TRENDS IN STATE CORRECTION - JUVENILES AND THE VIOLENT YOUNG OFFENDER

• NCJ Number: 56235
• Journal: Crime and Delinquency Volume: 25 Issue: 2 Dated: (APRIL 1979) Pages: 145-161
• Author(s): R D VINTER
• Date Published: 1979
• Length: 17 pages
• Corporate Author: National Council on Crime and Delinquency
• Sale Source: National Council on Crime and Delinquency; UMI Dissertation Services
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: PRICE QUOTED IS FOR SINGLE ISSUE

Annotation

THIS TRENDS ANALYSIS OF STATE CORRECTIONS FOR JUVENILE OFFENDERS FOCUSES ON PROBLEMS THAT THE FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF RATIONAL AND RESPONSIVE JUVENILE POLICY CONTINUE TO PRESENT FOR STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.

Abstract

NATIONWIDE, BETWEEN 1970 AND 1974, THERE WAS A SHARP DECREASE IN JUVENILE INSTITUTIONALIZATION AND ONLY A SLIGHT RISE IN ADULT INCARCERATION. CORRELATION ANALYSIS OF ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN STATE RATES OF JUVENILE AND ADULT INSTITUTIONALIZATION AND LEVELS OF FOUR CRIME CATEGORIES (TOTAL INDEX, VIOLENT, PROPERTY, AND BURGLARY) INDICATED NO LINK BETWEEN CRIME AND JUVENILE INSTITUTIONALIZATION RATES. HOWEVER, ASSOCIATIONS WERE FOUND BETWEEN CRIME AND ADULT INSTITUTIONALIZATION RATES. IT IS ARGUED THAT SUCH UNDERINSTITUTIONALIZATION, PARTICULARLY FOR VIOLENT JUVENILES, RESULTS BECAUSE STATE JUVENILE JUSTICE POLICIES AND PRACTICES IMPEDE THE RATIONAL ASSIGNMENT OF YOUNG OFFENDERS ACCORDING TO THE SEVERITY OF AN OFFENSE. FURTHERMORE, YOUTHS WHO COMMIT VIOLENT AND OTHER SERIOUS CRIMES OFTEN ARE MIXED IN ALL KINDS OF STATE FACILITIES WITH LARGE PROPORTIONS OF MISDEMEANANT AND STATUS OFFENDERS. THERE ARE SEVERAL POSSIBLE EXPLANATIONS FOR THESE IRRATIONAL PATTERNS OF TREATMENT. INCREASING FISCAL CONSTRAINTS, AGGRAVATED BY ESCALATING COSTS OF DAILY OPERATIONS, HAVE LEAD TO THE REDUCTION OF NUMBERS IN JUVENILE CORRECTION FACILITIES. ALSO, DESPITE THE RHETORICAL EMPHASIS ON PLANNING, COORDINATION, AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS, DISJUNCTURES AND CLEAVAGES EXIST BETWEEN NEARLY ALL LOCAL AND STATE LEVEL OPERATIONS, RESULTING MOSTLY FROM AMBIGUOUS POLICIES, PRIORITIES, AND GUIDELINES. ANOTHER CONTRIBUTING FACTOR IS JUVENILE CORRECTION'S MARGINALITY IN GOVERNMENT PLANNING AND POLICYMAKING; ITS AFFAIRS RECEIVE LITTLE PRIORITY AND NO CONSISTENT ATTENTION FROM POLITICAL PARTIES OR LEGISLATURES. IT ALSO SEEMS THAT MOST STATE ADMINISTRATORS ARE HAMPERED BY INADEQUATE INFORMATION PROCEDURES WHICH ARE INCAPABLE OF SUPPLYING SUFFICIENT DATA TO GUARANTEE THAT VARIOUS TYPES OF OFFENDERS ARE DIFFERENTIALLY ASSIGNED AMONG ALTERNATIVE FACILITIES. REFERENCES ARE FOOTNOTED.