The Knowledge of Detained Juveniles About the Juvenile Justice System

This article examines the knowledge and perceptions of detained juveniles about the roles of juvenile justice officials and the nature of the juvenile justice system. Data were collected through interviews in a group setting. The small sample size limited the generalizability of the findings but provided specific information important for future research and policymaking on an under‐studied group. The study found that the experiences of the juveniles with the justice system provided only limited understanding of the system's processes and confusion about juvenile justice officials' roles. The juveniles did not have a clear understanding of how each official's role operated within a set of roles that constitutes the system. Further, they did not fully understand the cumulative effect of juvenile processing.     

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.     

A Practical Approach to Evaluating and Improving Juvenile Justice Programs

For more than a decade, the juvenile justice field in the United States has been dominated by the seventh “moral panic” over juvenile delinquency. This panic led to an overreaction to juvenile delinquency by legislators and juvenile justice officials. The main consequence is a “crisis of overload” in many state and local juvenile justice systems across the country. Tools are available to help juvenile courts effectively manage the overload of court clients. Most important, a new method has been developed for evaluating existing programs against research‐based standards that have been synthesized from juvenile justice program evaluations. This tool enables states and localities to take a practical approach to improving juvenile justice system programs.     

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.     

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。     

Adultification in Juvenile Corrections: Examining the Orientations of Juvenile and Adult Probation and Parole Officers

Legislative activity, court decisions, and other activities have left open to question how distinct is the juvenile justice system from the criminal justice system. While several scholars have considered adultification of juvenile courts, no study has systematically examined the adultification of juvenile corrections. The present study assesses whether one type of juvenile corrections, probation and parole, has been adultified by comparing the professional orientations of juvenile and adult probation and parole officers. The study finds that juvenile probation and parole officers do differ from adult officers across several dimensions of professional orientation that are critical to the distinctiveness of the juvenile justice system. Specifically, our analyses show that compared to adult probation and parole officers, juvenile officers tend to more strongly adhere to ideals of treatment, welfare, and offender-focused probation and parole supervision.     

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.     

Punishment,Accountability, and the New Juvenile Justice

The juvenile justice system has undergone radical change in the past three decades. The procedural revolution that began at the end of the 1960s with the Gault decision has more recently evolved into a substantive revolution. The changes in juvenile justice have been many and in some instances drastic, particularly in the apparent demise of the rehabilitative ideal. New theories or models have emerged, incorporating terminology such as punishment, justice, and accountability into the vocabulary of juvenile justice practitioners and the lexicon of state juvenile codes. The transformation in the philosophy and underlying goals of the system has been well-documented over the past decade or so. It is now time to ask critical questions about the significance and meaning of this transformation and to bring attention to unresolved issues. This article suggests the issues that need to be addressed in order to make both practical and philosophical sense out of the changes in the mission of “juvenile justice.”     

Overview of: “Getting the Law Involved a Quasi-Experiment in Early Intervention Involving Collaboration Between Schools and the District Attorney's Office”

Research Summary Precursors to serious and chronic delinquency often emerge in childhood, stimulating calls for early interventions. Most intervention efforts rely solely on social service programs—often to the exclusion of the juvenile justice system. The juvenile justice system has been reluctant to become involved in the lives of relatively young children fearing net widening or further straining resources that could be used for older youth with documented delinquency histories. We report here the results of an early intervention program sponsored by and housed in a district attorney's office in Louisiana. Using a quasi-experimental design, we examined outcomes associated with program involvement as well as whether the obvious involvement of the prosecutor's office was associated with further reductions in problem behavior.

• 1 : The results revealed that significant reductions in problem behaviors of young children could be attributed to program participation.
• 2 : The obvious involvement of the district attorney's office, however, was associated with limited, albeit significant, reductions in specific problem behaviors.
• 3 : These findings show that successful early intervention efforts can be made part of the juvenile justice system and that in some limited situations prosecutorial involvement can result in positive outcomes.

Policy Implications The expansion of early intervention programming into the juvenile justice system offers opportunities to address early problem behavior. Our study and its results have the following policy implications.

• 1 : Closely coupled partnerships between schools and the juvenile justice system can effectively address, mitigate, and perhaps prevent an early onset of antisocial behavior.
• 2 : Even so, coupling early intervention efforts to the mission of the juvenile justice system warrants debate. Net-widening, resource diffusion, and the potential for officials to rely too heavily on the deterrent characteristics of the justice system represent serious threats to the integrity of effective early intervention programs.
• 3 : We suggest substantial debate and consideration is given before coupling early intervention efforts to the juvenile justice system.

     

Orientations to juvenile justice: Exploratory notes from a statewide survey of juvenile justice decisionmakers

This study examined the extent to which orientations to juvenile justice held by decisionmakers are related to their functional roles and educational backgrounds. Predictions concerning this question were drawn from both the literature on complex organizations and writings by scholars interpreting and forecasting the future of juvenile justice.The findings indicate that assignment to specific roles in the juvenile justice system is a significant predictor of commitment to either a rehabilitative or a just deserts model of juvenile justice. This effect appears to be modified to some extent by educational backgrounds and professional identifications. The implications of these findings for a continuation of the traditional rehabilitative ideal in juvenile justice are discussed.     

Accountability and evidence-based approaches: theory and research for juvenile justice

As part of the ‘accountability movement’ in juvenile justice, policy-makers, funding agencies, and the general public have called for greater accountability from agencies and organizations involved with youthful offenders. Within this context, performance measurement and monitoring, and use of evidence-based programs and practices, have emerged as recommended aspects of juvenile justice system operations nationwide. Little is known empirically, however, about the actual performance of juvenile justice systems or the real changes brought by contemporary reforms, and theory and research on the implementation and sustainability of evidence-based approaches have been slow to emerge. This paper will review the key aspects of the modern accountability movement in juvenile justice, and then discuss a recently proposed theory that may be useful in future examinations of juvenile justice system improvement efforts. A suggested research agenda also is presented.     

Causes and consequences of juvenile crime and violence: Public attitudes and question-order effect

This article examines issues in juvenile justice that include public opinion about the causes and the consequences of juvenile crime and violence. Data for the study were collected in 1996 by means of a telephone survey of 492 respondents from Shelby County, Tennessee. The study explores the relationships between attitudes about juvenile crime and sociodemographic factors. Results are consistent with national surveys aimed at assessing public attitudes toward issues in juvenile justice. Finally, the article discusses how survey instrumentation may influence responses regarding the issues surrounding juvenile crime and violence.     

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。     

Student Perceptions of Juvenile Offender Accounts in Criminal Justice Education

In criminal justice programs, a major teaching objective is to expose students to the wide range of experiences and career paths available in criminal justice. Technological advances increase instructional strategies so that students may gain more realistic educational experience and correct erroneous perceptions about the criminal justice system. This paper describes one such strategy for online criminal justice students, a virtual prison tour, founded on the principles of social learning, experiential learning, and e-learning. In an upperclass course in juvenile delinquency, 43 students viewed a video of incarcerated juvenile offenders recounting their experiences of institutionalization, sentences, challenges, programming, and fears upon release. Student responses to seven quantitative questions and one qualitative question revealed that the video greatly impacted their attitudes, understanding, and perceptions of the juvenile justice system and provided pedagogical benefits. This strategy can be used to help criminal justice educators enhance student learning so that students experience a major aspect of the juvenile justice system.     

The Effect of Race on Juvenile Justice Processing

Studies concerning differential treatment of minority youths in the juvenile justice system have not provided conclusive evidence. However, previous literature has revealed methodological problems which may account for the inconsistency among previous studies. Multi-stage design, adequate control of legal and non-legal variables, and refined measurement of social variables have been demonstrated as crucial elements in resolving the inconclusiveness in previous studies. The purpose of this study is to employ these approaches to detect case-handling bias at three stages of juvenile justice processing: detention, adjudication, and disposition. Data were obtained from juvenile cases reported to the Ohio trial court in 1989. A total of 2,334 court cases were randomly sampled from 17 Ohio counties. Research findings showed a differential treatment of minority juveniles at the detention stage. Further, detention status was also found to have an increasing impact at the two subsequent decision points.     

Sifting Through the Ashes: Processing Arsonists in Juvenile Justice

National estimates have suggested that less than one-in-five arsons are cleared by arrest. Interestingly, juveniles account for nearly 50% of arson arrests, a proportion greater than all other non-status offenses. While the criminological literature on juvenile arson has been fairly consistent, a dearth of applied criminological literature has observed how the juvenile justice system responds to arsonists. Drawing on data on more than 5,000 juveniles from a large southern state, this study was able to differentiate between the system responses for arsonists and other felons. The findings suggested that the juvenile justice system distinguished between arsonists and other felons in some respects, but these distinctions failed to align with the suggested approaches of the criminological literature.     

Domestic violence and criminal justice training needs of social services workers

Domestic violence is a multifaceted problem that requires various agencies to work together to serve victims. Among other agencies that are involved in this collaborative effort, criminal justice officials must work with social services workers to ensure that cases are handled effectively. At the root of this collaborative effort, it is natural to question whether various parties have the knowledge needed to effectively respond to specific cases of domestic violence. In this study, attention was given to whether social workers possessed enough knowledge about various aspects of domestic violence, including information required to process domestic violence cases in the criminal justice system. In all, 186 social services worker supervisors in the Commonwealth of Virginia were asked to rate the level of knowledge they believed social services workers had regarding specific domestic violence topics with the level of knowledge workers they believed social workers needed regarding each domestic violence topic. Findings suggested that social services workers might have more problems dealing with the interpersonal nature of domestic violence cases than they do with the legal issues. At the same time, the supervisors suggested the workers knew less about specific legal options than they needed to know. Based on this, the authors suggest changes in training for all human services workers, including criminal justice officials and social workers.     

Why Would Two-Level Consequentialists Punish Only the Guilty?

The most commonly encountered and most serious objection against consequentialist theories of punishment is that they could sometimes endorse punishing innocent people. Two-level consequentialists can resist this objection. Because of how deterrence works, a system of social protection would clearly need to be careful, most of the time, to pick out only the guilty for punishment. What about exceptional cases? Any institution empowered to secretly frame innocent people would pose a grave danger to democracy, a danger that could prove lethal under only moderately unusual conditions. Meanwhile, individual consequentialists working within the criminal justice system should fear that their own views could be distorted by confirmation bias and other cognitive errors. These officials should normally trust any moderately well-functioning adversarial trial process more than they trust their own judgment of who needs to be punished. They should use extra-legal discretion only in cases where both their confidence and the stakes are extremely high; and in cases where the stakes are extremely high, the consequentialist answer is no longer counter-intuitive.     

The Impact of Time on Parent Perspectives on the Barriers to Services and the Service Needs of Youths in the Juvenile Justice System

The purposes of this study were: 1) to assess the overall perspectives of parents (N=115) of youths in the juvenile justice system on the barriers to and services needs of youths in the juvenile justice system; and 2) to assess the strength of the relationship between duration of time the youth has been involved in the juvenile justice system and parent perceptions of barriers and service needs. The top service need was case management. Statistically significant moderate negative correlations were found between duration of time in the juvenile justice system and Total Barrier score, and all composite barrier scores (i.e., Mismatch, Red Tape, and Inaccessibility). Statistically significant small negative correlations were found between duration of time in the juvenile justice system and the Total Service Needs score and two composite scores: Substance Abuse Services and Out‐of‐Home Services.     

Thoughts on Juvenile Justice Systems and Research

This article updates comments published in this journal in 1994 about the nature of the American juvenile justice system, which laid out reasons that it might not serve as a useful model for other nations. Since that time, the US system has moved further right towards the justice model and away from the welfare model. Individualistic philosophies and political conservatism have combined to produce a more adult-like and punitive juvenile system, applied to increasing numbers of minors and to increasingly younger minors. Successful demonstrations of community absorption or treatment have been too few to balance the rightward direction. European scholars are urged to undertake increased studies in two critical areas: (1) the nature, functions, and comparative differences in their juvenile justice systems, and (2) the nature of local communities and their contributions to patterns of delinquency.