A Family Affair: The Juvenile Court and Family Violence Cases

Little attention has been devoted to studies of adolescent family violence offending, yet research on adult populations show that victim relationship may make a difference in how offenders are treated in the criminal justice system. Given that the intergenerational transmission of violence may operate through adolescent family violence, a detailed examination of these youth is warranted. Through an analysis of detained youth in a small northeastern state, this study examines differences in court treatment between family and non-family offenders. Family violence offenders are significantly more likely to be minor offenders and to be female than are non-family offenders. Results of logistic regression show that, all else being equal, family violence youth are treated more leniently by the court than non-family offenders. Finally, while most youth are released to community dispositions, there are no differences in court-ordered family counseling between family and non-family offenders. These findings point to areas of needed research on adolescent family violence offenders and larger policy questions about how such youth should be treated relative to other youth. A previous version of this paper was presented at the 2003 Annual Meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Denver, CO.     

Culture and theater as foundation for national identity formation in the Russian far east: where Europe meets Asia

Although most contemporary theories of nationalism and identity formation rest on some form of social constructivism, few theorists of nationalism and identity formation interrogate social constructivism as a social construction – a social science concept “imposed” on the non-self-consciously constructivist behaviors of people, who generally do not believe they are engaging in construction. Since social constructivism – unless it is a metaphysics about what is real – is really about the concept of social construction, the first task of constructivists is to ask not how various populations have engaged in social construction but how social construction should be defined. As this article shows, constructivism is at best a run-of-the-mill theoretical approach – perfectly respectable, but no different from any other theoretical approach in the social sciences. It is only when social constructivism makes outlandishly radical claims – that all of reality or all of social reality is constructed – that it is unusual, exciting, and wrong.     

LEGAL USE OF MENTAL HEALTH EVALUATIONS IN CHILD PROTECTION PROCEEDINGS

The authors examine the use of mental health evaluations in legal decision making within a large, urban juvenile court system. The focus was on court files in child protection cases relating to 171 randomly selected mental health evaluations completed on parents and 44 evaluations completed on children. Parent evaluations (46.7%) were much more likely to be present in court files than child evaluations (5.9%), and evaluations conducted by in-house court clinicians (63.8%) were more often present than those conducted by noncourt clinicians (37.5%). References to evaluations in child welfare, legal, or mental health documents varied with the type of information, subject (parent or child), and source of the evaluation. Findings and/or recommendations of evaluations were cited in legal or mental health documents for approximately two thirds of parent evaluations but only one third of child evaluations. Evaluation findings and/or recommendations were stated as a basis for legal decisions in 36.2% of court-based parent evaluations, 21.0% of noncourt-based parent evaluations, and 2.3% of child evaluations. These results provide evidence of a modest impact of parent evaluations on legal decisions and notably less impact for child evaluations. The authors suggest directions for future research and practice in order to increase the accessibility and usefulness of clinical evaluations in legal decision making.