The ongoing political debate over the future direction of
the juvenile justice system in America has frequently generated far more
heat than light, and nowhere is this more evident than in the efforts of
the contenders to claim the allegiance of public opinion for their
positions. Those who decry most strongly the growing wave of serious and
violent juvenile crime say they are only responding to the public's
demand for tougher penalties and more "adult-like" procedures, while the
advocates for retaining the traditional individualized rehabilitative
model for juvenile justice urge that voters still support the juvenile
and family court as it emerged from the progressive era early in the
century. It is rare, however, to have an actual sampling done of public
opinion to inform the debate about the true nature of the public
viewpoint.
THE MICHIGAN SURVEY
In August and September of 1991, the
Survey Research Center at the University of Michigan's Institute for
Social Research conducted a survey of 1,000 randomly selected adults
across the United States to inquire about the public's perceptions and
concerns about juvenile justice. (Ira Schwartz, "Juvenile Crime-Fighting
Policies: What the Public Really Wants," in Ira M. Schwartz, ed.,
Juvenile Justice and Public Policy: Toward a National Agenda (1992))
Eighty-two percent of the respondents believed that serious juvenile
crime had increased in their state, with 62 percent feeling that it had
increased a lot. Seventy-eight percent feared becoming the victim of a
serious crime. Interestingly, only 27 percent of those responding
believed that the amount of serious juvenile crime had increased in
their own neighborhood. Fifty-seven percent felt safe walking alone
within one mile of their homes at night.
The attitudes about handling juveniles in the courts and in
corrections were interesting. Although 62 percent of the respondents
wanted juveniles selling large amounts of drugs to be tried in the adult
courts, and 68 percent wanted youths who committed serious violent
crimes tried in the adult court, 68 percent did not want drug sellers
imprisoned with adults, 63 percent did not want serious property crime
offenders mixed with adults, and even 55 percent did not feel that
juveniles should be sent to adult prisons for serious violent crimes.
Eighty-two percent of those surveyed agreed that "juveniles who are
accused of a crime should receive the same due process as adults."
Survey respondents clearly distinguish between juveniles who use
drugs and those who sell drugs and between first offenders and repeat
offenders in drug-related offenses. Forty-six percent of those
questioned felt that drug use was a health problem and 34 percent viewed
it as a criminal problem while 20 percent believed it should be treated
as both. Sixty-nine percent felt that those found guilty of using drugs
should be treated differently from those convicted of selling drugs.
Seventy-one percent of the respondents believed that all but the most
serious juvenile offenders should be handled in community-based programs
contrasted with 29 percent who favored residential correctional
institutions, or training schools. Fifty-one percent thought that
training schools served as deterrents to juvenile crime, while 45
percent did not. Fifty-five percent believed that serving time in a
training school prevented offenders from committing crimes in the
future, while 44 percent thought otherwise. When presented with a list
of programs for which juvenile crime control funds could be spent, 81
percent thought restitution and community service programs were very
important, 70 percent favored job training and youth employment, 69
percent believed community-based programs emphasizing education were
very important, 57 percent favored community-based counseling, 47
percent attached high importance to very close supervision in the
community, 36 percent desired funds for special foster homes and small
group homes, and the same percentage thought more training schools were
very important.
VIRGINIA SURVEY RESULTS
In the fall of 1995 the Virginia
Commission on Youth, a legislatively based study group, was engaged in a
major study of juvenile justice reform, along with a parallel study
commission appointed by the governor and chaired by the state attorney
general. The latter group was calling for more punitive measures for
juvenile offenders, and especially serious offenders, who were
frequently described as "young thugs" and "predators." The Commission on
Youth commissioned a comprehensive survey of public attitudes about
juvenile crime as part of a survey of 811 randomly selected adult
respondents. ("Report of the Virginia Commission on Youth on the Study
of Juvenile Justice System Reform", House Document No. 37 (1996)) The
poll was conducted by the Survey Research Laboratory at Virginia
Commonwealth University as part of the Commonwealth Poll, a survey of
political attitudes during state-wide legislative races. A majority of
the respondents identified themselves as Republicans.
Sixty-three percent of the respondents believed that the main purpose
of the juvenile court system should be to rehabilitate youths, while 23
percent chose punishment, and 11 percent said both. Sixty-eight percent
said that government should concentrate on either prevention or
rehabilitation to reduce juvenile crime rather than enforcement or
punishment. A national poll conducted by the Wirthlin Group in September
1994 resulted in 53 percent favoring prevention or rehabilitation for
crime generally--and not just juvenile crime--over 44 percent who chose
enforcement or punishment. Fifty-seven percent of the Virginia
respondents believed that the state should spend more money on dealing
with juvenile crime, while 23 percent felt that current spending was
sufficient, and 5 percent thought that less should be spent. Only 32
percent of the surveyed group agreed that more juveniles should be sent
to training schools, while 50 percent favored community based programs,
and 9 percent wanted both or another alternative.
While 74 percent of those questioned believed that it is legal in
Virginia to try a youth under the age of 18 as an adult for a serious
crime, they could not say at what age this was possible. Eighty percent
felt that the decision to transfer a juvenile to an adult court should
be made by a judge, rather than a prosecutor, which was favored by 12
percent. Despite the support for adult treatment in certain cases, 84
percent opposed the mixing of adults and juveniles awaiting trial.
During the same study, the Virginia Commission on Youth surveyed
those who are expert in the juvenile justice system about proposed
changes to the system--juvenile and adult court judges, prosecutors,
public defenders and court-appointed defense counsel, and chief
probation officers. Sixty-eight percent believed that the decision to
transfer a juvenile to an adult court should not be made solely by a
prosecutor--even 44 percent of the prosecutors rejected this approach.
Seventy-nine percent favored the use of determinate sentencing by
juvenile court judges, but 75 percent saw no need for a statutory
graduated sanctions system for the juvenile court.
MAJORITY FAVORS PROGRESSIVE POLICIES
The results of these
recent surveys, and others that preceded them in California and
elsewhere, reveal a public that is not nearly so punitive as the
political debate would indicate. The majority of those responding to
professionally designed and administered surveys still believe in the
efficacy of the traditional juvenile justice system with its emphasis on
prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation, and they reject the
retributive thrust of a punishment-centered system. Even when
respondents call for the greater use of transfer to adult court for
serious juvenile offenders, they want them segregated from adults while
awaiting trial and they wish them to be afforded rehabilitation in any
institutional placement. The public wants juveniles to be afforded the
same due process protections provided for adults, a reaffirmation of the
In re Gault decision almost thirty years ago. (387 U.S. 1 (1967))
The survey respondents also favor progressive youth corrections
policies. They believe secure institutional programs, like training
schools, should be reserved for only the most serious juvenile
offenders, and that the treatment modality of choice for most youth
should be community based programs that focus on rehabilitation. Members
of the public want their tax dollars invested in programs incorporating
the restorative justice philosophy--one that emphasizes the use of
restitution to victims and service to the community. They also want
young offenders to get job training, to be placed in community based
programs focusing on education, and to receive counseling in the local
community. Training schools and residential services are at the bottom
of the public's list of priority programs.
In spite of the fact that the public believes that serious juvenile
crime is rising significantly, most respondents see this as happening
elsewhere and not in their own neighborhood. They even feel safe walking
alone near their neighborhoods at night. All this in spite of the
constant drum beat of political rhetoric and the persistent media focus
on the cacophony of sirens and the collage of yellow crime scene tape.
Survey respondents appear to be fairly well-informed about what works
and what doesn't, and they are prepared to invest in those programs that
do work and will reduce crime. Fifty-seven percent of those polled in
Virginia even believed that more money should be spent on the juvenile
justice system, and this in a very fiscally conservative state and time.
The ultimate question may be whether the leaders will lead, or at least
catch up with the followers. Sound bites do not equal sound policy, and
those who are responsible for making policy in juvenile justice need to
reflect on the public attitudes articulated in these opinion surveys.
Robert E. Shepherd, Jr. is a professor of law at the University of
Richmond School of Law in Virginia.
Copyright 1996 American Bar Association. All rights reserved. This
information or any portion thereof may not be copied or disseminated in
any form or by any means or downloaded or stored in an electronic
database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the
American Bar Association.
Return to the Juvenile
Justice Articles page