Global Risk Indicators and the Role of Gender in a Juvenile Detention Sample

• NCJ Number: 215804
• Journal: Criminal Justice and Behavior Volume: 33 Issue: 5 Dated: October 2006 Pages: 597-612
• Author(s): Stephen M. Gavazzi; Courtney M. Yarcheck; Meda Chesney-Lind
• Date Published: October 2006
• Length: 16 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This study examined the use of the Global Risk Assessment Device (GRAD) in assessing male and female adolescents who had contact with the juvenile court.

Abstract

Overall, the results indicated significant gender differences in a large number of risk/needs categories, including prior offenses, family/parenting, mental health, traumatic events, health-related risks, psychopathy, accountability, and peer relationships. Girls were more likely to be detained for family-related offenses such as exhibiting out of control behavior in the home and physically fighting with family members while boys were more likely to be detained for property crimes and crimes against persons. Surprisingly, females scored higher on some of the risk/needs categories that are considered traditionally male categories; females scored higher than their male counterparts in peer relationship risk, psychopathy, traumatic events, and accountability. The findings suggest the need to develop gender-sensitive assessment instruments for juvenile offenders and the need to take gender into account in the broader theories of delinquency. Participants were 305 youth (57 percent female and 43 percent male) who were assessed by court staff using the GRAD, which is a standardized instrument designed to assess potential threats to the developmental needs of juveniles who come into contact with the juvenile justice system. The GRAD assesses 11 categories of risk/needs: prior offenses, family/parenting issues, deviant peer relationships, substance abuse, traumatic events, mental health issues, leisure activities, accountability, and education/work issues. Data analysis involved the use of multivariate and univariate analyses of variance. Future research is planned to examine the patterns of scores across all categories of the GRAD to refine the instrument’s gender sensitivity. Table, figure, appendix, references