Abstract
The impact of a new state juvenile code on the processing of youth through one court locale was examined using an interrupted time-series design. The intent of the new code was to limit penetration of youth into the juvenile justice system. This locale, however, showed an increased number of youth going through to court despite no increase in the number of youth arrested. The importance of this paradoxical effect for local juvenile justice planners and court officials is discussed briefly.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Blomberg, T. The juvenile court as an organization and decisionmaking system.International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 1977,1(2), 135–145.
Box, G. E. P., & Jenkins, G. M.Time series analysis: Forecasting and control. San Francisco: Holden-Day, 1976.
Carter, B., & Klein, M. W.Back on the streets: The diversion of juvenile offenders. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1976.
Comment. Rehabilitation as the justification of a separate juvenile justice system.California Law Review, 1976,64, 984–1023.
Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T.Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago, Ill.: Rand-McNally, 1979.
Elmore, R. F. Backward mapping: Implementation research and policy decisions.Political Science Quarterly, 1979-1980,94, 601–606.
Empey, L.American delinquency: Its meaning and construction. Homewood, Ill.: Dorsey Press, 1978.
Goldstein, H.Policing a free society. Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger, 1977.
Handler, J., & Zatz, J. The implementation system: Characteristics and change. In National Academy of Sciences, Panel on the Deinstitutionalization of Children and Youth,Neither angels nor thieves: Studies in deinstitutionalization of status offenders, in press.
Hellum, F. Juvenile justice: The second revolution.Crime and Delinquency, 1979,25, 299–318.
Institute of Judicial Administration/American Bar Association.Juvenile justice standards project. Standard relating to juvenile misconduct. Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger, 1977.
Johnston, J.Econometric methods (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, 1972.
Kelly, J. G. The quest for valid preventive interventions. In G. Rosenblum (Ed.),Issues in community psychology and preventive mental health. New York: Behavioral Publications, 1971.
King, J. L.A comparative analysis of juvenile codes. Community Research Forum, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1980.
Klein, M. W. Issues in police diversion of juvenile offenders. In R. M. Carter & M. W. Klein (Eds.),Back on the street: The diversion of juvenile offenders. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1976.
Klein, M. W. Deinstitutionalization and diversion of juvenile offenders: A litany of impediments. In N. Morris & M. Tonry (Eds.),Crime and justice 1978. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979.
Lamiell, J. T. Discretion in juvenile justice: A framework for systematic study.Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1979,6, 76–101.
Lipton, D., Martinson, R., & Wilks, J.The effectiveness of correctional treatment. New York: Praeger, 1975.
Miller, J.The revolution in juvenile justice (from rhetoric to rhetoric). Manuscript published by Kenyon Public Affairs Forum, 1978.
National Academy of Sciences. Panel on Deinstitutionalization of Children and Youth,Neither angels nor thieves: Studies in deinstitutionalization of status offenders, in press.
National Criminal Justice Information and Statistics Service.Dictionary of criminal justice terminology. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976.
Nock, S., & Alves, W. Competing definition of troublesome children. In National Academy of Sciences, Panel on Deinstitutionalization of Children and Youth,Neither angels nor thieves: Studies in deinstitutionalization of status offenders, in press.
Picciano, V. M. Maintaining the status quo in Virginia (letter).Crime and Delinquency, 1979,25, 373.
Rappaport, J., Seidman, E., & Davidson, W. S. Demonstration research and manifest versus true adoption: The natural history of a research project to divert adolescents from the legal system. In R. F. Muñoz, L. R. Snowden, & J. G. Kelly (Eds.),Social and psychological research in community settings. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1979.
Ross, H. L., Campbell, D. T., & Glass, G. V. Determining the social effects of a legal reform: The British “breathalyser” crackdown of 1967.American Behavioral Scientist, 1970,13, 493–509.
Rothman, D. The state as parent: Social policy in the progressive era. In Q. Gaylin, I. Glasser, S. Marcus, & D. J. Rothman,Doing good. New York: Pantheon Books, 1974.
Rubin, T. The eye of the juvenile court judge: A one-step-up view of the juvenile justice system. In M. W. Klein (Ed.),The juvenile justice system. Beverly Hills: Sage, 1976.
Sabatier, P., & Mazmanian, D. The implementation of public policy: A framework for analysis.Policy Studies Journal, 1979-1980, Special Issue #2,8(4), 638–650.
Schur, E.Radical nonintervention: Rethinking the delinquency problem. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1973.
Skolnick, J.Justice without trial. New York: Wiley, 1966.
Whitebread, C., & Paulsen, M. G.Juvenile law and procedure. Reno, Nev.: National Association of Juvenile Court Judges, 1974.
Wilson, J. Q.Varieties of police behavior. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1968.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mulvey, E.P., Hicks, A. The paradoxical effect of a juvenile code change in Virginia. Am J Commun Psychol 10, 705–721 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01312600
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01312600