- May 7, 2020
Juvenile Justice in Children Delinquency, Annotated Bibliography
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPY 17
JuvenileJustice in Children Delinquency, Annotated Bibliography
JuvenileJustice in Children Delinquency, Annotated Bibliography
Butts,J. A., Bazemore, G., Meroe, A. S., Ayala, T., Davis, K., Donohue, E.,… & Schlachter, W. (2010). Positive youth justice: Framingjustice interventions using the concepts of positive youthdevelopment. Washington, DC: Coalition for Juvenile Justice.
Aboutthe authors: Butts works at the Criminal Justice Research andEvaluation Center at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, New YorkCity, as an executive director Bazemore is a professor ofcriminology and criminal justice Meroe serves as a senior researchwith Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago. The methodology usedwas a systematic review of literature that is directly related to thetopic. Their findings showed that the ideas of positive youthdevelopment are very effective to design corrective or rehabilitationprograms for youth who are involved in offenses. Additionally, theysuggested that there is a need to make positive youth developmentframework to be different from other frameworks meant for normativeyouths. The objective of the research paper was to initiate andprovide an explanation for the positive youth justice model throughreviewing literature related to the development of adolescent andyouth justice system. They recommended that positive youthdevelopment is a framework that is efficient in designing generalinterventions for the youths. In their conclusion, Byrne& Case (2016) echoed a similar result by clarifying that with therising rates of juvenile delinquency, positive youth developmentinitiatives are pivotal in the restoration of the young individuals.That is because they are still under growth and development, andconfining them in prisons the way mature adults are handled will beunfair. Therefore, the recommendation by Butts etal.(2010) to consider the use of positive youth development as arestorative justice tool for juvenile delinquency is worthconsideration.
CarlPope & William Fayerherm, US Dep’T OF Justice, Office OFJuvenile Justice AND Delinquency Prevention,. (1995). Minorities andthe Juvenile Justice System.
Thefollowing are some vital information concerning the authors: Carl actas a Criminal Justice program at the University of Wisconsin, whileFayerherm is based at the Regional Research Institute at PortlandState University. The authors used quantitative and qualitativeresearch methods to conduct their study on the topic “Minoritiesand the Juvenile Justice System.” The research paper aimed toevaluate the significance of minority status (Native American,African American, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander) in thepreparation or processing and handling of children by the juvenilejustice system. The following are the core tasks that were conductedby the authors: a review of literature related to the minority statusand juvenile processing, identifying regulations that might havehandled differential processing of the minority youth, and review ofpre-existing data so as to establish the challenges that were facedwith previous studies. The following were the findings that weredeveloped from the study: disparity concern in the youth crime canjustify the number of minorities in the system of juvenile justicewithin the system, disparity association in crime is distinct fromwhat happens to the youth offenders. According to Spinneyetal.(2016), racial disparity dominates the juvenile justice system of theUnited States, with the Hispanics and the African-American childrenbeing implicated more than their peer whites. They attribute that tothe household income inequality that compels the children from theless financially stable families of the people of color to indulge indelinquent acts in an attempt to mask the frustrations they faceregarding the inability to have their needs covered. Therefore, theconsideration of that difference is decisive in the restoration ofjuvenile delinquency as determined by CarlPope & William Fayerherm.
Finkelhor,D., Turner, H. A., Shattuck, A., & Hamby, S. L. (2015).Prevalence of childhood exposure to violence, crime, and abuse:Results from the National Survey of Children’s Exposure toViolence. JAMApediatrics,169(8),746-754.
Relevantinformation about the authors: Finkelhor, Crimes Against ChildrenResearch Center, University of New Hampshire, Durham Turner is basedin the Department of Psychology, Sewanee, of The University of theSouth, Sewanee, located in Tennessee. Their study is important sinceit provides the effects and trend for violent behavior,transgression, and maltreatment in the lives of the youngindividuals. The primary goal of their research was to provide thevarious categories of individual, such as the policymakers withestimations of crime exposure, abuse, and violence among children atdifferent development stages. The methodology employed in the studywas a telephone interview, where they managed to obtain informationfrom 4000 children of age 0-17 years. The findings showed that 37.3%had physical assault, while 9.35 experienced assault-related injury.Similarly, 2% of the girls experienced sexual abuse during the yearthe study was conducted. On the other hand, caregivers were found tocontribute to the assault of children by 15.2%. They concluded thatchildren are exposed to different types of crimes, abuse, violencethat require persistence monitoring and prevention efforts.Evidently, more delinquent behaviors are reported in children whoonce faced neglect and abuse, and the consideration of these areas bythe justice system of juveniles is inevitable. After all, cases ofchild abuse (e.g. sexual trafficking) and parental lack of care (dueto alcoholism or low income) are very common in the United States,and should be carefully examined and contained (Moylanetal.,2010)
Finkelhor,D., Ormrod, R., & Chaffin, M. (2009). Juveniles Who Commit SexOffenses Against Minors. JuvenileJustice Bulletin.
Informationabout the authors includea: Finkelhor, University of new Hampshire,Main Campus Ormrod, University of Northern Colorado Chaffin,University of Oklahoma health Sciences Center. The topic of the studywas “Juveniles Who Commit Sex Offenses against Minors.” In thestudy, the method utilized by the authors was a systematic review,where they analyzed the data obtained from the NationalIncident-Based Reporting system (NIBRS). From the examinations, theywere able to provide statistics indicating the actuality thatjuveniles delinquency represent more than a third of the other typesof offenses. The following are some of the significant findings fromthe article: the total percentage of juvenile offenders who are onrecords account for about 35.6%. Similarly, juveniles who commitsexual offenses to other children are prone to commit such offensesat school, groups and other places. There is a sharp increase in thenumber of youths committing a sexual offense at the age between 12and 14 years with an increase during adolescence. When juvenileoffenders are analyzed, it reveals that 1 out of 8 is below 12 years.The number of female offenders is low compared to male, and theyaccount for about 7%. According to Bender(2010), the proportions of youths committing sexual crimes is on therise not only because of the neglect they were once subjected to, butas a retaliatory response to the same act, which they were exposed toin the past. In tandem with that, it is imperative to identify theabuse victims and subject them to a thorough psychological therapy toprevent tham from retaliating in the future (Bender, 2010).
Gonzales,J. (2015). TREATING ADULTS LIKE CHILDREN: TEXAS JUVENILE PAROLEHEARINGS AND THE TEXAS BOARD OF PARDONS AND PAROLES. Tex.Tech. Admin. LJ,17,107-153.
Thework that was done by Gonzales relating to the topic “TreatingAdults like Children: Texas Juvenile Parole Hearings and the TexasBoard of Pardons and Paroles.” The methodology employed by theauthor was a systematic review of literature that relates to the lawsabout the parole concerning the adults and children. From the study,the author established that there was a disparity in handlingcriminals, and it is mostly influenced by the age of a person.Similarly, that directive is different from the process of parole forjuveniles. Additionally, there are different techniques that areintended during the hearing, but they are intended to achieve asimilar goal. Concurrently, Buss(2011) acknowledged that the juvenile court system of the UnitedStates is on the verge of failing because of the persistentmisinterpretation of the age of the offenders. That has often endedup with an underage awarded a penalty that is equivalent to adultpunishment. Therefore, the court system must conceive and implementmeasures that will ensure that children are not punished with thesame intensity as adults.
Grossman,E. R., & Miller, N. A. (2015). A systematic review of the impactof juvenile curfew laws on public health and justice outcomes.Americanjournal of preventive medicine,49(6),945-951.
Concerningthe authors, both are Ph.D., the context of their study comprises ofan analysis of death and injuries of youths that are caused byautomobile crashes. Similarly, some of the youths have been evaluatedto undergo the consequences of being a victim of a crime orperpetrator. Therefore, one of the laws that regulate youths behavioris the juvenile curfew laws that prohibit youths from been on thestreet and public places at particular times. The methodology used toconduct research was a systematic review of existing literature thatevaluates the efficacy of these laws to address the issue. One of theresearch questions is whether the laws regarding juvenile curfew canbe utilized to enhance the public health of the youth as well as theresults of juvenile justice. Additionally, they used standards keywords whereby six studies that handle the issue of efficiency of lawsof juvenile curfew on the negative youth health outcome, five of thestudies had a positive impact. Their finding showed that juvenilecurfew laws are successful at controlling the adverse youth healthoutcomes such as juvenile crimes among others. In addition to thefact that curfews are efficient in containing juvenile delinquentbehaviors, Wilson,Olaghere & Gill (2016) argued that if applied carefully andconsistently, curfews help to eliminate the possibility ofvictimization and wrong accusations, meaning that the number ofchildren being charged for offenses they never committed will dropunder the strategy.
Harnisher,J. L., Abram, K., Washburn, J., Stokes, M., Azores‐Gococo,N., & Teplin, L. (2015). Loss due to death and its associationwith mental disorders in juvenile detainees. Juvenileand family court journal,66(3),1-18.
Theauthors Harnisher et al. (2015) handled the topic “Loss due todeath and its association with mental disorders in juveniledetainees.” The primary fucus of the research was to assess theincidence of loss that is caused by deaths that are related tomentally ill detained youths in Chicago, Illinois. The designed usedfor the research was a quantitative that composed of randomlyselected participants of about 898 young people. The findings showedthat approximately 90% had an experiencing of losing an importantperson in their life. Similarly, some of the loss experienced bythese youths is considered as high-risk, since they resulted fromviolence or sudden loss. Additionally, it was established thatminority children were likely to experience a particular risk. Thestudy further showed that some of the youths who have experiencedloss or multiple losses were at risk of developing mood disorder andADHD/behavioral disorder at the same time. On the other hand, youthswho have not experienced and server loss were unlikely to developsuch complications. The authors recommended that implementinginterventions that concentrates on modifiable protective factorsafter the loss can result in positive outcomes among these vulnerableyouths. Espinosa,Sorensen & Lopez (2013) made similar observations in their study,noting that children in confinement report increased incidences ofhealth-related complications, which range from mental disorders oftrauma to a severe depression. Consequently, the juvenile justicesystem is encouraged to adopt other corrective measures rather thanimprisonment if the status of wellbeing is to be maintained forchildren.
Harris,A. J., Lobanov-Rostovsky, C., & Levenson, J. S. (2010). Wideningthe Net The Effects of Transitioning to the Adam Walsh Act’sFederally Mandated Sex Offender Classification System. CriminalJustice and Behavior,37(5),503-519.
Backgroundinformation about the authors: Harris, University of MassachusettsLobanov-Rostovsky, Colorado Sex Offenders Management Board, ColoradoDivision of Criminal Justice and Levenson, Lynn University.Methodology employed to conduct the research is the systematic reviewof existing literature that talks about various act related to youthsex offenders. Among the findings drawn from the study are: sexual orrecidivism incidence among the juveniles who carry out sexualoffenses either to the adult or peers is not different from those whocommit such act against children. Similarly, the rate of sexualrecidivism ranges between 7%-13% and that depends on the study.Additionally, when juveniles who commit sexual offenses were comparedto adults who commit such crimes, it is evident that the rate ofyouths is lower. Moreover, when the juveniles who perpetrate sexualoffenses become adults they are more likely to engage in such crimes,but others will still commit them. The final findings showed thatjuveniles who are involved in sexual felonies have an elevated rateof general recidivism in comparison to sexual recidivism prevalence.The above findings are in line with the outcomes of the study byCaldwell(2010), who noted that although the frequency of sexual recidivismremains low, the fact that more children are engaging in sexualcrimes will reverse the situation in the future. That is because theincidences of recidivism among the young individuals who executesexual abuse is affected by the offense, which is unfortunatelygrowing in the U.S., and worth scrutiny by the system of juvenilejustice.
Harris,P. W., Lockwood, B., Mengers, L., & Stoodley, B. H. (2011).Measuring recidivism in juvenile corrections. Journalof juvenile justice,1(1),1-16.
Thefollowing are the information about the authors, Harris, Departmentof Criminal Justice, Temple University Lockwood, MonmouthUniversity’s Department of Criminal Justice Mengers, Council ofJuvenile Correctional Administrators Stoodley, Maine Department ofCorrections. The method employed to conducted studies that enabledthem to develop standards that are useful to define and measurerecidivism, which consisted of five components. One of the componentsincludes a survey of the members of the agency regarding questionsraised by the state agency. The finding derived from the studystated that there is going to be an increase in the demand for theaccountability within juvenile justice when the government becomesaccustomed to increased information. They recommended that clearcommunication concerning the program outcomes and system performanceis very significant to improve on standard definitions. Additionally, they suggested that to improve the effectiveness ofrecidivism, it is important to formulate standards that can help indefining and measuring recidivism. Chu& Thomas (2010) reiterated that a permanent solution torecidivism is possible only if a clear relationship can beestablished between sexual offenses by the juveniles and typologyotherwise it will be needless to recommend strategies for thecontainment of the situation.
Lipsey,M. W., Howell, J. C., Kelly, M. R., Chapman, G., & Carver, D.(2010). Improving the effectiveness of juvenile justice programs.Washington,DC: Georgetown Center for Juvenile Justice Reform.
Informationabout the authors include Lipsey, Peabody Research Institute ofVanderbilt University Howell, Criminologist at Pinehurst of NorthCarolina Kelly, Consultant, Richmond, Virginia Chapman, PeabodyResearch Institute, Vanderbilt University Carver, Juvenile JusticeProgramming Consultant, META L.L.C. The method employed to conductthe research was a meta-analysis approached that helped to establishthe impact of juvenile offenders’ intervention programs. Theprimary aim of conducting the research was because there was amisunderstanding in the United States’ juvenile justice system. Thetensions that have been in existence related to the punishment foryouths violating the law and the role of government as the arm thatis responsible for restoring behavior among the youths who havecommitted a crime. They find out that the juvenile system has beenutilizing longstanding methods of managing behavior includingcustodial care and community supervision. Similarly, they suggestedthat those methods have not been used effectively so that they cangenerate a positive outcome. On the other hand, Henggeler& Schoenwald (2011) have recommended evidence-based interventionsas the best programs to exploit to bring transparency and success inthe justice system of juveniles. Accordingly, the authors argued thatthrough such interventions, the courts will be sure about thedecisions they make about delinquent acts, and the correctivemeasures to adopt based on the past results.
Michaels,A. (2016). A DECENT PROPOSAL: EXEMPTING EIGHTEEN-TO TWENTY- YEAR-OLDSFROM THE DEATH PENALTY. NYURev. L. & Soc. Change,40, 139-181.
Theauthor Michaels worked on the research topic titled “A DecentProposal: Exempting Eighteen-To Twenty-Year-Olds from the DeathPenalty.” The method utilized in the study was a systematic reviewlaw and social change. The paper investigated the events of beingsentenced to death, and in this case, it critically analyzed DzhokharTsarnaev case due to his role he played in Boston bombing. Therefore,the author wanted to establish the fact that juvenile should beexempted from capital punishment and an alternative measure be taken.The findings showed that the action that was taken by Dzhokhar wasvery brutal, but it would be prudent if his life were spared. Thearticle was not in any way disputing the move taken by the court bythey were arguing that Dzhokhar belongs to a particular class ofoffenders and that should be considered to exempt him from death. The research paper was not only concentrating on the issue ofDzhokhar, but they were considering the life of other youths whomight commit crime at of eighteen to twenty that may warrant death.Differences in these approaches are due to the strategy employed andalso the factors that are considered when making judgments. Thestudy concluded that there is need to compare the methods and thatcan help to determine the strategy that can serve it’s purposedadequately. In what would look as the simplest summation of juveniledeath sentencing, Berry(2010) clarified that such a punishment is unnecessary because itdenies a developing child the right to life. In actual sense,sentencing a young individual who is yet to complete the face ofsocial and cognition development would be the biggest error of alltime in the juvenile justice system (Berry, 2010).
Monahan,K., Steinberg, L., & Piquero, A. R. (2015). Juvenile justicepolicy and practice: A developmental perspective. Crime& Just.,44,557-557.
Theauthors Monahan etal.(2015), elaborated on the topic “Juvenile justice policy andpractice: A developmental perspective.” The designed utilized bythe authors was a systematic review of existing literature thatfocuses on juvenile justice policies and practices. According totheir finding, they showed that the juvenile courts that werestructured in the past handled children different from how adults aredealt with when in courts. The primary objective of juvenile courtwas directed towards rehabilitation as opposed to punishment. Withnumerous transformations that are taking place in the juvenilecourts, there have been shifts towards punishment and rehabilitation.Such changes in juvenile policy were experienced in the mid-twentiethcentury. Such changes were influenced by factors such as changes incrime rates, public perception, political culture, and publicpolicies. The assertions by Patacchini& Zenou (2012) are supportive of the above findings. The tworesearchers, on their work regarding juvenile delinquency andconformism, argued that the root causes of offenses among childrenare multifaceted and correlated, and include social, economic,political, and environmental factors. On that regard, it is advisablethat the policymakers in the juvenile justice discipline consider theaforementioned areas in the drafting of restorative laws for childrenoffenses (Patacchini & Zenou, 2012).
Shattuck,A., Finkelhor, D., Turner, H., & Hamby, S. (2016). Childrenexposed to abuse in youth-serving organizations: results fromnational sample surveys. JAMApediatrics, 170(2),e154493-e154493.
Informationconcerning the authors, Shattuck, Crimes Against Children ResearchCenter, University of New Hampshire, Durham, and Finkelhor, theUniversity of the South, Sewanee, Tennessee. The study is significantbecause it is a national concern to protect children in theorganizations that serve the youth. The aim of the study was to givean estimate of children who are exposed to abuse in the organizationsthat function in serving the youths to the clinicians, parents andpolicy makers. The design utilized in the study comprised oftelephone survey from three National Surveys of Children’s Exposureto Violence (represented by information from 2008, 2011, and 2014surveys). The sample used was 13,052 children and youths who areranging from ages 0-17 years old. The findings showed that the rateof abuse of children who were serving in the in those organizationswas standing at 0.4%. Maltreatment accounted for about 63.2%, andthey were mostly verbal, and those who were exposed to sexual abuseaccounted for 6.4%. They concluded that abuse within theyouth-serving organizations is not a common act. However, Wurtele(2012) argued that no matter how insignificant the issue of youthabuse in their workplace may seem to some, it is a serious cause ofdelinquency among the children, and must be corrected immediately.Specifically, sexual abuse has become a norm in several youth-servingorganizations, whereby the young job seekers are lured into sex toearn employment and such individuals are likely to do the same whenthey gain administrative positions.
Stokes,M. L., McCoy, K. P., Abram, K. M., Byck, G. R., & Teplin, L. A.(2015). Suicidal Ideation and Behavior in Youth in the JuvenileJustice System A Review of the Literature. Journalof Correctional Health Care,21(3),222-242.
Thearticle was written by Wiley etal.(2015), the topic of their paper was addressing the issue of“Suicidal Ideation and Behavior in Youth in the Juvenile JusticeSystem.” The methodology used to conduct the studies was reviewingarticles that address the issue of concern stated above. Furthermore,the authors also based their research on the status of incarcerationand the justice processing stages. Some of the findings that werereached from the study include: the suicidal ideation and behavior’sprevalence are common, and they tend to increase with the associationin the juvenile justice system. Additionally, suicidal ideation isdetermined by the following factors trauma, depression and sexualabuse. Moreover, they find out that the rate of suicidal ideationand behavior varies across sex and race. They recommended that thereis a need to formulate and implement gender-specific and culturallyappropriate interventions. Javdani,Sadeh & Verona (2011) made the issue of suicidal ideation clearby asserting that it is attributed to mental stress, trauma, anddepression. Hence, the inclusion of inappropriate juvenile justiceremedies which illicit the above situations often result inself-murder by the young victims who are unable to accommodate thepsychological distress.
Wiley,T., Belenko, S., Knight, D., Bartkowski, J., Robertson, A., Aarons,G., … & Jones, D. (2015). Juvenile Justice-TranslatingResearch Interventions for Adolescents in the Legal System(JJ-TRIALS): a multi-site, cooperative implementation science cooperative. ImplementationScience,10(1),1.
Inthe article, Wiley etal.(2015) aimed to address the issue of “Juvenile Justice-TranslatingResearch Interventions for Adolescents in the Legal System(JJ-TRIALS).” Their study was enhanced by examining various models,for instance, EPIS that would increase service delivery concerningthe contentious system of juvenile justice. The primary objectives ofthe authors were to formulate and explain the implementation scienceinitiatives for the youths who are justice-involved. The methodologyemployed was a critical analysis of other research papers that havebeen conducted in the past also known as a systematic review. Theirfindings showed that there are likely improvements that areassociated with the implementation of the proposed strategies thatprevent youths from engaging from drug abuse. Therefore, the paperprovides a roadmap on how consumption of drugs among youths can beavoided by implementing EPIS model. According to Andrews& Bonta (2010), one of the primary reasons for the highdelinquent behaviors among the children and adolescents is substanceabuse. Therefore, the baseline for controlling the situation would beto eliminate the leading cause, and that calls for the utilization ofrestorative strategies that can prevent the youths from indulging indrug malpractices.
Andrews,D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). Rehabilitating criminal justice policyand practice. Psychology,Public Policy, and Law, 16(1),39.
Bender,K. (2010). Why do some maltreated youth become juvenile offenders?: Acall for further investigation and adaptation of youthservices. Childrenand Youth Services Review, 32(3),466-473.
Berry,W. W. (2010). More different than life, less different thandeath. OhioState Law Journal, 71(6),1112.
Buss,E. (2011). Failing Juvenile Courts and What Lawyers and Judges Can Doabout It. Nw.JL & Soc. Pol`y, 6(3),318.
Byrne,B., & Case, S. (2016). Towards a positive youth justice. SaferCommunities, 15(2),69-81.
Caldwell,M. F. (2010). Study characteristics and recidivism base rates injuvenile sex offender recidivism. InternationalJournal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 54(2),197-212.
Chu,C. M., & Thomas, S. D. (2010). Adolescent sexual offenders: Therelationship between typology and recidivism. Sexualabuse: a journal of research and treatment, 22(2),218-233.
Espinosa,E. M., Sorensen, J. R., & Lopez, M. A. (2013). Youth pathways toplacement: The influence of gender, mental health need and trauma onconfinement in the juvenile justice system. Journalof youth and adolescence, 42(12),1824-1836.
Henggeler,S. W., & Schoenwald, S. K. (2011). Evidence-Based Interventionsfor Juvenile Offenders and Juvenile Justice Policies that SupportThem. Social Policy Report. Societyfor Research in Child Development,25(1),321-329.
Javdani,S., Sadeh, N., & Verona, E. (2011). Suicidality as a function ofimpulsivity, callous–unemotional traits, and depressive symptoms inyouth. Journalof abnormal psychology, 120(2),400.
Moylan,C. A., Herrenkohl, T. I., Sousa, C., Tajima, E. A., Herrenkohl, R.C., & Russo, M. J. (2010). The effects of child abuse andexposure to domestic violence on adolescent internalizing andexternalizing behavior problems. Journalof family Violence, 25(1),53-63.
Patacchini,E., & Zenou, Y. (2012). Juvenile delinquency andconformism. Journalof Law, Economics, and Organization, 28(1),1-31.
Spinney,E., Yeide, M., Feyerherm, W., Cohen, M., Stephenson, R., &Thomas, C. (2016). Racial disparities in referrals to mental healthand substance abuse services from the juvenile justice system: areview of the literature. Journalof Crime and Justice, 39(1),153-173.
Wilson,D. B., Olaghere, A., & Gill, C. (2016). Juvenile curfew effectson criminal behavior and victimization: a Campbell Collaborationsystematic review. Journalof Experimental Criminology,14(4),1-20.
Wurtele,S. K. (2012). Preventing the sexual exploitation of minors inyouth-serving organizations. Childrenand Youth Services Review, 34(12),2442-2453.