The paper argues that the model of conferencing has been imposed on Indigenous communities without consideration of Indigenous cultural values and without consideration of how communities might wish to develop their own Indigenous approaches to the issue, and has grossly simplified Indigenous mechanisms for resolving conflicts. In most jurisdictions, community conferencing has reinforced the role of state police and done little to ensure greater control over police discretionary decision-making. The changes have also been introduced in the context of more punitive law and order policies, including mandatory minimum imprisonment terms and repeat offender legislation for juveniles. Theoretical, observational and empirical evidence strongly suggests that family group conferencing, far from being a panacea for offending by Indigenous young people, is likely to lead to harsher outcomes for those young people. The end result is likely to be greater bifurcation of the juvenile justice system along radicalized boundaries, with Indigenous youth receiving more punitive outcomes. Notes, references