Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Opportunities Diverted: Intake Diversion and Institutionalized Racial Disadvantage in the Juvenile Justice System

  • Published:
Race and Social Problems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The overrepresentation of youth of color in the juvenile justice system is well documented, but researchers know less about the mechanisms that produce these disparities. In this paper, we focus on an understudied point of contact between youth and the criminal justice system: intake diversion. Based on a multivariate analysis of court records, we find that racial disparities in diversion are strongly mediated by family structure. We suggest that assumptions about the role of family in the completion of diversion requirements create indirect disadvantages by race. Specifically, African American youths are denied diversion opportunities largely because they disproportionately live in alternative family arrangements. Importantly, however, our analysis also reveals that such assumptions about family are incorrect. Family structure in our data has no relationship to the successful completion of diversion. We conclude by discussing the implications of these findings for understanding institutionalized racial disadvantage in juvenile justice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Our data are from a Southeastern U.S. state, so we will specify this state’s procedures. Other states might have slightly different guidelines.

  2. In analyses not reported here, we examined the bivariate effect of living arrangement on successful diversion completion. Living arrangement was not a statistically significant predictor. In further analyses not presented here, we conducted the same mediation analysis but instead included gender as the primary predictor of the likelihood of receiving a diversion agreement. The results show that gender is non-statistically significant, making the effect of living arrangement a truly racialized factor.

References

  • Alexander, M. (2010). The new Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness. New York: New Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, W. R. (1995). African American family life in societal context: Crisis and hope. Sociological Forum, 10, 569–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, D. M., & Frazier, C. E. (1996). Race effects in juvenile justice decision-making: Findings of a statewide analysis. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 86, 392–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonilla-Silva, E. (2006). Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in the United States. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bridges, G. S., & Steen, S. (1998). Racial disparities in offical assessments of juvenile offenders: Attributional stereotypes as mediating mechanisms. American Sociological Review, 63, 554–570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clair, M., & Winter, A. S. (2016). How judges think about racial disparities: Situational decision-making in the criminal justice system. Criminology, 54, 332–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clear, T. R. (2007). The impacts of incarceration on public safety. Social Research, 74, 613–630.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, P. H. (1990). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness and the politics of empowerment. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, C., Chiricos, T., & Kleck, G. (1998). Race, racial threat and sentencing of habitual offenders. Criminology, 36, 481–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curtis, G. B. (1976). The checkered career of parens patriae: The state as parent or tyrant? DePaul Law Review, 25, 895–915.

    Google Scholar 

  • Development Services Group, Inc. (2015). Risk factors for delinquency literature review. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donzelot, J. (1979). The policing of families. London: Hutchinson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dovidio, J. F., Kawakami, K., & Gaertner, S. L. (2002). Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 62–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ender, P. (2010). binary_mediation: A new command to compute mediations with multiple mediators and binary and continuous variables in STATA. UCLA: Academic Technology Services, Statistical Consulting Group. http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/ado/analysis/

  • Fader, J. J., Kurlychek, M. C., & Morgan, K. (2014). The color of juvenile justice: Racial disparities in dispositional decisions. Social Science Research, 44, 126–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feld, B. C. (2017). The evolution of the juvenile court: Race, politics, and the criminalizing of juvenile justice. New York: New York University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Foster, H., & Hagan, J. (2015). Punishment regimes and the multilevel effects of parental incarceration: Intergenerational, intersectional, and interinstitutional models of social inequality and systemic exclusion. Annual Review of Sociology, 41, 135–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1991). Governmentality. In G. Burchell, C. Gordon & P. Miller (Eds.), The Foucault effect. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garland, D. (1997). Governmentality and the problem of crime: Foucault, criminology, sociology. Theoretical Criminology, 1, 173–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garland, D. (2001). The culture of control: Crime and social order in contemporary society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Glöckner, A., & Engel, C. (2013). Role-induced bias in court: An experimental analysis. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26, 272–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, M. L., Mutambudzi, S., Gitari, S., Keiser, P. H., & Seidel, S. E. (2016). Child-street migration among HIV-affected families in Kenya: A mediation analysis from cross-sectional data. AIDS Care, 28, 168–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102, 4–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hebert, C. G. (1997). Sentencing outcomes of Black, Hispanic, and White males convicted under federal sentencing guidelines. Criminal Justice Review, 22, 133–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, B. D., & King, R. D. (2017). Facial profiling: Race, physical appearance, and punishment. Criminology, 55, 520–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kang, J., & Lane, K. (2010). Seeing through colorblindness: Implicit bias and the law. UCLA Law Review, 58, 465–520.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauritsen, J. L. (2005). Racial and ethnic differences in juvenile offending. In D. F. Hawkins & K. Kempf-Leonard (Eds.), Our children, their children: Confronting racial and ethnic differences in american juvenile justice (pp. 83–104). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Leiber, M. J. (2015).Race, prior offending, and juvenile court outcomes. Journal of Crime and Justice, 39, 88–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leiber, M. J., & Mack, K. Y. (2003). The individual and joint effects of race, gender, and family status on juvenile justice decision-making. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 40, 34–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leiber, M. J., Richetelli, D., & Feyerherm, W. (2009). Disproportionate minority contact technical assistance manual (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leiber, M. J., & Stairs, J. M. (1999). Race, contexts, and the use of intake diversion. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36, 56–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lemert, E. (1951). Social pathology. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, J. D., & Young, D. M. (2010). Different shades of bias: Skin tone, implicit racial bias, and judgments of ambiguous evidence. West Virginia Law Review, 112, 307–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loeb, R. C., Waung, M., & Sheeran, M. (2015). Individual and familial variables for predicting successful completion of a Juvenile Justice Diversion Program. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 54, 212–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mack, K. Y., Leiber, M. J., Featherstone, R. A., & Monserud, M. A. (2007). Reassessing the family-delinquency association: Do family type, family processes, and economic factors make a difference? Journal of Criminal Justice, 35(1), 51–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, O. (2005). A meta-analysis of race and sentencing research: Explaining the inconsistencies. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 21, 439–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2014). The growth of incarceration in the United States: Exploring causes and consequences. Committee on causes and consequences of high rates of incarceration. In J. Travis & B. Western; & S. Redburn (Eds.), Committee on law and justice, division of behavioral and social sciences and education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pager, D., & Shepherd, H. (2008). The sociology of discrimination: Racial discrimination in employment, housing, credit, and consumer markets. Annual Review of Sociology, 34, 181–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T. (1943). The kinship system of the contemporary United States. American Anthropologist, 45, 22–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patrick, S., & Marsh, R. (2005). Juvenile diversion: Results of a three year experimental study. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 16, 59–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payne, K. B. (2006). Weapon bias: Split-second decisions and unintended stereotyping. Current Direction in Psychological Science, 15, 287–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phelps, M., & Pager, D. (2016). Inequality and punishment: A turning point for mass incarceration? The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 663, 185–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puzzanchera, C., & Hockenberry, S. (2018). National disproportionate minority contact databook. Developed by the National Center for Juvenile Justice for the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/dmcdb/.

  • Rios, V. M. (2011). Punished: Policing the lives of Black and Latino boys. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roscoe, J. N., Lery, B., & Chambers, J. E. (2018). Understanding child protection decisions involving parents with mental illness and substance abuse. Child Abuse & Neglect: The International Journal, 81, 235–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, R. J., & Laub, J. H. (1993). Crime in the making: Pathways and turning points through life. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stack, C. (1974). All our kin: Strategies for survival in a Black community. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, J. R. (2013). Structural bias in the sentencing of felony defendants. Social Science Research, 42, 1207–1221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomita, A., Lukens, E. P., & Herman, D. B. (2014). Mediation analysis of critical time intervention for persons living with serious mental illnesses: Assessing the role of family relations in reducing psychiatric rehospitalization. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 37, 4–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Census Bureau (2016). Current Population Survey. Annual Social and Economic Supplement, 2013. Retrieved Febrauary 23, 2017.

  • U.S. Census Bureau (2017). QuickFacts. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/location/PST045217.

  • Wakefield, S. & Wildeman, C. (2013). Children of the prison boom: Mass incarceration and the future of American inequality. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, E. L., & Rankin, J. H. (1991). Families and delinquency: A meta-analysis of the impact of broken homes. Social Problems, 38, 71–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Western, B. (2006). Punishment and Inequality in America. New York: Russell Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Western, B. & Pettit, B. (2010). Incarceration and social inequality. Daedalus, 139, 8–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, H. A., & Hoge, R. D. (2013). The effect of youth diversion programs in recidivism. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 40, 497–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, USA

    Tony P. Love & Edward W. Morris

Authors
  1. Tony P. Love
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Edward W. Morris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tony P. Love.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Love, T.P., Morris, E.W. Opportunities Diverted: Intake Diversion and Institutionalized Racial Disadvantage in the Juvenile Justice System. Race Soc Probl 11, 33–44 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12552-018-9248-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12552-018-9248-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation