A Life Table Approach to Estimating Disproportionate Minority Contact in the Juvenile Justice System

Disproportionate minority contact (DMC) in the U.S. juvenile justice system persists despite substantial efforts to reduce it. The juvenile justice system is comprised of a series of interconnected stages, yet few studies to-date use methods to measure DMC that take the cascading nature of the decision-making process into account. Our study addresses this gap by applying life table analysis to identify the cumulative nature of DMC across multiple stages of the juvenile justice system using data from 2008 to 2010 in Georgia that include white, black, and Hispanic/Latino youth. We then compare these state-level results to life tables from a national sample of black youth and a subnational sample of Hispanic/Latino youth. Our findings show that arrest/referral accounts for the greatest proportion of total system-wide DMC for black youth, but most of the total DMC for Hispanic/Latino youth results from later stages.     

美国少年司法的新近发展

作为世界上第一个少年司法制度的诞生地———美国 ,它的少年司法体系的改革令人关注。本文回顾了美国少年司法政策的发展历史 ,并系统地检验了美国少年司法体制 ,总结了美国少年司法的历史 ,阐述了美国少年司法近年来的发展状况 ,这些发展推动了学者们对美国少年司法的深入研究 ,从而为处理青少年偏差行为指明了合理、有效的策略。本文还涉及到意识形态、政治策略和媒体对少年司法的公共政策的影响问题 ,最后探讨了将来美国少年司法领域中可能出现的争议。     

Trauma‐Informed Approaches to Juvenile Justice: A Critical Race Perspective

Youth of color experience disproportionate juvenile justice contact and recidivism. Trauma‐informed approaches may provide important support to these youth and improve their future outcomes. This paper describes dynamics of the various levels of the juvenile justice system (i.e., police contact, courts, correctional placement, aftercare) that perpetuate psychological trauma among adjudicated youth of color. This paper explores trauma‐informed approaches from a critical race theory perspective to address issues of systemic racial injustice in the juvenile justice system. Current and emerging models for trauma‐informed juvenile justice and implications for practice, policy, and research are discussed.     

PUBLIC OPINION AND THE FOUNDATION OF THE JUVENILE COURT*

Over 100 years ago, juvenile courts emerged out of the belief that juveniles are different from adults—less culpable and more rehabilitatable—and can be "saved" from a life of crime and disadvantage. Today, the juvenile justice system is under attack through increasing calls to eliminate it and enactment of statutes designed to place younger offenders in the adult justice system. However, little evidence exists that policy makers have taken the full range of public views into account. At the same time, scholarly accounts of calls to eliminate the juvenile justice system have neglected the role of public opinion. The current study addresses this situation by examining public views about 1) abolishing juvenile justice and 2) the proper upper age of original juvenile court jurisdiction. Particular attention is given to the notion that child‐saving and "get tough" orientations influence public views about juvenile justice. The analyses suggest support for the lingering appeal of juvenile justice among the public and the idea that youth can be “saved,” as well as arguments about the politicization and criminalization of juvenile justice. They also highlight that the public, like states, holds variable views about the appropriate age of juvenile court jurisdiction. We discuss the implications of the study and avenues for future research. Why is it not just and proper to treat these juvenile offenders, as we deal with the neglected children, as a wise and merciful father handles his own child whose errors are not discovered by the authorities? Why is it not the duty of the state, instead of asking merely whether a boy or a girl has committed a specific offense, to find out what he is, physically, mentally, morally, and then if it learns that he is treading the path that leads to criminality, to take him in charge, not so much to punish as to reform, not to degrade but to uplift, not to crush but to develop, to make him not a criminal but a worthy citizen.     

The Evolution of Balanced and Restorative Justice

Maloney, Armstrong, and Romig presented a portrait of “Joey,” who was the exemplar of what was wrong with the juvenile justice system, in 1988 when they published The Balanced Approach in this Journal. In response, they reimagined a juvenile justice system predicated on balancing three fundamental goals—protection of community, accountability to victims, and development of competencies to prepare juvenile court‐involved youth for productive roles in their communities. The authors examine the evolution of balanced and restorative justice and re‐imagine how Joey's life may have been different at critical junctures of his juvenile court involvement.     

美国少年司法严罚刑事政策的形成、实践与未来

建立独立的少年司法制度，在保护主义的理念下处理少年犯罪，曾经是美国的骄傲，也是其他国家效仿的范本。但自20世纪70年代后期开始，严罚刑事政策开始逐步占据美国少年司法刑事政策的主流，呈现出逐步背弃福利型少年司法传统的趋势。这种转变是在少年犯罪恶化与古典犯罪学派复兴的社会背景与理论背景下发生的，也是对少年司法理念的歪曲。少年司法严罚刑事政策的推行激化了少年法院存废的争论，也遭到了激烈的批评和日益深入的反思。     

Youth probation officers' interpretation and implementation of the Youth Criminal Justice Act: A case study of youth justice in Canada

Many juvenile justice systems are characterized by an amalgam of different principles and ideologies, which have been incorporated into laws and policies regarding youth crime. This study examines the perceptions of youth probation officers (YPOs) concerning the 2003 Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) in Canada, which is one recent case example of a mixed model of juvenile justice. For instance, although the Act emphasizes diversion and community-based sanctions for first time and minor offenders, it also allows for adult-length custody sentences for the most serious and violent youth. This study asked YPOs about their understanding of the YCJA and their ability to apply the Act in their daily work as well as their access to community programs in 2004 and 2007. The results as well as previous research on the YCJA and policy implications are discussed.     

英国少年司法政策变化之研究

将研究自《1969年儿童和青少年法案》实施以来,英国少年司法政策的变化。在经历福利模式和犯罪控制模式后,英国对现行少年司法制度进行了重大调整。在原先救助与保护的原则之外,根据变化了的刑罚理念、青少年犯罪现状以及社会舆论导向等因素,对少年司法制度更多引进了惩罚和预防的理念。这对于目前建设中的我国少年司法制度的构建和完善不无借鉴意义。     

Decomposing disproportionate minority contact in juvenile justice

The objective of this study was to decompose racial disparity in juvenile justice decision-making into a part explained by differing characteristics of racial groups, and an unexplained part often attributed to discrimination. Individual case-level data from Alabama and logistic regression were used to model detention, petition, and disposition decisions in the juvenile justice system. Decomposition of racial disparity between white and black juveniles using the nonlinear Blinder-Oaxaca methodology suggested that about a half to three fourths of the racial gaps in the three juvenile justice decision points were caused either by discrimination or unobserved predictors. Decomposition of racial disparity in juvenile justice can help devise effective public policy by quantifying the extent to which specific policies can reduce disproportionate minority contact.     

Role of voice in the legal process*

As communities face unrest and protest because of perceived racial bias and decreased trust and confidence in the criminal justice system, it is critical to explore mechanisms that foster institutional legitimacy. Voice is a central element in the procedural justice framework because it is anticipated to promote process control as well as a shared understanding between institutions and communities. As a concept, however, voice is undertheorized. Measures of voice used in legitimacy research may result in oversimplification of the concept, not fully capturing the struggles disadvantaged people face in trying to exercise influence in the court system. Through the use of rich data from qualitative interviews with youth and families involved in the juvenile justice system and in‐depth observations of juvenile court events, we explore what voice is, the mechanisms through which people try to assert voice, and how voice matters in the legal process. Respondents sought voice for many reasons, including to validate their experiences, to affirm their membership in a community, and to assert concerns about perceived police misconduct. Contrary to traditional conceptualizations of voice as a static event (e.g., having voice or not having voice), voice was a process of negotiating dialogue between court officials and court participants throughout the legal process.     

When does Race and Gender Matter? The Interrelationships between the Gender of Probation Officers and Juvenile Court Detention and Intake Outcomes

Racial and gender disparities in case outcomes have recently been explained by a focus on the characteristics of court officers within the context of the interplay between discretion, stereotyping, and the perceptions of decision-makers. Using data within a single juvenile court jurisdiction, the present study continues this line of inquiry to assess: (1) how race and gender, individually and in combination, influence juvenile justice decision-making and (2) how court outcomes for certain race/gender combinations are conditioned by the gender of the court officer. Results indicate that, to some degree, the race and gender of the youth along with the gender of the court officer influenced case outcomes; however, the findings were not always in the expected direction. The results have implications for broadening the contexts of detention and intake decision-making, and may also better inform efforts to address the equitable treatment of youth in the juvenile justice system.     

MI Implementation in Juvenile Justice: A Case Report

Motivational interviewing (MI) is a communication style focused on enhancing clients’ own motivation towards change. In the justice system MI has evidence to support that it enhances communication and change behaviors in youth. As most MI training is designed for healthcare settings training and implementation of MI must be adapted to fit the juvenile justice model. This includes both rehabilitation and restorative justice. Here we describe the details that allowed one county small county in Pennsylvania to roll out MI training and initial skills review in less than 6 months. The case reviews the details of planning, trainings, and timing of activities. We then discuss what elements of those details fit into a greater implementation plan that may be applied elsewhere. Four key elements were instrumental to implementation: 1) appreciation of JPO time constraints, 2) cost containment 3) using blending to enhance JPO flexibility with MI use, and 4) policies that normalize use of MI. This outline may assist other courts in their own implementation efforts.     

制度公正与人性制约

制度公正指社会在进行制度设计、制度选择、制度实施、制度创新和制度评价过程中要遵循社会公正原则.制度公正是符合人性要求的产物,同时设定并付诸实施的制度又会反作用于人性.一种制度公正与否自然不能脱离人性的考虑,制度公正的人性制约因素主要表现在以下几方面:1.正确的人性假设是制度公正的前提;2.制度公正必须符合人性实际的要求;3.人性的局限性决定了制度公正的相对性;4.制度公正的实现还受到人性发展水平的制约.制度公正的基本功能就是抑恶扬善,协调私利与社会公益的矛盾,塑造全面发展的人的个性.     

Aboriginal youth with foetal alcohol spectrum disorder and enmeshment in the Australian justice system: can an intercultural form of restorative justice make a difference?

Aboriginal youth with Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) are overrepresented in the justice system. FASD results from prenatal alcohol exposure, and may lead to cognitive, social and behavioural difficulties that increase susceptibility to contact with the justice system. This paper explores the potential contribution of restorative justice in creating diversionary options for Aboriginal youth with FASD, and related cognitive impairments, to prevent enmeshment in the justice system. The lesson from work in Australia and New Zealand is that restorative justice and Indigenous justice are different, but not irreconcilable, projects. We suggest that there is the potential for creating rich intercultural engagement spaces ‘in between’ restorative practices and Indigenous processes: provided that restorative justice – as an essentially Eurocentric paradigm of the Global North – does not attempt to colonise Indigenous justice. An appropriate model would have Aboriginal people engaged in the planning and management of diversionary options, with greater focus on diversion into place-based, Aboriginal owned and managed services. Restorative justice needs to engage with the historical demands of Indigenous peoples for their land and their way of life; though constantly imperilled by forces of neo-liberalism and colonialism, Indigenous peoples remain resilient and provide a vision of an alternative to Euro-modernity.     

论未成年人恢复性司法的合理性与局限性

恢复性司法是一种通过恢复性程序实现恢复性后果的非正式犯罪处理方法。为考察司法人员与公众对待确定未成年人恢复性司法制度态度,对法官、公众等不同群体作问卷调查,结果表明,法官和公众对未成年人司法制度的诸项改革基本认可。该制度的合理性表现在可减少刑事污点对未成年人的消极影响,有利于恢复受损的社会关系,对违法犯罪的未成年人有积极的矫正作用;其局限性体现在难以满足同罪同罚的刑法原则,难以避免替代性的承担责任的现象等。避免局限性的关键在于要解决恢复性司法与正式司法程序的关系问题。     

From Centre Stage to Spear Carrier: The Repositioning of the English Juvenile Court

The approach of the new millennium poses significant challenges for the way in which the youth justice system in general, and the juvenile (now youth) court in particular, develops in the future. The past one hundred years of the juvenile court in England and Wales have seen its role both flow and ebb. It currently faces further significant repositioning. The author distinguishes four themes which have influenced the marginalisation of the juvenile court: bifurcation, diversion, manageralism and legislation of the court.     

Recent Trends in Sentencing Policies in the Netherlands

This article considers sentencing in the Netherlands and in particular the changes that have been introduced since the 1980s, both in the adult and in the juvenile justice system. Several questions will be treated in the article. Sentencing in the Netherlands in the last two decades is analysed and some explanations for the changing trends are presented. Results indicate that the Netherlands is following a general pattern, prevalent in Europe and the US, of more punitive and repressive punishment. Also, the extent to which new sentencing options, such as community sanctions have made a difference to the upward trend in imprisonment, will be analysed. In an effort to reduce the costs of the system new policies are being developed, introducing both 'front door' and 'back door' varieties in sentencing. These will lead to some important and radical changes in the criminal justice system.     

JUVENILE CRIME AND WHY WAIVER IS NOT THE ANSWER

Many states deal with the issue of juvenile crime by charging juveniles as adults. This is done by a method of waiver. Waiver allows adult criminal courts to have the power to exercise jurisdiction over juveniles.¹ In effect, a juvenile is tried and sentenced as an adult when his or her case is waived (removed) from the juvenile court to the adult court. Waiver in juvenile (youths seventeen and younger) cases should never be allowed because juvenile offenders are too immature and incompetent to appreciate the nature of their crimes and because the juvenile justice system is a more appropriate place to rehabilitate juvenile offenders.     

论未成年人轻罪犯罪记录封存制度——我国新《刑事诉讼法》第275条之理解与适用

未成年人轻罪犯罪记录封存制度的适用对象除被判处五年有期徒刑以下刑罚的未成年犯外,未成年人相对不起诉和附条件不起诉记录封存也应参照适用,而且,从长远来看,应适用于所有未成年人;在法律效力上应严格限定但书中"国家规定"的范围,并协调与其他相关法律的关系;适用主体除公安机关、检察院、法院和未成年犯管教所外,还包括知晓未成年人犯罪记录的有关机关、单位以及当事人、辩护人、诉讼代理人和其他知晓其犯罪记录的个人。为充分发挥该制度的重要价值,应当将其"升级"为未成年人犯罪记录消灭制度。