Who Deserves Diversion? A Theoretical Critique of Mitigation, Consequentialism, and the Juvenile Court

The juvenile court was created as a means of diverting youth from the criminal justice system, and, in turn, diversion within the juvenile court has been used for a variety of purposes. This paper argues that an understanding of diversion, and its implications, requires distinguishing deservingness...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Zane, Steven N. (Author)
Contributors: Mears, Daniel P.
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Published: 2023
In: Journal of contemporary criminal justice
Year: 2023, Volume: 39, Issue: 4, Pages: 570-589
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Keywords:
Description
Summary:The juvenile court was created as a means of diverting youth from the criminal justice system, and, in turn, diversion within the juvenile court has been used for a variety of purposes. This paper argues that an understanding of diversion, and its implications, requires distinguishing deservingness and consequentialism. Analysis of the former goal entails a focus on mitigation and draws attention to a critical gap in scholarship—namely, how do juvenile courts decide which youth deserve diversion? While risk and needs assessments likely play a role, so, too, may mitigation assessments about which youth are more deserving of interventions that may impose less punishment and more rehabilitation. In advancing this argument, we discuss ways in which a focus on diversion, and on mitigation, help to illuminate fundamental tensions in juvenile justice. We discuss, too, ways in which this focus can help to advance research and policy.
ISSN:1552-5406
DOI:10.1177/10439862231189616