Estilos parentais no microssistema familiar de adolescentes com e sem histórico de ato infracional

Abstract

Adolescence is a period marked by numerous changes, however this phase can vary depending on individual, contextual and relational aspects in their life trajectories. Studies with adolescents who have committed criminal acts aim to investigate the risk and protective factors found in this microsystem, which influence the changes expected in this developmental phase. This study aimed to compare the parenting styles reported in the family microsystem of two groups of adolescents with and without a history of criminal acts. To this end, 82 male adolescents participated in the research, the first group consisting of 47 who were serving socio-educational measures (G1) and the second of 35 without a history of criminal acts (G2). The information was obtained through a Biopsychosocial Characterization Form, Semi-Structured Interviews and the Parenting Styles Inventory - IEP. A quantitative and qualitative approach was used to analyze the data, using IBM SPSS Statistics 20 for quantitative data and Iramuteq software for qualitative data. The results were analyzed in three different ways: first, through a quantitative approach, which included the characteristics of the participants, family composition, and associations between personal and family characteristics belonging to each group of adolescents. Secondly, we performed a quantitative analysis of parenting styles, presenting the percentages distributed between G1 and G2, associating them with the parental figure and significantly related practices. Finally, a mixed analysis included excerpts from the interviews, especially about the family microsystem of 11 adolescents from G1, with the aim of establishing a hierarchical order among the representative classes obtained. The adolescents had an average age of 15.71 years (SD=1.557), had incomplete elementary education (65.9%) and did not drop out of school (52.9%), lived/lived with their mother (70.6%) and with siblings (57.6%), and had their father's name registered (74.1%). The prominent characteristics in G1 were low education and school dropout (p<0.01), having children, living with other people, and not having paternal registration. The groups received Risky Parenting Style (50.6%) and the maternal figure (64.7%) when answering the IEP. The educational practices Positive Monitoring and Moral Behavior reached G2 (p<0.02), while Negative Monitoring and Physical Abuse reached G1 (p<0.01). Regarding the perception of the family microsystem, adolescents showed similarities when relating to violent interactions with family members (27.23%) and the father figure as an authority (22.98%) and the mother figure as an affective figure (25.11%). The results share differences, both in the family microsystem of adolescents and in the educational practices adopted by their parents, depending on whether or not they were involved in the crime, demonstrating that it is a relevant variable in elucidating the delinquent behavior in adolescents. However, the risky parenting style presented in G2 points to other factors that can act as protective in this group. We suggest studies involving the mesosystem of these adolescents (family-school) and specific investigations into their experiences of parenthood in conflict with the law, whether in relation to the parental figure of this adolescent or when he becomes a father, in order to verify other variations that can outline the form and direction of the development processes of these adolescents.