NCJ Number
80885
Date Published
1981
Length
187 pages
Annotation
This report presents the findings and policy recommendations arising from a year-long study of policies for treatment and control of seriously violent juvenile offenders in Massachusetts.
Abstract
It focuses on problems in the current State juvenile justice system, violent juvenile crime trends in the State, the separate treatment of adults and juveniles under current policy, recent policy initiatives in other States, and the issue of transfer or waiver from juvenile to adult court. A variety of research methods were used to conduct the study, including an analysis of the records of all youths committed to correctional institutions for violent acts in 1975, 1977, and 1979, indepth interviews with over 100 State juvenile justice officials, and questionnaires mailed to an additional 200 juvenile justice respondents. Available literature on legislative and administrative practices in Massachusetts and other States and on violent crime trends among juveniles was also reviewed. The committee undertaking the study assumed that juvenile offenders deserve treatment, that the public deserves protection, that youths aged 14-16 should be held accountable for violent acts, and that the juvenile justice system should have a consistent intervention strategy and should provide for due process rights. It found a lack of uniformity in decisions regarding treatment and placement of violent juvenile offenders and a lack of relationship between the offense committed and the placement provided. It also found security in institutions housing serious juvenile offenders to be inadequate. Other problems identified were inadequate provision, monitoring, and evaluation of treatment and also the disruptive presence of political pressure affecting the handling of violent youths. In addition the committee found conflicts and inadequate communication between the courts and the corrections system and noted that lowering the age of criminal responsibility to 14 years for certain, violent offenses (as done in New York) does not always result in higher conviction rates or increased public safety. The committee examined measures taken by other States to improve their juvenile justice systems, particularly the presumptive sentencing model of Washington State and the designated felony model of New York State. The major recommendation calls for the option of a restrictive placement commitment to State corrections for repeat seriously violent juvenile offenders. Footnotes, graphs, tables, and chapter references are supplied. Appended materials include the study questionnaire and data collection form, the committee's interview guide, and about 50 references. (Author summary modified)