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.

There is growing concern that the management of persons with psychiatric disabilities after disaster has been inadequate. Unfortunately, the literature is extremely limited, and empirical evidence on the best practices for addressing the needs of persons with psychiatric disabilities after disasters is sparse. A literature search of articles published in 3 widely used databases revealed only 12 articles on the topic. The 12 reviewed articles included persons with psychiatric disabilities after both natural disasters and acts of terrorism, both in close proximity to the disaster site and far away and in 3 different treatment modalities. All of the studies used clinically based samples. The available literature indicated that many persons with psychiatric disabilities demonstrate an ability to handle the stress of a disaster without decompensation from their primary illness. However, the literature also revealed that persons with severe mental illness (SMI) can experience posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, anxiety, and illness exacerbation after disaster. There is evidence that persons with SMI can be resilient in the short term when they are enrolled in an assertive community treatment program prior to the disaster; however, the outcomes for people with severe mental illness in other treatment modalities are unclear. Well-designed studies with clinical and population-based samples on disaster reactions of persons with psychiatric disabilities are needed for disaster psychiatrists and emergency planners to develop empirically based treatment guidelines for this population.in the law as state and local governments, any department or other instrumentality of a state or local government, and certain transportation authorities. Emergency services, including state and local emergency operations, cannot legally discriminate against individuals with disabilities (Jones, 2005). One of the most important roles of local government is to protect its citizenry from harm, including helping people prepare for and respond to emergencies (Jones, 2005). Making local government emergency preparedness programs accessible to people with disabilities is a critical part of this responsibility and is also required by the ADA (Jones, 2005). Therefore, it is necessary for state and local governments to include adequate response and recovery plans for the psychiatrically disabled population in their emergency planning. The first step in developing proper disaster treatment and response protocols is a thorough assessment of the unique needs and responses of this population during times of disasters.One way to operationalize the term psychiatric disability is to use a benchmark of severity known as severe mental ill-

No abstract

No abstract