Although juvenile courts have always administered punishment to youthful offenders, the concept of parens patriae and the individual treatment mission have historically assigned an ambivalent role to sanctioning. In the absence of a coherent sanctioning framework, a punitive model has recently gained dominance over dispositional decisionmaking in juvenile court. However, both sanctioning approaches have major limitations. A restorative sanctioning model would shift the focus of offender accountability from the government to the victim. Restorative justice sanctions could also meet the need of communities to provide meaningful consequences for crime, confront offenders, denounce delinquent behavior, and send the message that such behavior is unacceptable. This model emphasizes dialogue and negotiation; restitution is a means of restoring both parties and achieving reconciliation. However, an effective sanctioning model is only one aspect of the comprehensive agenda for reform needed in juvenile justice to produce a more empowering reintegrative approach to rehabilitating and define a new role for juvenile justice professionals in enhancing the safety and security of communities. Charts and 65 references (Author abstract modified)