Home  About us  Contact
 

Juvenile Crime (juvenile + crime)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Law and Criminology80%

Selected Abstracts

PUBLIC PREFERENCES FOR REHABILITATION VERSUS INCARCERATION OF JUVENILE OFFENDERS: EVIDENCE FROM A CONTINGENT VALUATION SURVEY,

CRIMINOLOGY AND PUBLIC POLICY, Issue 4 2006
DANIEL S. NAGIN
Research Summary: Accurately gauging the public's support for alternative responses to juvenile offending is important, because policy makers often justify expenditures for punitive juvenile justice reforms on the basis of popular demand for tougher policies. In this study, we assess public support for both punitively and nonpunitively oriented juvenile justice policies by measuring respondents' willingness to pay for various policy proposals. We employ a methodology known as "contingent valuation" (CV) that permits the comparison of respondents' willingness to pay (WTP) for competing policy alternatives. Specifically, we compare CV-based estimates for the public's WTP for two distinctively different responses to serious juvenile crime: incarceration and rehabilitation. An additional focus of our analysis is an examination of the public's WTP for an early childhood prevention program. The analysis indicates that the public is at least as willing to pay for rehabilitation as punishment for juvenile offenders and that WTP for early childhood prevention is also substantial. Implications and future research directions are outlined. Policy Implications: The findings suggest that lawmakers should more actively consider policies grounded in rehabilitation, and, perhaps, be slower to advocate for punitive reforms in response to public concern over high-profile juvenile crimes. Additionally, our willingness to pay findings offer encouragement to lawmakers who are uncomfortable with the recent trend toward punitive juvenile justice policies and would like to initiate more moderate reforms. Such lawmakers may be reassured that the public response to such initiatives will not be hostile. Just as importantly, reforms that emphasize leniency and rehabilitation can be justified economically as welfare-enhancing expenditures of public funds. The evidence that the public values rehabilitation more than increased incarceration should be important information to cost-conscious legislators considering how to allocate public funds. Cost-conscious legislatures may become disenchanted with punitive juvenile justice policies on economic grounds and pursue policies that place greater emphasis on rehabilitation. They may be reassured, on the basis of our findings, that the public will support this move. [source]

The Role of Youth Problem Behaviors in the Path From Child Abuse and Neglect to Prostitution: A Prospective Examination

JOURNAL OF RESEARCH ON ADOLESCENCE, Issue 1 2010
Helen W. Wilson
Behaviors beginning in childhood or adolescence may mediate the relationship between childhood maltreatment and involvement in prostitution. This paper examines 5 potential mediators: early sexual initiation, running away, juvenile crime, school problems, and early drug use. Using a prospective cohort design, abused and neglected children (ages 0,11) with cases processed during 1967,1971 were matched with nonabused, nonneglected children and followed into young adulthood. Data are from in-person interviews at approximately age 29 and arrest records through 1994. Structural equation modeling tested path models. Results indicated that victims of child abuse and neglect were at increased risk for all problem behaviors except drug use. In the full model, only early sexual initiation remained significant as a mediator in the pathway from child abuse and neglect to prostitution. Findings were generally consistent for physical and sexual abuse and neglect. These findings suggest that interventions to reduce problem behaviors among maltreated children may also reduce their risk for prostitution later in life. [source]

What Do Juvenile Offenders Know About Being Tried as Adults?

JUVENILE AND FAMILY COURT JOURNAL, Issue 3 2004
Implications for Deterrence
ABSTRACT An underlying assumption in the nationwide policy shift toward transferring more juveniles to criminal court has been the belief that stricter, adult sentences will act as either a specific or general deterrent to juvenile crime. With respect to general deterrence,whether transfer laws deter would-be offenders from committing crimes,it is important to examine whether juveniles know about transfer laws, whether this knowledge deters criminal behavior, and whether juveniles believe the laws will be enforced against them. The current study is one of the first to examine juveniles' knowledge and perceptions of transfer laws and criminal sanctions. We interviewed 37 juveniles who had been transferred to criminal court in Georgia, obtaining quantitative as well as qualitative data based on structured interviewed questions. Four key findings emerged. First, juveniles were unaware of the transfer law. Second, juveniles felt that awareness of the law may have deterred them from committing the crime or may deter other juveniles from committing crimes, and they suggested practical ways to enhance juveniles' awareness of transfer laws. Third, the juveniles generally felt that it was unfair to try and sentence them as adults. Finally, the consequences of committing their crime were worse than most had imagined, and the harsh consequences of their incarceration in adult facilities may have had a brutalizing effect on some juveniles. The implications for general and specific deterrence are discussed. [source]

Young People, Crime and School Exclusion: A Case of Some Surprises

THE HOWARD JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, Issue 1 2005
Philip Hodgson
Coinciding with this rise was a resurgence of the debate centring on lawless and delinquent youth. With the publication of Young People and Crime (Graham and Bowling 1995) and Misspent Youth (Audit Commission 1996) the ,common sense assumption' that exclusion from school inexorably promoted crime received wide support, with the school excludee portrayed as another latter day ,folk devil'. This article explores the link between school exclusion and juvenile crime, and offers some key findings from a research study undertaken with 56 young people who had experience of being excluded from school. Self-report interview questions reveal that whilst 40 of the young people had offended, 90% (36) reported that the onset of their offending commenced prior to their first exclusion. Moreover, 50 (89.2% of the total number of young people in the sample), stated that they were no more likely to offend subsequent to being excluded and 31 (55.4%) stated that they were less likely to offend during their exclusion period. Often, this was because on being excluded, they were ,grounded' by their parents. [source]

PUBLIC PREFERENCES FOR REHABILITATION VERSUS INCARCERATION OF JUVENILE OFFENDERS: EVIDENCE FROM A CONTINGENT VALUATION SURVEY,

CRIMINOLOGY AND PUBLIC POLICY, Issue 4 2006
DANIEL S. NAGIN
Research Summary: Accurately gauging the public's support for alternative responses to juvenile offending is important, because policy makers often justify expenditures for punitive juvenile justice reforms on the basis of popular demand for tougher policies. In this study, we assess public support for both punitively and nonpunitively oriented juvenile justice policies by measuring respondents' willingness to pay for various policy proposals. We employ a methodology known as "contingent valuation" (CV) that permits the comparison of respondents' willingness to pay (WTP) for competing policy alternatives. Specifically, we compare CV-based estimates for the public's WTP for two distinctively different responses to serious juvenile crime: incarceration and rehabilitation. An additional focus of our analysis is an examination of the public's WTP for an early childhood prevention program. The analysis indicates that the public is at least as willing to pay for rehabilitation as punishment for juvenile offenders and that WTP for early childhood prevention is also substantial. Implications and future research directions are outlined. Policy Implications: The findings suggest that lawmakers should more actively consider policies grounded in rehabilitation, and, perhaps, be slower to advocate for punitive reforms in response to public concern over high-profile juvenile crimes. Additionally, our willingness to pay findings offer encouragement to lawmakers who are uncomfortable with the recent trend toward punitive juvenile justice policies and would like to initiate more moderate reforms. Such lawmakers may be reassured that the public response to such initiatives will not be hostile. Just as importantly, reforms that emphasize leniency and rehabilitation can be justified economically as welfare-enhancing expenditures of public funds. The evidence that the public values rehabilitation more than increased incarceration should be important information to cost-conscious legislators considering how to allocate public funds. Cost-conscious legislatures may become disenchanted with punitive juvenile justice policies on economic grounds and pursue policies that place greater emphasis on rehabilitation. They may be reassured, on the basis of our findings, that the public will support this move. [source]