E. Adolescent Diversion Program The Adolescent Diversion Program (ADP) is an advocacy oriented diversion program in Michigan created in 1976 from a study done by Michigan State University Professor, William Davidson. Davidson’s (1987) study included only youth that had been arrested and referred by the juvenile courts. The goal of Davidson’s (1987) study was to reduce recidivism among juveniles with serious criminal offenses as well as status offenses (Davidson et al, 1987). The study was conducted with 213 juveniles (228 were referred to the program, however, 8 refused and 7 dropped out) over the course of 5 years, in order to study the effectiveness of various components of the Adolescent Diversion Program (Davidson et al, 1987). According to Davidson’s (1987) study, the sample was 83% male with 26% being minorities. Davidson (1987) also found the participants were between 12-17 years old with the …show more content…
Researchers found 2-3 years after completing the program, youth had a 30.2% rate of recidivism (Wylie et al, n.d.). Those who did not successfully complete the program had at 51.1% to 61.1% rate of recidivism over the course of 2-3 years (Wylie et al, n.d.). This study also looked at whether the subsequent offenses were more or less severe (Wylie et al, n.d.). Wylie and Hobbs (n.d.) found 75.2% of offenses were of the same severity as the offense for which the youth was in the diversion program. Additionally, 7.6% decreased in severity and 17.2% increased in severity (Wylie et al, n.d.). Further, the research showed youth who were unsuccessful in the diversion program were less likely to commit an offense more severe than the original offense than juveniles who were never enrolled in a diversion program (Wylie et al,
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
The data that was assembled from the program was found inconclusive and conflicting (Gould, p.5). Recidivism rates seemed to remain the same while the perception that the youth had of their treatment improved but those results didn’t appeal to the public (Gould,
More specifically, it is a repeated cross sectional design examining the treatment given to identify problematic children bent on criminal proceedings. The research conclusion is based on the group’s assessment of the progress of the intervention program Beyond Scared Straight (BSS). Below is the rundown of the treatment, groups, tests, data collection and sample. The cumulative analysis will inevitably reveal what the effects psychological stress to affect criminally learned behavior. The treatment we are evaluating is experimental and determines whether the psychological shock of direct immersion into prison reality will deter troubled misdemeanant youths from continuing down a criminal pathway.
This program promotes a positive collaboration between offending youths, the justice system, and the community through the acceptance of responsibility, compliance with the disposition, and the completion of sanctions without a formal juvenile record. The intended outcome of this program is to reduce court backlogs, improve timeliness of case adjudication, cost savings, and accountability for first time, in some cases, second chances for misdemeanor offenders within the local community. Social learning theory proposes that youths learn deviance through imitation, cognitive definitions, differential reinforcement and association (Akers & Lee, 1996). Social influence theory contains conceptual elements of peer pressure, normative influence, and modeling (Maxwell, 2002).
This website discusses the main focus their diversion programs have when interacting with first time offenders. As it describes the main focus of the program it mentions how ninety percent of first time offenders who go through this program do not reoffend. This teen court diversion program is well known around the Lansing area of Michigan. It is well known because this program not just work with juveniles as they offend but also work closely with their family and the school they attend. Teen Court does not just focus on the individual it focuses on other factors that can potentially affect the youth.
This time of rehabilitation could also give him the help to make sense of his troubled childhood since he was never given an opportunity before his crime. There are many ways in which an offender not receiving rehabilitation could negatively affect them. In his viewpoint essay, Adult Sentencing Does Not Deter Juveniles from Crime, Enrico Paganelli uses a study on increased recidivism among juvenile offenders as an example of why rehabilitation is important for the future. This study was conducted by Jeffrey Fagan of Columbia and Paganelli states that Fagan “compared the recidivism rate of such youths charged in criminal court under New York's automatic transfer statute to those charged in New Jersey's juvenile court and found a significant increase in the recidivism of juveniles who had been transferred to the adult system”. This increase in recidivism would not greatly affect Miller if he was given a juvenile sentence.
The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, also can be referred as JJDPA, was originally called the Juvenile Delinquency Prevent and Control Act of 1968. The act of 1968 was to “to assist the courts, correctional systems, community agencies, and primary and secondary public school systems to prevent, treat, and control juvenile delinquency; to support research and training efforts in the prevention, treatment, and control of juvenile delinquency; and for other purposes,” (OJJDP). The interest in delinquency prevention, diversion and deinstrulationazation program starts between the 1960s-1980s. It was the initial way of getting the right help for youth in order to control and change their mindsets to prevent them from transferring
According to the National Institute of Justice, currently there are 1,558 drug courts within the United States, and 409 which are juvenile drug courts. The purpose of drug courts are to serve as an alternative to incarceration for drug offenders, based on a treatment-oriented approach. The research question that I have developed will address the effectiveness of drug courts on juvenile offenders compared to those adjudicated to traditional sentencing (i.e. Probation, Incarceration). Although many research has been conducted on the effectiveness of adult drug courts, less is known about effectiveness on
Juveniles referred to diversion programs are usually status offenders or first-time offenders. Most diversion programs require a juvenile to complete a number of tasks or complete a rehabilitative process. At the completion of the program, most times the juvenile 's record is wiped clean, as long as it was part of the agreement. Diversion programs are used most to avoid putting the juvenile into the formal
Within the urban communities, negative perceptions are magnified. Adolescents are more prone to be a product of their environment, especially those whose parents are incarcerated. Because of this trend adolescents are being incarcerated at an alarming rate and sentenced to adult facilities. Lambie & Randall (2013) states, the United States have imposed harsher penalties on serious young offenders, and have consequently increased rates of incarcerated youth and made it easier for youth to be treated and incarcerated as adults within the justice
The Juvenile Justice Delinquency Prevention and Protection Act (JJDPA) was established in 1974 and was the first federal law that dealt comprehensively with juvenile delinquency to improve the juvenile justice system and support state and local efforts at delinquency prevention. This paper will assess the JJDPA and summarize its purpose and implementation and enforcement. Next, there will be a discussion of the historical context of the policy; followed by a focus of the latent consequences. Finally there will be a vignette as to how this Act has affected a person or family as well as personal reflection toward the policy.
It is debated that juveniles are committing more serious and violent crimes because the youth think they can get off easy and take advantage of the system put in place. Those in favor of youth offenders being tried as adults believe that as juveniles are punished to the full extent of the law, future youth offender will think twice before committing a criminal act. In support of this, seventy-five percent of the transferred juveniles interviewed by Redding and Fuller (2004) felt that their experiences in the adult criminal justice system had taught them the serious consequences of committing crimes. As one juvenile explained, “[Being tried as an adult] showed me it’s not a game anymore. Before, I thought that since I’m a juvenile I could do just about anything and just get 6 months if I got
There are indication that most criminals have a juvenile records in the US, indicating that crime manifests from a tender age. Therefore, to reverse the incidence of crime, it follows that the best strategy is to reduce the criminal orientation in the juvenile offenders as opposed to hardening them and preparing them for criminal careers. The case of the Crossroads Juvenile Center demonstrates the willingness of the juvenile justice systems to make these changes on the children. References Day, S. (2014). Runaway Man: A Journey Back to Hope.
The literature that has been reviewed directly incorporates the principles set out in Goldson and Muncie “Youth Justice with Integrity”. The analysis of the current justice model attempts to maximize diversion by providing more offences available for extrajudicial measures and the use of measures for re-offenders. Additionally, it is argued that the de-politicization of the youth justice model will help the integrity by providing effective programs and services that will address the social needs of specific individuals within the available resources in the community. The programs and services that are being used are effective, but there are areas of improvement for greater prevention strategies which will hold a person more accountable for
Many teens get into some kind of trouble in their life whether it is at home or at school. Teens use drugs to “fix” these problems or committing suicide or crimes. These teens go to a juvenile justice center to fix their problems with help from the workers which sometimes doesn’t work and they come out as even worse than they had come to the center in the first place. Teens can either have learning disabilities, emotional and behavioral problems, and health issues.