Formal System Processing of Juveniles: Effects on Delinquency

Abstract

The Campbell Collaboration was founded on the principle that systematic reviews on the effects of interventions will inform and help improve policy and services. Campbell offers editorial and methodological support to review authors throughout the process of producing a systematic review. A number of Campbell's editors, librarians, methodologists and external peer reviewers contribute. Plain language summaryInterventions to reduce homelessness and improve housing stability are effectiveThere are large numbers of homeless people around the world. Interventions to address homelessness seem to be effective, though better quality evidence is required. What is this review about?There are large numbers of homeless people around the world. Recent estimates are over 500,000 people in the USA, 100,000 in Australia and 30,000 in Sweden. Efforts to combat homelessness have been made on national levels as well as at local government levels.This review assesses the effectiveness of interventions combining housing and case management as a means to reduce homelessness and increase residential stability for individuals who are homeless, or at risk of becoming homeless. What is the aim of this review?This Campbell systematic review examines the effectiveness of interventions to reduce homelessness and increase residential stability for individuals who are homeless, or at risk of becoming homeless. Forty-three studies were included in the review, 37 of which are from the USA. What studies are included?Included studies were randomized controlled trials of interventions for individuals who were already, or at-risk of becoming, homeless, and which measured impact on homelessness or housing stability with follow-up of at least one year.A total of 43 studies were included. The majority of the studies (37) were conducted in the United States, with three from the United Kingdom and one each from Australia, Canada, and Denmark. 6The Campbell Collaboration | www.campbellcollaboration.org What are the main findings of this review?Included interventions perform better than the usual services at reducing homelessness or improving housing stability in all comparisons. These interventions are: These interventions seem to have similar beneficial effects, so it is unclear which of these is best with respect to reducing homelessness and increasing housing stability. What do the findings of this review mean?A range of housing programs and case management interventions appear to reduce homelessness and improve housing stability, compared to usual services.However, there is uncertainty in this finding as most the studies have risk of bias due to poor reporting, lack of blinding, or poor randomization or allocation concealment of participants. In addition to the general need for better conducted and reported studies, there are specific gaps in the research with respect to: 1) disadvantaged youth; 2) abstinence-contingent housing with case management or day treatment; 3) non-abstinence contingent housing comparing group vs independent living; 4) Hous...

Juvenile Justice Policy and Practice: A Developmental Perspective

“…Coupled with evidence that transfer policies have no deterrent effects on youthful offenders (McGowen et al 2007), 21 the weight of the evidence suggests that involvement with the juvenile justice system does more harm than good, with negative effects magnified as punishments become harsher (Petrosino, Turpin-Petrosino, and Guckenburg 2010;Mears et al 2011). This does not imply that the system cannot be effective, especially if meaningful services are provided to the youths, but that current justice system practices do not appear to deter criminal activity.…”

Towards a positive youth justice

“…Considering 29 studies of juvenile offending over 35 years Petronsino et al (2010) concluded that formal processing increased the likelihood, frequency and severity of further offending. This was true when formal processing Diversion from the formal system is part of a range of 'systems management' techniques, which inform decision-making within and beyond the YJS in order to improve outcomes for children (Haines and Case 2015).…”

Restorativeness, Procedural Justice, and Defiance as Long-Term Predictors of Reoffending of Participants in Family Group Conferences

“…Some studies have reported promising reductions in juvenile recidivism following restorative justice interventions (Petrosino, Guckenburg, & Turpin-Petrosino, 2010), but other scholars have been more critical of these studies due to potentially biasing flaws in research design (Weatherburn, McGrath, & Bartels, 2012). Admittedly, restorative justice programs are unlikely to replace conventional justice programs in the foreseeable future.…”