Race, Ethnic, and Gender Divides in Juvenile Court Sanctioning and Rehabilitative Intervention

Abstract

Objectives: Drawing on focal concerns theory, as well as scholarship on the juvenile court's mandate to consider youth culpability and amenability to treatment, we develop hypotheses that seek to examine whether the court will (1) punish Whites less severely and (2) be more likely to intervene with Whites through rehabilitative intervention and, simultaneously, be more punitive and less rehabilitative with minorities, and, in particular, Black males. Method: Florida juvenile court referral data and multinomial logistic regression analyses are used to examine multicategory disposition and ''subdisposition'' measures. Results: Findings suggest that minority youth, especially Black males, are not only more likely to receive punitive sanctions, they also are less likely than White youth to receive rehabilitative interventions and instead experience significantly higher rates of dismissals. The analyses indicate that similar racial and ethnic disparities emerge when ''subdispositions''-specifically, placement options within diversion and probation-are examined. Conclusions: The results underscore the salience of race, ethnicity, and gender in juvenile court decisions about punitive sanctioning and rehabilitative intervention, as well as the importance of employing multicategory disposition measures that better reflect the range of sanctioning and intervention options available to the court.

Punishment within Prison: An Examination of the Influences of Prison Officials’ Decisions to Remove Sentencing Credits

“…We also found that an inmate's incarceration history, designation as a sexual offender, or whether they were incarcerated for a violent offense had no effect on prison officials decision‐making regarding good time. These findings not only run counter to what would be expected under the uncertainty avoidance, attribution, or focal concerns perspectives, but they are also inconsistent with findings derived from studies of judicial sentencing decisions (e.g., Cochran and Mears ; Griffin and Wooldredge ; Johnson ; Spohn and Holleran ; Steffensmeier and Demuth ; Steffensmeier, Ulmer, and Kramer ; Ulmer and Johnson ; Ulmer, Kurlychek, and Kramer ).…”

Disproportionality and Disparities among Sexual Minority Youth in Custody

“…Studies have interrogated how a young person's race, gender, and age can influence judicial decision-making, including out-of-home placements and length of sentencing, controlling for factors such as crime severity and criminal history (e.g., Bishop, Lieber, & Johnson 2010; Bridges & Steen 1998; Cochran & Mears 2014; Fader, Kurlychek, & Morgan 2014; Guevara, Herz, Spohn 2006). While the disproportionate number of sexual minority girls in juvenile justice system may be in part the result of the explicit and implicit bias of decision-makers, more research is needed to understand the extent to which sexual orientation is salient in juvenile justice processing, and how this relates to other youth characteristics (e.g., gender expression, race, history of mental health problems) and contextual factors (e.g., family support, homelessness history).…”

Juvenile Court and Contemporary Diversion

“…Historically, the juvenile court has emphasized active intervention in the lives of youth to help them succeed in life. From this perspective, dismissing minor cases from juvenile court is inappropriate and, indeed, would be unjust and inconsistent with the court's mission (Cochran and Mears, 2015;Tanenhaus, 2004). At the same time, informal processing and sanctioning helps, in theory, to ensure that youth receive balanced, individualized intervention rather than excessive punishment (Guarino-Ghezzi and Loughran, 2004;Howell et al, 2014).…”