FIVE ALTERNATIVES ARE DESCRIBED. THREE--WAIVER TO CRIMINAL COURT, MANDATORY SENTENCING, AND LOWERING THE AGE LIMIT OF JUVENILE COURT JURISDICTION--ARE CLEAR RESPONSES TO THE PUBLIC PRESSURE OF PUNISHMENT. THERE IS A GROWING TREND TOWARD WAIVER OF JUVENILE COURT JURISDICTION AS JUVENILES ACCUSED OF SERIOUS OFFENSES ARE INCREASINGLY BOUND OVER FOR REGULAR CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN ADULT COURT. IN 12 STATES, SUCH TRANSFER IS REQUIRED, YET THERE IS LITTLE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THE OFFENDER WILL BE THE BETTER FOR THE EXPERIENCE. LIKE THE BIND-OVER, MANDATORY SENTENCING RESPONDS TO THE YOUTHFUL CRIMINAL WITH INCARCERATION AND INTIMIDATION AND REQUIRES JUVENILE COURT JUDGES TO SENTENCE A CERTAIN CLASS TO OFFENDERS TO LONG TERMS IN TRAINING SCHOOLS AND PRISONS. LOWERING THE AGE LIMIT OF JUVENILE COURT JURISDICTION (AS IN NEW YORK AND VERMONT WHERE THE LIMIT IS 16) WHILE RETAINING SOME JUDICIAL DISCRETION SENDS YOUTH TO ADULT COURT AT A AGE WHEN, FOR ALL OTHER SOCIAL PURPOSES, THEY ARE NOT CONSIDERED ADULTS. THERE ARE, HOWEVER, TWO ALTERNATIVES THAT MAKE SOME ATTEMPT TO PRESERVE THE IDEAL OF REHABILITATIONS MANY STATES HAVE DEVELOPED SMALL, SECURE FACILITIES TO HOLD AND HELP VIOLENT YOUTH AND PROGRAMS HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED IN WHICH YOUTHFUL OFFENDERS ARE REINTEGRATED INTO THE COMMUNITY USING COMMUNITY RESOURCES TO MAINTAIN THE OFFENDER IN A FREE SOCIETY (DEINSTITUTIONALIZATION/PURCHASE-OF-SERVICE PROGRAMS). MANY JUVENILE JUSTICE PROFESSIONALS CONSIDER THE DESINSTITUTIONALIZATION/PURCHASE-OF-SERVICE PROGRAMS THE MOST PROMISING OF THE POLICY OPTIONS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSIDERATION SINCE THEY RELY ON BOTH STATE AND COMMUNITY, DIMINISH THE NEED FOR LARGE STATE INSTITUTIONS, AND ARE LESS COSTLY. (MJW)