Assessing the current state of juvenile probation practice: A statutory analysis
Assessing the current state of juvenile probation practice: A statutory analysis
复制标题
DOI：
10.1080/10509674.2016.1181693
复制
发表时间：
2016-01-01
影响因子：
0.7
通讯作者：
Hemmens, Craig
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hsieh, Ming-Li;Woo, Youngki;Hemmens, Craig
2002年《良好少年缓刑做法桌面指南》指出，一个州的少年司法制度应体现“平衡和恢复性司法”模式。自这本书出版以来已经过去了十多年，但人们对少年缓刑是否遵循BARJ知之甚少。本研究采用了法定分析，以探讨法律规定的青少年缓刑监督官的角色和BARJ模型之间的差异，在50个州和哥伦比亚特区。结果表明，即使随着时间的推移进行了重大改革和法律变革，少年缓刑的做法仍然不符合恢复性司法的基本原则。
The 2002 Desktop Guide to Good Juvenile Probation Practice indicated that a state's juvenile justice system should reflect a "balanced and restorative justice" (BARJ) model. Over a decade has passed since this publication, yet little is known about whether juvenile probation followed the BARJ. This study employed a statutory analysis to examine the differences between the legally prescribed roles of juvenile probation officers and the BARJ model across 50 states and the District of Columbia. Results indicated that even with significant reforms and statutory changes overtime, juvenile probation practices still fall short of meeting the basic tenets of restorative justice.