U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Race Disparities in the Juvenile Justice System (From Race, Culture, Psychology, & Law, P 311-325, 2005, Kimberly Holt Barrett and William H. George, eds. -- See NCJ-216932)

NCJ Number
216942
Author(s)
Eileen Poe-Yamagata; Madeline Wordes Noya
Date Published
2005
Length
15 pages
Annotation
This chapter reviews research and statistics on where and how racial bias influences decisions on the management of youth of color in U.S. juvenile justice systems, and suggestions are offered for interventions that may reduce such racially biased decisions.
Abstract
Research and statistics show that the juvenile courts do not adequately screen police arrest decisions that may have been racially biased. Other decision points in juvenile processing where racially biased decisions may be made are detention decisions, the decision about whether to transfer a juvenile to adult criminal court, juvenile court intake, formal case processing, the adjudicatory hearing, and the dispositional hearing. Although it is clear from juvenile justice data that minority youth are overrepresented in the juvenile justice system, some argue the this is true because minority youth commit more serious and frequent offenses; however, research indicates that racial bias is also at work in the processing of minority youth, possibly because of the biased assumption that minority youth are at greater risk for escalation into adult criminal careers compared with White youth. One intervention that may reduce racially biased juvenile justice decisionmaking is the establishment of strict detention criteria and/or objective risk assessment screening procedures for detention. Other interventions include the development of alternatives to detention, the use of standardized assessment for placement decisions, the development of alternative dispute resolution forums, and the creation of community commissions that have the power to review decisionmaking in a local juvenile justice system. 5 tables, 9 figures, and 32 references