RISK-taking and adolescence are inextricably linked. Part of the attraction of many sports such as rock-climbing and surf-boarding is the fact that they are, by their nature, hazardous.
The attraction to risk is perfectly normal for teenagers. As most parents of adolescents will know, getting them to wear a cycling helmet is quite a challenge. (A US study in 1987 found that 92 per cent of adolescents never wear a cycling helmet and over 50 per cent never wear a seat belt.)
Some sociologists argue that for young males the instinctive need to be involved in exciting and therefore risky activities is part of the transition to manhood. It can be viewed as a throwback to our hunting and warrior ancestry.
(It is this same inclination that is encouraged and exploited by every army in the world, when they recruit young males in their late teens.)
The inclination to risk-taking comes at a very high price. Research in the US conducted by the National Centre for Health Statistics in 1989 found that the mortality rate among teenagers rises by over 200 per cent when one compares early adolescence (10-14 years) to the late teens (15-19). Intentional or unintentional injuries account for this rise.
The study also found that the death rate from motor vehicle injuries increased by 386 per cent, while homicides and other anti-social behaviour increased by 525 per cent.
But why should certain youths engage their need for excitement in such a reckless fashion as stealing cars and driving at dangerously high speeds when death and serious injury to themselves or others are so likely?
There is no simple answer. However, there is no escaping the fact that the youths who do it are almost invariably from dysfunctional families and, often live in communities where such behaviour carries with it high social status among their peer group. The fact that this includes as many hazards for themselves as for others is no deterrent.
Access to a car is usually not within their grasp - without stealing one - and in all probability, the prospects of owning one are remote. In all probability, these youths have engaged in an array of other dangerous behaviour, not just reckless vehicle use.
So what can be done?
In 1993 Joy Dryfoos of Columbia University, New York, undertook a review of evaluated prevention programmes aimed at high-risk youth populations in the US which were considered to have been effective.
She found that youngsters became high-risk because of deficiencies in their families, communities and schooling.
The most successful responses must, therefore, address these different levels. She has outlined the common components of successful interventions found in evaluations of prevention programmes. These include:
(1) intensive individual attention; (2) early intervention; (3) comprehensive multi-agency community-wide co-operation; (4) parents must have a defined role; (5) peers must have a defined role; and (6) social skills training.
Most youth/community programmes here are unlikely to provide this menu of interventions. It goes without saying that most youth detention centres do not provide such a comprehensive array of services in spite of the huge expense involved.
It costs over £50,000 a year to keep a boy in Trinity House detention centre, for example.
COMMUNITY-based programmes don't get anything like this kind money, but it is arguable that they are at least as effective in bringing about change.
The 1996 Children's Bill is currently before the Oireachtas, and one of its prime tasks is to update the juvenile justice legislation.
The reactions from professional groups to the Bill have so far been mixed. Most have seen it as high in aspiration but weak in imaginative approaches to anti-social behaviour.
When incidents like the death of Trevor O'Connell occur, it is very difficult to get policy-makers to see any solution to young law-breakers other than to find more places to lock them up.
Incarcerating such youngsters may placate our need to express anger - given the awful trauma they wreak on others - but at the end of the day, however, it doesn't necessarily make our streets any safer.
To do that there is little substitute for comprehensive youth and community programmes.