Open AccessJournal Article
Three dogmas of juvenile justice
Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
Juvenile justice policy in Australia is dominated by three assumptions so widely accepted and so rarely challenged they might fairly be described as dogmas: contact with the court system increases the risk of further offending (i.e., is criminogenic).Abstract:
Juvenile justice policy in Australia is dominated by three assumptions so widely accepted and so rarely challenged they might fairly be described as dogmas. The first assumption is that contact with the court system increases the risk of further offending (ie, is criminogenic). The second assumption is that restorative justice ('RJ') is more effective than traditional justice in reducing the risk of further offending. And the third assumption is that, left to their own devices, most juveniles grow out of crime. In other words, juvenile involvement in crime is for the most part transient and self-limiting.read more
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
A review of restorative justice responses to offending
Don Weatherburn,Megan Macadam +1 more
TL;DR: In this paper, a review of the available evidence on whether restorative justice (RJ) is an effective means of reducing re-offending, what benefits victims of crime obtain from participation in the RJ process, and whether the public supports the principles of RJ, and how the cost and efficiency of RJ proceedings compare with conventional courts in cost-and efficiency (i.e. time taken to finalize cases).
Journal ArticleDOI
Blurred Lines: Reconsidering the Concept of ‘Diversion’ in Youth Justice Systems in Australia
TL;DR: This article revisited "diversion" in the context of youth justice in Australia and found that although diversion is omnipresent in youth justice, it is rarely subject to critical examination.
Journal ArticleDOI
A child’s capacity to commit crime: Examining the operation of doli incapax in Victoria (Australia)
Kate Fitz-Gibbon,Wendy O'Brien +1 more
TL;DR: The rebuttable presumption of doli incapax is available in all Australian states and territories and provides that, where a child is unable to comprehend the distinction between actions that are seriously wrong and those that are "naughty or mischievous", they cannot be held criminally responsible for their actions as mentioned in this paper.
Journal ArticleDOI
Restorativeness, Procedural Justice, and Defiance as Long-Term Predictors of Reoffending of Participants in Family Group Conferences:
TL;DR: This article examined how varying degrees of restorative justice, procedural justice, and defiance in family group conference (FGC) processes and outcomes affect long-term juvenile recidivism measures in one large Midwestern U.S. city.