DO EXISTING PENAL MEASURES 'REFORM' JUVENILE DEFENDERS?

• NCJ Number: 45793
• Journal: Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology Volume: 10 Issue: 4 Dated: (DECEMBER 1977) Pages: 217-222
• Author(s): J KRAUS
• Date Published: 1977
• Length: 6 pages
• Corporate Author: New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services
• Publication Format: Document
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: Australia

Annotation

TO EXAMINE WHETHER PENAL MEASURES IMPOSED BY THE CHILDREN'S COURT ACTUALLY DETER RECIDIVISM, A TEST OF EXPECTANCY OF APPREHENSION AND PERCEIVED HARSHNESS OF PUNISHMENT WAS DEVELOPED AND ADMINISTERED TO 107 BOYS.

Abstract

THE SAMPLE CONSISTED OF 47 JUVENILE OFFENDERS COMMITTED TO A TRAINING SCHOOL IN NEW SOUTH WALES AND A GROUP OF 60 CONTROLS MATCHED FOR AGE. THE TEST INSTRUMENT CONSISTED OF 22 ITEMS DESCRIBING AN OFFENSE SUCH AS STEALING, ASSAULT, AND MALICIOUS DAMAGE TO BE RATED BY DEGREE OF UNPLEASANTNESS OF THE PROBABLE PUNISHMENT AND LIKELIHOOD OF GETTING CAUGHT. THE FINAL TEST ITEM MEASURES PERCEIVED PUBLIC ATTITUDE TOWARD JUVENILE OFFENDERS. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS INDICATES THAT NONDELINQUENT BOYS HAD SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER EXPECTANCY OF APPREHENSION SCORES AND PERCEIVED HARSHNESS OF PUNISHMENT SCORES THAN DID THE INSTITUTIONALIZED DELINQUENTS. THERE WAS NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO GROUPS IN THE OBJECTIVE KNOWLEDGE OF LEGAL MEASURES AVAILABLE TO THE COURT. DELINQUENTS PERCEIVED PUBLIC ATTITUDES AS BEING MORE PUNITIVE THAN DID NONDELINQUENTS. WHILE THE USE OF A CONTROL GROUP IN PLACE OF A BEFORE/AFTER RESEARCH DESIGN MAY CONSTITUTE A METHODOLOGICAL WEAKNESS, IT IS ASSUMED THAT THE INSTITUTIONAL DELINQUENT POPULATION DIFFERS FROM THE RANDOM SAMPLE FROM THE SAME GENERAL POPULATION PRIMARILY IN HAVING BEEN CAUGHT AND PUNISHED BY THE COURTS. HOWEVER, THE VALIDITY OF THIS ASSUMPTION HAS NO REAL BEARING ON THE IMPLICATONS OF THE FINDINGS FOR THE LEGALISTIC HYPOTHESIS THAT PENAL MEASURES REFORM BY REINFORCING THE OFFENDER'S FEAR OF APPREHENSION AND PUNISHMENT. THE PENAL MEASURES TAKEN WITH THIS GROUP OF OFFENDERS DID NOT REHABILITATE THEM, E.G., DID NOT RAISE THE DELINQUENTS' EXPECTATIONS OF HARSH PUNISHMENT TO THE LEVEL OF THE NONDELINQUENTS. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT EXPERIENCE WITH THE PENAL SYSTEM HAS DESENSITIZED THE DELINQUENTS TO THE THREAT OF PUNISHMENT OR THAT THE PENAL MEASURES WERE NOT AVERSIVE ENOUGH TO PRODUCE ATTITUDE CHANGE. HOWEVER, INCREASES IN RATES OF APPREHENSION AND PUNITIVENESS WOULD BE INCONSISTANT WITH THE EXISTING POLICY OF TREATMENT AND REHABILITATION OF OFFENDERS. (JAP)