblings were marked by aggression, violence, and mistrust. For some, siblings played the role of the parent and disciplined participants through physical aggression. Others revealed that siblings prepared them for life in the neighborhood through having them fight with other children and not backing away from a fight. Some participants reported sibling aggression being excused by the parents and other family members as play or typical sibling rivalry. However, the aggression was more severe than what would constituted play or sibling rivalry. Finally, participants reported that these interactions with siblings led to a loss of trust in siblings and family. On the other hand, some participants shared how they attempted to protect and provide for their younger siblings.

Many gang members spoke about the intergenerational effects of gangs, in which family members including parents, uncles, aunts, siblings, cousins, and others are part of the gang. The criminal perspective and gang mentality is passed on from generation to generation through socializing young people to stray from societal norms (Wood & Alleyne, 2010). In my study, participants shared that their siblings were either not ganginvolved or became involved after the participants joined. Participants talked about how

205

their relationships with siblings, including aggression in the relationship, led to mistrust and hyper-vigilance.

Family dynamics affect a person's sense of self and others. Depending on how people are treated within their families, they may see the outside world as safe, supportive, and encouraging of one’s progress. In this instance, the world appears as a place to achieve one’s wants and wishes. However, if the family environment is one of aggression, violence, and victimization, an individual will internalize those relationships and dynamics, forming a worldview of threat and danger, in which the person will surely be victimized. As one of the participants shared, “What’s is going on inside the house, I have to come to see, I made sure it didn’t go on in the street. I will be damned if what happens in my house happens in the street. I have to be the aggressor” (Michael). This finding supports previous research in that the lure of the gang amounts to more than survival of influences of the environment. Rather, the allure includes the gang member’s attempt to endure internal states of persistent trauma and traumatic memories (Tolleson, 1996).

Another new finding was the detrimental and significant effect of violence in the home that impacted the participants' internal world, their view of the outside world, and ability to control anger and other destructive impulses in relation to others. The majority of participants shared that they were exposed to violence by parents in the form of discipline. In addition, many participants acknowledged that at times their relationships with siblings included severe and serious violence. This was beyond typical sibling rivalry, taking the form of physical violence such as beating and torture. Participants

206

expressed that they saw the violence among siblings under the auspice of play, discipline, or preparation for the future. Parents justified or minimized violence in the home as sibling rivalry, play, or discipline.

Further, participants shared that such behavior affected their ability to trust siblings.

By extension, other people were internalized as being potentially victimizing. Therefore, participants formed a view that they will always be victimized, leading to hypervigilance. In interactions with others, participants were aggressive and even acted like predators.

According to participants’ experiences, when they were victimized, aggression was seen as a part of life and appropriate behavior, excused by parents for different reasons.

However, when the participants were aggressive, attempting to protect themselves from fear of harm and victimization, they were rejected, punished, and pushed away. Michael expressed this dynamic, saying, “It is play. Why are you whipping me? Why are you taking this out on me? Now I am double-offended. People taught me this way and I'm now being punished for the teaching” (Michael).

Another standout and significant finding pertained to how participants’ violent behavior impacted their relationships with others and increased susceptibility to gangs.

This seemed to influence the participants in two ways. First, as children, participants were confused about the messages they were taught and felt unsupported, alone, and betrayed by both parents and siblings. They felt unable to trust their parents for protection, or to view their parents as role models. Their developmental need for a strong, supportive, secure idealizable figure was not met, calling to mind Sauma’s observation

207

that, “Violence is also seen in betrayal of relationships by adults who lie, who neglect, who undermine, who betray the trust that these young people need to develop a positive association with adults” (2008).

Secondly, because as children participants acted in aggressive manners and victimized others, they were rejected, criticized, and pushed away by others in the community, and many in their own peer groups. As a result, it appears that the participants were not afforded the opportunity to have their self-object need of twinship—identifying with like others—met by people in the community. As Michael put it: If we were to go to camp to play some sport, they would kick me out because I already did something. I always gave them a reason to kick me out. It was never like they wanted to kick me out. A lot of times they didn’t want to kick me out but I would insist.

This made participants more susceptible to the influence of gangs, which would accept, encourage, and support aggressive behavior. Gangs also seemingly offered the mirroring and idealization that participants sought, and provided encouragement and positive reinforcement for negative, aggressive, and delinquent behavior. This study provides personal, in-depth narrative examples of previous research findings that gangs “provide affirmation, superficial care, and responsiveness, but at a price that can involve physical harm, arrest, or worse, losing one’s life” (Smaller, 2012, p. 141).

208

Psychological and emotional reaction to family.

Another uncommon finding pertained to how participants experienced loss of trust, and lack of acceptance, in caregivers. Participants disclosed that, at some point, they lost trust in their caregivers because of the choices those caregivers made, such as engaging in abusive relationships, being unaccepting and untruthful, or violent. This loss of trust resulted in participants not confiding in their parents, even when in danger or being abused.

One participant shared that he did not feel he needed to trust his parents because he was never put in a predicament that required trust. This is noteworthy because all participants were gang members and, therefore, at some point were in danger of their lives. This participant specifically stated that he felt safe with his aunt who had raised him from birth to age five, before he moved in with his mother. His aunt nurtured, supported, and protected him throughout his life. However, he felt he was not accepted by his mother, as her love and care were conditional on him obeying her.

As Cedric said, “I can honestly say I never entertained or had interest in telling anyone what I was going through or why I felt I was going through it. So, it was never significant with me to have to trust anyone. But generally speaking, did I trust anyone? I have to say no, because I was never placed in a predicament to have to do it, per se, maybe—or have to confide in someone and feel comfortable or safe. (Asked about whether he felt safe with anyone) As a child, yeah, probably more so with my aunt.�

When children can connect with, trust, and rely on their parents, it provides the children with a sense of safety and protection, which helps them develop a secure sense

209

of self, manage their emotions, handle challenges, and engage in healthy relationships.

Children who have these experiences are typically able to seek comfort, support, and guidance from their caregivers and others, while also being more confident in their own abilities to solve problems and rely on parents for support as they reach for goals and ambitions. When family dynamics are unhealthy—marked by violence, trauma, and dysfunction—a more insecure, incoherent, and incomplete sense of self is likely to develop.

Anderson (2003) discusses family dynamics among children who are at risk of significant risk-taking and dangerous behavior. In a no-haven family, there is not a sense of safety for the child. Instead, parents’ “profoundly split feelings of love and hate are managed by focusing hostility on the child, who is criticized and blamed and for whom there is no haven” (Anderson, 2003, p. 78). This could in turn mean that the child feels vulnerable on its own, unable to trust and depend on others for support, assistance, or encouragement. Such a child is left alone to deal with difficulties, traumas, and challenges. This confirms previous research that stated, “[Children] were let down and they looked for someone to make a difference in their life, and pay attention to them” (Robertson, 2008, p. 117).

Participants directly elaborated on the effect of their parents’ inability to provide for self-object needs in childhood. Participants repeatedly remarked that they felt disconnected from their caregivers, misunderstood, and not valued. Based on their descriptions, it appears that their parents, for a multitude of reasons, were frequently

210

unable to fulfill the self-object functions necessary for them to develop a solid, secure sense of self where they felt worthy and important.

This finding provides narrative support for previous research that parents’ experiences affect their ability to care for children—and that children attempt to cope with this by denying and repressing feelings about it. A child who has not experienced opportunities to feel valuable, important, and capable in the family, neighborhood, and community will rely on primary defenses such as denial, repression, and projection.

In order to cope with the painful experience of unmet needs of dependency, love, and safety—combined with the experience of adults as hostile and hurtful—the child will repress needs, project hostility, and deny the need for adults. Children will demand and manipulate in order to establish a relationship, while viewing adults as hurtful, hostile, and unneeded. This defends against the children’s own strong need for a dependable safe adult, who is seen as a threat (Bernabeu, 1958).

When children’s self-object needs are not met, they became resentful and project their anger at their parents toward others in the community. In this study, acting out on others through the gang seemed to be the participants’ way of combating feelings of worthlessness, dismissal, and invalidation.

Another remarkable finding was that participants did not feel loved by parents because of the lack of empathic care from their parents. Some participants experienced their parents’ lack of empathy, acceptance, and understanding of their wishes, wants, and ambitions as a sign that their parents did not care for or love them. These participants described deficits in their relationships, which, according to self-psychology, have the

211

potential to affect the sense of self. Certain psychological needs (e.g., the need for acknowledgement of feelings, help with managing emotions, general support, guidance, modeling, and identification) went unmet in participants’ early relationships.

As a result, it appears that participants searched for fulfillment of these needs outside of the family. Participants talked about many instances in which they sought validation from their own family members to no avail. In all likelihood, in an effort to feel good, participants continued to search for others who would validate them and were thereby attracted to gangs. Sharkey, Shekhtmeyster, Chavez-Lopez, Norris, and Sass (2011) argue that parental factors such as supervision, support, and communication are more strongly related to delinquency as opposed to gang affiliation, but gangs may provide a lure for maltreated youth who wish to escape family violence and find a sense of safety and a substitute family. Gang members are more likely to show abnormal behavior, commit more crimes, and are more committed to their antisocial peers in comparison to non-gang-member offenders.

According to Jenson and Howard (1998), there is a difference between family factors that influence delinquency versus gang affiliation or membership. Given this, it seems that gangs attracted the participants in this study by tapping into their insecurities and providing certain self-object functions such as recognition and praise, while also encouraging abilities, talents, and aspirations. This provided a sense of connection, strength, and security, and offered camaraderie. However, the gang necessarily validated participants’ antisocial tendencies, as the “foundation of the gang is murder and mayhem” (Michael).

212

Gang Dynamics Emotional and psychological factors leading to joining the gang.

Another remarkable finding was that participants' narratives revealed many emotional vulnerabilities. Their early experiences seemed mostly devoid of nurturing, safe, consistent, and supportive relationships—all of which are key components to the development of a healthy sense of self. The ways in which participants described their behavior suggested they may have been searching to fulfill these unmet self-object needs.

Some participants found meaningful connections with mentors in the community, such as teachers or police offers. However, these relationships were not enough to heal their early relational deficits or to significantly contribute to the development of a healthy sense of self.

Peer relationships are also important to the development of the self. Connecting with like-minded others can provide a sense of camaraderie, companionship, and understanding. All of these factors contribute to the growth of self-esteem and self-worth.

Participants in this study shared peer experiences of being bullied or judged—or their peer relationships were simply superficial. Of note: Participants were aware that their own aggressive behavior or association with aggressive people likely resulted in these dysfunctional peer relationships.

As Lefer (1984) observed, some gang members become violent quickly when questioned or when feeling disrespected. This may be related to the seeming helplessness that gang members described feeling in childhood when they were unable to build

213

relationships with peers. Some of these individuals may only feel visible when getting negative attention because they have given up on positive attention (Lefer, 1984).

As a result, participants turned to gangs, whose members encouraged participants’ aggressive tendencies. Fellow gang members were always available to participants, and offered a sense of acceptance. This latter point is another unique finding. It confirms previous research that gangs attract children who crave a sense of belonging, identity, and self-worth. The narratives of participants in my study depicted a sense of being wanted, fitting in, and being part of something. This is crucial for a person who, as a child or youth, felt unwanted, possibly due to being in foster homes or having abusive parents (Brown, 2012).

My study added to existing research via the acknowledgement of participants that because of their vulnerability and view of the world as hostile and full of rejection, they acted in ways that recreated their internal worlds and projected their feelings and insecurities onto others. Self-psychology suggests that “the internal experience of self, self-concept, or self-identity from birth are dynamic, and instinctually forward moving” (Smaller, 2012, p. 139). Therefore, individuals continue to search for fulfillment of selfobject needs in the environment.

Tolpin (2002) discussed the idea of the “forward edge” of development, in which a person continues to search for ways to fulfill unmet, normal needs of mirroring, idealizing an object, and counteracting shame. Further, “the reactivation of these needs in self-object transference . . . is potentially transforming” (p. 22). When such needs are not

214

met within the family, society, or among peers, children will attempt to find alternatives.

Such was the case with the participants in this study.

Another distinctive finding was that a few pro-social friends were not adequate to fulfill participants’ significant need for self-object functions. Participants told stories about their attempts to befriend pro-social individuals, which appears to be another example of their efforts to fulfill self-object needs. All participants talked about individuals whom they admired growing up. However, as Tudy put it, “We were always looking for more, but we couldn’t find nothing more than [him]. He was doing what he could do because he had a family.” The participants, like all children, needed consistent and routine validation, love, attention, care, reinforcement, and acceptance. This level of need exceeded what could be provided by one mentor or one sympathetic person in a brief period of time. Winnicott (1984) discusses the “link between delinquency and deprivation and the need for a strong and reliable parental function . . . ” (as stated in Hindle, 1998, p. 38).

Participant narratives also revealed an apparent lack of opportunities and limited availability of social agencies to serve as a source of connection, consistency, support, and reliability. Paradoxically, the gang functioned on a consistent basis and was available at any hour of need. Although previous research has discussed the lack of opportunities in the community, my study finding was unique, as it expressed the way in which the gang becomes more reliable than the limited available social agencies. As Bill put it, “They have Boys and Girls Clubs and things like that, but they are being utilized [during working hours, 8am to 5pm, five days a week]. The gang is there 24 hours a day, seven

215

days a week.” The lack of resources, opportunities, and perceived discrimination— combined with a limitation of established agencies—made it unlikely that participants would be able to get their self-object needs met via social agencies. Thus, the allure of the consistency and containment of the gang became stronger.

Participants discussed their experiences of observing and being exposed to violence within the family, as domestic violence, and within their community via gang fights and riots. The participants also shared that they were victims of violence at the hands of family members, and in the community by peers and other gang members. Finally, participants added that being exposed to violence and experiences of victimization led to them becoming more aggressive, and viewing violence and abusive relationships with family members and others as normal. Previous research elaborated on the effect of violence on children. However, my study is unique in its finding that the participants discussed the idealization of violence.

Exposure to and experience of violence, maltreatment at home and in the neighborhood, trauma, and unmet relational needs not only seem to have contributed to participants viewing violence as normal, but also idealizing violence. This idealization likely occurred because participants considered violence as a way to defend against feelings of helplessness, loss, grief, frustration, emotional pain, and unmet object needs.

As Caliman said about his friend, “He was my age but I looked up to him because he [took] out [his] aggression at somebody else. . . . When I would fight, I would take all my aggression on that kid, on whomever [I was fighting].” Previous research supports this

216

finding that experiencing and observing chronic trauma and violence during childhood causes violence to become a part of the child’s identity (Tolleson, 1996).

Participants reported that they tried to cope with the influence of violence, trauma, and dysfunctional family dynamics through drug use, disconnecting from their feelings, being aggressive, and projecting their anger and frustration onto others. They talked about attempting to escape physically (e.g., staying away from the house) or emotionally (e.g., using drugs and alcohol) to disconnect and numb their feelings. From their descriptions, it appears that they employed the psychological defenses of denial, suppression, and aggression.

Another unique finding of this study was that many participants openly acknowledged that they joined the gang to avoid their emotions. Gangs allowed them to use violence as a way to act out their feelings without having to feel them. It is crucial to keep in mind that the participants—with their histories of maltreatment, exposure to violence, and victimization in the family, neighborhood, school, and larger society—were reactive, aggressive, and disconnected from their own feelings. As David said when talking about his experience of violence in the home, “There was always some type of sibling altercations, physical fights, and arguments.”

Participants related to others from positions of distrust. They expected violence and victimization. As Tudy explained, “There was so much happening in my life, I think that’s why I became heartless. I didn’t give a fuck about nothing. I didn't care about nothing.”

217

Similar to findings of this study, previous research has shown that some gang members join gangs to combat a sense of powerlessness or to search for family. Some join a gang in response to discrimination and alienation from mainstream culture, looking for a new family that can give them a sense of power, belonging, and closeness (Tapia, Kinnier, & MacKinnon, 2009).

Composition of the gang.

Participants in this study pointed out that the gang is made of “gifted” individuals who have talents and abilities. This is a unique finding of this study. However, within the gang framework these skills are used for negative and criminal purposes. Participants reported that the gang was based on destruction and causing chaos and, therefore, the roles of the gang were to promote gang values of violence and victimization. As Cedric put it, “I believe that some of my positive core values were flipped into negative core values. Like my ambition and being a risk-taker, it became a negative value or attribute.” Active gang members do not really care for the welfare of individuals, and the credo of a gang is to put the gang before anything else, even one’s own belief system and family. (Brown, 2012, p. 13).

Participants shared that gang members are in search of recognition, validation, acceptance, and encouragement of their own skills and abilities—all of which were missing from their early relational experiences. Tolleson (1996) interviewed active gang members and found that they experienced gangs as a subject, or institution, in their psychological lives, from which they derived a sense of identity, morality, and values.

218

The gang members Tolleson interviewed also developed feelings of omnipotence, making their minds into their own subjects in the presence of a hostile and unreliable outer world. Additionally, gang members were able to recognize, accept, validate, and even encourage other gang members. However, as Michael put it, “It’s again the same cycle because [the gang members] can’t give you what they don’t got.” Therefore, the cycle of victimization, aggression, and victimizing and vulnerability continues.

Participants joined gangs through different means. Some grew up into the gang, others went through an initiation process, while others followed their friends into the gang or formed their own gangs. My research, like previous research, found that a “gang serves the interest and the need of certain vulnerable youths, particularly during adolescence and young-adult period when existing social, economic, and even religious institutions do not function properly” (Spergel, 1995, p. 90).

Many individuals join gangs to fulfill a physical or emotional need. "I joined the gang because they provided all of what I needed to survive on the street: food, clothes, shoes, protection, love, friendship. They [the gang] really cared about me. They gave me what my family, my school, and my neighborhood didn’t. Nobody except for the gang cared about me" (Morris, 2012, p. 262).

Previous research has documented what gang members claim to have gained from their gangs. My research added a new depth to these findings. Participants in my study mentioned joining gangs as a means to gain protection from bullies and other gang members, or to gain recognition, acceptance, care, value, belonging, achievement, and camaraderie. As Cedric put it, “I have to say, first a sense of acceptance, second

219

accomplishment, even though it’s negative, but I see monetary value, I’m seeing results.

And last for me it was nurturing.” During their research of First Nations gangs in Canada, Grekul and LaBoucane-Benson (2008) observed that these individuals became involved in gangs for similar reasons, that is, in search of identity, belonging, and finding an alternative life.

Gang as family.

The participants in this study shared that they saw the gang and some other gang members as family. They felt strong connections to these gang members, whom they protected, defended, loved, avenged, and otherwise treated as family. Participants expressed how they attempted to fulfill their own emotional needs by forming a new family. Members of this family supported each other by providing unconditional acceptance (at least initially), valuing, validating, encouraging, and supporting each other’s aggressive, negative behavior. This was consistent with previous qualitative studies with gang members who felt that gangs provided love, identity, self-esteem, a sense of belonging, discipline, and protection (Omizo, Omizo, & Honda, 1997; Kallus, 2004; Grekul & LaBoucane-Benson, 2008).

Based on the findings from my research, it seems that when family bonds are compromised and one is facing loss of family members (physically or emotionally), the individual may believe a gang’s promises to act as a substitute family (Goodwill, 2009).

Others have expressed that they joined a gang to combat a sense of powerlessness or to search for a family. Some join a gang in response to discrimination and alienation from

220

mainstream culture, looking for a new family that can provide a sense of power, belonging, and closeness (Tapia, Kinnier, & MacKinnon, 2009).

The results of this study confirmed previous research findings that, in a way, gangs provide opportunities for fulfilling self-object needs by providing a sense of safety, belonging, meeting of psychological needs, and opportunities to make money (Brown, 2012).

Relationships within the gang.

My study uncovered a new finding regarding the relationship between gang members.

The participants in this study explained that relationships in the gang were not consistent, and that the gang allowed members to be friends and support each other without trusting each other. Gang members connect based on their common understanding and childhood experiences of violence and victimization. However, trust, true friendship, and connections were reserved only for one’s closes friends. Such friends were individuals whom the gang member considered family. As Caliman added, “I can’t explain it. But again, I had a lot of love for the circle, that inner circle. I never did anything, I never hurt anybody in that inner circle.”

On the other hand, participants described disloyalty, mistrust, and betrayal among gang members. This included stealing from each other, setting a person up to be killed, and disconnecting from an incarcerated fellow member despite a preexisting relationship on the street. As Cedric explained, “I am incarcerated and I am unable to provide for myself. I am unable to rely on them to assist me with my financial needs within

221

incarceration. So, I am looking at the disloyalty and this is not acceptance now.� Once again, akin to their family dynamics, gang members’ belief that their needs will be met by the gang prove to be an illusion.

Trauma Participants reported histories of childhood maltreatment, neglect, exposure to domestic violence, and traumatic losses. They described experiencing a sense of helplessness, anger, and a wish for retaliation against the abusers. Based on their narratives, it appears that many of participants joined gangs to deal with these negative feelings by projecting them onto others (that is, their feelings of anger and helplessness turned into aggression toward others), and by seeking gang protection from abusers.

A significant finding was that the majority of the participants experienced sexual abuse. Some minimized the effect of abuse, while others related the devastating impact of the abuse on their lives, sense of self, and relations to others. Participants reported attempting to protect themselves from the emotional effects of abuse by staying out of the house, behaving aggressively so to be removed from the house (even if it meant incarceration or poverty), and struggling to provide for themselves. Participants also shared the impact of maltreatment and trauma on the development of hypervigilance, as participants expected negative outcomes and victimization in society. Interestingly, this is a viewpoint that assisted them in being successful in a gang, where gang members believed that others were intending to harm them.

222

Other researchers have repeatedly studied trauma, maltreatment, and relationships with family as marked by interpersonal distance and family dysfunction in relation to gang membership. Factors that influence youths' decision to join gangs include stressful conditions within the family, emotional problems, authoritarian parenting styles, lack of attachment, and belonging to the family and disorganized family structures (Harris, 1988; Vigil, 1988). Additional reasons for membership include protection from maltreatment in the family setting, and experiencing a sense of safety and security from the dangers in the home or in the environment (Gordon, 2000; Walker-Barnes & Mason, 2001; Joe & Chesney-Lind, 1995).

My study also found that trauma, in the form of maltreatment, violence in the home, and traumatic losses significantly impacted the participants and their decision to join the gang. However, it added to existing research with rich stories that clearly paint the picture of chronic abuse and neglect, as well as its impact on emotional well-being and sense of self.

Similar to previous research, participants in my study minimized the effect of histories of physical abuse and regarded physical aggression as normal during their childhoods.

Goodwill (2009) found that many study participants reported histories of violence, abuse, and neglect in their early lives. These ill effects prompted the development of survival skills, which individuals later used when part of a gang. “Participants made statements such as ‘becoming adapted to violence’ and ‘growing up with abuse,’ and that gang life was a normal continuation of these experiences” (Goodwill, 2009, p. 134).

223

As Morris (2012) stated, many gang members value protection for themselves and their families. When they do not feel the protection and monitoring necessary for them to develop “safe, loyal, and trustworthy” support systems, they turn to gangs to provide those needs for them and their families. "Not to be raisin’ nothing, but a younger Black person on the street, they’re pushed to the point where there’s nothin’ else for them to do, but to sell drugs if he wants to survive personally. It is the only option he can take, cuz he needs the guy’s money” (Morris, 2012, p. 266).

In addition, many participants described witnessing domestic violence in their homes.

Participants shared their feelings of helplessness, anger, and resentment towards the abusive caregiver while observing this violence. Additionally, participants experienced a loss of trust and respect for caregivers who allowed abusers back into their lives, and participants expressed a willingness to use violence to stop the abuse. From early childhood, participants received messages about violence, such as violence being acceptable and common, which they later used in relation to their own parents or others in the community.

From a self-psychology perspective, the effects of abuse are significant on children.

Children rely on parents to provide care, safety, guidance and an environment in which they can strive and grow. However, when exposed to maltreatment, children’s sense of safety is destroyed because they are violated by those they depend on for survival.

Therefore, as reported previously, the participants cope with their sense of betrayal, devastation, sadness, and insecurity by repressing their feelings toward the parent on whom they depend. In turn, the anger, rage, helplessness, fear, devastation, shame,

224

humiliation, and other emotions brought on by the abuse are projected onto a lessthreatening object. This can be another child, another adult, or anyone the child can project anger onto without facing annihilation. Therefore, gang members are consistently projecting their own feelings of victimization onto others, thus victimizing others.

The former gang members I interviewed considered other gangs as enemies. However, when asked why they were enemies, participants said it was because the other gang was victimizing them, shooting at them, and violating their territory. Gangs become victims of each other, reenacting earlier childhood traumas. This is consistent with current research that states groups are formed of individuals who share similar principles. Some groups, such as gangs, are based on the assumption that they are in danger, “fight-flight assumption,” and they need to either engage with that danger or run from it (Cregeen, 2008). This danger can consist of externalized threats or internalized factors such as dependency, victimization, and vulnerability—which is to say, a combination of all that pulls people together to form gangs.

Gang members experience others as predators and enemies based on territory, race, gang colors, and projections of negative feelings. This perception of being a victim manifests itself in fights, shootings, and other gang activity, which leads to further victimization. Previous research has found that the loss of important people in one’s life can have significant damaging impact. Harinsher (2007) assessed the level of loss among 898 juvenile detainees between the ages of 10 and 18. The researcher found that 21.2% had lost at least one caregiver, 13.8% had lost at least a sibling, and 55.5% had lost one other important person (as stated in Placencio, 2009).

225

In my study, all of the participants experienced the loss of close friends from gang violence. Participants shared that they became overly aggressive, vengeful, and unable to control their rage after losing their friends. If a participant was involved in the gang at the time of the loss, he became more aggressive by attempting to take revenge, and became disconnected from his feelings. Others shared that they joined their gangs to avenge a friend’s life and to combat feelings of devastation, loss, grief, and sadness. As Malcolm said regarding his feelings after he had joined a gang, “That’s what I used to pride myself on—‘Never ever again will I feel that kind of pain that I felt when George died.’ That’s all I used to think about.”

According to self-psychology and previous research, the experience of a caring relationship characterized by a sense of compassion, non-judgment, and love is crucial for developing resiliency and moving away from a gang (Albert, 2007). However, during my interviews, it became apparent that none of the participants’ parents, family members, or adults encouraged or assisted them in processing the loss and trauma of losing a friend.

This was a unique but sad finding of this study. Some participants’ parents were unaware of the situation, while other parents and family members minimized the situation and its impact on participants. As Malcolm clearly shared, “When I look back on it, I wish that instead of him [his father] beating me, trying to get me to understand, trying to get his point across to me, I wish he would have sit down with me and talked to me. I think we would have had a better relationship and I wouldn’t have been so fearful of him. And also, the resentment, all the anger I held for him, was really, I think somewhere in

226

psychology I read, is called ‘misplaced aggression’ or ‘misplaced anger.’ I think I exhibited that all my life.”

Another unique finding of this study was that all participants stated that their gangs provided a means of grieving by encouraging them to fight, shoot, and hurt rival gang members to avenge fallen friends. All participants shared their devastation and remorse for the actions they had taken, and expressed their interest to be able to help others avoid gangs.

From a self-psychology perspective, gangs seemed to temporarily meet participants' self-object needs. Gangs mirrored participants’ feelings of loss, rage, sadness, and destitution at the loss of their friends. The gangs then recognized, encouraged, and supported participants’ attempts to get revenge, which was considered a means of achievement. The gang structure and organization provided idealizing functions such as a sense of safety through belonging and regulating aggression via a sense of order and rules. These rules expressed when to be aggressive, and when to hold back. In essence, the gang provided some self-object functions, but in an inconsistent and temporary manner due to the gang members’ faulty self structure.

Finally, the gang provided twinship by supporting, valuing, and sharing the participants’ experiences and emotions—and by accepting the participants as the gangs’ own. In the most negative and destructive way, the gang fulfilled the gang members’ selfobject needs. Yet, because of the destructive, negative, and dysfunctional means of fulfilling these self-object needs, participants were left further victimized, more devastated, and lost.

227

Each participant experienced devastation and confusion as he began to regret the kind of person he had become. Participants remained without a solid, cohesive, coherent sense of identity, self-value, or self-esteem. The gang had used participants’ vulnerabilities to further its own cause at the expense of the physical and emotional life of the participants.

In summary, individuals become vulnerable to gangs through a variety of factors, including: 1.

Dysfunctional family relationships

2. Exposure to violence and victimization 3. Effects of trauma and negative experiences with peers 4. Lack of or limited corrective experiences with others This overall vulnerability may owe, in part, to prospective members searching for fulfillment of unmet needs. After joining gangs, individuals continue to become victimized. In order to suppress their feelings, they engage in more violence, substance abuse, and disconnection from internal emotional states. Therefore, gang members fall into a cycle of victimizing and victimization.

In my study, gang members shared that at some point in their lives, often during incarceration, they became disappointed and disillusioned with gang life. This was in part because of the disloyalty of their "homies." When participants were incarcerated, they recognized that they did not have the support of fellow gang members still in the streets.

This led to mistrust and disappointment in the gang. In a way, the participants became disillusioned that the gang as a whole did not provide the self-object functions they had hoped for. Only one participant shared that he had received what he wished for from the

228

gang, which was to never again feel the pain he had experienced when his friend was killed. Other participants shared that they did not receive what they had hoped from the gang. Some shared that they learned to be street-smart, which helped them survive in prison or to work in any neighborhood after being released from prison.

All participants in my study recognized and were able to break the cycle of violence and disconnectedness that continued from childhood to gang membership. However, this only occurred after they faced consequences of their past behavior, including 30-plus years of incarceration; loss of family, friends, and support system; and emotional, physical, financial, social, and legal problems. Participants had limited social support, skills, and abilities to function in the society outside of their gangs. Their criminal records prevented them from securing employment and societal opportunities. Once again, despite their wish to be productive members of society, as former gang members they experienced rejection, discrimination, invalidation, and judgment. The few participants who achieved goals did so through support from agencies and groups that provided training, engagement, mental-health treatment, and group therapy, to name a few resources. These agencies also engaged participants in treatment that took into account their experiences of self development.

Summary of findings.

1.

Participants experienced a sense of being neglected.

2.

Participants’ parents’ self-deficits were passed down through generations.

229

3.

Participants’ parents searched for fulfillment of their own self-object needs through their relationship with their children.

4.

Some participants' parents placed their children in dangerous situations because of their own histories of maltreatment.

5.

Participants’ parents struggled from economical and social disadvantages.

6.

Corollary to the above finding, the emotional and psychological needs of the children became secondary.

7.

Participants observed their mothers struggle to provide for them.

8.

Participants did not have many consistent positive role models.

9.

Participants’ relationships with siblings were marked by aggression, violence, and mistrust.

10. Violence at home had a detrimental and significant impact on the participants' internal world, their view of the outside world, and ability to control anger and other destructive impulses in relation to others.

11. Participants’ violent behavior impacted their relationships with others and increased susceptibility to gangs.

12. Participants lost trust in caregivers because of caregivers’ choices such as engaging in abusive relationships, being unaccepting and untruthful, or violent.

13. Participants did not feel loved by parents because of the lack of empathic care from parents.

230

14. Participants’ early experiences seemed mostly void of nurturing, safe, consistent, and supportive relationships— key components necessary to develop a healthy sense of self.

15. Few pro-social friends were not adequate to fulfill participants’ significant need for self-object functions.

16. Many of the participant joined the gang to avoid their emotions.

17. Relationships in the gang were not consistent and gangs allowed participants to support each other without trusting one another.

18. Some of the participants minimized the effect of abuse while others reported its devastating impact on their sense of self and relation to others.

Figures 1 through 7 provide a visual summary of the findings, illuminating the relation between each category. Figure 1—Family construct, relationships, and psychological impact—shows the family construct, relationship, and impact of family relationships on participants’ sense of self. Figure 2—Gang constructs and relationships—illustrates the construct of the gang and relationships, as well as the impact of those relationships on participants. Figure 3—Peer relationships and their psychological impact—illuminates relationships with peers and their impact on participants. Figure 4—Experiences and impact of trauma—discusses the experiences and effects of trauma on participants’ psychological health and functioning. Figure 5—Experience and impact of violence— discusses the experiences and effects of trauma on participants’ psychological health and

231

functioning. Figure 6—Attempts to cope—illustrates participants’ attempts to cope with experiences related to missing self-object needs. Figure 7—Relations with others in the world—shares the effect of participants’ relations with others in the world and the impact of those relations on the sense of self.

232

Figure 1: Family Construct, Relationships, and Psychological Impact Family

Parents’ character

Parents' childhoodunmet selfobject functions

Social and economical standing of parents

Experiences of siblings aggression/ trauma

Hardworking parents

experiences fathers.

Missing self-object functions

Psychological Impact of family. Lack of mirroring and idealization

Loss of trust

Parents' childhood experiences and self object functions

Lack of Mirroring

Inability to provide selfobject functions in relationship

Importance of validation

233

Figure 2: Gang Constructs and Relationships Gang

What Gang Was Like

Street Code

Joining the gang

Psychological Meaning of the Gang

Family FigureMirroring and idealizing

Accept, Validation, Mirroring

ComradshipTwinship

Care/True FriendshipTwinship

Experiences with Other Gang Members

Loyalty/ Disloyalty/ Lack of Trust

234

Figure 3: Peers Relationships and Their Psychological Impact

Peers

Influence of Peers on Gang Involvement- Twinship

Lack of Acceptance and Belonging to the Peer Group- Lack of Twinship

235

Figure 4: Experiences and Impact of Trauma Trauma

Experience of Trauma within the family

Reaction to childhood maltreatment

Domestic Violence

Physical Abuse

Sexual Abuse

Traumatic Losses

236

Figure 5: Experience and Impact of Violence

Violence

Experience of Violence

Being a Victim of Violence

Reaction to Violence

Understanding of Violence

237

Figure 6: Attempts to Cope

Coping

What Actions I took

Emotional and Psychological Attempts to Cope

238

Figure 7: Relations with Others in the World

World

Emotional and Psychological Relationships to the World

239

Chapter VII

Implications and Conclusion Further Research Implications 1. Gang phenomenon is complex and multifaceted. While this study focused on early relational experiences, further research can look at gang members’ experiences in different areas such as substance abuse in the family, the community and gang, success or lack of success in school, and experiences with (and the influence of) peers. These topics can shed light on gang members’ emotions, thoughts, internal worlds, and perspectives. This in turn can provide significant information to better understand and provide services to populations affected by gangs.

2. A lot of data were gathered about the participants’ experiences as adults, which was outside of the scope of this study. However, this additional data pointed to the fact that in addition to unmet self-object needs, the participants' gang membership was also influenced by their difficulty self-regulating emotions and the significant impact of trauma on their personality development. The participants in this study, as adults, had the capacity to recognize these influences and the suffering they had caused for others. They felt empathy for their victims and their families and expressed remorse. Further research can examine gang members’ experiences with family, non-gang-affiliated peers, adults, and other gang members from different

240

theoretical perspectives while also examining the effect of lack of emotional selfregulation and impact of trauma on the development of the self. This perspective could accommodate theories pertaining to ego psychology, object relations, attachment, or trauma. Each of these theories can look at the same phenomenon studied here and potentially uncover fresh nuances in understanding the gang phenomenon.

3. Future research can repeat this study with female former gang members to observe and evaluate if their experiences resemble those of their male counterparts in relation to family, peers, the world, and the gang. Exploring female former gang members’ experiences can help better understand gender within the gang phenomenon.

4. Also, future researchers can consider conducting a similar study with participants who are still involved in gangs. Such research could evaluate whether active gang members have similar insights about their early relationships, as compared to participants in my research.

5. Another valuable research question to be studied is why participants chose to leave the gang. This approach could focus on decision-making around leaving a gang and how one goes about such a departure. Additional insight could be provided around the process of re-entering the community as a civilian, not a gang member.

241

6. Future research can examine the childhood experiences of the parents of gang members, gaining further insight into their internal worlds and the ability of these parents to provide self-object functions for their children.

7. Further research can examine the relationships of gang members with their own children and their experiences as parents. This can include the type of the parents that gang members became and the reasons for it.

Clinical Implications 1. By understanding the multifaceted nature of the gang phenomenon, service providers, school staff, community leaders, and society in general can work to recognize, address, and provide services in different areas including home, school, and neighborhood.

2. Mental-health and supportive services can be provided to families, parents, and children. Counselors and therapists can recognize self-deficit in parents and caregivers, and better detect dysfunctional family dynamics. Therefore, the services will be provided to children, parents, and the family in general. This will create opportunities for caregivers to better fulfill self-object functions for their children, thereby reducing vulnerability and decreasing the potential for gang involvement.

3. Therapists, counselors, community leaders, educational-program leaders, and other involved parties will need to educate parents and communities about the effect of

242

violence on children. These parties will also need to work to effectively reduce violence and improve children’s resilience. Violence among siblings, childhood maltreatment, and exposure to violence in the home and neighborhood has a damaging impact on a child’s sense of safety and emotional regulation. When exposed to such violence, a child may cope by becoming more violent and seeing violence as a resolution to problems. This may be because of the child’s hypervigilance and expectation of violence and abuse from the world. This also affects the child’s ability to interact with other children appropriately and be part of positive peer groups.

4. Policies and practices that can increase parents’ employment opportunities (e.g., skills training or education) may improve parents’ lives and thus their ability to provide for their children both physically and emotionally. Therefore, parents may become better equipped to meet their children’s self-object needs.

5. Also, having after-school programs and positive opportunities for children to spend their free time and engage in productive activities has the potential to improve sense of self, meeting self-object needs such as belonging and achievement.

6. Being aware of ways that a person can become vulnerable—including in the family, peers, neighborhood or school—allows adults to provide services to increase resiliency.

243

7. Understanding the dynamics of gang membership, therapists and counselors may better recognize deficits in the development of the self and provide necessary selfobject functions.

8. This study illuminated that gangs are made of traumatized individuals who have good qualities and capabilities. This understanding can help service providers employ strength-based perspectives to help gang-involved young people use their abilities in pro-social ways.

9. In addition, by understanding the dynamics involved in gangs and the reasons for membership, individuals can become more empathic to this population. This may provide opportunities for more rehabilitation, as opposed to punishment, in the justice system. The goal would be to stop the cycle of gang violence and punishment, and focus on healing.

Research Limitation 1. This research is limited as it only looked at male former gang members. Data from female former gang members was not gathered or analyzed. Also, active gang members and active gang-affiliated individuals were not involved in this research.

Therefore, it was not possible to see the differences (if any) between former and active gang members. I interviewed eight participants and learned from their experiences. It is possible that with a larger sample, more dynamics and themes would emerge.

244

2. Another limitation of the study was that the sample was not ethnically diverse. The participants were African American, Hispanic, and one person was Native American. This probably was, in part, because the majority of gang members come from ethnic minorities, especially African American and Hispanic. “Law enforcement agencies report a greater percentage of Hispanic/Latino and African American/black gang members compared with other races/ethnicities” (National Youth Gang Survey Analysis, 2012).

3. Another potential limitation is bias I introduced through research and data analysis.

I attempted to control for my bias through memo writing, member check-in, and closely working with my committee on data collection, analysis, and interpretation.

4. Finally, another limitation of this study was that I looked at the data from one theoretical perspective, self-psychology. The data can be understood from many different theoretical perspectives such as ego-psychology, object-relations, relational theory, attachment, or trauma theories.

In summary, this study looked at the childhood experiences of former gang members with caregivers, significant adults, peers, and other gang members. The goal of this study was to explore the impact of those childhood relationships on the construct of the self and the child’s decision to join a gang. This study only looked at one aspect of gang membership—the influence of family members, non-gang-affiliated peers, and other gang members on the child’s sense of self, vulnerabilities, missing self-object functions, and gang involvement. The results showed how the journey to gang membership is impacted by an array of influences and factors, including:

245

1. Family relationships 2. Exposure to violence and unresolved trauma 3. Exposure to gangs and limited positive influences from others outside of the family 4. One’s attempts to cope Future research can look at gang members’ experiences in relation to areas not studied here in depth. These areas would include peers, substance abuse, violence in the community, and lack of opportunities. Also, the data from this study can be evaluated from a different theoretical model or repeated with female or active gang members.

Future studies can look at why former gang members left the gang and if there are differences between those who left and those who remained active. Further research can also examine the childhoods of parents of gang members, as well as gang members’ experiences as parents themselves.

The results of this study have many clinical implications. Counselors, therapists, services providers, community leaders, and society in general can gain insight about gang phenomenon and form a more empathic view of the gang population. In turn, this newfound empathy can shift policies and practices from punishment and incarceration to prevention and rehabilitation. Also, to address the multifaceted nature of gangs, programs and services can be directed to families, caregivers, and children. This includes providing education and supportive services, and recognizing and reducing violence in the home and community.

246

In addition, the goal will be to improve employment opportunities and skills-training for adults and after-school programs and opportunities for children. Efforts such as these can improve resiliency and reduce vulnerability to gangs. Therapy and counseling services can focus on understanding the internal emotional experiences of those who join gangs, and thereby approach gang members from a strength perspective, working to improve positive qualities in a pro-social setting.

When one understands the dynamics of gang membership and recognizes members’ vulnerability and failed attempts to cope with trauma, violence, and missing self-object functions, one can be more empathic and willing to assist these individuals effectively.

This assistance can reduce the violence, victimization, death, and suffering currently endemic within the gang phenomenon.

247

Appendix A Recruitment Flyer

HAVE YOU EVER BEEN PART OF A GANG? 248

IF SO, YOU MIGHT QUALIFY TO PARTICIPATE IN A RESEARCH STUDY Purpose of this study: This study will explore the experiences of former, inactive gang members with their childhood caregivers.

What you are asked to do: Participate in three 45-60 minute interviews at a safe and confidential location, like a school, local community center, or public library near you.

To participate, you must: For your time participating in this study, you will receive a $15 Visa gift card for each interview.

Benefits of participation: Your participation will contribute to a wider understanding of the importance of childhood relationships between caregivers and other significant adults for gang members. This is an opportunity to talk about your experiences in ways that you haven’t before.

Risks of participation: There are minimal risks in participating in this study. Your participation will be completely confidential. If you wish to talk to a therapist after the interviews, I can refer you to free and low-cost therapy centers.

This research is being conducted by PhD candidate Mahsa Hojat, LCSW, under the direction of Dr. Denise, Duval, Tsioles, PhD at the Institute for Clinical Social Work.

This research study has been approved by the ICSW Institutional Review Board. If you have any questions, you can contact Mahsa Hojat at (310) 701-3713 or mahsahojat57@gmail.com For further information or to volunteer, please contact me at (310) 701-3713 or mahsahojat57@gmail.com.

249

Appendix B Support Letters

250

251

252

253

254

255

Appendix C Initial Phone Interview Script

256

I truly appreciate you contacting me and your interest in the study. My name is Mahsa Hojat, and I am a licensed clinical social worker. I am currently conducting research as part of my doctorate degree in clinical social work. I am interested in hearing your story.

I would like to learn about your experiences as a child and a youth within your family, which adults were / are important to you, and your experiences as part of a gang.

I am looking for people who are willing and able to talk about their feelings and experiences, and who want to share their stories with others who can learn from them.

Everything that you share with me is confidential—unless you share that you plan to hurt yourself or someone else, or that a child or elderly person is in danger, in which case I will have to get you and others help. Other than that, your name and all identifying information, such as your name or your street name, etc. will not be shared, unless you want me to include it in the research report. I will not ask you about the specific gang activity you have participated in, or about any other details around who does what in the gang, or the structure of the gang. We will not talk about anything that makes you uncomfortable.

This is an opportunity for you to talk to me about what you felt, experienced, and went through as a child, and to share that experience with others. By participating, you may help others understand your experiences and the experiences of others like you. Also, our conversations might help people have a better understanding of important social topics for years to come.

I would like to get to know you, to make sure that participating in this research is something you are interested in and that will work well for both of us. We will be conducting three to four interviews (45–60 minutes each), in a private setting, such as room in the library, community center, etc.

You will receive compensation in the amount of a $15 Visa gift card at the end of each interview. You can stop participating in the research anytime you wish. The interviews will be recorded on a digital recorder and will be kept in a confidential location. Your interview recordings and written transcripts will only be shared with my committee chair, committee members, and myself. All digital audio files will be destroyed immediately after completion of the study. The written transcripts will be kept confidential on my password-protected computer for five years following the study. After five years, the transcripts will also be destroyed.

I would like to ask you a few questions to get to know you better and establish your eligibility for the purpose of this study.

Have you ever been a part of a gang? Did you have to go through an initiation process and were you considered a gang member among your peers?

Were you part of a gang for more than one year?

257

Are you currently active in the gang and gang lifestyle?

Have you been hospitalized in the last six months due to psychiatric reasons?

Will you commit to attend the interviews in a sober state?

Thank you so much for taking the time to speak with me, and for your interest in the study. I will consult with my dissertation committee chair (my professor) and will get back to you if I am able to continue with the interviews with you. If so, in the next few days, I will contact you to set up a time and place to meet for our first interview. We will go over the consent form and I will explain it clearly. If you wish to participate, I will ask you to sign the consent form. You can ask me any questions you have about the consent form, the study process, and your involvement in the study at that time. Do you have any questions or concerns about what I’ve shared with you so far?

258

Appendix D Consent Forms

259

Institute for Clinical Social Work Research Information and Consent for Participation in Social Behavioral Research FORMER GANG MEMBERS’ EXPERIENCE OF CHILDHOOD CARE AND ITS IMPACT ON GANG INVOLVEMENT I, , acting for myself, agree to take part in the research entitled: Former Gang Members’ Experience Of Childhood Care And Its Impact On Gang Involvement This work will be carried out by Mahsa Hojat, LCSW, under the supervision of Dr. Denise Tsioles.

This work is conducted under the auspices of the Institute for Clinical Social Work; At Robert Morris Center, 401 South State Street; Suite 822, Chicago, IL 60605; (312) 935-4232.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to gain an in-depth understanding of the experience of the former gang members with family of origin, caregivers, and significant adults in their lives. Through such understanding, I hope to understand your emotional dynamics, feelings, and thoughts, advantages and disadvantages, and what you felt was present and was missing in relation to significant adults in your life. Also, with understanding your childhood experiences and your decision to join the gang, I hope to understand your reasons to joining the gang and what could have prevented your decision to join the gang if any. The results of this study will allow others to understand your childhood history, story, and felt experiences and provide knowledge and tools for professionals, community workers and policy makers who work with or affect the gang population and others in the community.

Procedures used in the study and duration The research study will include an initial phone interview to assess your appropriateness and willingness to join the study. You will then be interviewed 3 or 4 times for a period of 45-60 minutes each in a community location where both you and I agree upon. You will receive a $15 Visa Gift Card upon completion of each interview.

Benefits The benefits of this study includes offering you a chance to express yourself and share your story in a way that you may have not before. In sharing your story, you will be able to reflect back on your life experiences in a safe environment. In addition, you have a chance to be heard and understood by me, which can be beneficial to a person. The outcome of the study will provide an understanding of your childhood experiences, your needs, and wants and how we as professional can help remedy some of the difficulties, provide opportunities, and increase our understanding of the people we work with.

260

Costs Participation in the research study may cause you a small cost as you may travel to a community location (not the home or office of the person referred you to me) agreed upon by you and me. And you will receive a small gift, $15 Visa gift card per interview to compensate you for your time and travel.

Possible Risks and/or Side Effects There is a chance that you may feel upset by sharing your stories in which case, I will talk with you about the ability to continue with the interview or the research, and the need for referrals to outside agencies for further treatment. Also, there may be former gang members who may be unhappy that you shared your story with me and your participation in the story may affect your status and your trustworthiness among other former gang members.

Privacy and Confidentiality Your privacy and confidentiality will be safeguard by using a numerical identification code to keep confidentiality. The person who told you about my study will not be aware of your participation in the study or any information you share with me. After completing the survey, I will place the survey in a locked brief case until after the interview. Upon arriving at home, I will scan the surveys into a password protected folder in a password protected computer and will place the computer in my home office that can be locked in Cypress, CA 90630. Immediately after scanning the surveys, I will shred the hard copy. Your voice recordings and transcripts will be kept in a passwordprotected file, on a password-protected computer in my home office. If I utilize transcription service, the transcriptionist will sign an agreement of confidentiality, assuring that your information is protected.

In addition, everything you share with me will stay with me and my research committee unless you let me know that you plan to hurt or kill yourself, hurt or kill someone else or a child or older adult is in danger of harm, I will have to report it to get you or other help. This may mean I have to contact any of the following agencies based on the situation: Police, Department of Mental Health Psychiatric Mobil Response Team, Department of Children and Family Services, or Adult Protective Services. This is because I am a mandated reporter and by law I have to report if I become aware of any of the above situations.

Subject Assurances By signing this consent form, I agree to take part in this study. I have not given up any of my rights or released this institution from responsibility for carelessness.

I may cancel my consent and refuse to continue in this study at any time without

261

penalty or loss of benefits. My relationship with the staff of the ICSW will not be affected in any way, now or in the future, if I refuse to take part, or if I begin the study and then withdraw.

If I have any questions about the research methods, I can contact Mahsa Hojat, LCSW or Dr. Denise Tsioles at this phone number 310-701-3713/ (312) 935-4232 or (day), 310-701-3713/ (evening).

If I have any questions about my rights as a research subject, I may contact Dr. John Ridings, Chair of Institutional Review Board; ICSW; At Robert Morris Center, 401 South State Street; Suite 822, Chicago, IL 60605; (312) 935-4232.

Signatures I have read this consent form and I agree to take part in this study as it is explained in this consent form.

Signature of Participant

Date

I certify that I have explained the research to and believe that he understands and that he has agreed to participate freely. I agree to answer any additional questions when they arise during the research or afterward.

Signature of Researcher Revised 1 Feb 2014

Date

262

Confidentiality Agreement with Transcriptionist

I, ______________________________ transcriptionist, agree to maintain full confidentiality in regards to any and all audio files and documentations received from Mahsa Hojat, LCSW, PhD Candidate at ICSW, related to a research study titled “Former Gang Members’ Experience of Childhood Care and Its Impact on Gang Involvement.�

Furthermore, I agree: 1. To hold in strictest confidence the identification of any individual who may be inadvertently revealed during the transcription of voice-recorded interviews, or in any associated documents.

2. To not make copies of any audio files or computerized titles of the transcribed interview texts, unless specifically requested to do so by the researcher, Mahsa Hojat.

3. To store all study-related audio files and materials in a safe, secure location as long as they are in my possession.

4. To return all audio files and study-related materials to Mahsa Hojat in a complete and timely manner.

5. To delete all electronic files containing study-related documents from my computer hard drive and any back-up devices.

I am aware that I can be held legally responsible for any breach of this confidentiality agreement, and for any harm incurred by individuals if I disclose identifiable information contained in the audio files and / or files to which I will have access.

263

Transcriber’s name (printed) ______________________________________________________ Transcriber's signature ______________________________________________________ Date:__________________________________________________

264

Appendix E Mental Health Resources

265

266

267

Appendix F Establishing Participant Understanding Of Consent Form

268

Thank you for expressing your interest in participating in my research study. Today, we will go over the consent form and what you can expect from this research and from me.

Then I will ask you to complete the demographic survey and we will start the interview.

Do you have any questions for me? Would you like me to read the consent form with you or would you like to read it alone?

After reading the consent form, I will ask, “Do you have any questions? Will you please tell me what you understood from this consent form? The goal of these questions is to make sure all information is clear. Is it clear that the information you provide to me is confidential and will stay with me, and that your name and identifying information will be kept separate from the information you provided me? Also, is it clear that you can stop the interview or the research participation at any point if you wish to do so? At any point, if you feel emotional distress, please let me know and I will help you feel more stable. I can also refer you to appropriate treatment centers if needed. Do you have any questions about what I have shared with you so far?”

Just to review: 1. What is your understanding of what will happen if you agree to participate in my study? How many times will we meet? For how long?

2. How will this research help you?

3. Can participating in this research not help you or even harm you? What can you and I do to help you if it becomes uncomfortable?

4. Do you feel that you have a choice whether to participate or not?

5. Can you stop participating in an interview or the research overall? How can you do that?

6. Will you get compensated for the time you have spent in the study even if you don’t complete all interviews?

269

Appendix G Demographic Survey

270

Please answer the following questions to the best of your ability. Your information will be kept confidential and will not be shared or disclosed without your permission. The purpose of gathering this data is to better understand your demographic background.

ID NUMBER: ________________________________________________________________________ AGE: ________________________________________________________________________ RACE: ________________________________________________________________________ TIME IN THE GANG: How long would you say you were / have been actively a part of gang? ________________________________________________________________________ How long have you been out or inactive? ________________________________________________________________________ Are there or were there any family members who were involved in the gang? If yes, how many? ________________________________________________________________________ Are they still a part of the gang, the same gang? How long were they a part of the gang? ________________________________________________________________________ Were they the ones who helped you get into it? ________________________________________________________________________

271

HISTORY OF CHRONIC HEALTH PROBLEMS OR DISABILITY WITH CAREGIVER OR SIBLINGS: Is there a history of mental illness in the family? If yes, will you please elaborate? ________________________________________________________________________ HISTORY OF SUBSTANCE ABUSE IN THE FAMILY: Is there a history of substance abuse in the family? If yes, will you please elaborate? ________________________________________________________________________

272

Appendix H Interview Questions

273

FAMILY COMPOSITION, DYNAMICS, AND RELATIONSHIP WITH ADULTS Primary Question: please tell me what life was like for you as a child and tell me what you remember about growing up as a child. Tell me about your relationships with different family members and any other important grown ups when you were growing up.

Sub-questions: (To be used to deepen the conversation and elicit more detailed information following the response to the primary question): Who do you consider to be your family?

Who raised you? If different people took care of you at different times, do you remember how old you were when it happened? Tell me about why they were taking care of you.

Who did you grow up with, such as brothers and sisters, cousins, who did you spend most of your time with?

Who else do you consider the family?

Family dynamics: Tell me about the relationships between family members as you were growing up.

Who did you most trust in your family?

Who did you feel safe with in your family?

Who were you afraid of or didn’t trust in your family?

In your family, who made you feel better when you were sick, scared, or upset ?

In your family, what would happen when you got in trouble? How did that person respond?

In your family, what were the consequences when you got into trouble?

274

In your family, who made you feel special and important and encouraged you to do things. How did they do it?

In your family, do you remember a time when you were really proud of yourself?

How did people respond?

What kind of things did your family say to you about what they imagined for your future and your goals?

Tell me about your family's values and beliefs.

What is your happiest memory of your family?

What is your worst memory of your family?

How did your family deal with disagreements?

What were your caregivers doing to take care of the family, for example, were they working, were they a part of the gang, were they at home raising the kids.

Was anybody using drugs or involved in the gangs themselves or doing anything illegal?

Relationship with other adults: What were your relationships with other adults like in your childhood?

What was most significant relationship (good or bad) in your childhood?

Was there anyone that was very important to you? Who was that, and why was that person so important?

How did you meet them?

How did they become a part of your life?

What did they tell you or talk to you about?

275

What did they do when you were successful?

What did they do when you were in trouble?

Did they care about you? If so, how did they show it?

What was the best memory you have of that relationship?

What is the worst memory you have of that relationship?

JOINING THE GANG Primary Questions: Tell me how you decided to join the gang: What were your reasons to join? What were you hoping to gain or avoid by joining? Was your experience different after you joined? What did you learn, gain, and lose as a result of joining? What is your relationship with the gang like now?

Sub-questions: (To be used to deepen the conversation and elicit more detailed information following the response to the primary questions) Experience with the gang: Why did you join the gang?

What were you hoping to get out of the gang?

What was your experience like being in the gang? Did you get what you hoped?

What was the cost of getting that?

Why did you leave the gang?

Have you learned any skills in the gang that you could use throughout your life outside of the gang?

276

References Albert, D. F. (2007). Embraced by Hope: The resilience of former Latino gang members (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Gonzaga University, Spokane, WA. Allen, D. (2013). Walk on the wild side; Gang members need help too. Mental Health Practice, 16(9), 6-7.

Alleyne, E., & Wood, J. L. (2010). Gang involvement: Psychological and behavioral characteristics of gang members, peripheral youth, and nongang youth.

Aggressive Behavior, 36, 423-436.

Alleyne, E., & Wood, J. L. (2014). Gang involvement: Social and environmental factors.

Crime and Delinquency, 60(4), 547-568.

Anderson, J. (2003). The mythic significance of risk-taking, dangerous behavior. Journal of Child Psychotherapy, 29, 75-91.

Bandura, A. (2002). Selective moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency.

Journal of Moral Education, 31, 101-119.

Beare, M. E., & Hogg, C. (2013, July 2013). Listening in ...to gang culture. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 55(3), 421-452. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/cjccj.2011-E-29 Belitz, J., & Valdez, D. M. (1994). Clinical issues in the treatment of Chicano male gang youth. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 16, 57-74.

277

Bendixen, M., Endersen, I. M., & Olweus, D. (2006). Joining and leaving gangs: Selection and facilitation effects on self-reported antisocial behavior in early adolescence. European Journal of Criminology, 3, 85-114.

Bernabeu, E. P. (1958). Underlying ego mechanisms in delinquency. The Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 27, 383-396.

Bilmes, M. (1967). Shame and delinquency. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 3, 113-133.

Brown, G. C., Vigil, J. D., & Taylor, E. R. (2012, 1 April 2012). The ghettoization of Blacks in Los Angeles: The emergency of street gangs. Journal of African American Studies, 209-225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12111-012-9212-7 Brown, J. A. (2012). Does affirming the self decreases the desire to join a Gang?

(Masters thesis, University of Waterloo). Retrieved from http://uwspace.uwaterloo.ca/bitstream/10012/6734/1/Brown_James.pdf/ Brownfield, D., Thompson, K. M., & Sorenson, A. M. (1997). Correlates of gang membership: A test of strain, social learning and social control theories. Journal of Gang Research, 4(4), 11-22.

Burns, E. (2003). Gang- and drug-related homicide: Baltimore’s successful enforcement strategy. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/html/bja/gang/pfv.html Canham, H. (2002). Group and gang states of mind. Journal of Child Psychotherapy, 28, 113-127.

Carlie, M. K. (2002). Into the abyss: A personal journey into the world of street gangs.

Retrieved from http://faculty.missouristate.edu/m/MichaelCarlie/site_map.htm

278

Child maltreatment: Definition. (2012). In Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/childmaltreatment/definitions.html Cloward, R., & Ohlin, L. (1960). Delinquency and opportunity. New York, NY: Free Press.

Cohen, A. K. (1955). Delinquent boys: The culture of the gang. . Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.

Craig, W. M., Gagnon, C., & Tremblay, R. E. (2002). The road to gang membership: Characteristics of male gang and nongang members ages 10 to 14. Social Development, 11(1), 53-68.

Cregeen, S. (2008). Workers, groups, gangs: Consultation to residential adolescent teams.

Journal of Child Psychotherapy, 34, 172-189.

Cullerton-Sen, C. C., Cassidy, A. R., Murray-Close, D., Cicchetti, D., & Crick, N. R. (2008). Childhood maltreatment and the development of relational and physical aggression: The importance of a gender-informed approach. Child Development, 79, 1736-1751.

Curotto, N. (1998). Understanding gang-involved adolescent males’ perception of social support (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Chicago School of Professional Psychology, Chicago, IL. Decker, S. H., & Curry, G. D. (2002). Gangs, gang members and gang homicides: Organized crimes or disorganized criminals. Journal of Criminal Justice, 30, 343352.

279

Decker, S. H., & Winkle, B. V. (1996). Life in the gang: Family, friends, and violence.

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Dukes, R. L., Martinez, R. O., & Stein, J. A. (1997). Precursors of membership into youth gangs. Youth and Society, 29, 139-165.

Dupere, V., Lacourse, E., Williams, J. D., Vitaro, F., & Tremblay, R. E. (2007).

Affiliation to youth gangs during adolescence: The interaction between childhood psychopathic tendencies and neighborhood disadvantage. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 35, 1035-1045.

Egley, A., Howell, J. C., & Moore, J. P. (2010, March). OJJDP fact sheet: Highlights of the 2008 national youth gang survey. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Egley Jr, A., & Howell, J. C. (2012). Highlights of the 2010 National Youth Gang Survey [Fact sheet]. Retrieved from Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention : http://www.ojjdp.gov/pubs/237542.pdf Egley Jr., A., & Howell, J. C. (2013). Highlights of the 2011 national youth gang survey [Fact sheet]. Retrieved from http://www.ojjdp.gov/pubs/242884.pdf Eitle, D., Gunkel, S., & Van Gundy, K. (2004). Cumulative exposure to stressful life events and male gang membership. Journal of Criminal Justice, 32, 95-111.

Esbensen, F. A., & Weerman, F. M. (2005). Youth gangs and troublesome youth groups in the United States and Netherlands: A cross-national comparison. European Journal of Criminology, 2, 5-37.

280

Fleisher, M. S. (1998). Dead end kids: Gang girls and the boys they know. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

Galatzer-Levy, R. M., & Gohler, B. J. (1990). Chapter 8: The self-objects of second half of life: An introduction. Progress in self psychology, 6, 93-109.

Gang activity and the falling crime rate. (2012, May 07). National Gang Center Quarterly Newsletter. Retrieved from http://www.corrections.com/news/article/30758-gang-activity-and-the-fallingcrime-rate Getsinger, L., & Popkin, S. J. (2010). Reaching next generation: The crisis for CHA’s youth [Issue Brief]. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

Gilbertson, D. L. (2009). Are gangs a social problem? Journal of Gang Research, 16(2), 1-25.

Gilman, A. B., Hill, K. G., Hawkins, J. D., Howell, J. C., & Kosterman, R. (2014). The development of dynamics of joining a gang in adolescence: Patterns and predictors’ of gang membership. Research on Adolescence, 24(2), 204-219.

Goldberg, A. (2002). Chapter 1 self psychology since Kohut. Progress in Self Psychology, 18, 1-13.

Goldman, L., Giles, H., & Hogg, M. A. (2014). Going to extremes: Social identity and communications processes associated with gang membership. Group Processes & intergroup Relations, 17(6), 813-832.

281

Goodwill, A. O. (2009). In and out of aboriginal gang life: Perspectives of aboriginal exgang members (Doctoral dissertation, The University of British Columbia).

Retrieved from http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/thesescanada/vol1/BVAU/TC-BVAU11076.pdf Gordon, J. (2009). Young people in crisis: The need for secure relationships in the family and in society. Attachment: New Directions in Psychotherapy and Relational Psychoanalysis Journal, 3, 38-52.

Gordon, R. (2000). Criminal business organization, street gangs, and ’wanna-be’ groups: A Vancouver perspective. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 42(1), 39-60.

Gorman-Smith, D., Tolan, P. H., & Henry, B. (2000). A developmental-Ecological model of the relation of family functioning to patterns of delinquency. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 16(2), 169-198.

Grekul, J., & LaBoucane-Benson, P. (2008). Aboriginal gangs and their (dis)placement: Contextualizing recruitment, membership, and status. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 59-82.

Hagedom, J. (1988). People and folks. In Gangs, crime, and the underclass in a rust belt city. Chicago: Lake View Press.

Harris, M. (1988). Cholas: Latino girls and gangs. New York, NY: AMS Press.

Heck, C., & Walsh, A. (2000). The effects of maltreatment and family structure on minor and serious delinquency. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 44, 178-193.

282

Herzog, J. M. (1943). Father hunger and children’s dreams. In Father hunger: Explorations with adults and children (pp. 20-35). http://dx.doi.org/https://books.google.com/books Hill, K. G., Howell, J. C., Hawkins, J. D., & Battin-Pearson, S. R. (August 1999).

Childhood risk factors for adolescent gang membership: Results from the Seattle social development project. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36(3), 300-322.

Hindle, D. (1998). Loss and delinquency: Two adolescents’ experience of prison as an external container of psychic pain. Journal of Child Psychotherapy, 24, 37-60.

Horne, A. (2004). ’Gonnae No’ Dae That’ the internal and external worlds of the delinquent adolescent. Journal of Child Psychotherapy, 30, 330-346.

Horowitz, R. (1983). Honor and the American dream: Culture and identity in a Chicano community. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Howell, J. C. (1998, august). Youth Gangs: An overview [Juvenile Justice Bulletin].

Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Department of Justice.

Howell, J. C., Egley Jr, A., & Gleason, D. K. (2002, June). Modern-day youth gangs.

Juvenile Justice Bulletin, 1-11.

Hyatt-Williams, A. (1998). Cruelty, violence, and murder: Understanding the criminal mind. London: Karnac Books.

Jenson, J. M., & Howard, M. O. (1998). Correlates of gang involvement among juvenile probationers. Journal of Gang Research, 5(2), 7-15.

283

Joe, K., & Chesney-Lind, M. (1995). Just every mother’s angel: An analysis of gender and ethnic variation in youth gang membership. Gender and Society, 9, 408-431.

Joe-Laidler, K., & Hunt, G. (1997). Violence and social organization in female gangs.

Social Justice, 24(4), 148-169.

Kallus, L. (2004). Because no one ever asked: Understanding youth gangs as a primary step in violence prevention. In E. R. Gerler (Ed.), Handbook of school violence (pp. 215-236). New York, NY: Haworth Press.

Keenan, K., Loeber, R., Zhang, Q., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., & Farrington, D. P. (1995).

Boys who join gangs: A prospective study of predictors of first gang entry.

Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 27, 261-276.

Kelley, B. T., Thornberry, T. P., & Smith, C. A. (1997). In the wake of childhood maltreatment. OJJDP Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice.

Klein, M. W. (1995). The American street gang. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Klemp-North, M. (2007). Theoretical foundations of gang membership. Journal of Gang Research, 14, 11-26.

Kohut, H., & Wolf, E. S. (1978). The disorders of the self and their treatment: An outline.

International Journal of psycho-Analysis, 59, 413-426.

Lacourse, E., Nagin, D. S., Vitaro, F., Cote, S., Arseneault, L., & Tremblay, R. E. (2006).

Prediction of early-onset deviant peer group affiliation: A 12 year longitudinal

284

study. Archives of General Psychiatry, 63, 562-568. Retrieved from www.archgenpsychiatry.com Lane, J., & Meeker, J. W. (2004). Social disorganization perceptions, fear of gang crime, and behavioral precautions among Whites, Latinos, and Vietnamese. Journal of Criminal Justice, 32, 49-62.

Lefer, L. (1984). The fine edge of violence. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis and Dynamic Psychiatry, 12, 253-268.

Lloyd-Jones, G. (2003, June 1). Design and control issues in qualitative case study research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(2), 1-19.

Lurigio, A. J., Flexon, J. L., & Greenleaf, R. G. (2008). Antecedents to gang membership: attachments, beliefs, and street encounters with police. Journal of Gang Research, 4, 15-33.

Lynam, D. R., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., Wikstrom, P. O., Loeber, R., & Novak, S. (2000). The interaction between impulsivity and neighborhood context on offending: the effects of impulsivity are stronger in poor neighborhoods. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 109, 563-574.

Lyon, J., Henggeler, S., & Hall, J. A. (1992). The family relations, peer relations, and criminal activities of Caucasian and Hispanic-American gang members. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 20, 439-449.

Maclure, R., & Sotelo, M. (2004). Youth gangs in Nicaragua: Gang membership as structured individualization. Journal of Youth Studies, 7, 417-432.

285

Maxson, C. L., Whitlock, M. L., & Klein, M. W. (1998). Vulnerability to street gang membership: Implications for practice. Social Service Review, 72, 70-91.

McDaniel, D. D. (2012, January 11). Risk and protective factors associated with gang affiliation among high-risk youth: A public health approach. Injury Prevention. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/injuryprev-2011-040083 Miller, J., & Decker, S. (2001). Young women and gang violence: Gender, street offending, and violent victimization in gangs. Justice Quarterly, 18, 115-140.

Moore, J. (1991). Going down to the barrio: Homeboys and homegirls in change.

Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Morris, E. J. (2012). Respect, protection, faith, and love: Major care constructs identified within the subculture of selected urban African American adolescent gang members. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 23(3), 262-269.

Mosby, E. (2009). Family Dynamics. In Moby’s Medical Dictionary (8th ed.). Retrieved from http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/family+dynamics Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Nakhid, C. (2009). The meaning of family and home for young Pacifica people involved in gangs in the suburbs of South Auckland. Social Policy Journal of New Zealand, 35, 112-128.

National Criminal Justice Reference Services. (2011). In the spotlight: Gangs [Summary]. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/spotlight/gangs/summary.html

286

National Gang Center. (2013). Brief review of federal and state definition of the terms “gang,” “gang crime,” and “gang member”. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

National Gang Intelligence Center. (2011). 2011 National gang threat assessment emerging trends [Report]. Retrieved from The Federal Bureau of Investigation: http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/2011-national-gang-threatassessment National Youth Gang Survey Analysis [Annual report]. (2012). Retrieved from National Gang Center: http://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/Survey-Analysis National gang center analysis: Demographics [Fact Sheet]. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/survey-analysis/demographics National gang threat assessment: Emerging trends [Report]. (2011). Retrieved from The Federal Bureau of Investigation: http://www.fbi.gov/statsservices/publications/2011-national-gang-threat-assessment National youth gang survey analysis [Fact Sheet]. (2014). Retrieved from http://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/survey-analysis O’Brien, K., Daffern, M., Chu, C. M., & Thomas, S. D. (2013). Youth gang affiliation, violence, and criminal activities: A review of motivational, risk, and protective factors. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 18, 417-425.

Omizo, M. M., Omizo, S. A., & Honda, M. R. (1997). A phenomenological study with youth gang members: Results and implications for school counselors. .

Professional School Counseling, 1(1), 39-42.

287

Padilla, F. M. (1992). The gang as an American enterprise. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Pfeiffer, C., Wetzels, P., & Enzmann, D. (1999). Innerfamiliar Gewalt gegen Kinder und jugendliche und ihre Auswirkungen [Consequences of interfamilial violence against children and juveniles]. Forschungsberichte, 80.

Placencio, A. P. (2009). Loss among former gang members: A risk factor for gang membership (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Raine, A., Brennan, P., & Mednick, S. A. (1994). Birth complications combined with early maternal rejection at age 1 predisposes to violent crime at age 18 years.

Archives of General Psychiatry, 1994, 984-988.

Rees, T. A. (1996). Joining the gang: A look at youth recruitment. Journal of Gang Research, 4(1), 19-25.

Reiboldt, W. (2001, March 1). Adolescent interaction with gangs, family, and neighborhoods: An ethnographic investigation. Journal of Family Issues, 22(2), 211-242.

Resnick, M. D. (2000). Protective factors, resiliency, and healthy youth development.

Adolescent Medicine: State of the Arts Reviews, 11, No 1, 157-164.

Robertson, H. J. (2008). Youth gangs: Lived experiences in an emergent area (Doctoral dissertation, North Carolina State University). Retrieved from http://repository.lib.ncsu.edu/ir/bitstream/1840.16/3514/1/etd.pdf

288

Ruble, N. M., & Turner, W. L. (2000). A systemic analysis of the dynamics and organization of urban street gangs. American Journal of Family Therapy, 28(2), 117-132.

Ryan, L. G., Miller-Loessi, K., & Nieri, T. (2007). Relationships with adults as predictors of substance use, gang involvement, and threats to safety among disadvantaged urban high-school adolescents. Journal of Community Psychology, 35(8), 10531071.

Sander, J. B., Sharkey, J. D., Olivarri, R., Tanigawa, D., & Mauseth, T. (2010). A qualitative study of juvenile offenders, student engagement and interpersonal relationships: Implications for research directions and preventionist approaches. .

Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 20(4), 1-28.

Sauma, J. (2008). Street encounters: Betrayal and belonging in youth gangs. Public Policy Research, 32-35.

Shakur, S. (1993). Juvenile Tank. In Monster: The autobiography of an L.A. gang member. (pp. 161-200). New York, NY: Grove Press.

Sharkey, J. D., Shekhtmeyster, Z., Chavez-Lopez, L., Norris, E., & Sass, L. (2011). The protective influence of gangs: Can schools compensate? Aggression and Violent Behavior, 16, 45-54.

Shelden, R. G., Tracy, S. K., & Brown, W. B. (2000). Youth gangs in American society.

Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Shonkoff, J. P. (2010). Building a new biodevelopmental framework to guide the future of early childhood policy. Child Development, 81(1), 357-367.

289

Shonkoff, J. P., Garner, A. S., Siegel, B. S., Dobbins, M. I., Earls, M. F., McGuinn, L., Wood, D. L. (2012, January 1, 2012). The lifelong effects of early childhood adversity and toxic stress. Pediatrics, 129, e232-e246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.2011-2663 Siegel, D. J. (2012). Mind, brain, and relationships: The interpersonal neurobiolgy perspective. In The developing mind: How relationships and the brain interact to shape who we are (2nd ed., pp. 1-45). http://dx.doi.org/ www.guilford.com/p/siegel Sirpal, S. K. (2002). Familial criminality, familial drug use, and gang membership: Youth criminality, drug use, and gang membership—what are the connections? Journal of Gang Research, 9, 11-22.

Smaller, M. D. (2012). Psychoanalysis and forward edge hit the streets: The analytic service to adolescent programs (ASAP). Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 32, 136-146.

Smith, C., & Thornberry, T. P. (1995). The relationship between childhood maltreatment and adolescent involvement in delinquency. Criminology, 33, 451-479. Retrieved from Spergel, I. A. (1995). The youth gang problem: A community approach. New York, NY: Oxford University.

Stretesky, P. B., & Pogrebin, M. R. (2007). Gang-related gun violence: Socialization, identity, and self. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 36(1), 85-114.

290

Tapia, H. A., Kinnier, R. T., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2009, October 2009). A comparison between Mexican American youth who are in gangs and those who are not.

Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 37, 229-239.

Thompson, K. M., & Braaten-Antrim, R. (1998). Youth maltreatment and gang involvement. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13(3), 328-345.

Thornberry, T. P. (1998). Membership in youth gangs and involvement in serious and violent offending. In R. Loeber, & D. P. Farrington, Serious and violent offenders: Risk factors and successful interventions. (pp. 147-166). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Thornberry, T. P., Krohn, M. D., Lizotte, A. J., Smith, C., & Tobin, K. (2003). Gangs and delinquency in developmental perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tolleson, J. A. (1996). The transformational power of violence: The psychological role of gang life in relation to chronic traumatic childhood stress in the lives of urban adolescent males (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://archive.icsw.edu/_dissertations/tolleson_1996.pdf Tolpin, M. (1978). Self-objects and oedipal objects- A crucial developmental distinction.

Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 33, 167-185.

Tolpin, M. (2002). Chapter 11 doing psychoanalysis of normal development: Forward edge of transferences. Progress in self-psychology, 18, 167-190.

Venkatesh, S. A., & Levitt, S. D. (2000). Are we a family or business? History and disjuncture in the urban American street gang. Theory and Society, 29, 427-462.

291

Vigil, J. D. (1988). Barrio gangs: Street life and identity in Southern California. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Walker-Barnes, C. J., & Mason, C. A. (2001). Ethnic differences in the effect of parenting on gang involvement and gang delinquency: A longitudinal, hierarchical linear modeling perspective. Child Development, 72(6), 1814-1831.

Walker-Barnes, C. J., & Mason, C. A. (2001). Perceptions of risk factors for female gang involvement among African-American and Hispanic women. Youth and Society , 32(3), 303-336.

Webster, C., MacDonald, R., & Simpson, M. (2006). Predicting Criminality? Risk factors, neighborhood influences, and desistance. Youth Justice, 6, 7-22.

Werner, E., & Smith, R. (1992). Overcoming the odd: High risk children from birth to adulthood. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

White, R., & Mason, R. (2006). Youth gangs and youth violence: Charting the key dimensions. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 3(1), 5470.

Widom, C. S. (1989). Child abuse, neglect and violent criminal behavior. Criminology, 27, 251-271.

Widom, C. S. (1992). The cycle of violence (Research in Brief). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.

Winfree Jr., L. T., Bernat, F. P., & Esbensen, F. (2001). Hispanic and Anglo gang membership in two southwestern cities. The Social Science Journal, 38, 105-117.

292

Wood, J., & Alleyne, E. (2010). Street gang theory and research: Where are we now and where do we go from here? Aggression and Violent Behavior, 15(2), 100-111.