U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Working Assumptions of Diversion Staff

NCJ Number
80114
Author(s)
C Ruby; K Polk
Date Published
1977
Length
22 pages
Annotation
A study comparing attitudes of youth service bureau staff and traditional juvenile justice personnel toward diversion and the causes of delinquency discovered few differences between the groups, indicating that diversion agencies have not become vehicles for change.
Abstract
Accumulating evidence is beginning to suggest that diversion programs are not diverting young people from the correctional experience, but may be increasing the numbers of juveniles who are exposed to the justice system. If diversion programs are to provide a real alternative to the justice system, there should be some observable differences in how staff look at the problem of delinquency. To test this hypothesis, questionnaires were completed by 83 professionals from 14 youth service bureaus and 91 probation officers and supervisors in 8 probation departments located in the Western United States. Data were also obtained on 168 respondents attached to the parole units of the California Youth Authority (CYA) and 427 staff members from 16 different CYA institutions from a previous study which had used a similar questionnaire. Items assessed the importance attached to the diversion concept and commitments to contemporary theories of delinquency. Analysis of this data revealed that the staff of youth service bureaus were more likely than justice system personnel to see problems arising from unnecessary legal processing and negative effects of the justice system. However, both youth service bureau and correctional personnel operated within a similar causal framework which emphasized individual or person-centered experiences rather than institution or situation-centered experiences as being important contributors to delinquency. For example, all groups generally ranked variables relating to family life highest in terms of causal importance and placed unemployment and opportunity variables at the bottom. This suggests that diversion programs do not counter institutional bias, but continue to place the weight of change on the group with the least power to bring about institutional change -- the deviant young persons themselves. To achieve their original objectives, diversion programs should involve all kinds of young persons and adults, allow participants to leave at any time without fear of reprisals, and provide positive opportunities for individuals to engage in constructive change of social conditions. Tables and 14 references are included.