Šeimos ir mokyklos įtaka nuteistųjų iki gyvos galvos už nužudymus asmenų nusikalstamo elgesio formavimuisi

LTStraipsnyje analizuojama nuteistųjų iki gyvos galvos už nužudymus asmenų gyvenimo sąlygų reikšmė jų nusikalstamam elgesiui. Nagrinėjamos šių asmenų gyvenimo sąlygos šeimoje ir mokykloje, šių socializacijos institutų reikšmė asmenybės formavimuisi. Aptariami praeities įvykiai, asmenybės postūmiai, krizės, kurie galbūt lėmė individo nusikalstamą elgesį – asmenys, padarę žmogžudystes, už kurias buvo nubausti iki gyvos galvos. Tyrimui naudotų klausimynų tinkamumas buvo vertinamas taikant Cronbach alfa kriterijų. Nuteistųjų iki gyvos galvos už nužudymus asmenų grupė lyginama su kontroline nuteistųjų už vagystes asmenų grupe. Skirtumų patikimumui įvertinti taikomas χ2 kriterijus. Tyrimų duomenys apdoroti statistine programa SPSS 13.0. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Nuteistieji už nužudymus iki gyvos galvos; Gyvenimo sąlygos šeimoje; Gyvenimo sąlygos mokykloje; Sentenced to life imprisonment for murder; Family living conditions; School living conditions.

ENThis article analyses the significance of living conditions of individuals sentenced to life for murder for their criminal behaviour. Living conditions of these individuals in family and at school as well as significance of these socialization institutions for personality formation are examined in this article. Also, past events, personality stimuli and crises that possibly determined criminal behaviour of an individual – persons committed murders for which have been sentenced to life – are discussed in this work. Cronbach’s alpha was applied to assess suitability of questionnaires used for the study. The group of individuals sentenced to life for murder was compared with the control group of individuals sentenced for thefts. The χ2 criterion was used to assess reliability of differences. In the opinion of individuals sentenced to life for murders, their living and personality formation conditions were not favourable in the family. The vast majority of sentenced to life for murder think that their parents did not care of them. Sentenced to life for murders 8 times more often do not agree with the statement that their parents paid some care of them, if to compare to individuals sentenced for thefts. Sentenced to life for murders 10 times more often thought that their parents were bad in respect to them, if to compare to individuals sentenced for thefts. Parents of sentenced to life for murder regularly used alcohol and in turn their children get used to alcohol usage.This process confirms the social learning theory and alcohol intoxication influenced the commitment of the murder. A 52.3 per cent of the sentenced to life for murder experienced violence from their parents (they were beaten, other corporal punishments were used). Individuals sentenced to life for murder 4.3 times more often experienced violence, if compared to individuals sentenced for thefts. Sentenced to life for murders did not get positive incentives from their parents for their good behaviour, 9.8 time more often ran from their homes in childhood and adolescence and did not feel secure about their future, if to compare to individuals sentenced for thefts. In the opinion of individuals sentenced to life for murders, their personality formation conditions were not favourable at school. These persons came non-prepared to school from their families. The individuals sentenced to life for murder do not remember schoolmates, had communication problems at school and did not have positive social support of their teachers. Sentenced to life for murder 4.3 times more often felt nervous communicating with their teachers, 3.8 times more did not try to study at school, 5 times more often used violence against others and 9.4 times more often themselves experienced violence at school, if to compare to the individuals sentenced for thefts. Such a negative experience in family and at school influenced a personality and criminal behaviour of sentenced to life for murder. [From the publication]