This document provides an overview of restorative justice legislation and policy across various US states. It discusses how some states have incorporated restorative justice principles into statutes, policies, and programs. It identifies three states (Pennsylvania, Alaska, and South Carolina) as models in implementing restorative justice reforms through consistent restorative language in their missions, legislation, policies, and programs. The document also analyzes specific types of restorative programs and principles that have been codified into law in different states.
Balanced and restorative justice for juvenilessevans-idaho
- The juvenile justice system has traditionally focused on either treatment or punishment alone, but both approaches have failed to satisfy the needs of victims, communities, and offenders.
- A new model called Balanced and Restorative Justice aims to address these shortcomings by focusing on making amends to victims, increasing offender competencies, and protecting public safety through processes where victims, offenders, and communities are active participants.
- Implementing this model requires systemic reforms like developing new goals and resources, redefining roles, and piloting new programs that accomplish sanctioning, rehabilitation, and public safety objectives.
This document discusses juvenile delinquency systems in Mexico and the United States. It notes that Mexico reformed its system in 2005 to separate juvenile and adult offenders and implement a system focused on rehabilitation rather than punishment. Both countries now emphasize restorative justice methods like counseling and education instead of incarceration. The reforms in Mexico were influenced by concepts of human rights and research showing juveniles' diminished responsibility due to age. The document evaluates how both countries consider social factors that may contribute to juvenile crimes, such as poverty, abuse, and gang involvement. It argues restorative justice is more effective at rehabilitation and preventing recidivism compared to punitive models.
This document summarizes New Mexico's behavioral healthcare crisis and proposes reforms. Key points:
- New Mexico faces high rates of substance abuse and mental illness that burden the state financially and socially.
- Previous reforms failed to create an effective, coordinated system, and a 2013 scandal further divided stakeholders.
- The summary argues that simply increasing funding will not solve problems and that New Mexico must reform its system through more effective policies rather than looking to the dysfunctional US federal system for guidance or funds.
The document is a task force report with recommendations to reduce criminal recidivism in North Carolina. It finds that the current system is inefficient and underfunded to support the large number of ex-offenders released each year without supervision. The task force recommends: 1) Creating a continuum of assessment-based services for ex-offenders from intake through one year after release; 2) Increasing educational and job training programs in prisons to teach skills needed for current jobs; 3) Improving access to stable housing for ex-offenders.
Francisco Estrada 2013
El estado de Missouri ha creado un sistema de justicia juvenil que ha tenido tanto éxito en los últimos 30 años que se ha conocido como el "Milagro de Missouri.“”
Lo constituyen una serie de prácticas que se combinan para hacer único el sistema de Missouri :
Se compone sobre todo de pequeñas instalaciones, en general diseñadas para entre 10 y 30 jóvenes, cerca de los hogares de los jóvenes.
Estas instalaciones no se parecen a las cárceles con las celdas tradicionales; sólo hay ocho celdas de aislamiento en todo el estado, que se utilizan raramente y sólo en situaciones de emergencia
http://justiciapenaladolescente.blogspot.com/
Material del Diplomado en Intervenciones especializadas con adolescentes infractores de ley penal. 2013
Universidad de Chile
Recidivism Socially Just Policy Miriam and EricaMiriam Holbrook
This policy proposal aims to reduce recidivism rates in Michigan by revising the state's prisoner reentry program, MPRI. The proposal calls for increased community participation, addressing the needs of minority groups, and providing services that support well-being and reduce barriers to reentry. It summarizes research finding that programs providing case management, employment assistance, treatment, and support networks after release are effective at reducing recidivism. However, cuts to MPRI funding threaten progress. The proposal seeks to improve MPRI through culturally appropriate programming and support from community organizations.
WHITE PAPER SUMMIT PREVENT LEGAL DETOX 101514 docxAngelo Papa
This document outlines the mission and approach of the Substance Abuse Coalition Summits Inc. organization. The coalition aims to facilitate informed debates on substance abuse issues through presentations featuring experts in education, law, and medicine. It advocates for a coordinated legal and medical team approach for both prevention and treatment referrals. Recent summits have included presentations from doctors, judges, lawyers, and other professionals on topics like prescription drug abuse, treatment options, and drug courts. The coalition teaches that combining legal accountability with evidence-based medical treatment can help address the widespread problems of substance abuse.
Balanced and restorative justice for juvenilessevans-idaho
- The juvenile justice system has traditionally focused on either treatment or punishment alone, but both approaches have failed to satisfy the needs of victims, communities, and offenders.
- A new model called Balanced and Restorative Justice aims to address these shortcomings by focusing on making amends to victims, increasing offender competencies, and protecting public safety through processes where victims, offenders, and communities are active participants.
- Implementing this model requires systemic reforms like developing new goals and resources, redefining roles, and piloting new programs that accomplish sanctioning, rehabilitation, and public safety objectives.
This document discusses juvenile delinquency systems in Mexico and the United States. It notes that Mexico reformed its system in 2005 to separate juvenile and adult offenders and implement a system focused on rehabilitation rather than punishment. Both countries now emphasize restorative justice methods like counseling and education instead of incarceration. The reforms in Mexico were influenced by concepts of human rights and research showing juveniles' diminished responsibility due to age. The document evaluates how both countries consider social factors that may contribute to juvenile crimes, such as poverty, abuse, and gang involvement. It argues restorative justice is more effective at rehabilitation and preventing recidivism compared to punitive models.
This document summarizes New Mexico's behavioral healthcare crisis and proposes reforms. Key points:
- New Mexico faces high rates of substance abuse and mental illness that burden the state financially and socially.
- Previous reforms failed to create an effective, coordinated system, and a 2013 scandal further divided stakeholders.
- The summary argues that simply increasing funding will not solve problems and that New Mexico must reform its system through more effective policies rather than looking to the dysfunctional US federal system for guidance or funds.
The document is a task force report with recommendations to reduce criminal recidivism in North Carolina. It finds that the current system is inefficient and underfunded to support the large number of ex-offenders released each year without supervision. The task force recommends: 1) Creating a continuum of assessment-based services for ex-offenders from intake through one year after release; 2) Increasing educational and job training programs in prisons to teach skills needed for current jobs; 3) Improving access to stable housing for ex-offenders.
Francisco Estrada 2013
El estado de Missouri ha creado un sistema de justicia juvenil que ha tenido tanto éxito en los últimos 30 años que se ha conocido como el "Milagro de Missouri.“”
Lo constituyen una serie de prácticas que se combinan para hacer único el sistema de Missouri :
Se compone sobre todo de pequeñas instalaciones, en general diseñadas para entre 10 y 30 jóvenes, cerca de los hogares de los jóvenes.
Estas instalaciones no se parecen a las cárceles con las celdas tradicionales; sólo hay ocho celdas de aislamiento en todo el estado, que se utilizan raramente y sólo en situaciones de emergencia
http://justiciapenaladolescente.blogspot.com/
Material del Diplomado en Intervenciones especializadas con adolescentes infractores de ley penal. 2013
Universidad de Chile
Recidivism Socially Just Policy Miriam and EricaMiriam Holbrook
This policy proposal aims to reduce recidivism rates in Michigan by revising the state's prisoner reentry program, MPRI. The proposal calls for increased community participation, addressing the needs of minority groups, and providing services that support well-being and reduce barriers to reentry. It summarizes research finding that programs providing case management, employment assistance, treatment, and support networks after release are effective at reducing recidivism. However, cuts to MPRI funding threaten progress. The proposal seeks to improve MPRI through culturally appropriate programming and support from community organizations.
WHITE PAPER SUMMIT PREVENT LEGAL DETOX 101514 docxAngelo Papa
This document outlines the mission and approach of the Substance Abuse Coalition Summits Inc. organization. The coalition aims to facilitate informed debates on substance abuse issues through presentations featuring experts in education, law, and medicine. It advocates for a coordinated legal and medical team approach for both prevention and treatment referrals. Recent summits have included presentations from doctors, judges, lawyers, and other professionals on topics like prescription drug abuse, treatment options, and drug courts. The coalition teaches that combining legal accountability with evidence-based medical treatment can help address the widespread problems of substance abuse.
Fundamental Concepts Scope and Steps in Program Evaluation. .docxstarkeykellye
Fundamental Concepts: Scope and Steps in Program Evaluation.
A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT AND EXPLAIN THE TYPE OF EVALUATION EMPLOYED IN THE CASE.
The anticipation and power of juvenile offending is first assumed as a procedure containing of unlike levels of intrusions, containing schooling and obstacle at the neighborhood level among criminal approvals and intrusions to rebuild juvenile offenders and adjust them into the neighborhood. “Articles 37, 39 and 40 of the convention on the rights of the child pertain to children’s rights with respect to the juvenile justice system and, more generally, the criminal justice system as a whole”. Lastly, a few other match ethics happen which are located on generally known tactics to juvenile offense and the analysis of children in battle with the law. These ethics obligation enlighten and monitor improvement actions in the juvenile justice region
They present a convincing structure in reach which cultures and neighborhoods are likely to describe their own reaction to juvenile offense and profile the involvement of the criminal justice system in the exists of children in battle with the law. The Second Chance Act supports state, local, and tribal governments and nonprofit organizations in their work to reduce recidivism and improve outcomes for people returning from state and federal prisons, local jails, and juvenile facilities. Passed with bipartisan support and signed into law on April 9, 2008, SCA legislation authorizes federal grants for vital programs and systems reform aimed at improving the reentry process. The U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of justice programs funds and administers the second chance act grants within the bureau of justice assistance awards SCA grants serving adults, and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention awards grants serving youth. Since 2009, more than 700 awards have been made to grantees across 49 states.
Nevertheless, even when captured closely, these ethics don’t present a detail programming image or detail leadership on how programmers ought to be created sequentially to bring current preparations into obedience with the theories underlying these ethics. In everyday conditions, estimating a design includes establishing if the aims of the programmers were suitable the actions were effectively realized and the aims were met. In this case it would be a summative impact evaluation, because it would be a long term effects of an intervention.
EXPLAIN WHETHER THIS WAS A NEEDS ASSESSMENT, FORMATIVE, PROCESS, OR SUMMATIVE (IMPACT) EVALUATION AND WHY.
I would use a summative impact evaluation, because “NCCD conduct program evaluations in juvenile justice, adult corrections, child welfare, adult protection, and poverty/economic support to estimate the impact of various program, initiatives, and system reform efforts on the populations served”. Our extremely capable and skilled explore staff service quant ...
Balanced and restorative justice for juvenilessevans-idaho
- The juvenile justice system has traditionally focused on either treatment or punishment alone, but both approaches have failed to satisfy the needs of victims, communities, and offenders.
- A new model called Balanced and Restorative Justice aims to address these shortcomings by focusing on making amends to victims, increasing offender competencies, and protecting public safety through processes where victims, offenders, and the community are active participants.
- Implementing this model requires systemic reforms like developing new goals and resources, redefining roles, and piloting programs to build consensus and test the approach.
This document discusses police and probation partnerships as a strategy to reduce recidivism. It begins by outlining the problems of increased incarceration and high recidivism rates in Massachusetts. It then discusses how partnerships between police and probation officers can help address issues like lackluster supervision and weak enforcement policies among probation officers. Examples are given of successful programs in Boston, Texas, and California where probation officers partnered with police officers for intensive supervision of high-risk offenders, which reduced crime and recidivism rates. The benefits and potential challenges of such partnerships are also examined.
CRJ 570 Social Justice Project Guidelines The Social.docxfaithxdunce63732
CRJ 570
Social Justice Project Guidelines
The Social Justice Project Paper will involve trend analysis, fact-finding policy analysis for
practitioner evidence-based decision-making, and a triangulation of criminal justice, social
justice, and responsible stewardship. The paper must be a minimum of 3,800 words in
length, but must not exceed 4,500 words.
The paper requires a minimum of 5 different non-worldwide web internet references. The
paper must be typewritten, double-spaced, standard margins, and follow the APA style and
format. The paper will be submitted through Turnitin.com. No previously submitted papers,
articles, reports or projects, in whole or part, to any university or college will be accepted. It
is expected that this will be your original work. No more than 15% of your entire document
can be quoted. The Social Justice Project Paper is 25% of your overall grade for this course.
The criminal justice system is the action mechanism for enforcing social ideologies and
policies related to acceptable and unacceptable behaviors. Moreover, the socially acceptable
sanctions and penalties are applied to law violators through the criminal justice system.
Certain sanctions carry periods of incarceration which can result in structural impediments
to re-entry as noted by convict criminologists. To place the re-entry issue into perspective,
according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), more than 700,000 state and federal
prisoners returned to their communities in 2010. Furthermore, 95 percent of state inmates
will be released into their communities at some point in time according to BJS. Today,
recidivism rates remain high though states invest more than $50 billion annually in
corrections. According to one 2011 Pew Center on States report, despite significant
increases in state funding of prisons, from a national perspective more than four in ten
offenders return to state prison within three years of their release. Recidivism is measured
by criminal violations or violations of conditions of parole or probation that resulted in the
re-arrest, reconviction, or return to prison with or without a new sentence during a three-
year period following the prisoner's release at an average annual cost of $24,000 per
offender. Recidivism can represent new victims, higher tax expenditures associated with law
enforcement, prosecutorial, and judicial processes and re-incarceration, unsupported
families, public assistance, and other negative social ramifications. A 2007 forecasting
report by the Public Safety Performance Project of the Pew Charitable Trusts, stated “If
current trajectories continue, state and federal prisons will grow by 13 percent by 2013,
adding an additional 192,000 prisoners at a cost of $27.5 billion.”
Society is responsible for the laws and the sanctions, and society as a whole benefits from
the laws and sanctions when applied. Therefore, does social justice.
REDEFINING THECriminalJusticS Y S T E MPHYLLIS BACK,.docxsodhi3
REDEFINING THE
Criminal
Justic
S Y S T E M
PHYLLIS BACK, C J
Historically, the judicial system,
law enforcement, and corrections
have each had separate goals and visions
for achieving the united mission of safety and
justice within the criminal justice commtinity. Today,
it appears that these goals have hindered the original
intent or purpose of those goals. Progressing into the second
decade of the 21st century, the criminal justice system has realized
that to achieve its ultimate mission—public safety—for its citizens, it must
be united in redefining its goals and visions. This approach requires a profound
across-the-board collaboration in a manner that thus far has not been broached.
JANUARY i FEBRUARY 2013 AMERICANjails
The contemporary criminal justice system must
respond in a proactive rather than a reactive man-
ner to provide both the necessary and immediate
sanctions for the convicted, and at the same
time ensure that victims' needs are addressed
respectfully. One way to achieve this is
to implement a program tor the sole
\
purpose ot sharing information about
all new arrests. This information
includes:
• Family history and
background.
• Delinquent offenses.
• Previous encoun-
ters with the
law.
• Prior
convictions.
• Probation or
parole mandates.
• Work history
• Education
Stable living condifions.
The strategy is to share this
information during an inmate's entire
involvement with the criminal justice
system. For the data program assessment,
an offender would be evaluated annually and
i continuum ot care established and shared with
' every participating agency—^beginning at pretrial,
following through to the completion ot any mandated
requirements of post-release sentencing. All informa-
tion pertaining to treatment interventions, including an
offender's progress and failure with his or her treatment
plans, is entered into the data program. It an offender
relapses or reotfends, the data are updated and the con-
tinuum is reestablished to help redirect as needed.
Legislative Approaches
The criminal justice system needs legislative support
tor sentencing practices such as habilitation, rehabilita-
tion, restoration, and réintégration. Criminal sanctions
that lack intervention and prevention strategies are not
a deterrent trom future criminal activity. Creating laws
that mark people as criminals tor the remainder of their
lives denies former imnates the opporttinities available
to other citizens.
To address these issues, legislators and officials estab-
lished the Public Safety Performance Project (PSPP) in
2006. The tocus of PSPP is not only to allow ex-oftenders
to return to the community as productive members of
society, but also to improve public safety. (See "Public
Safety Performance Project.")
It laws continue to limit ottenders' opportunities tor
employment (including selt-employment), education,
and housing, the criminal justice system is only fostering
further criminal behavior. As mention ...
The California legislature and governor approved $41.3 million to fund two new proposals that promote pre-arrest diversion for youth. The Youth Reinvestment Fund provides $37.3 million over three years for community-based interventions for youth accused of minor offenses instead of arrest. The Fostering Success Fund allocates $4 million to support foster youth at risk of criminalization through training for staff and increased services. These initiatives aim to improve outcomes for vulnerable youth by addressing underlying needs through developmentally appropriate and culturally sensitive programs, resulting in better life outcomes and enhanced public safety compared to arrest and incarceration.
Running head JUVENILE JUSTICE REFORMS1JUVENILE JUSTICE RE.docxcowinhelen
Running head: JUVENILE JUSTICE REFORMS
1
JUVENILE JUSTICE REFORMS
9
The Juvenile System Reforms
Stephanie Rincon
Professor: Captain W. Michael Koval
Criminal Justice Capstone
February 7, 2018
Introduction
A criminal activity committed by an adult is normally considered as a crime and is punishable by law but when the same crime is committed by a child, it is not considered a crime but a juvenile delinquency. The American juvenile system has been focusing on a rehabilitation model which means that the primary goal entails rehabilitating the offenders as opposed to punishing them (Goswami & Mehra, 2014). However, it is imperative to point out that the United States is slowly shifting from the rehabilitation model and getting utterly tougher on the juveniles. This has seen rising opposition and support in equal measure. Individuals opposing shifting from the rehabilitation model view children or adolescents as persons who needs assistance and hence should not be subjected to destructive punishments. On the other hand, individuals in support of the shift argue that children and adolescents are more likely to commit heinous crimes such as murder when they know they can easily get free after committing a crime. The following section evaluates whether juvenile justice systems should shift from the rehabilitation model as a deterrence to juvenile delinquency.
Discussion
In more than a century ago, a separate juvenile system was established in the U.S. with the aim of diverting young offenders from the destructive punishments in the criminal courts so as to encourage the much needed rehabilitation (Leve & Chamberlain, 2005). This system was to focus on a child as a person in need of assistance. Actually, the proceedings were informal where discretion was left to the judge handling the case. It is imperative to point out that the judge was supposed to act in the best interests of the child but an offender was denied procedural safeguards such as right to a jury, right to an attorney and right to confront an accuser among others (Maschi, Hatcher, Schwalbe & Rosato, 2008). Further, the proceedings were supposed to be confidential so as not to interfere with a child’s ability to reintegrate into the society.
After the establishment of the separate system, there was a rising tension between social welfare and social control. This means that focus on the best interests of the offenders as opposed to focus on punishments and protecting the society from certain offenses. Various occurrences followed such as increasing violent crime in the 1980s which called for reforms in dealing with serious offenses and concern for public safety (Huizinga, Schumann, Ehret & Elliott, 2003). 17 states redefined purpose of the Juvenile courts to emphasize public safety and offender accountability. In the U.S., 51 states and District of Columbia have different juvenile justice systems. In majority of the states, there are legal reforms and policy changes that focus on mor ...
This document discusses juvenile delinquents and different treatment models used in the juvenile justice system. It describes how treatment models aim to address the underlying causes that led youth to commit crimes through rehabilitation rather than punishment. The document also discusses biblical principles of restorative justice and how some diversion programs use a restorative justice model to restore both the victim and offender.
Overview of the Implementation of Restorative Justice in Indonesia’s Criminal...AHRP Law Firm
Restorative justice has been actively incorporated into domestic criminal legal systems globally, including Indonesia. Indonesia's legal system has been aiming to transform its criminal justice approach from retributive to restorative. However, there are still some notes on its implementation which could be studied in deeper sense by, among others, considering and contemplating on how the other countries implement such approach in their criminal justice systems as a parameter to see Indonesia's milestone in achieving the spirit of restorative justice.
This document discusses how administrators can promote organizational change to support integrated service delivery between child protection and juvenile justice systems. It provides examples from Outagamie County, Wisconsin. The key points are:
1) Administrators must form an alliance between the two systems by having candid discussions to address misperceptions and establish trust.
2) They must establish common goals around safety, well-being and outcomes for dual-status youth by engaging stakeholders across systems.
3) Administrators need to provide compelling and unified messaging around the vision for change using data to establish urgency and make the case for reform.
4) They must tie the organizational changes to proven practices and guide staff in developing new protocols to jointly
This document provides information and instructions for applying for National Legal Assistance and Elder Rights Projects grants from the U.S. Administration on Aging (AoA). The grants aim to enhance and coordinate elder rights legal assistance through activities like training, technical assistance, publishing materials, and case consultations. Eligible applicants are national non-profit organizations with experience providing nationwide support to elder rights programs. AoA plans to fund approximately 5 new projects at $150,000 per year for 3 years. Applications are due by July 8, 2005 and must meet requirements around planning, implementation, management, and reporting.
Taap Conference Therapeutic Jurisprudence Models In San Antonio Texas FinalGilbert Gonzales
This presentation will discuss the origin of the Therapeutic Jurisprudence from Mental Health Law and its evolution to include addiction and dual diagnosis youths and adults involved in the criminal justice system. A national movement of Drug Courts, which execute therapeutic justice strategies to motivate high recidivist populations toward treatment in lieu of incarceration, is occurring across the US.
The Supreme Court ruled that mandatory life sentences without parole for juveniles are unconstitutional. In response, NCYL has helped pass legislation in California to create opportunities for release for those already sentenced as juveniles to life without parole. NCYL also works to develop parole policies that take into account youths' diminished culpability and potential for rehabilitation. Additionally, NCYL partners with public defenders to improve representation of youth in the juvenile justice system by advocating for community-based rehabilitation services instead of incarceration.
Reply1CollapseHilary Clinton once said, We need a cost-ef.docxchris293
Reply1
Collapse
Hilary Clinton once said, “We need a cost-effective, high quality health care system, guaranteeing health care to all of our people as a right” There are a set of resources that govern the body of our health care delivery system. Some of the sectors of the system include protocols, standard care of delivery and policies.
Protocols are a set of rules governed by nursing practice by the state or federal level, it allows providers to maintain quality services and educate staff (Heymann, 1994). Policy is the agreement, contract, that describes all terms and conditions to meet the need of people (Mason, et al, 2017). Standard of care is a collective body of knowledge required for the nurse to know and sets minimum criteria for proficient practice (IMC, 2003).
Policies at the federal level are set to regulate and maintain on influencing nursing and nursing practice, they also determine who gets funding for specific programs, such as health research, education, and Medicare or Medicaid programs (Mason, et al, 2017). States determine their own scope of nursing practice and govern their own practice act (Mason, et al, 2017). Collectively, State and federal level determine regulations under government programs such as Medicare. In essence the resources all provide balance to the health care delivery system; Protocols, Policies, Standard delivery of care, are key to quality health care delivery.
The healthcare delivery system is responsible to deliver quality care to patients, such as hospitals, outpatient clinics, insurance plans, purchasers of health care services and independent practices (IMC, 2003). Delivery systems are either private sector, nonprofit or for profit. Perceptions of the patient, provider, payer and policy maker differ in a health care delivery system. The patient assumes to receive quality care, access to care and affordability. Providers must deliver quality health care services in efforts to maintain payments from insurers and contracted services. Payers such as insurance companies, is a business that shifts the risk of loss from an individual to a third party (Austin, 2017). Since the cost of health care has increased, there are developed plans that help Americans pay for health care services. Payers pay the provider under contract agreement. Policy makers help control and regulate government funds and create polices that meet the need of citizens. Overall, the resources of health care delivery systems maintain and address the needs of health care demands and provide patient centered care.
Reply2
Our healthcare system is shaped by regulations in the form of protocols, standards of care, and policies. Protocols at the practice level constitute a set of instructions to guide patient care decisions and define specific management plans (Brunier, n.d.). Protocols at the state level define activities and set guidelines according to the states’ legislation. At the federal level, protocols relate to the national .
A program evaluation of alive to the world 2009 william & maryChus
This document provides a program evaluation of Alive to the World (AAQ), a character education program used in Latin America. It assesses the program's potential to promote democratic values based on surveys of students in Mexico, Peru, and Venezuela.
The initial survey results showed statistically significant positive impacts on students' attitudes related to democratic values. However, the survey methodology had limitations that require the results be interpreted cautiously. To address these, a new survey instrument and methodology were developed.
While further testing is needed, evidence supports that AAQ has the potential to positively impact democratic values in Latin America. Environmental factors not related to the program also influence values and must be considered. Overall, the evaluation finds promise for A
Are There Any Alternatives To Jail Time For Sex Crime Convictions in Los AngelesChesley Lawyer
The document discusses alternatives to incarceration for sex crime convictions in Los Angeles, including rehabilitation programs, restorative justice practices, and community-based solutions. It notes that while jail time has historically been the default punishment, there is growing recognition of the need for alternatives that address rehabilitation and public safety. Rehabilitation programs and restorative justice approaches have shown promise in reducing recidivism but face challenges in implementation including public stigma, inequitable access to resources, and the need for greater collaboration between stakeholders. The document concludes that a balanced approach combining punishment, support and rehabilitation is ideal.
Juvenile Justice And The Criminal Justice SystemToya Shamberger
The juvenile justice system aims to rehabilitate juvenile offenders rather than punish them. It recognizes that juveniles are still developing and can be reformed. However, some argue juveniles should face tougher consequences to deter crime. This document discusses the history and goals of the juvenile justice system, including landmark Supreme Court cases that established juveniles' constitutional rights in the system. It also examines different approaches to treating juvenile offenders and the challenges of addressing their rehabilitation and public safety.
2.1 The Commencement of Criminal Justice ResearchThe first.docxvickeryr87
2.1 The Commencement of Criminal Justice Research
The first efforts to produce and fund wide-scale research on criminal justice came in 1968
with the passage of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act (OCCSSA). This act
established the Law Enforcement Assistance Agency (LEAA), and within it the National
Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice (NILECJ). LEAA, the lead agency,
provided grants to law enforcement agencies to improve public safety (most often to
purchase new equipment and personnel) while NILECJ was the research center of the LEAA.
As the criminal justice research arm of the federal government, the NILECJ (since renamed
the National Institute of Justice [NIJ]) was created to “advance scientific research,
development, and evaluation to enhance the administration of justice and public safety”
(Wellford, Chemers, & Schuck, 2010, p.14). It accomplishes this mandate by awarding
federal grants and contracts to universities, public agencies, and private institutions engaged
in research and demonstration projects that expand our knowledge of “what works” in
preventing and controlling crime, and by disseminating those findings to researchers and
practitioners. It may be surprising to learn that prior to the establishment of the NILECJ in
1968, there was no national agency encouraging, conducting, or disseminating criminal
justice research. Research was conducted by a few small, independent agencies (such as
California Institute for the Study of Crime and Delinquency, National Council on Crime and
Delinquency, and the Vera Institute), but there was no unified research agenda nor concerted
effort to organize or circulate the findings (Wellford et al., 2010).
This changed when Congress passed the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of
1968 to provide federal monies to research criminal justice issues and to “provide more
accurate information on the causes of crime and the effectiveness of various means of
preventing crime” (Wellsford et al., 2010, p. 27). As a result of this funding, we expanded
our knowledge about crime control strategies and learned a great deal about policing
practices, and a few things about prison alternatives, drug treatment programs, and other
programs thought to prevent crime. Some of the well-known studies that you may be familiar
with that were funded as a result of this act include: the Kansas City Preventative Patrol
Experiment, the Newark and Flint Foot Patrol Experiments, as well as many other studies on
police response time, neighborhood watch programs, team policing strategies, crime
prevention through environmental design, fingerprinting, investigations, habitual criminals,
and plea bargaining (LEAA, 1978).
Only a few of the funded studies were methodologically rigorous by today’s standards. Still,
this was the first time that federal grant money was made available on a wide-scale for
criminal justice research, and the legislation was vitally important for the avenues of inquiry
it.
Crij 103 001 w intro to law and justice summer 2012 schedulesevans-idaho
This document outlines the schedule and assignments for an online course on law and justice over two modules in the summer of 2012. Module 1 takes place over weeks 1 and 2 (June 4-10 and June 11-17) and focuses on readings from the textbook "Law, Justice and Society" as well as weekly discussion questions, individual posts, and article or film responses on topics like the function and purpose of law and justice and law. Students are expected to complete reading assignments, discussion questions, individual posts, and a response paper each week for a total of 25 points per week.
Cwi crij 103 intro to law and justice summer 2012 syllabussevans-idaho
This document provides the syllabus for an online Introduction to Law and Justice course offered during the summer of 2012 at the College of Western Idaho. The syllabus outlines the course objectives, which include gaining an understanding of the criminal justice system and applying sociological and psychological principles to legal issues. Students will be assessed through exams, discussion posts, article responses, and individual posts. The course will be conducted entirely online and expects students to dedicate 12-16 hours per week to be successful.
More Related Content
Similar to Restorative juvenile-justice-legislation-and-policy-a-national-assessement
Fundamental Concepts Scope and Steps in Program Evaluation. .docxstarkeykellye
Fundamental Concepts: Scope and Steps in Program Evaluation.
A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT AND EXPLAIN THE TYPE OF EVALUATION EMPLOYED IN THE CASE.
The anticipation and power of juvenile offending is first assumed as a procedure containing of unlike levels of intrusions, containing schooling and obstacle at the neighborhood level among criminal approvals and intrusions to rebuild juvenile offenders and adjust them into the neighborhood. “Articles 37, 39 and 40 of the convention on the rights of the child pertain to children’s rights with respect to the juvenile justice system and, more generally, the criminal justice system as a whole”. Lastly, a few other match ethics happen which are located on generally known tactics to juvenile offense and the analysis of children in battle with the law. These ethics obligation enlighten and monitor improvement actions in the juvenile justice region
They present a convincing structure in reach which cultures and neighborhoods are likely to describe their own reaction to juvenile offense and profile the involvement of the criminal justice system in the exists of children in battle with the law. The Second Chance Act supports state, local, and tribal governments and nonprofit organizations in their work to reduce recidivism and improve outcomes for people returning from state and federal prisons, local jails, and juvenile facilities. Passed with bipartisan support and signed into law on April 9, 2008, SCA legislation authorizes federal grants for vital programs and systems reform aimed at improving the reentry process. The U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of justice programs funds and administers the second chance act grants within the bureau of justice assistance awards SCA grants serving adults, and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention awards grants serving youth. Since 2009, more than 700 awards have been made to grantees across 49 states.
Nevertheless, even when captured closely, these ethics don’t present a detail programming image or detail leadership on how programmers ought to be created sequentially to bring current preparations into obedience with the theories underlying these ethics. In everyday conditions, estimating a design includes establishing if the aims of the programmers were suitable the actions were effectively realized and the aims were met. In this case it would be a summative impact evaluation, because it would be a long term effects of an intervention.
EXPLAIN WHETHER THIS WAS A NEEDS ASSESSMENT, FORMATIVE, PROCESS, OR SUMMATIVE (IMPACT) EVALUATION AND WHY.
I would use a summative impact evaluation, because “NCCD conduct program evaluations in juvenile justice, adult corrections, child welfare, adult protection, and poverty/economic support to estimate the impact of various program, initiatives, and system reform efforts on the populations served”. Our extremely capable and skilled explore staff service quant ...
Balanced and restorative justice for juvenilessevans-idaho
- The juvenile justice system has traditionally focused on either treatment or punishment alone, but both approaches have failed to satisfy the needs of victims, communities, and offenders.
- A new model called Balanced and Restorative Justice aims to address these shortcomings by focusing on making amends to victims, increasing offender competencies, and protecting public safety through processes where victims, offenders, and the community are active participants.
- Implementing this model requires systemic reforms like developing new goals and resources, redefining roles, and piloting programs to build consensus and test the approach.
This document discusses police and probation partnerships as a strategy to reduce recidivism. It begins by outlining the problems of increased incarceration and high recidivism rates in Massachusetts. It then discusses how partnerships between police and probation officers can help address issues like lackluster supervision and weak enforcement policies among probation officers. Examples are given of successful programs in Boston, Texas, and California where probation officers partnered with police officers for intensive supervision of high-risk offenders, which reduced crime and recidivism rates. The benefits and potential challenges of such partnerships are also examined.
CRJ 570 Social Justice Project Guidelines The Social.docxfaithxdunce63732
CRJ 570
Social Justice Project Guidelines
The Social Justice Project Paper will involve trend analysis, fact-finding policy analysis for
practitioner evidence-based decision-making, and a triangulation of criminal justice, social
justice, and responsible stewardship. The paper must be a minimum of 3,800 words in
length, but must not exceed 4,500 words.
The paper requires a minimum of 5 different non-worldwide web internet references. The
paper must be typewritten, double-spaced, standard margins, and follow the APA style and
format. The paper will be submitted through Turnitin.com. No previously submitted papers,
articles, reports or projects, in whole or part, to any university or college will be accepted. It
is expected that this will be your original work. No more than 15% of your entire document
can be quoted. The Social Justice Project Paper is 25% of your overall grade for this course.
The criminal justice system is the action mechanism for enforcing social ideologies and
policies related to acceptable and unacceptable behaviors. Moreover, the socially acceptable
sanctions and penalties are applied to law violators through the criminal justice system.
Certain sanctions carry periods of incarceration which can result in structural impediments
to re-entry as noted by convict criminologists. To place the re-entry issue into perspective,
according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), more than 700,000 state and federal
prisoners returned to their communities in 2010. Furthermore, 95 percent of state inmates
will be released into their communities at some point in time according to BJS. Today,
recidivism rates remain high though states invest more than $50 billion annually in
corrections. According to one 2011 Pew Center on States report, despite significant
increases in state funding of prisons, from a national perspective more than four in ten
offenders return to state prison within three years of their release. Recidivism is measured
by criminal violations or violations of conditions of parole or probation that resulted in the
re-arrest, reconviction, or return to prison with or without a new sentence during a three-
year period following the prisoner's release at an average annual cost of $24,000 per
offender. Recidivism can represent new victims, higher tax expenditures associated with law
enforcement, prosecutorial, and judicial processes and re-incarceration, unsupported
families, public assistance, and other negative social ramifications. A 2007 forecasting
report by the Public Safety Performance Project of the Pew Charitable Trusts, stated “If
current trajectories continue, state and federal prisons will grow by 13 percent by 2013,
adding an additional 192,000 prisoners at a cost of $27.5 billion.”
Society is responsible for the laws and the sanctions, and society as a whole benefits from
the laws and sanctions when applied. Therefore, does social justice.
REDEFINING THECriminalJusticS Y S T E MPHYLLIS BACK,.docxsodhi3
REDEFINING THE
Criminal
Justic
S Y S T E M
PHYLLIS BACK, C J
Historically, the judicial system,
law enforcement, and corrections
have each had separate goals and visions
for achieving the united mission of safety and
justice within the criminal justice commtinity. Today,
it appears that these goals have hindered the original
intent or purpose of those goals. Progressing into the second
decade of the 21st century, the criminal justice system has realized
that to achieve its ultimate mission—public safety—for its citizens, it must
be united in redefining its goals and visions. This approach requires a profound
across-the-board collaboration in a manner that thus far has not been broached.
JANUARY i FEBRUARY 2013 AMERICANjails
The contemporary criminal justice system must
respond in a proactive rather than a reactive man-
ner to provide both the necessary and immediate
sanctions for the convicted, and at the same
time ensure that victims' needs are addressed
respectfully. One way to achieve this is
to implement a program tor the sole
\
purpose ot sharing information about
all new arrests. This information
includes:
• Family history and
background.
• Delinquent offenses.
• Previous encoun-
ters with the
law.
• Prior
convictions.
• Probation or
parole mandates.
• Work history
• Education
Stable living condifions.
The strategy is to share this
information during an inmate's entire
involvement with the criminal justice
system. For the data program assessment,
an offender would be evaluated annually and
i continuum ot care established and shared with
' every participating agency—^beginning at pretrial,
following through to the completion ot any mandated
requirements of post-release sentencing. All informa-
tion pertaining to treatment interventions, including an
offender's progress and failure with his or her treatment
plans, is entered into the data program. It an offender
relapses or reotfends, the data are updated and the con-
tinuum is reestablished to help redirect as needed.
Legislative Approaches
The criminal justice system needs legislative support
tor sentencing practices such as habilitation, rehabilita-
tion, restoration, and réintégration. Criminal sanctions
that lack intervention and prevention strategies are not
a deterrent trom future criminal activity. Creating laws
that mark people as criminals tor the remainder of their
lives denies former imnates the opporttinities available
to other citizens.
To address these issues, legislators and officials estab-
lished the Public Safety Performance Project (PSPP) in
2006. The tocus of PSPP is not only to allow ex-oftenders
to return to the community as productive members of
society, but also to improve public safety. (See "Public
Safety Performance Project.")
It laws continue to limit ottenders' opportunities tor
employment (including selt-employment), education,
and housing, the criminal justice system is only fostering
further criminal behavior. As mention ...
The California legislature and governor approved $41.3 million to fund two new proposals that promote pre-arrest diversion for youth. The Youth Reinvestment Fund provides $37.3 million over three years for community-based interventions for youth accused of minor offenses instead of arrest. The Fostering Success Fund allocates $4 million to support foster youth at risk of criminalization through training for staff and increased services. These initiatives aim to improve outcomes for vulnerable youth by addressing underlying needs through developmentally appropriate and culturally sensitive programs, resulting in better life outcomes and enhanced public safety compared to arrest and incarceration.
Running head JUVENILE JUSTICE REFORMS1JUVENILE JUSTICE RE.docxcowinhelen
Running head: JUVENILE JUSTICE REFORMS
1
JUVENILE JUSTICE REFORMS
9
The Juvenile System Reforms
Stephanie Rincon
Professor: Captain W. Michael Koval
Criminal Justice Capstone
February 7, 2018
Introduction
A criminal activity committed by an adult is normally considered as a crime and is punishable by law but when the same crime is committed by a child, it is not considered a crime but a juvenile delinquency. The American juvenile system has been focusing on a rehabilitation model which means that the primary goal entails rehabilitating the offenders as opposed to punishing them (Goswami & Mehra, 2014). However, it is imperative to point out that the United States is slowly shifting from the rehabilitation model and getting utterly tougher on the juveniles. This has seen rising opposition and support in equal measure. Individuals opposing shifting from the rehabilitation model view children or adolescents as persons who needs assistance and hence should not be subjected to destructive punishments. On the other hand, individuals in support of the shift argue that children and adolescents are more likely to commit heinous crimes such as murder when they know they can easily get free after committing a crime. The following section evaluates whether juvenile justice systems should shift from the rehabilitation model as a deterrence to juvenile delinquency.
Discussion
In more than a century ago, a separate juvenile system was established in the U.S. with the aim of diverting young offenders from the destructive punishments in the criminal courts so as to encourage the much needed rehabilitation (Leve & Chamberlain, 2005). This system was to focus on a child as a person in need of assistance. Actually, the proceedings were informal where discretion was left to the judge handling the case. It is imperative to point out that the judge was supposed to act in the best interests of the child but an offender was denied procedural safeguards such as right to a jury, right to an attorney and right to confront an accuser among others (Maschi, Hatcher, Schwalbe & Rosato, 2008). Further, the proceedings were supposed to be confidential so as not to interfere with a child’s ability to reintegrate into the society.
After the establishment of the separate system, there was a rising tension between social welfare and social control. This means that focus on the best interests of the offenders as opposed to focus on punishments and protecting the society from certain offenses. Various occurrences followed such as increasing violent crime in the 1980s which called for reforms in dealing with serious offenses and concern for public safety (Huizinga, Schumann, Ehret & Elliott, 2003). 17 states redefined purpose of the Juvenile courts to emphasize public safety and offender accountability. In the U.S., 51 states and District of Columbia have different juvenile justice systems. In majority of the states, there are legal reforms and policy changes that focus on mor ...
This document discusses juvenile delinquents and different treatment models used in the juvenile justice system. It describes how treatment models aim to address the underlying causes that led youth to commit crimes through rehabilitation rather than punishment. The document also discusses biblical principles of restorative justice and how some diversion programs use a restorative justice model to restore both the victim and offender.
Overview of the Implementation of Restorative Justice in Indonesia’s Criminal...AHRP Law Firm
Restorative justice has been actively incorporated into domestic criminal legal systems globally, including Indonesia. Indonesia's legal system has been aiming to transform its criminal justice approach from retributive to restorative. However, there are still some notes on its implementation which could be studied in deeper sense by, among others, considering and contemplating on how the other countries implement such approach in their criminal justice systems as a parameter to see Indonesia's milestone in achieving the spirit of restorative justice.
This document discusses how administrators can promote organizational change to support integrated service delivery between child protection and juvenile justice systems. It provides examples from Outagamie County, Wisconsin. The key points are:
1) Administrators must form an alliance between the two systems by having candid discussions to address misperceptions and establish trust.
2) They must establish common goals around safety, well-being and outcomes for dual-status youth by engaging stakeholders across systems.
3) Administrators need to provide compelling and unified messaging around the vision for change using data to establish urgency and make the case for reform.
4) They must tie the organizational changes to proven practices and guide staff in developing new protocols to jointly
This document provides information and instructions for applying for National Legal Assistance and Elder Rights Projects grants from the U.S. Administration on Aging (AoA). The grants aim to enhance and coordinate elder rights legal assistance through activities like training, technical assistance, publishing materials, and case consultations. Eligible applicants are national non-profit organizations with experience providing nationwide support to elder rights programs. AoA plans to fund approximately 5 new projects at $150,000 per year for 3 years. Applications are due by July 8, 2005 and must meet requirements around planning, implementation, management, and reporting.
Taap Conference Therapeutic Jurisprudence Models In San Antonio Texas FinalGilbert Gonzales
This presentation will discuss the origin of the Therapeutic Jurisprudence from Mental Health Law and its evolution to include addiction and dual diagnosis youths and adults involved in the criminal justice system. A national movement of Drug Courts, which execute therapeutic justice strategies to motivate high recidivist populations toward treatment in lieu of incarceration, is occurring across the US.
The Supreme Court ruled that mandatory life sentences without parole for juveniles are unconstitutional. In response, NCYL has helped pass legislation in California to create opportunities for release for those already sentenced as juveniles to life without parole. NCYL also works to develop parole policies that take into account youths' diminished culpability and potential for rehabilitation. Additionally, NCYL partners with public defenders to improve representation of youth in the juvenile justice system by advocating for community-based rehabilitation services instead of incarceration.
Reply1CollapseHilary Clinton once said, We need a cost-ef.docxchris293
Reply1
Collapse
Hilary Clinton once said, “We need a cost-effective, high quality health care system, guaranteeing health care to all of our people as a right” There are a set of resources that govern the body of our health care delivery system. Some of the sectors of the system include protocols, standard care of delivery and policies.
Protocols are a set of rules governed by nursing practice by the state or federal level, it allows providers to maintain quality services and educate staff (Heymann, 1994). Policy is the agreement, contract, that describes all terms and conditions to meet the need of people (Mason, et al, 2017). Standard of care is a collective body of knowledge required for the nurse to know and sets minimum criteria for proficient practice (IMC, 2003).
Policies at the federal level are set to regulate and maintain on influencing nursing and nursing practice, they also determine who gets funding for specific programs, such as health research, education, and Medicare or Medicaid programs (Mason, et al, 2017). States determine their own scope of nursing practice and govern their own practice act (Mason, et al, 2017). Collectively, State and federal level determine regulations under government programs such as Medicare. In essence the resources all provide balance to the health care delivery system; Protocols, Policies, Standard delivery of care, are key to quality health care delivery.
The healthcare delivery system is responsible to deliver quality care to patients, such as hospitals, outpatient clinics, insurance plans, purchasers of health care services and independent practices (IMC, 2003). Delivery systems are either private sector, nonprofit or for profit. Perceptions of the patient, provider, payer and policy maker differ in a health care delivery system. The patient assumes to receive quality care, access to care and affordability. Providers must deliver quality health care services in efforts to maintain payments from insurers and contracted services. Payers such as insurance companies, is a business that shifts the risk of loss from an individual to a third party (Austin, 2017). Since the cost of health care has increased, there are developed plans that help Americans pay for health care services. Payers pay the provider under contract agreement. Policy makers help control and regulate government funds and create polices that meet the need of citizens. Overall, the resources of health care delivery systems maintain and address the needs of health care demands and provide patient centered care.
Reply2
Our healthcare system is shaped by regulations in the form of protocols, standards of care, and policies. Protocols at the practice level constitute a set of instructions to guide patient care decisions and define specific management plans (Brunier, n.d.). Protocols at the state level define activities and set guidelines according to the states’ legislation. At the federal level, protocols relate to the national .
A program evaluation of alive to the world 2009 william & maryChus
This document provides a program evaluation of Alive to the World (AAQ), a character education program used in Latin America. It assesses the program's potential to promote democratic values based on surveys of students in Mexico, Peru, and Venezuela.
The initial survey results showed statistically significant positive impacts on students' attitudes related to democratic values. However, the survey methodology had limitations that require the results be interpreted cautiously. To address these, a new survey instrument and methodology were developed.
While further testing is needed, evidence supports that AAQ has the potential to positively impact democratic values in Latin America. Environmental factors not related to the program also influence values and must be considered. Overall, the evaluation finds promise for A
Are There Any Alternatives To Jail Time For Sex Crime Convictions in Los AngelesChesley Lawyer
The document discusses alternatives to incarceration for sex crime convictions in Los Angeles, including rehabilitation programs, restorative justice practices, and community-based solutions. It notes that while jail time has historically been the default punishment, there is growing recognition of the need for alternatives that address rehabilitation and public safety. Rehabilitation programs and restorative justice approaches have shown promise in reducing recidivism but face challenges in implementation including public stigma, inequitable access to resources, and the need for greater collaboration between stakeholders. The document concludes that a balanced approach combining punishment, support and rehabilitation is ideal.
Juvenile Justice And The Criminal Justice SystemToya Shamberger
The juvenile justice system aims to rehabilitate juvenile offenders rather than punish them. It recognizes that juveniles are still developing and can be reformed. However, some argue juveniles should face tougher consequences to deter crime. This document discusses the history and goals of the juvenile justice system, including landmark Supreme Court cases that established juveniles' constitutional rights in the system. It also examines different approaches to treating juvenile offenders and the challenges of addressing their rehabilitation and public safety.
2.1 The Commencement of Criminal Justice ResearchThe first.docxvickeryr87
2.1 The Commencement of Criminal Justice Research
The first efforts to produce and fund wide-scale research on criminal justice came in 1968
with the passage of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act (OCCSSA). This act
established the Law Enforcement Assistance Agency (LEAA), and within it the National
Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice (NILECJ). LEAA, the lead agency,
provided grants to law enforcement agencies to improve public safety (most often to
purchase new equipment and personnel) while NILECJ was the research center of the LEAA.
As the criminal justice research arm of the federal government, the NILECJ (since renamed
the National Institute of Justice [NIJ]) was created to “advance scientific research,
development, and evaluation to enhance the administration of justice and public safety”
(Wellford, Chemers, & Schuck, 2010, p.14). It accomplishes this mandate by awarding
federal grants and contracts to universities, public agencies, and private institutions engaged
in research and demonstration projects that expand our knowledge of “what works” in
preventing and controlling crime, and by disseminating those findings to researchers and
practitioners. It may be surprising to learn that prior to the establishment of the NILECJ in
1968, there was no national agency encouraging, conducting, or disseminating criminal
justice research. Research was conducted by a few small, independent agencies (such as
California Institute for the Study of Crime and Delinquency, National Council on Crime and
Delinquency, and the Vera Institute), but there was no unified research agenda nor concerted
effort to organize or circulate the findings (Wellford et al., 2010).
This changed when Congress passed the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of
1968 to provide federal monies to research criminal justice issues and to “provide more
accurate information on the causes of crime and the effectiveness of various means of
preventing crime” (Wellsford et al., 2010, p. 27). As a result of this funding, we expanded
our knowledge about crime control strategies and learned a great deal about policing
practices, and a few things about prison alternatives, drug treatment programs, and other
programs thought to prevent crime. Some of the well-known studies that you may be familiar
with that were funded as a result of this act include: the Kansas City Preventative Patrol
Experiment, the Newark and Flint Foot Patrol Experiments, as well as many other studies on
police response time, neighborhood watch programs, team policing strategies, crime
prevention through environmental design, fingerprinting, investigations, habitual criminals,
and plea bargaining (LEAA, 1978).
Only a few of the funded studies were methodologically rigorous by today’s standards. Still,
this was the first time that federal grant money was made available on a wide-scale for
criminal justice research, and the legislation was vitally important for the avenues of inquiry
it.
Similar to Restorative juvenile-justice-legislation-and-policy-a-national-assessement (20)
Crij 103 001 w intro to law and justice summer 2012 schedulesevans-idaho
This document outlines the schedule and assignments for an online course on law and justice over two modules in the summer of 2012. Module 1 takes place over weeks 1 and 2 (June 4-10 and June 11-17) and focuses on readings from the textbook "Law, Justice and Society" as well as weekly discussion questions, individual posts, and article or film responses on topics like the function and purpose of law and justice and law. Students are expected to complete reading assignments, discussion questions, individual posts, and a response paper each week for a total of 25 points per week.
Cwi crij 103 intro to law and justice summer 2012 syllabussevans-idaho
This document provides the syllabus for an online Introduction to Law and Justice course offered during the summer of 2012 at the College of Western Idaho. The syllabus outlines the course objectives, which include gaining an understanding of the criminal justice system and applying sociological and psychological principles to legal issues. Students will be assessed through exams, discussion posts, article responses, and individual posts. The course will be conducted entirely online and expects students to dedicate 12-16 hours per week to be successful.
1) Law serves to regulate human behavior and transform self-interest into social interest by establishing general rules that bind a community.
2) Scholars have proposed different perspectives on law and its role in society, ranging from it maintaining order and consensus to it perpetuating conflicts between groups.
3) Key thinkers like Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Hobbes, and Locke contributed different philosophical views of law and its relationship to concepts like justice, the state, and social contracts.
The document discusses several issues facing the future of corrections, including a lack of clear mission and competing priorities, difficulty choosing effective methods, internal and external structural divisions, challenges in personnel recruitment and motivation, rising costs, and the need for evidence-based practices and professionalization. It proposes three main challenges: reinvigorating correctional leadership, refocusing investments in prevention programs, and reclaiming moral and ethical standards.
This chapter discusses the future of corrections by examining 5 dilemmas, 4 trends, and 3 challenges facing the system. It outlines how the philosophy and methods of corrections have changed, and aspirations for a system focused on evidence-based practices, technology, cost-effectiveness, and professionalism. The key challenges are to develop new leadership promoting best practices, refocus investments on rehabilitation programs, and restore moral and ethical priorities.
The National Academy of Sciences convened a committee to study forensic science needs and issues. The committee made 13 recommendations in its report, including creating a National Institute of Forensic Sciences, standardizing terminology and practices, and improving research, education, oversight and accreditation. The National Institute of Justice recognizes the need for reform and is taking steps like funding research projects and establishing advisory groups to address the report's recommendations.
This document provides a timeline of important events and discoveries in the field of forensic science from BCE to 2002 CE. Some key developments include the first use of fingerprints to solve a crime in 1880, the establishment of the first police crime laboratory in 1910, the development of blood typing techniques in the early 20th century, and the founding of organizations like the American Academy of Forensic Science in 1950 and the Federal Bureau of Investigation crime laboratory in 1932. The timeline is intended as a historical overview of the emerging field of forensic science.
A man was found dead in a bedroom with reddish-brown stains on the walls and carpet, and a broken bottle nearby. The forensic team must collect evidence from the crime scene to determine if the death was from natural causes or foul play. Samples will be analyzed in a lab to uncover clues like DNA, fingerprints, and traces of substances. A forensic pathologist will also examine the body to look for causes of injury or death. The analysis aims to reconstruct what happened and solve the crime.
DNA profiling is a forensic technique that uses a person's unique DNA to identify them. It examines DNA found at crime scenes. Two main techniques are used: Restriction fragment length polymorphism cuts DNA into fragments of varying lengths, which are then compared to suspects' DNA. Short tandem repeat profiling makes copies of DNA sections and examines repetitive patterns that differ between people. DNA profiling is a powerful forensic tool that can include or exclude suspects by matching DNA evidence to their profiles.
Islamic law, or Sharia, originated from the teachings of the Quran and the Prophet Muhammad. It developed over centuries as Islamic legal scholars interpreted Sharia and adapted it to changing circumstances. By the 10th century, the classic Sharia took shape, covering religious, family, property, commercial, and criminal law. It was not a strict legal code but a body of religious scholarship that continued evolving. Modern influences like Western colonialism have led to reforms, but Sharia remains influential in many Muslim-majority nations.
Common law systems like those in the United States and United Kingdom have legal systems that evolve through judicial decisions and rely heavily on legal precedents set in past cases. In civil law systems found in Europe and Latin America, legislative statutes are the primary source of law and judicial decisions have weaker precedential value. Common law systems emphasize procedural correctness and debate during adversarial trials, while civil law prioritizes establishing factual certainty through an inquisitorial judicial examination process.
Canada has two legal systems: common law from England and civil law from France. Common law is based on precedent from past court cases, while civil law relies on codified legal texts. Quebec uses civil law based on codes originating from French rule. The rest of Canada uses common law, with the exception of some Indigenous legal traditions. The Canadian legal system has evolved through influences from both common law and civil law.
This document provides an overview of comparative law and different legal traditions around the world. It discusses the legal systems of preliterate bands and tribes, and the four main modern legal traditions: common law, civil law, socialist law, and Islamic law. It also addresses the rule of law and convergence of legal systems as globalization increases interactions between cultures.
Topic paper week 16 cja 101 intro to criminal justicesevans-idaho
This document provides instructions for a topic paper assignment in a criminal justice course. Students must write a 750-1000 word paper answering one of two questions and including an introduction, body, and conclusion using APA format with at least two cited sources and a reference page. The paper is worth 30 points and is due by the end of the course.
The document discusses different types of terrorism including domestic and international terrorism. It outlines the United States Government Interagency Domestic Terrorism Concept of Operations Plan which coordinates response to domestic threats. It also discusses terror alerts issued by the Department of Homeland Security that aim to inform the public of potential threats and recommend protective actions.
The document discusses how terrorism has affected the US criminal justice system. It details how the US reorganized law enforcement agencies after 9/11 through the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, which consolidated various federal agencies. It also explains how anti-terrorism laws like the USA Patriot Act have expanded law enforcement powers but raised civil liberties concerns.
Topic paper week 14 cja 104 intro to correctionssevans-idaho
This document provides instructions for a topic paper assignment in an Intro to Corrections course. Students must write a 750-1000 word paper answering one of two questions and including an introduction, body, and conclusion using APA format with at least two sources cited. The paper is worth 25 points and requires selecting a topic about how mental health offenders have challenged corrections systems or the most effective juvenile delinquency programs.
This document discusses several special populations within the correctional system, including elderly prisoners, prisoners with HIV/AIDS, mentally ill prisoners, and long-term prisoners. It also covers the history of the juvenile justice system in the US and challenges in sanctioning and treating juvenile offenders, including those involved in gangs. Key topics include medical care and housing needs of special populations, debates around segregating HIV-infected inmates, high rates of mental illness among prisoners, the high costs of life sentences, and balancing rehabilitation and public safety in the juvenile system.
This chapter discusses special populations within corrections including elderly prisoners, prisoners with HIV/AIDS, mentally ill prisoners, and long-term prisoners. It also covers juvenile corrections, including the history of the juvenile justice system in the US, why juveniles are treated differently than adults, challenges with serious juvenile offenders and gangs, and the future of the juvenile justice system. The chapter outlines topics like the aging correctional population, managing HIV-infected inmates, challenges with the incarcerated mentally ill, the extent of youth crime, and factors considered in sanctioning juvenile offenders.
The document provides an overview of the Marshall Trilogy Supreme Court cases from the 1820s-1830s that established foundational principles of federal Indian law. It then discusses the 1905 case United States v. Winans, which faithfully applied these principles. The Marshall Trilogy established that Congress has plenary power over tribes, tribes have inherent sovereignty unless expressly limited, and the federal government holds tribes' lands in trust. It also established canons of construction that treaties should be interpreted in tribes' favor. Winans affirmed tribes' treaty-reserved rights to fish off-reservation, applying congressional plenary power, inherent tribal sovereignty unless limited, the trust doctrine requiring the federal government sue on tribes' behalf, and canons
1. VI RESTORATIVE JUVENILE JUSTICE LEGISLATION AND POLICY:
A NATIONAL ASSESSMENT
Sandra Pavelka PhD
Introduction
While the modern day restorative justice movement continues to evolve at
the state and community levels, jurisdictions have addressed juvenile justice
system concerns with policy and legislative agendas. These actions have lead
to a response to juvenile crime and established a balance between the needs
of victims, offenders and community. This article serves as an update of the
research completed by the author (O’Brien, 1999), who found that a majority
of states had incorporated restorative justice language in legislation, policy,
mission or program. Three states are also identified as model implementation
states.
Articulation of restorative principles in statute
Statutory or code articulations of restorative justice differ widely. Some focus
exclusively on the balanced approach mission, in some cases articulating
restorative principles in policy and procedures manuals. Others emphasize
the restorative justice value framework with or without reference to the
balanced approach. Appendix A provides the state, statute or code reference,
and type of reference for each state articulating restorative justice and/or
balanced approach principles.
Common restorative language (Bazemore, 1997) in many of these state
documents includes: holding juvenile offenders accountable for their offense,
involving victims and the community in the justice process, obligating the
offender to pay restitution to the victim and/or a victims’ fund, improving the
juvenile’s ability to live more productively and responsibly in the community,
and securing safer communities. Statutes or codes which include a balanced
approach (Maloney, et al., 1988) to juvenile justice incorporate accountability,
community safety and competency development. Balanced and restorative
justice legislative language comprehensively addresses principles from each
paradigm.i
2. Pavelka
Balanced and restorative justice
Sixteen states articulate balanced and restorative justice in statute or code
reference. The juvenile justice system in Pennsylvania (42 PA CSA Section
6301) is guided by a balanced and restorative justice philosophy, “the
protection of the public interest, to provide for children committing delinquent
acts programs of supervision, care, and rehabilitation that provide balanced
attention to the protection of the community, the imposition of accountability
for offenses committed, and the development of competencies to enable
children to become responsible and productive members of the community.”
Alaska’s statute (Sec. 47.12.010) promotes “a balanced juvenile justice
system in the state to protect the community, impose accountability for
violations of the law, and equip juvenile offenders with the skills needed to
live responsibly and productively.” Alaska’s law also incorporates a key
principle of restorative justice, “restoration of community and victim.” Both of
these states clearly emphasize restorative justice principles throughout policy
and program documents.
The New Jersey legislative statement (P.L. 2002 Title 2A:4A-21) clearly
declares “the Juvenile Justice Commission…to incorporate into the juvenile
justice system the principles of balanced and restorative justice. The concept
of restorative justice holds that an offender incurs an obligation to restore the
victim of the offense and, by extension, the community to the state of well-
being that existed prior to the offense. The principle of balance in connection
with restorative justice suggests that the juvenile justice system should give
equal weight to ensuring community safety, holding offenders accountable to
victims, fostering reconciliation between the offender, victim and community,
and providing competency development for offenders in the system so they
can pursue legitimate endeavors after release.”
Restorative justice
Eight states communicate restorative justice principles in statute or code
reference. The legislative declaration of Colorado based on restorative justice
(CRS Section 19-2-102) is to “protect, restore, and improve the public
safety...provide the opportunity to bring together affected victims, the
community, and juvenile offenders for restorative purposes.” Further, “while
holding paramount the public safety, the juvenile justice system shall take
into consideration the best interests of the juvenile, the victims, and the
community in providing appropriate treatment to reduce the rate of recidivism
www.crjcs.org
3. www.crjcs.org International Journal of Restorative Justice 2008 Vol4, No2
productive member of society.” California's statute (Welfare and Institutions
Code, Section 1700) includes powerful restorative justice language which
states "to protect society from the consequences of criminal activity and to
that purpose community restoration, victim restoration, and offender training
and treatment shall be substituted for retributive punishment and shall be
directed toward the correction and rehabilitation of young persons who have
committed public offenses."
The State of Montana, under MCA 2-15-2013, established the Office of
Restorative Justice, which promotes restorative justice throughout the state.
The legislation provides training and technical assistance to jurisdictions and
offers resources to communities for program implementation. Montana
communities have implemented a number of programs based on this
philosophy, including victim/offender meetings, family group conferencing,
sentencing circles, the use of victim and community impact statements,
restitution programs, victim awareness education, school expulsion
alternatives, diversion programs and community panels.
The balanced approach
Seven states convey the balanced approach in statute or code reference.
Oregon’s juvenile justice system is specifically based on the balanced
approach, “the principles of personal responsibility, accountability, and
reformation within the context of public safety and restitution to the victims
and to the community (419C.001).” Connecticut (Section 46b-121h)
incorporates the balanced approach with the goal of the juvenile justice
system: “provide individualized supervision, care, accountability and
treatment in a manner consistent with public safety to those juveniles who
violate the law. “ Idaho’s policy for the juvenile corrections system (Title 20,
Ch. 5, 20-501) is also based on the principles of the balanced approach.
Restorative programs
Specific restorative programs are specified within statute of several states.
Restorative justice programs are explicitly addressed in Minnesota’s statute
(Ch. 611A.775) including victim offender mediation. The State of Oregon
(ORS 417.365) specifies a family decision making meeting as a facilitated
intervention. Arizona (ARS 8-1001) offers victims reconciliatory services and
family group decision making processes.
102
4. Pavelka
Reparative Boards are established for probationers in Vermont (Title 28
910a). Community Reparative Boards are specified in the Maine State Statute
(Title 17-A:1204-A). Colorado implements Community Accountability Boards
based on the Reparative Board model (CRS Section 19-2-309.5).
Hawaii (Ch. 353H-31) establishes the use of reentry courts to monitor
offenders returning to the community. The reentry courts provide
reintegrated offenders with drug and alcohol testing and treatment and
mental and medical health assessment services. Restorative justice practices,
including family or community impact panels, family impact educational
classes, victim impact panels, and victim impact educational classes are
facilitated across the state.
State models
Pennsylvania, Alaska and South Carolina have been identified as models of
restorative justice reform and implementation. These states have clear and
consistent restorative language in mission, legislation, policy and programs,
while providing for systemic change. Leadership, stakeholder collaboration
and consensus strengthen each state’s ability to move forward with reform
strategies. Each state has also developed performance measures and informs
its citizenry of the progress of the identified outcomes through a report card
system. The following narrative highlights each state’s progress with regard to
restorative justice.ii
Pennsylvania
Mission and legislation
The State of Pennsylvania has emerged to the forefront of being a model
for juvenile justice reform by holding juveniles accountable for their crimes
and by addressing the needs of its crime victims and its community. In 1995,
the state’s legislature thoroughly integrated the balanced approach and
restorative justice (BARJ) into its Juvenile Act (42 Pa.C.S. S6301). The
Juvenile Act required that the juvenile justice system provide balanced
attention to the protection of the community, obligation of accountability for
offenses, and development of competencies to delinquent youth. The law
also secures allocation of resources necessary to achieve system balance and
client goals.
Two years later, the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
Committee (JJDPC) incorporated victim restoration into its mission statement.
Further, by the year 2000, the legislature amended the Crime Victims Act (18
www.crjcs.org
5. www.crjcs.org International Journal of Restorative Justice 2008 Vol4, No2
P.S. S11.201) with provisions relating to juvenile crime victims in what is
called the Basic Bill of Rights for Victims. Although Pennsylvania had
amended its Crime Victims Act in 2000, giving victims of juvenile offenders
the same rights as victims in the criminal system, it is notable that much
attention was given to victim issues prior to the passage of this legislation.
While legislation provided victims legal access to a wide variety of rights, the
climate in the courts had already been receptive to assuring those rights
(Pavelka, 2008).
Since the enactment of the new purpose clause in the Juvenile Act, the
Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency (PCCD) has awarded
approximately $2 million to develop, implement, and expand programs and
services consistent with BARJ. Along with PCCD, the Juvenile Advisory
Committee, Juvenile Court Judges’ Commission and the Council of Chief
Probation Officers develop funding allocations to promote state-wide BARJ
conferences, training, technical assistance and evaluation components. The
Victims’ Services Advisory Committee is a strong voice in recommending that
the basic services reach the crime victims and include dialogue with the
juvenile justice systems partners.
By taking these steps, the juvenile justice system has placed a high
degree of responsibility on its juvenile offenders, its crime victims, and its
community. The system’s response, therefore, determines the obligations of
the juvenile offender to the crime victim and the community, guides juveniles
in fulfilling his/her obligations to the victim and the community and engages
the crime victims so that they receive their entitled rights in the process
(Bender, et al, 2006) (See Table 1).
104
6. Pavelka
Table 1 Pennsylvania juvenile justice
Mission: community protection, victim restoration, youth redemption
Our Belief
In Pennsylvania, a juvenile who commits a crime harms the victim of
the crime and the community and thereby incurs an obligation to
repair that harm to the greatest extent possible.
Guiding Principles
Pennsylvania’s juvenile justice system shall:
o Ensure that the harm to the crime victim and community is understood
and considered by the decision makers throughout the juvenile justice
process.
o Inform crime victims about their rights, their cases, and the juvenile
justice process.
o Provide crime victims with access to a wide range of support and
services and enable crime victims to actively participate in their cases.
o Require that community service performed by juvenile offenders be of
value to crime victims and communities.
o Operate the juvenile justice system so that victims of juvenile crime
regard the system as responsive, fair, and just.
o Ensure that juvenile offenders understand that crimes have
consequences.
o Ensure that juvenile offenders understand the impact of their crimes
on their victims and their communities.
o Hold juvenile offenders accountable for restoration of crime victims
and communities to their pre-crime status, to the greatest extent
possible.
(Source: Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Committee,
Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency. (2004) Mission and
guiding principles for Pennsylvania’s juvenile justice system).
Models for change
The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation selected Pennsylvania
to participate in its national initiative, Models for Change.iii Models for Change
supports the progress of juvenile justice system reform with principles that
are restorative in nature, holding youth accountable for their actions,
rehabilitating youth, protecting them from harm, increasing their life chances,
and managing the risk to themselves and the community. Features of the
advancement of reform in Pennsylvania consist of: engaging judicial expertise
in juvenile justice policy and training, encouraging need-based programs and
budgeting, using of evidence based prevention programs, providing mental
www.crjcs.org
7. www.crjcs.org International Journal of Restorative Justice 2008 Vol4, No2
health screening for detainees, and supervising youth in community and
school-based settings (Ziedenberg, 2006).
Outcome measures
The restorative process, in the case of Pennsylvania, goes beyond victim
restoration and ensuring that the offender’s obligations are completed, the
offender must truly understand the harm that has occurred to the crime
victim and the community, action to be taken to repair the harm to return the
crime victim, to the greatest extent possible, to pre-crime condition and who
has the responsibility for repairing the harm. Accountability and competency
development are central to the process. Accountability incurs the obligation
to the victim and community when a crime is committed by a juvenile.
Competency development addresses having the juveniles who come within
the jurisdiction of Pennsylvania’s juvenile justice system leave the system
more capable of being responsible and productive members of their
communities (Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Committee, 2007).
Specific outcome measures to address these goals are included in the
juvenile’s case plan, including writing a letter of apology, completing
meaningful community service, attending victim awareness panels, providing
restitution and payment to the Crime Victims Compensation Fund. Using the
community justice “report card” model first developed in Deschutes County,
Oregon, statewide outcome measures have been reported annually since
2004. The community protection, accountability, and competency
development data, which is central to the goals of the state’s juvenile justice
process, are included in the report.
Alaska
Mission/statute
The mission of Alaska’s Division of Juvenile Justice is “to hold each
juvenile offender directly accountable for the offender’s behavior, restoration
of the community and victims, protection of the public, and development of
the juvenile into a productive citizen, and assist offenders and their families in
developing skills to prevent crime.” Its statute (Sec. 47.12.010) was revised
in 1999 to incorporate restorative language, “to promote a balanced juvenile
justice system in the state to protect the community, impose accountability
for violations of law, and equip juvenile offenders with the skills needed to
live responsibly and productively, encourage and provide opportunities for
local communities and groups to play an active role in the juvenile justice
process in ways that are culturally relevant.” Alaska’s state statute (2007
106
8. Pavelka
Sec. 12.55.011) also includes a strong victim’s component including victim
and community involvement in sentencing.
Graduated incentives and responses are used with the expectation that
juveniles must restore and repair the harm caused to victims and
communities by their offenses. This approach ensures that the offenders take
responsibility for repairing the harm caused to victims and communities by
their delinquent behavior. Crime prevention, by supporting competency and
skill development and providing alternatives to law-breaking behavior, is also
a priority.
Diagram 1 Alaska’s Juvenile Justice Logo
Incorporating Balanced and Restorative Justice
Performance measures
The Department of Juvenile Justice has specific performance outcomes
that are addressed annually. The performance measures are identified for
the department’s restorative mission and its core services, including secure
detention, court ordered treatment for juvenile offenders, intake investigation
management, probation supervision and monitoring, and juvenile offender
www.crjcs.org
9. www.crjcs.org International Journal of Restorative Justice 2008 Vol4, No2
skill development. The performance outcomes are linked to a report card that
is presented to the community and elected officials.
The Juvenile Justice Report Card (2008) presents a performance-based
report with concerns of the division to the legislature and citizens. The report
card presents three specific performance outcomes: holding offenders
accountable through community work service, promoting restoration of
victims by providing restitution, and preventing repeat criminal behavior by
monitoring recidivism. Other initiatives that are identified and aimed at
improving the safety, security, and success of the juvenile facilities in the
state include: appropriate funding for safety and security through elimination
of the vacancy factor for juvenile facilities, provide adequate support for the
Nome Youth Facility, meeting behavioral health needs, continued participation
in performance-based standards, and provide sufficient staffing levels in
juvenile facilities.
Tribal justice
A series of agreements have been documented with tribal villages across
the state. These community panel agreements between the tribals, the
Division of Juvenile Justice and the Department of Law authorize direct
referrals to the division to be referred back to the tribe for resolution. Native
American tribes utilize peacemaking circles and Native Elders Panels to form a
resolution to the wrongdoing.
The Alaska Native Justice Center in Anchorage works with youth diverted
from the system. The aggression replacement effort works primarily with
male Natives who have been diverted form the system. Training includes skill
building and cognitive building exercises. The Bethel Drumming Group
incorporates cultural and victim sensitivity classes which allow the elders and
young people to be culturally relevant in a restorative way.
The Kake Tribe established a Heart Healing Council which utilizes circle
peacemaking, celebrates the completion of a sentence with young adults as a
healing circle for victims. A group of tribal members determines the sentence
and supervises the completion of the offender’s sentence. The completion
rate is approximately 98%. These practices used by indigenous communities
have existed for centuries (Bird, 2007).
South Carolina
Mission and statute
The Department of Juvenile Justice in South Carolina has adopted
Balanced and Restorative Justice in its mission, derived from the state’s
108
10. Pavelka
Children’s Code (Section 20-7-20; 20-7-6840). The department’s mission
statement addresses “protecting the public and reclaiming juveniles through
prevention, community programs, education and rehabilitative services in the
least restrictive environment.”
University partnerships
Partnerships have been established with local universities in providing
youth services. The department has partnered with Clemson University to
create a Center for Girls Advocacy, a gender specific program, which
incorporates circles and reintegration, along with a youth day treatment
program. Female youth referred to the department participate in the “Seven
Habits of Highly Effective Teens” program through Columbia College’s
Leadership Institute. While the Children’s Law Center at the University of
South Carolina collaborates with the department in addressing pre-trial
detention, disproportionate minority confinement, and child protection
education. (Telephone interview, September 23, 2008, Virginia Barr,
Department of Juvenile Justice, State of South Carolina).
Reintegration
The Serious and Violent Offender Reintegration Program, originally funded
by more than a $1 million grant and presently state funded, seeks to address
the needs of the offenders reentering their community following incarceration.
This initiative, which serves four counties, creates aftercare and transitional
case planning, service delivery, supervision, and support services for serious
and violent juvenile offenders released from long-term facilities back to their
communities. (See also http://www.state.sc.us/djj/pdfs/reintegration-fact-
sheet.pdf)
Charrette concept
The charrette concept provides a framework for a community to
implement vision and engage citizens. The community is brought together to
collaboratively address its challenges. The Broad River Road complex is site
to a charrette in a juvenile prison setting. The goal of this plan is to
redevelop the complex using specific objectives: develop a recreational and
therapeutic “community behind the fence”, create a holistic approach to
therapeutic activities through experience based learning, develop a continuum
of activities which provide youth with responsible opportunities while
institutionalized and upon reintegration into the community, create
meaningful community service opportunities, engage in partnerships, and
www.crjcs.org
11. www.crjcs.org International Journal of Restorative Justice 2008 Vol4, No2
develop a strong research component. In addition, the Friends of Juvenile
Justice Foundation privately funded the Community Connections Center,
raising $3 million for its construction. The facility is part of the complex,
including the girl’s transition home. (See also http://www.state.sc.us/djj/pdfs/
charette.pdf)
Performance measures
The state was one of the initial pilot sites receiving federally funded
assistance from the American Prosecutors Research Institute to develop a
report card.iv The Department of Juvenile Justice developed the report card
to inform the public on its progress toward identified goals (Rubin, 2006).
Among its restorative benchmarks, South Carolina’s “Report to Our Citizens”
measures restitution payment rates, completion rate of community service
hours ordered, victims satisfaction, volunteer hours, and recidivism rates
following juvenile incarceration. The department’s progress and key strategic
goals are then included in the governor’s annual accountability report
(Thomas, 2006).
Concluding perspectives
The primary findings of this examination of restorative justice and the
balanced approach in U.S. justice systems suggest that virtually every state is
implementing restorative justice at various levels (e.g., state, regional, or
local, in program and policy). The majority of the states that have revised
their statutes or codes to reflect restorative justice principles have done so in
the past two decades. The political and professional challenges will increase
as restorative justice programs and practices expand to incorporate principles
into state statutes, policies, mission statements, program plans, job
descriptions, and evaluation standards. Certainly, restorative justice is the
ancient idea whose time has come.
110
12. Pavelka
Appendix A
State Statutes or Codes Incorporating
The Balanced Approach and/or Restorative Justice
State Statute/Code Type
AL Code of Alabama BARJ
Section 12-15-1.1 Purpose Clause
AK Alaska Code BARJ
Section 47.12.010 Goal and purposes of chapter
Section 12.55.011 Victim community involvement
in sentencing
AZ Arizona Revised Statute BARJ
8-201 Definition
8-419 Victim reconciliation services
8-1001 Family group decision making
CA California Welfare and Institutions Code RJ
Section 1700 Relating to minors
CO Colorado Revised Statute RJ
Section 19-2-102 Legislative declaration
Section 19-2-213 Restorative justice coordinating
council
Section 19-2-308 Community service and community
work programs
Section 19-2-309.5 Community accountability board
CT General Statutes of Connecticut BARJ
Section 46b-121h Goals of the juvenile justice system
DE Delaware Code RJ
Title11, chapter 9501 Victim offender mediation
FL Florida Statute RJ
Ch 985.155 Neighborhood restorative justice
GA Official code of Georgia Annotated BARJ
§ 15-11-66 Disposition of a delinquent child
www.crjcs.org
13. www.crjcs.org International Journal of Restorative Justice 2008 Vol4, No2
HI Hawaii Revised Statute RJ
HR 11 (2000) Mandate to establish
restorative justice
Ch 353H-31 Adult offender reentry programs
and services
ID Idaho Statute BA
Title20, Ch 5, 20-501 Juvenile Corrections Act
Legislative intent
IL Illinois Compiled Statute BARJ
705 ILCS 405/5-101 Juvenile Court Act
IN Indiana Code BA
IC 31-10-2-1 Policy and purpose
KS Kansas Statutes Annotated BA
Ch 38-2301 Citation; goals of the code;
development
LA Louisiana Revised Statute RJ
RS 46: 1841-844 Legislative Intent
ME Maine State Statute RJ
Title 17-A: 1204-A Community Reparative Boards
Title 54: 1321 Purpose
MD Maryland Code BARJ
Title 3-802 Juvenile causes purpose and
construction of subtitle
MN Minnesota Statute RJ
Ch 611A.77 Mediation program for crime
victims and offenders
Ch 611A.775 Restorative justice programs
MT Montana Code Annotated BARJ
Title 2-15-2012 Intent
Title 2-15-2013 Office of restorative justice
Title 2-15-2014 Restorative justice fund created,
source of funding, use of fund
112
14. Pavelka
NE Nebraska Statute BARJ
Section 43-402 Legislative intent, juvenile justice
system, goal
NJ New Jersey Statute Annotated BARJ
P.L. 2002 Title 2A: 4A-21 Incorporates balanced and
restorative justice principles in
juvenile justice system
NM New Mexico Statutes BA
Ch 32A-2-2 Delinquency Act, purpose of Act
NC North Carolina General Statutes BA
Article 15, Ch 7B-1500 Undisciplined and delinquent
youth, purpose.
OH Ohio Revised Code BARJ
Title 21, Ch 2152.01 Delinquent Children
Purpose of Juvenile Dispositions
OR Oregon Revised Statute BARJ
Ch 417.365-417.375 Family decision-making meeting
Ch 419C.001 Purposes of juvenile justice system
in delinquency cases
PA Pennsylvania State Statute BARJ
42 PA CSA Section 6301 Juvenile Act
SC South Carolina Code of Laws RJ
Section 20-7-20 Children’s policy established
Section 20-7-6840 Community service
TX Texas Statutes BA
Title 3 Juvenile Justice Code
Ch 51.01 Purpose and interpretation
VT Vermont Statutes RJ
Title 28 § 910a Reparative boards; functions
Title 3 § 3085c Commission on juvenile justice
www.crjcs.org
15. www.crjcs.org International Journal of Restorative Justice 2008 Vol4, No2
VA Code of Virginia BARJ
Ch 11 Juvenile and domestic relations
district courts
16.1-227 Purpose and intent
16.1.309.2-309.10 Establishment of community based
services, statewide plan for juvenile
justice services
WA Revised Code of Washington BARJ
RCW 13.40.500-13.40-560 Community Juvenile Accountability
Act
WI Wisconsin Statute BARJ
938.01 Juvenile Justice Code Title,
legislative intent and purposes
WY Wyoming Statutes BA
14-6-245 Progressive sanction guidelines
BARJ =Balanced and Restorative Justice
BA = Balanced Approach
RJ = Restorative Justice
114
16. Pavelka
Notes
i The language and extent to which legislation incorporates restorative
justice and/or the balanced approach differ widely.
ii For further information on each state’s progress with its restorative justice
initiatives and implementation, see also: Pennsylvania:
http://www.pccd.state.pa.us/pccd/cwp/view.asp?A=1411&Q=571707,
Alaska http://www.hss.state.ak.us/djj/restorative.htm, and South Carolina
http://www.state.sc.us/djj/.
iii Four states, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Louisiana, and Washington, have been
chosen to participate in the Models for Change Initiative which seeks to
promote juvenile justice system reform. The John D. and Catherine T.
MacArthur Foundation provides funding for this initiative. The model
policies, practices and procedures that are developed in these states
represent reform that may be replicated in other jurisdictions. Website:
http://www.modelsforchange.net/
iv The American Prosecutors Research Institute also funded Deschutes
County (Bend), Oregon, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and Cook County
(Chicago), Illinois. Nineteen other communities received training in the
development of report cards from 2005-06.
www.crjcs.org
17. www.crjcs.org International Journal of Restorative Justice 2008 Vol4, No2
References
Alaska code goals and purposes of chapter 47.12.010 (1998).
Arizona revised statutes 8-1001 family group decision making.
Bazemore, G. (1997). Balanced and restorative justice for juveniles: A
framework for juvenile justice in the 21st century. Washington, D.C.:
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
Bender, V., King, M., Torbet, P. (2006). “Advancing accountability: moving
toward victim restoration,” National Center for Juvenile Justice: Pittsburgh,
PA.
Bird, A. (2007). “Restorative justice in action: The words and work of Dennis
Maloney.” Justice Matters. Spring.
Colorado revised statutes, C.S. 19-2-102 (1999).
Department of Juvenile Justice, State of South Carolina. “The community
behind the fence: the charrette concept.”
http://www.state.sc.us/djj/pdfs/charette.pdf. Retrieved: September 14,
2008.
Department of Juvenile Justice, State of South Carolina. “Report card 2007.”
http://www.state.sc.us/djj/pdfs/2007-report-card.pdf. Retrieved:
September 14, 2008.
Department of Juvenile Justice, State of South Carolina, “Serious and violent
offender reintegration program.”
http://www.state.sc.us/djj/pdfs/reintegration-fact-sheet.pdf. Retrieved:
September 14, 2008.
Division of Juvenile Justice, State of Alaska, Juvenile Justice Report Card
(2008).
General Statutes of Connecticut, Section 46b-121h, goals of the juvenile
justice system (1995).
Hawaii revised statute, ch. 353H-31 adult offender reentry programs and
services (2000).
116
18. Pavelka
Idaho Statute, title 20, Ch. 5, 20-501, Juvenile Corrections Act, legislative
intent (1995).
Juvenile Court Judges’ Commission. (1997). Balanced and restorative justice
in Pennsylvania: A new mission and changing roles within the juvenile
justice system. Harrisburg, PA: Author.
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Committee, Pennsylvania
Commission on Crime and Delinquency. (2004). Mission and guiding
principles for Pennsylvania’s juvenile justice system. Harrisburg, PA:
Author
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Committee (2007). “Statewide
outcome measures,” Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency:
Harrisburg, PA: Author.
Maine state statute, title 17-A:1204-A, community reparative boards (1998).
Maloney, D.M., Romig, D. & Armstrong, T.L. (1988). Juvenile probation: The
balanced approach. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 39(3).
Maloney, D. and O’Brien, S. (2007). “Doing good: Service and the
transformation of criminal justice intervention,” Crime Victims Report,
Spring.
Minnesota state statute, restorative justice code ch. 611A.775 (1998).
New Jersey legislative statement P.L. 2002 Title 2A:4A-21.
Pavelka, S. (2008). “Serving victims in Pennsylvania: balanced and
restorative justice as a means towards juvenile justice reform,” Crime
Victims Report, Fall.
O’Brien, S., Maloney, D., Landry, D. and Costello, D. (2003). “Bringing justice
back to the community,” National Council of Juvenile and Family Court
Judges Journal, 54(3).
O'Brien, S. (1999). "Restorative juvenile justice policy development and
implementation assessment: A national survey of states,” Balanced and
Restorative Justice Project, Florida Atlantic University, Ft. Lauderdale, FL.
Oregon revised statutes 417.365, purpose of juvenile justice system in
delinquency cases (1995).
Pennsylvania state statutes 42 PA CSA Section 6301, juvenile act (1995).
www.crjcs.org
19. www.crjcs.org International Journal of Restorative Justice 2008 Vol4, No2
Rubin, H. T. (2006). “Juvenile justice systems addressing accountability
report card to their community” Future Trends in State Courts, New Jersey
Institute of State.
South Carolina, Section 20-7-20; 20-7-6840, children’s code (1993).
Thomas, D. W. (2006). “Measuring juvenile justice system performance:
Focus on South Carolina.” Pittsburgh, PA: National Center on Juvenile
Justice.
Vermont statutes title 28 910a, reparative boards, functions (1999).
Youth Authority Act, California welfare and institutions code, relating to
minors, Section 1700 (1999).
Ziedenberg J. (2006). “Models for change: Building momentum for juvenile
justice reform.” Washington, D.C.: Justice Policy Institute, December.
Sandra Pavelka is an Associate Professor of
Public Affairs, in the College of Professional
Studies, at Florida Gulf Coast University.
118