Juvenile Diversion - Factors Related to Decision Making and Outcome (From Juvenile Justice Policy, P 145-165, 1984, Scott H Decker, ed. See NCJ-93299)

• NCJ Number: 93306
• Author(s): E J Latessa; L F Travis; G P Wilson
• Date Published: 1984
• Length: 21 pages
• Sale Source: Sage Publications, Inc
• Publication Type: Program/Project Evaluation
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Earlier version presented at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Association of Criminal Justice Educators, Indianapolis, October 14, 1982.

Annotation

This study examines the relationship between juveniles' age, sex, race, offense, and neighborhood and the decision regarding whether or not to divert them from formal processing to some treatment service; the relationships between these factors and the delivery of treatment services to the outcome of diversion are also explored.

Abstract

The study focused on a formal juvenile diversion program operating in a large midwestern county. The program, known as the Juvenile Court Liaison Program, was begun in May 1975 by the Citizen's Committee on Youth. The target group for the program was youth 18 years-old and younger referred for status offenses, minor criminal offenses, and drug abuse. About 40 percent of the cases are referred to appropriate local youth-serving agencies for followup counseling. The study population consisted of 769 youths processed through the program during 1980. Information on basic demographics, program referrals, and delinquent behavior was collected from juvenile court records. A 12-month followup period was used to obtain data on recidivism. To measure the relative severity of criminal offenses, a criminal behavior severity scale was used. The cohort was examined to determine (1) whether the subgroups differed from each other at program entry and on referral followup, (2) whether there were differences in terms of criminal behavior severity at program entry, and (3) what factors were related to subsequent criminal behavior. The findings indicate that decisions to refer youth to diversion treatment appear to be related more to extralegal than to legal factors. The most likely candidates for referral to treatment were black, female, residents of the city, 13-15 years-old, and accused of less serious offenses. Youth referred to treatment services tended to commit more serious offenses in the followup period than those not referred. The findings pose the question as to whether such diversion programs widen the net of juvenile processing and discriminate against certain classes of youth so as to outweigh the benefits of diverting youth from further formal processing. Tabular data, 53 references, and 6 notes are provided.