Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice

2014 Edition
| Editors: Gerben Bruinsma, David Weisburd

History of Juvenile Courts

Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5690-2_84

Overview

The juvenile court of today, often referred to as a quasi-criminal court, is seen primarily as a slightly less severe version of the adult criminal court. It exists to hold youth accountable for offenses committed while still offering some semblance of rehabilitation or treatment. Like adults, we speak of these juveniles as being arrested and sentenced. However, their sentences are typically less onerous than those imposed on more mature and culpable adult offenders by the criminal court. In reality, however, there are many more differences between the two systems of justice than a mere mitigation of punishment, not the least of which are their underlying purposes and origins. Indeed the seeds of the juvenile court were sown in social welfare and not the criminal justice system. The catalyst of its creation was not to merely modify the adult court, but rather to provide an entirely separate system of justice for juveniles that was not based on punishment at all, but rather...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Recommended Reading and References

  1. Bernard T (1992) The cycle of juvenile justice. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernard T, Kurlychek M (2010) The cycle of juvenile justice. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Bishop DM, Frazier CE (1988) The influence of race in juvenile justice processing. J Res Crime Delinq 25:242–263Google Scholar
  4. Blue Print Commission (2008) Getting smart about juvenile justice. Florida Department of Juvenile Justice, TallahasseeGoogle Scholar
  5. Brooks K, Kamine D (2003) Justice cut short: an assessment of access to counsel and quality of representation in delinquency proceedings in Ohio. American Bar Association, Criminal Justice Section, Juvenile Justice Center, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  6. Calvine EM (2003) Washington: an assessment of access to counsel and quality of representation in delinquency proceedings. American Bar Association, Criminal Justice Section, Juvenile Justice Center, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  7. Cauffman E, Steinberg L (2000) Immaturity and judgments in adolescence: why adolescents may be less culpable than adults. Behav Sci Law 18:741–769Google Scholar
  8. Feld B (1990) The punitive juvenile court and the quality of procedural justice disjunctions between rhetoric and reality. Crime Delinq 36:443–466Google Scholar
  9. Feld B (1993) Juvenile (in)justice and the criminal court alternative. Crime Delinq 39:403–424Google Scholar
  10. Feld B (1999) Bad kids: race and the transformation of the juvenile court. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Fox S (1970) Juvenile justice reform: an historical perspective. Stanf Law Rev 22:1187–1192Google Scholar
  12. Grisso T (1981) Juveniles’ waiver of rights. Plenum, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Grisso T, Schwartz R (2000) Youth on trial: a developmental perspective on juvenile justice. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  14. In re Gault (1967) 387 U.S. 1Google Scholar
  15. In re Winship (1970) 397 U.S. 358Google Scholar
  16. Kent v. United States (1966) 383 U.S. 541Google Scholar
  17. Lathrop J (1912) Introduction. In: Breckinridge SP, Abbott E (eds) The delinquent child and the home. Arno, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Maloney D, Armstrong T, Romig D (1988) Juvenile probation: the balanced approach. Juv Fam Court J 39:1–57Google Scholar
  19. McKeiver v. Pennsylvania (1971) 40 U.S. 528Google Scholar
  20. Mennel RM (1973) Thorns and thistles: juvenile delinquents in the United States, 1925–1940. University Press of New England, HanoverGoogle Scholar
  21. Miller-Wilson S (2003) Pennsylvania: an assessment of access to counsel and quality of representation in delinquency proceedings. American Bar Association, Criminal Justice Section, Juvenile Justice Center, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  22. Nagin DS, Piquero AR, Scott ES, Steinberg L (2006) Public preference for rehabilitation versus incarceration of juvenile offenders: evidence from a contingent valuation survey. Criminol Public Policy 5(4):623–672Google Scholar
  23. Pierce BK (1969) A half century with juvenile delinquents. Patterson-Smith, MontclairGoogle Scholar
  24. Platt A (1977) The child savers. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  25. Puritz P, Brooks K (2002) Kentucky advancing justice: an assessment of access to counsel and quality of representation in delinquency proceedings. American Bar Association, Criminal Justice Section, Juvenile Justice Center, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  26. Puritz R, Sun T (2001) Georgia: an assessment of access to counsel and quality of representation in delinquency proceedings. American Bar Association, Criminal Justice Section, Juvenile Justice Center, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  27. Singer SI (1996) Recriminalizing delinquency. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Snyder H, Sickmund M (2006) Juvenile victims and offenders: a national report. National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  29. Torbet P, Gable R, Hurst H, Montgomery I, Szymanski L, Thomas D (1996) State responses to serious and violent juvenile crime. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  30. Zimring F (1998) American youth justice. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Zimring FE (2005) American juvenile justice. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Criminal JusticeUniversity at Albany, State University of New YorkAlbanyUSA