This study examined the impact of a diversionary juvenile arbitration program. The guiding question was "What works best for whom?" The arrest records of youth whose cases were arbitrated (n = 215) were compared to youth whose cases were handled informally (n = 73) and youth who went to court and were placed on probation (n = 58). Recidivism was the specific operationalization of program impact used. The broader system-wide consequences of the program were also studied. Specifically, the net-widening potential of this juvenile justice reform was examined by monitoring the operation of the juvenile court over time. / Case files were systematically sampled and reviewed and the computerized records of the state's human service agency were used to determine if a youth was rearrested within one year after program termination. In addition, seven and one-half years of quarterly data relating to referrals, judicial handling, probation, and commitments were collected and analyzed for both the program jurisdiction and the remainder of the state. / The findings indicate that relative to probation and informal handling, arbitration decreases the chances of rearrest for certain types of youth and increases the odds for others. Also, the specific nature of the arbitration sanction was not significantly related to a youth's chance of rearrest. / Youth referred to arbitration were significantly younger, charged with less serious offenses, and had less delinquent histories than probationers and youth handled informally. It is unlikely that these youth would have gone to court were it not for the new program. The program widened the net of the justice system by increasing the number of youth subject to court control and supervision. The program operated with minimal attention to youths' democratic rights, arbitrating cases which could not go to court for lack of evidence. / The operation of juvenile arbitration represents the ongoing decentralization and extension of social control in America and demonstrates the potential danger of increased state intervention into matters formerly left to families and informal community mechanisms. Arbitration also symbolizes a shift in diversion programming from a rehabilitative service orientation to one that emphasizes retributive sanctions. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 46-09, Section: A, page: 2811. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1985.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:fsu.edu/oai:fsu.digital.flvc.org:fsu_75639 |
| Contributors | EZELL, ROBERT MARKHAM., Florida State University |
| Source Sets | Florida State University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Text |
| Format | 164 p. |
| Rights | On campus use only. |
| Relation | Dissertation Abstracts International |
Page generated in 0.0021 seconds