Juvenile Diversion

2005 ◽  
pp. 161-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah A. Chapin ◽  
Patricia A. Griffin
Keyword(s):  
2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (7) ◽  
pp. 923-936 ◽  
Author(s):  
Constanta Belciug ◽  
Cynthia Franklin ◽  
Kristin Whitehill Bolton ◽  
Catheleen Jordan ◽  
Peter Lehmann

1984 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 624-647 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arnold Binder ◽  
Gilbert Geis

For a variety of reasons, some valid, many irrelevant, it has become fashionable within sociological criminology to condemn juvenile diversion. Participants in the condemnatory rituals identify each other as insiders by catchy words and phrases (like “widening the net”), and frequently substitute rhetoric for logic in their argumentation aimed both at gaining cultic recognition and winning over the unwary. Perhaps the most damaging consequence is the forfeiture of influence in an important social process by a large array of social scientists. Contrary to the predictions of some in the cult, diversion remains a flourishing mode of serving young offenders, as indeed it must so long as the present juvenile justice system remains in operation.


1993 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-45
Author(s):  
John R. Fuller ◽  
William M. Norton

2004 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Patrick ◽  
Robert Marsh ◽  
Wade Bundy ◽  
Susan Mimura ◽  
Tina Perkins

1984 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 305-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARK R. POGREBIN ◽  
ERIC D. POOLE ◽  
ROBERT M. REGOLI

2011 ◽  
Vol 50 (7) ◽  
pp. 447-465 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kay Hodges ◽  
Lisa A. Martin ◽  
Cynthia Smith ◽  
Shaun Cooper

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document