Informal decisions have always been an integral part of the community's handling of delinquency, although the extent to which this discretion is exercised varies greatly by location. In the examination of research in these areas, an attempt is made to clarify how decisions to screen children from court intervention are currently being made, and what consequences would arise if these practices were altered by the introduction of formal diversion. Labeling theory has had an impact on the development of diversion, since theorists believe involvement in the juvenile justice system increases, rather than reduces, the young person's commitment to deviant norms. Among issues that have arisen in the literature are confusion over the definition of diversion and the consequent ambiguity of the term, the multiplicity of goals and the absence of priorities among them, and the problems of coercion. Ways in which the new diversion has been implemented are described as they relate to legal programs, the youth service bureau, and other paralegal and nonlegal programs. Evaluations of diversionary programs and their drawbacks are reviewed. Four basic stages which should be taken in any diversion assessment are presented and related to the research on diversion. Potential consequences of diversion that might not be anticipated by its advocates are also outlined. That careful attention must be paid to the definitional issues and the specific objectives of diversion is emphasized. A list of 21 references is provided. (Author abstract modified)