THE HISTORICAL AND SOCIAL CONTEXT OF THE TREND IS DISCUSSED, RESEARCH FINDINGS INDICATIVE OF THE IMPACT OF DIVERSIONARY PROGRAMS AND ALTERNATIVES TO INSTITUTIONALIZATION FOR JUVENILE DELINQUENTS ARE CITED, AND CONCLUSIONS ARE DRAWN ABOUT THE SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS OF THESE PROGRAMS. IT HAS BEEN ASSUMED THAT THE NEGATIVE EFFECTS OF OFFICIAL LABELING WILL BE DECREASED BY PLACING DELINQUENTS IN NONCOERCIVE ORGANIZATIONS OUTSIDE THE LEGAL SYSTEM. EXISTING STUDIES ON THE IMPACT OF DIVERSION AND DEINSTITUTIONALIZATION PROGRAMS INDICATE THAT THE PRINCIPLE EFFECTS OF THESE PROGRAMS ARE THAT GREATER NUMBERS AND TYPES OF JUVENILES COME INTO CONTACT WITH AGENTS OF SOCIAL CONTROL, THAT THE OVERALL SERVICE SYSTEM EXPANDS, AND THAT YOUTHS ACTUALLY EXPERIENCE MORE RESTRICTIVE FORMS OF DETENTION FOR GREATER PERIODS OF TIME THAN HAD BEEN THE CASE UNDER 'INSTITUTIONAL' APPROACHES. IT APPEARS THAT, INSTEAD OF DECREASING THE ADVERSE EFFECTS OF COERCIVE SUPERVISION AND LABELING, DIVERSION AND DEINSTITUTIONALIZATION HAVE MERELY TRANSFERRED THE LOCUS OF CONTROL OVER YOUTHS FROM THE LEGAL BUREAUCRACY TO ANOTHER BUREAUCRACY. IF DIVERSION AND DEINSTITUTIONALIZATION PROGRAMS ARE TO AVOID THE FATE OF INSTITUTIONAL TRAINING SCHOOLS FOR JUVENILES, CARE SHOULD BE TAKEN TO EXAMINE WHAT ACTUALLY IS OCCURRING IN THESE PROGRAMS RATHER THAN WHAT IS HOPED WILL OCCUR. (LKM)