NCJ Number
6810
Journal
Crime and Delinquency Volume: 18 Issue: 1 Dated: (JANUARY 1972) Pages: 79-92
Date Published
1972
Length
14 pages
Annotation
CONSIDERATION OF THE EXTENT TO WHICH A PARTICULAR METROPOLITAN JUVENILE COURT IS IMPLEMENTING THE PRINCIPLE OF INDIVIDUALIZED TREATMENT FOR JUVENILE OFFENDERS.
Abstract
THIS ARTICLE QUESTIONS BOTH THE ADVISABILITY AND THE ACCURACY OF VIEWING DELINQUENCY SOLELY AS A MATTER OF YOUTHFUL BEHAVIOR, AND NOTES THE LIMITATIONS OF A PURELY PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL. IT PRESENTS A POLITICAL DEFINITION OF JUVENILE DELINQUENCY, WHICH IS THUS SEEN AS ARISING OUT OF THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES OF THE JUVENILE COURT RATHER THAN OUT OF THE BEHAVIOR ITSELF. DATA ARE PRESENTED CONCERNING THE LEGAL AND SOCIAL SERVICES PROVIDED 229 YOUTH COMMITTED TO THE PIKEVILLE TENNESSEE STATE TRAINING SCHOOL OVER A FOUR-YEAR PERIOD, A LONG ENOUGH TIME TO PERMIT AN ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACT OF THE SUPREME COURT'S GAULT DECISION ON THE OPERATIONS OF THIS JUVENILE COURT. THE STUDY FOUND A HIGH RATE OF PRETRIAL DETENTION REGARDLESS OF THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE ALLEGED DELINQUENT ACT. THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION BY THIS COURT REGARDING THE USE OF PREHEARING DETENTION OR THE USE OF LAWYERS. FORTY-SEVEN PER CENT OF THE YOUTHS COMMITTED WERE COMMITTED WITHOUT EITHER THE SERVICES OF A LAWYER OR A PROBATION OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION. AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED