Intergenerational Conflict Among Immigrant Families and Youth Crime

Introduction: Becoming American Across Generations

Becoming American means something fundamentally different for immigrant parents than it does for the second generation. For first-generation families, the transition involves leaving a native place behind and integrating into an entirely new one. They carry memories of their home country — its customs, language, and way of life. Second-generation families, by contrast, have no such reference point. They have never lived anywhere else. To them, America is their native country.

Second-generation children may still be surrounded by first-generation family members who remember arriving in America and who speak of the old country and its traditions — but they identify primarily as American, far more so than those who came to this country after spending formative years elsewhere. The transition for immigrant parents is therefore far more dramatic and emotionally complex. This paper discusses what this distinction means for immigrant families and why the experience differs so significantly between first-generation parents and their American-raised children.

As Vallejo notes, the immigrant family cannot be understood through a single lens — there is no one definition that captures all immigrant families. Some are able to incorporate into the American experience more smoothly than others. The degree of integration depends greatly on the community into which a family moves, the work the family does, the connections it makes, and the social or civic activity it undertakes. For some families, the most significant factor is education.

Defining the Immigrant Family Experience

Immigrant parents are less likely to be shaped by an American education than their children are. Those who grow up in the United States are far more likely to become Americanized than their parents. For children raised in America, being American is simply normal — it is the only way of life they have ever known.

Conflicts can arise between the two generations as a result of this divergence. They may experience clashes over culture, values, and ideals. Immigrant parents often hold to the ways they learned in their home country — in matters of religion, family roles, social norms, language, and social interaction. Children, on the other hand, are shaped by the American environment around them: by their American peers, their schools, and the broader culture. Their values may differ significantly from their parents', including their views on the role of religion in daily life, simply because their formative experiences took place in a different cultural context.

Sources of Intergenerational Conflict

Specific areas that can generate intergenerational conflict include education, employment, family roles, social life, politics, and finances. Children may view credit as a normal financial tool while parents may distrust it. Children may adopt more liberal attitudes toward dating while immigrant parents may prefer a more traditional or conservative approach. Immigrant children are generally more eager to fit in and identify as American, while their parents may wish to preserve their native identity and customs.

Immigrant groups may not be able to quickly "become American," and that phrase carries complex meanings for many people. The second generation certainly benefits from being embedded in its own ethnic community — it learns traditions, customs, values, and ideals that it otherwise would not encounter. But it also benefits from mixing and integrating with the broader community outside the ethnic group, because doing so supports incorporation into the wider national fabric.

This process should not be forced or artificially accelerated. For some families, integration is relatively straightforward; for others, it is much more difficult. It is best when it proceeds organically, in whatever way the immigrant family and community finds most natural. The danger when integration does not proceed at all, however, is that some second-generation youth may be drawn to ethnic gangs as a refuge. These youth may feel unable to integrate into the broader American community and may gravitate instead toward people they understand — people like themselves. Vietnamese youth gangs in Little Saigon, for instance, function as safe spaces for second-generation youth who have never managed to integrate (Vigil, Yun, Cheng).

Conclusion: Bridging the Generational Divide