Goal Conflict in the Juvenile Court

Urban, Lynn S.; Cyr, Jenna L.; Decker, Scott H.

doi:10.1177/1043986203259484

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This bias seen in sentencers echoes an international perspective proposed by Urban, St. Cyr, and Decker (2003), in that the Court process seems to give unequal consideration in practice to the fact that many young people are highly vulnerable due to aversive life experiences. It questions to what extent sentencing guidelines for young people charged with sexually harmful offending are fully operationalized, that is, to consider the circumstances of the offense and “the effect on young people of experiences of loss or of abuse” (Sentencing Guidelines Council, 2009, p. 6).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…A recurring narrative during interview involved practitioner experiences of other agencies such as educational establishments/providers, housing departments, and the police perceiving young people who sexually harm as 'different' from other young people who commit non-sexual offences: There was evidence in interviews that some agencies (particularly legal professionals) approached the appraisal of these young people in an unsystematic and unprofessional way (as opposed to using structured professional judgement that is standard in assessing forensic risk This bias seen in sentencers echoes an international perspective proposed by Urban, St. Cyr, & Decker (2003), in that the Court process seems to give unequal consideration in practice to the fact that many young people are highly vulnerable due to aversive life experiences. It questions to what extent sentencing guidelines for young people charged with sexually harmful offending are fully operationalised i.e.…”

Section: Systemic Unease: Unease With Working Practices In Partner Agmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Holding the Child (and Practitioner) in Mind? Youth Justice Practitioners’ Experiences Supervising Young People Displaying Sexually Harmful Behavior

Myles-Wright¹,

Nee

2017

J Interpers Violence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This qualitative study explored the lived experiences of youth justice practitioners supervising young people (below 18 years old) displaying sexually harmful behavior within the Youth Justice System (YJS) in the United Kingdom, as little is currently known about the challenges faced when working with this vulnerable group. Five practitioners from two Youth Offending Services (YOS) participated in individual semistructured interviews, which were subjected to thematic analysis while also analyzing the performative function of language used. The analysis identified an overarching theme of "systemic unease," which contained two subthemes surrounding "unease with the self, and wider YOS personnel" and "unease working with partner agencies." The findings illuminate critical issues regarding future practice with this underresearched group of young people within the broader context of youth justice, which require further exploration and investigation. The "dual relationship problem" involving tension between risk management and therapeutic alliance is explored in relation to this group. The moral acquaintance model and the model of dynamic adaptation are suggested as helpful approaches to support practitioners and multi-agency professionals going forward in this area.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 80%

Section: Systemic Unease: Unease With Working Practices In Partner Agmentioning

confidence: 98%

Holding the Child (and Practitioner) in Mind? Youth Justice Practitioners’ Experiences Supervising Young People Displaying Sexually Harmful Behavior

Myles-Wright¹,

Nee

2017

J Interpers Violence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Past, Present, and Future of Juvenile Justice: Assessing the Policy Options (APO)

Buck-Willison¹,

Mears²,

Shollenberger³

et al. 2009

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders. research for safer communities We wish to thank Katherine Browning, Senior Social Science Analyst, at the National Institute of Justice, for her support and guidance throughout the study, and we gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Janet Chiancone, Research Coordinator, in the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention in advancing the study's objectives, as well as the continuous support, feedback, and guidance of researchers and staff within the National Institute of Justice and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Several current and former employees of the Urban Institute played critical roles in the APO project. Dr. Christy Visher, Principal Research Associate, provided invaluable guidance throughout the project and important criticisms of the survey instrument as it was being developed. Shannon Courtney constructed the web-interface for the online survey and assisted in managing key aspects of online data collection. David D'Oro provided critical technology support, and Benjamin Clark, Elizabeth Davies, and Sara Debus played other key roles. Many scholars also were consulted for the study. The project is especially indebted to the practitioners, researchers, and advocates who generously gave of their time and shared their insights regarding the policies and practices governing juvenile justice-involved youth. Although we appreciate the contribution of those noted above, and any others inadvertently omitted, the authors acknowledge their responsibility for any errors herein.

show abstract

Juvenile Economic Sanctions

Haynes

Cares

Ruback

2014

Criminology & Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research SummaryEconomic sanctions, particularly restitution, can help juvenile offenders both learn the extent of the harm they caused and assume responsibility for repairing that harm. If that assumption is true, then restitution should be imposed in every case for which it is appropriate, other factors should not affect imposition, and paying restitution should be negatively related to recidivism. This analysis of 921 juvenile cases in five Pennsylvania counties found that restitution was imposed in only 33% of cases for which it was appropriate, whereas fees were imposed in 66% of cases. Consistent with expectations, restitution was more likely to be imposed for property offenses, but contrary to expectations, restitution was more likely to be imposed for felonies and for males. Judges were less likely to revoke the sentences of juveniles who paid a greater percentage of their total economic sanctions and of juveniles whose violation of sentencing conditions was for nonpayment of economic sanctions. Policy ImplicationsGiven that support for both punitive and progressive policies exists, policy makers have a unique opportunity to pursue alternatives, like economic sanctions, that appeal to both perspectives. Economic sanctions are particularly important for juveniles because they are less likely to interfere with other financial obligations (in large part because juveniles have fewer financial obligations than do adults) and because they avoid the Juvenile Economic Sanctions stigma associated with more punitive sentences, such as incarceration. The negative relationship between payment of economic sanctions and recidivism, found in this study and in other studies, also suggests that, in both the short and the long term, economic sanctions are more cost-effective. Furthermore, the restorative aspect of economic sanctions, particularly restitution, suggests that policy makers should consider how best to impose and collect economic sanctions, as they also are consistent with efforts to improve the treatment of crime victims.

show abstract

Goal Conflict in the Juvenile Court

Cited by 4 publications

References 26 publications

Holding the Child (and Practitioner) in Mind? Youth Justice Practitioners’ Experiences Supervising Young People Displaying Sexually Harmful Behavior

Holding the Child (and Practitioner) in Mind? Youth Justice Practitioners’ Experiences Supervising Young People Displaying Sexually Harmful Behavior

Past, Present, and Future of Juvenile Justice: Assessing the Policy Options (APO)

Juvenile Economic Sanctions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About