Juvenile Courts after 100 Years: Past and Present Orientations

Juvenile institutions were developed in the nineteenth century. In the United States, they prompted an extension of the parens patriae doctrine, which provided a basis for the creation of the juvenile court a century ago. The protective orientation of the court was intended both for juvenile delinquents and children in danger. Important changes have occurred since the 1960s. Procedural guarantees for delinquents and de-institutionalisation of children in danger have created a clear distinction between the two groups. Diversion has introduced an alternative to the court process. Policies aimed at young offenders have moved gradually in the direction of the adult criminal court model. The article presents an overview of this evolution, essentially for North America.     

JUVENILE COURT FOR YOUNG ADULTS? HOW ONGOING COURT INVOLVEMENT CAN ENHANCE FOSTER YOUTHS' CHANCES FOR SUCCESS

States wishing to extend foster care supports to young adults under the Fostering Connections to Success Act are required to meet all the requirements of Title IV‐E, which include regular reviews that have traditionally been conducted in juvenile courts. For some, this requirement of ongoing judicial involvement is a reason to forgo this significant source of new federal dollars. Others are seeking ways to minimize ongoing court involvement while still complying with federal requirements. This article argues that these views are misguided. Designed properly, juvenile court reviews can play a unique and important role in helping young adults begin to take responsibility for their own futures.     

The Double Paradox of Juvenile Justice

This article considers the history of a century of juvenile justice. Illinois 'invented' the separate 'children's court' in 1899 and this concept was spearheaded in Northern America, Great Britain and continental Europe in the first decades of the new century. However, a century after its foundation the future of the juvenile court is in doubt everywhere in the Western world. Some conclude that there is a cyclical pattern in juvenile justice policies. That proposition is rejected in this article. The proposition of a cyclical pattern also presupposes that there is no real problem at stake in treating juvenile offenders. The main point of this article, however, is that juvenile justice cannot escape trying to solve a very complicated foundational issue. This issue is a double paradox, that is, juvenile justice has to solve two philosophical questions: the justification of punishment and the justification of punishment for non-adults. This diagnosis presents a new conceptual framework for an analysis of the history of juvenile justice.     

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.     

Beyond Confinement: The Regulation of Girl Offenders’ Bodies,Sexual Choices,and Behavior

Throughout transformations in juvenile justice, control over girls’ bodies, sexual behavior, and reproductive choices has remained a constant focal point among decision makers, with girls infrequently charged with serious law violations and commonly judged in terms of their moral welfare and chasteness. Using interview data with 62 court and correctional decision makers, this article examines how the contemporary juvenile justice system responds to girls’ sexual behavior and explores the policies and procedures used to restrain sexual agency and reproductive choices, both physically and cognitively. This article also investigates the penalties enforced when girls resist such controls as well as intentions toward change and reform in the system.     

THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION ADDRESSES THE NATIONAL PROBLEM OF YOUTH AT RISK

During the 2006–2007 American Bar Association (ABA) year, a special ABA Presidential Youth at Risk Initiative has addressed several important topics: addressing the needs of juvenile status offenders and their families; foster children aging out of the foster care system; increases in girls, especially girls of color, in the juvenile justice system; the need to better hear the voices of youth in court proceedings affecting them; and improving how laws can better address youth crossing over between juvenile justice and child welfare systems. Lawyers are encouraged to use their skills to improve the systems addressing at‐risk youth and their families and to help facilitate coordination of youth‐related community efforts. Learning how to effectively communicate with youth is an important skill attorneys must learn. Through the Youth at Risk Initiative, the ABA has held continuing legal education programs, hosted community roundtables among youth‐serving stakeholders, and developed projects on: juvenile status offenders; lawyer assistance to youth transitioning from foster care; educating young girls on violence prevention, conflict resolution, and careers in law and justice; and provision of useful information to youth awaiting juvenile court hearings. New ABA policy has addressed services and programs to at‐risk youth, assuring licensing, regulation, and monitoring of residential facilities serving at‐risk youth, enhanced support for sexual minority foster and homeless youth, juvenile status offenders, and improving laws and policies related to youth exiting the foster care system.     

The Changing Role of the Youth Court Judge

The last century has witnessed the creation of a number of strategies regarding youth justice and the young offender. With each change in policy has come a redefinition of the role of the youth court judge. This article discusses the traditional role of the judge, the unique role of the youth court judge, and how history has and is likely to continue to define and influence this role.     

THE “TRUE” JUVENILE OFFENDER: AGE EFFECTS AND JUVENILE COURT SANCTIONING

Age is the only factor used to demarcate the boundary between juvenile and adult justice. However, little research has examined how age guides the juvenile court in determining which youth within the juvenile justice system merit particular dispositions, especially those that reflect the court's emphasis on rehabilitation. Drawing on scholarship on the court's origins, attribution theory, and cognitive heuristics, we hypothesize that the court focuses on youth in the middle of the range of the court's age of jurisdiction—characterized in this article as “true” juveniles—who may be viewed as meriting more specialized intervention. We use data from Florida for court referrals in 2008 (N = 71,388) to examine the decision to proceed formally or informally and, in turn, to examine formally processed youth dispositions (dismissal, diversion, probation, commitment, and transfer) and informally processed youth dispositions (dismissal, diversion, and probation). The analyses provide partial support for the hypothesis. The very young were more likely to be informally processed; however, among the informally processed youth, the youngest, not “true” juveniles, were most likely to be diverted or placed on probation. By contrast, among formally processed youth, “true” juveniles were most likely to receive traditional juvenile court responses, such as diversion or probation.     

Juvenile Court Context and Detention Decisions: Reconsidering the Role of Race,Ethnicity, and Community Characteristics in Juvenile Court Processes

The relationship between race/ethnicity, community dynamics, and juvenile court processes has long been established. Prior research has relied on city‐ or county‐level measures of community characteristics (e.g., racial composition, poverty) to examine how racial groups are processed within juvenile courts. To date, no study has utilized finer scale measures of geographic areas to examine how characteristics of juveniles’ communities impact court decisions. By utilizing official juvenile court data from a city in the southwest, this study draws upon attribution theory to examine how economic and crime community‐level measures directly and indirectly influence detention outcomes. Findings reveal that the effect of race and ethnicity in detention outcomes varies across communities, and the effect of ethnicity in detention decisions is mediated by economic community‐level measures. The theoretical and policy implications of the study findings are discussed.     

Court outcomes among female juveniles with sexual offences

ABSTRACT

Female juveniles with sexual offences (FJSOs) are an understudied population. The current study compares FJSOs with their male counterparts and evaluates whether male and female juveniles with sexual offences from different family types have similar charges and court outcomes. Data were obtained from a statewide court dataset in Alabama from 2004 to 2014 (n?=?205 females, 2816 males). Participants were categorised by offence category, family type, and court outcome. Chi-square tests and hierarchical logistic regressions were conducted to test for differences in offence patterns and court outcomes by gender and family type, respectively. Females committed less severe offences and received less severe punishments for a given offence compared with males. Family type and two-way interactions between family type, gender, and offence severity played limited roles in offence patterns and in court sentencing. Disposition patterns in females point towards the feasibility of providing more services for all juveniles with sexual offences.     

日本非行少年的法律保护及启示

在日本,少年非行是指14岁以上20岁未满少年的犯罪行为、14岁未满少年的触法行为以及虞犯等三方面的总称,主要由《少年法》及《儿童福祉法》等法律予以规制。《少年法》以少年的人权保障和健康成长为目的、以保护主义的社会复归为理念,与《儿童福祉法》等共同构成非行少年的法律保护体系。家庭裁判所以少年事件为主要审理对象、以保护处分为主要处罚手段,与社会福祉性质的儿童相谈所共同担负起日本的少年保护事业。官民协动与社会参与制度是对我们的最大的启示,我国要进一步加强少年保护理念的转变,完善我国的少年保护体制,将其建设成为全民参与的社会事业。     

Sustained Outcomes? an Exploratory Study of Juvenile Drug Courts and Long-Term Recidivism

This exploratory study examined juvenile drug courts’ effect on adulthood recidivism. Utilizing a twelve-year average follow up time, adult recidivism rates were compared between previous juvenile drug court participants and a comparison group of juveniles who participated in traditional probation. Linear regression models indicated limited recidivism effects of drug court on arrests or convictions into adulthood. The findings suggest that gender and race may play a role in how justice-involved juveniles interact and experience juvenile drug court, highlighting the need for gender-responsive and culturally responsive policies, practices, and programs within juvenile drug courts. Recommendations are made regarding future research areas and ways to potentially improve long-term juvenile drug court outcomes.     

Meeting the Mandates of Gault: Automatic Appointment of Counsel in Juvenile Delinquency Proceedings

In 1967, the United States Supreme Court ruled that children facing delinquency charges have a constitutional right to defense counsel. Despite that mandate, state assessments of juvenile defense systems have consistently found high rates of waiver of counsel. Children are facing harsh punishments with potentially lifelong consequences without the benefit of a trained defense attorney at their side. Given the severity of the consequences of juvenile court involvement and society’s understanding of the developmental science behind adolescence, this article argues that to meet constitutional requirements, juvenile courts must automatically appoint defense counsel for all children facing delinquency charges.     

Potential Impact of Research on Adolescent Development on Juvenile Judge Decision‐making

This paper discusses how biological and psychological literature on the developmental differences between juveniles and adults may affect juvenile judges in their “dual role” as retributive and rehabilitative decision‐makers in juvenile cases, specifically focusing on sentencing. Particularly, it discusses potential influences of this research on adolescent development regarding four factors known to be integral in juvenile judge decision‐making: legal factors, characteristics of juvenile offenders, and individual structural and social contexts in which judges’ decisions are made. To conclude, implications and recommendations stemming from this discussion are considered.     

Feedback on Forensic Mental Health Assessments in a Juvenile Court Clinic Certification Program

Public-sector mental health systems have set forth specialized practice competencies for forensic mental health clinicians conducting court-ordered examinations. This study examined a sample of feedback letters to clinicians who submitted mid-training and final reports for review as part of the requirements for certification as a juvenile court clinician. The most common feedback points were insufficient/irrelevant historical data, problems with clarity/organization of the report, problems with interview/mental status examination, and problems with competency to stand trial data/opinions. Clinicians had fewer deficiencies in their final report compared to their mid-training report, supporting the perspective that forensic training and supervision is associated with better quality reports.     

THE JUVENILE PENALTY: A COMPARISON OF JUVENILE AND YOUNG ADULT SENTENCING OUTCOMES IN CRIMINAL COURT*

This study uses criminal court data from the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing (PCS) to investigate the sentencing of juvenile offenders processed in adult criminal court by comparing their sentencing outcomes to those of young adult offenders in similar situations. Because the expanded juvenile exclusion and transfer policies of the 1990s have led to an increase in the number of juveniles convicted in adult courts, we argue that it is critical to better understand the judicial decision making processes involved. We introduce competitive hypotheses on the relative leniency or severity of sentencing outcomes for transferred juveniles and interpret our results with the focal concerns theoretical perspective on sentencing. Our findings indicate that juvenile offenders in adult court are sentenced more severely than their young adult counterparts. Moreover, findings suggest that juvenile status interacts with and conditions the effects of other important sentencing factors including offense type, offense severity and prior criminal record. We discuss these results as they relate to immediate outcomes for transferred juveniles, criminal court processes in general and the broader social implications for juvenile justice policy concerning the transfer of juveniles to criminal court.     

CHALLENGES FACING CROSSOVER YOUTH: AN EXAMINATION OF JUVENILE‐JUSTICE DECISION MAKING AND RECIDIVISM

Although a substantial amount of research documents the increased likelihood of maltreated youths to engage in delinquency, very little is known about them once they cross into delinquency. These youths are often referred to as “crossover youth,”“dual jurisdiction,” or “dually involved” youth, and based on a growing amount of research, it appears these youths face a number of challenges. They have significant educational problems, high rates of placement changes and high rates of substance abuse and mental health problems, and when they enter the juvenile justice system, they are more likely to stay longer and penetrate deeper into the system then their nonmaltreated counterparts. Using data from Los Angeles County (N= 581), the purpose of this study is to identify what characteristics among a crossover population are more likely to result in receiving harsher dispositions and higher recidivism rates.     

“YOUTH IS ENMESHED IN A HIGHLY DYSFUNCTIONAL FAMILY SYSTEM”: EXPLORING THE RELATIONSHIP AMONG DYSFUNCTIONAL FAMILIES,PARENTAL INCARCERATION,AND JUVENILE COURT DECISION MAKING*

Although prior work has substantiated the role of external attributes in juvenile court decision making, no study to date has examined how family situational factors as well as maternal and paternal incarceration affect juvenile court officials' responses to troubled youth. Using quantitative and qualitative juvenile court data from a large urban county in the southwest, this study draws on attribution theory to examine how family structure, perceptions of family dysfunction, and parental incarceration influence out‐of‐home placement decisions. Findings reveal that juvenile court officials' perceptions of good and bad families inform their decision making. This study emphasizes the need to unravel the intricate effects of maternal and paternal incarceration and officials' attributions about families and family structure on juvenile court decision making.