NCJ Number
124887
Journal
New Designs for Youth Development Volume: 9 Issue: 1-3 Dated: (Winter, Spring, and Summer 1989) Pages: 3-8
Date Published
1989
Length
6 pages
Annotation
A survey of juvenile justice and youth-serving professionals' attitudes toward juvenile crime, interventions, and prosecution procedures is analyzed for its implications for legislative reform.
Abstract
In 1985-86, the Rose Institute of State and Local Government at Claremont McKenna College conducted a national survey of the attitudes and preferences of juvenile justice and youth-serving professionals on a variety of juvenile justice issues. Against a historical and legislative background that finds the courts increasingly offense-oriented, these professionals expressed an openness for reform in such areas as government response to juvenile problems, offender-offense orientation, informal and formal decisionmaking, interventions, and prosecution procedures. Respondents indicated that juveniles charged with certain offenses should be transferred automatically to adult courts, but that serious offenders be granted the right to jury trial. Respondents also expressed a belief that social services and counseling may not be the best responses to juvenile crime, and that the courts are not placing undue emphasis on rehabilitation. They also favor the participation of prosecutors in all decisions after apprehension, the elimination of indeterminate dispositions, the use of explicit criteria to guide post-apprehension decisions, and mandatory minimum penalties for certain offenses. On some issues, respondents were clearly divided into two groups, with law enforcement and social service professionals on one side, and probation and legal professionals on the other. Survey results suggest implications for legislative reform in four areas. First, regarding the overall philosophy of juvenile punishment and treatment, reformers must develop criteria for determining who is assigned to what type of intervention and for how long. Second, reformers must study systematic implementation of provisions for juvenile restitution, the focus of a national evaluation and training effort. Third, legislators must find ways to alter intake, through screening and by shifting intake from probation to prosecutors, without alienating the concerned professionals. Finally, steps must be taken to develop more consistent guidelines for sentencing policies that stress equality and proportionality. 4 tables, 13 references.