ONE OF THE STAGES THROUGH WHICH ANY NEW FIELD OF STUDY MUST PASS IS ACADEMIC LEGITIMATION. THE FIELD OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE IS PRESENTLY (1978) IN THIS STAGE OF STRIVING FOR ACCEPTANCE WITHIN THE ACADEMIC COMMUNITY. RECENTLY, CRITICISM OF THE FIELD AS WELL AS LEGITIMIZING ACTIVITIES SEEM TO HAVE INCREASED. IN THE COURSE OF THE DEBATE ABOUT THE APPROPRIATE LOCATION AND IDENTITY OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, IT CAN BE EXPECTED THAT THE ISSUE OF DISCIPLINARY STATUS FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE WILL GAIN PROMINENCE. IF CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACADEMICIANS FOLLOW THE PATTERN OF OTHER FIELDS, THE FOLLOWING PRODISCIPLINE ARGUMENTS MAY BE EXPECTED: (1) DISCIPLINARY STANDING WILL MEAN THAT CRIMINAL JUSTICE POSSESSES A DISTINCT BODY OF KNOWLEDGE OF ITS OWN; (2) FULL DISCIPLINARY STANDING WILL PROVIDE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACADEMICIANS WITH A MORE SECURE INSTITUTIONAL IDENTITY AND ENHANCED RESEARCH STATUS; AND (3) INCREASES IN AUTONOMY ARE LIKELY TO ACCOMPANY THIS IMPROVED STATUS AND PRESTIGE. AS APPEALING AS SOME OF THESE POINTS MIGHT BE, CERTAIN 'COSTS' ALSO WOULD BE ATTRIBUTABLE TO A DISCIPLINARY STATUS. DISCIPLINES TEND TO SUPPRESS CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION, AND THE STRUCTURING OF FIELDS INTO DISCIPLINES MAY RESULT IN THE PITFALLS OF REDUCTIONISM. ANOTHER COST RELATES TO THE NOTION OF DRAWING BOUNDARIES AROUND CRIMINAL JUSTICE, WHICH MAY RESULT IN OVERLAP AND DUPLICATION OF EFFORT. WHILE THERE SEEMS TO BE POINTS IN FAVOR OF A DISCIPLINARY STATUS, SOME OF THE WEAKNESSES OF DISCIPLINES IN GENERAL SUGGEST THAT CONTINUING A MORE SYNTHETIC AND OPEN APPROACH IS PERHAPS PREFERABLE. REFERENCES ARE NOTED. (KBL)