The dramatic turn toward punitive justice for juveniles that occurred in the 1990’s has produced little of the promised effects. As such, America’s juvenile justice system finds itself at a crossroads. The article argues that the punitive stance of the 1990’s has not reduced juvenile crime and recidivism and, in fact, may only be worsening the problem by not allowing juvenile offenders the opportunity for rehabilitation. In keeping with the “crossroads” analogy, the article outlines four choices the juvenile justice system must make in terms of its future ideology. The first choice involves the rise in juvenile transfers to adult criminal courts. Research findings are presented that show how this punitive stance toward juvenile crime is doing little to decrease crime and, in fact, may exacerbate juvenile recidivism. The second choice concerns juvenile detention versus alternative community-based supervision programs. Research findings show that juvenile offenders respond well to community-based supervision programs, whereas detention homes for juveniles offer little in terms of rehabilitation. The third choice that the juvenile justice system must face involves a juvenile offender’s right to counsel. In many jurisdictions, juveniles are often under-represented or not represented by counsel at all; the article calls for all juveniles to be afforded “meaningful legal defense.” The fourth choice calls for juvenile programming to be research-based and have measurable outcomes. Tables, figures