1. Running head: DRAFT OF LITERATURE REVIEW 1
Draft of Literature Review
Kendra L. Woods
Argosy University

2. DRAFT OF LITERATURE REVIEW 2
Introduction
Juvenile crime has continued to gain increasing attention over the last few decades.
Fortunately, when a juvenile is convicted of an offense, it is not likely that they will remain
incarcerated for the remainder of their lives. So what happens to a juvenile while they are
serving out their sentence, whether in a juvenile facility or criminal detention facility? Do these
facilities have programs and services structured to assist adolescents as they continue to grow
and develop?
The purpose of this literaturereview will be to evaluate and compare the availability and
effectiveness of the programs and treatment services available to juvenile offenders incarcerated
in both juvenile and adult facilities. The questions below are the research questions that this
proposed study is attempting to address:
1. Are the adult prisons providing the programs and services that juveniles need to
become productive members of society?
2. Does trying juvenile offender in the criminal justice system help them become
productive citizens in the future?
The review will begin with a synthesis of literature pertaining to the history and purpose
of the juvenile justice system as it relates to the psychological development of adolescents.
Next, the origins of the criminal justice system will be assessed along with the effects that this
system has on adolescent development and their ability to successfully returnhome upon release.
Relevant studies related to this issue will be introduced, along with implications for further
research based on the gaps in literature.
The theoretical framework that will be used as a guide will be an integrated model
involving both adolescent and social development. Adolescent development occurs during that

3. DRAFT OF LITERATURE REVIEW 3
period of child development from 14 – 19 years of age. It tends to encompass three chronological
stages: early adolescence, middle adolescence, and late adolescence. Social development
involves relationships with peers, family, school, work, and community (APA, 2002).
Unfortunately for the juvenile offender, those groups may be limited or expanded to include
institutional staff during their incarceration and the detention facility, jail, or prison becomes the
place where social development can take place (Steinberg, 2004). This model will be used to
focus on delinquency prevention and the reduction of recidivism.
Juvenile Justice System
The United States juvenile justice system has experienced some significant changes
sinceits inception in 1899 (Hinton, Sims, Adams, & West, 2007).Originally the juvenile justice
system was formatted as an informal environment established to protect all children while also
providing punishment for their inappropriate or illegal acts (Johnson, Lanza-Kaduce, & Woolard,
2011).In addition to punishment for criminal activity, juvenile court was established to look at
ways of rehabilitating juvenile offenders(Hinton et al., 2007). The juvenile justice system was
responsible for issuing lenient sentences that would allow the juvenile to be rehabilitated
(Kupchik, 2006).Juvenile correctional facilities were operating based on a mission to house and
provide the necessary supports to assist juvenile offenders in their rehabilitation (Caeti,
Hemmens, Cullen, & Burton, 2003).
The most appropriate way to handle juvenile offenders has changed over the years
because society continues to go back and forth in their thoughts regarding the accountability of
these offenders(Hinton, Sims, Adams, & West 2007). Juvenile crime rates were on the rise from
about 1970 until the early 1990s, causing the public and policymakers to look for other options
to help decrease juvenile crime. As a result the most recent public opinion has been to move

4. DRAFT OF LITERATURE REVIEW 4
toward a more punitive option (Jordan & Myers, 2011). Although historically, juvenile justice
policymakers encouraged programs to address the rehabilitative needs of juveniles, over the last
20 years, they have altered their beliefs and tend to lean more toward policies that sanction
juveniles based on their offense(Hinton et al., 2007).
Current Juvenile System
Over the past few years there have numerous meetings regarding the inadequacies of the
juvenile system. The juvenile systems’ philosophy, structure and procedures are being
questioned. It is because of these criticisms and the increased juvenile arrests that the traditional
juvenile justice system is being altered. In contrast to the conventional system’s idea of saving
or rehabilitating the children, the focus is now based on a philosophy of punishment (Myers,
2003). Today, the United States juvenile justice system processes millions of juvenile arrests on
an annual basis (Steinberg, Chung, & Little, 2004). By 2004, approximately 7% of the two
million juvenile arrests were transferred to adult courts (Snyder, 2006).Reports show that in
2008, there were 1,653,300 juvenile cases processed nationally and of that total 1,203,600 were
adolescent males (Puzzachera & Kang, 2011).The criminal system has seen an increase in the
number of juvenile offenders in adult facilities. In June of 2009 there were 2,778 inmates under
the age of 18 in adult facilities (West, 2010). Recent studies have revealed that the number of
juveniles prosecuted in criminal court rather than juvenile court continues to rise (Johnson,
Lanza-Kaduce, & Woolard, 2011).
Public Response to Juvenile Crime
The public’s response to juvenile crime had a huge impact on the changes made to policy
related to juvenile offenders (Hinton, Sims, Adams, & West, 2007). The society’s view of
juveniles and crime caused the policies regarding juvenile sanctions to go back and forth

5. DRAFT OF LITERATURE REVIEW 5
between rehabilitation and punishment. Most of the interventions used over the past 60 years
have focused on both. Some of those interventions include community based and residential
programs that are able to provide needed therapeutic services (Johnson, Lanza-Kaduce, &
Woolard, 2011). For those juveniles who commit serious, violent offenses the use of long term
consequences in adult jails and prisons is being used (Kupchik, 2007).
It was the belief that many people believed that juvenile court was not issuing
punishment that was suitable for the offenses being committed compared to those that could be
issued by criminal courts (Johnson, Lanza-Kaduce, & Woolard, 2011).The public believed that
the use of the adult criminal court would ideally impose harsher sanctions that could increase
accountability of the youth and reduce recidivism. However, they did not necessarily want
juvenile offenders to be housed in the same facilities with adult offenders (Myers, Lee, Giever, &
Gilliam, 2011).Today, all 50 states have policies in place that make it easier for juvenile
offenders to be tried in the criminal court based on varying criteria (Kupchik, 2006).
Psychological Development of Juveniles
Society began to look at childhood and adolescence as a developmental stage somewhere
between 1900 and 1980. Youth between early and late adolescence are said to endure numerous
changes related to physical development and cognitive development (Gutman & Eccles,
2007).Mears and Travis (2004) report that generally, developmental psychologistsclassify
adolescents into three groups based on age. Each group is then distinguished by varying degrees
of emotional, social, and physical development.It is the experiences that occur during a
juveniles’ adolescence that affect their development as an adult. The transition from adolescence
to adulthood is not an easy process and it involves the development of many skills (Steinberg,
Chung, & Little, 2004).

6. DRAFT OF LITERATURE REVIEW 6
Developmental psychology is a concept that believes adolescents need assistance in
learning how to live independently upon transitioning into adulthood. Juveniles or adolescents
undergo a process called psychosocial development. Psychosocial development is an important
aspect of maturing to adulthood (Mears & Travis, 2004). Steinberg, Chung, and Little (2004)
state that psychosocial maturity is necessary for the appropriate transition from adolescence to
adulthood. Reaching this level of maturity involves the development of mature thinking and
reasoning, which are said to reduce the number of poor decisions made bylate adolescents
(Fagan, 2008).Studies show that juvenile offenders have issues adjusting to becoming productive
adults and tend to have problems reaching normal adult milestones. Travis, Solomon, and
Waul (2001) report that while adults have a difficult time attempting to transition from
incarceration to freedom, juveniles face even greater challenges. Steinberg et al. (2004) state
that in order for an adolescent to successfully achieve the adult role they must achieve a
threshold level of psychosocial development. Based on what is known about former juvenile
offenders, it is not impossible to believe that many juveniles leave the juvenile justice system and
become adults who are not equipped to handle the responsibility of adulthood. Whether or not a
juvenile offender positively develops this aspect of healthy development is determined by the
institutional programming available during incarceration (Mears & Travis, 2004). By guiding
the focus of our juvenile facilities, jails and prisons, toward psychosocial development,
intervention programs can be developed to assist juveniles develop the skills needed to be
productive citizens (Steinberg et al., 2004).
Psychological Needs of Juveniles
Determining whether incarcerated juvenile offenders in adult prisons and juvenile
facilities have similar mental health needs can be of assistance when deciding how adult facilities

7. DRAFT OF LITERATURE REVIEW 7
should structure programs to meet the needs of their most vulnerable residents (Woolard,
Odgers, Lanza-Kaduce, & Daglis, 2005).Limited research reveals that juvenile offenders tend to
have mental health and substance abuse issues at rate higher than adult offenders (Vaughn,
Freedenthal, Jenson, & Howard, 2007).Unfortunately, the literature regarding the occurrence of
behavioral health issues among this population is insufficient due to the lack of research
(Sullivan, 2004). It is imperative that data regarding this population be collected in future
studies due to the fact that a large number of juvenile offenders are being held in adult courts.
Studies report that over 50% of incarcerated juveniles have been diagnosed with some type of
mental health disorder, with 20% being the more serious disorders (Cocozza & Skowyra, 2000;
Teplin, Abram, McClelland, Dulcan, & Mericle, 2002). Juveniles in adult prison are said to have
a large number of treatment needs compared to their peers (Murrie, Henderson, Vincent,
Rockett, & Mundt, 2009). Research shows that many young offenders have serious issues
related to their mental health and educational attainment. These deficiencies have shown to
affect the offenders’ ability to achieve psychosocial maturity (Steinberg, Chung, & Little, 2004).
Adult Prison Programs
Beneros & Merlo (2008) report that most adult prison systems are not structured to
effectively house and treat juvenile offenders.Prison is not an environment with the purpose of
rehabilitating juveniles. The adult facilities tend to focus on punishment versus treatment which
is in conflict with the needs of juvenile offenders (Johnson, Lanza-Kaduce, & Woolard, 2011).
When juvenile offenders enter adult prison they usually do not have the skill set or the coping
skills to handle that type of environment (Benekos & Merlo, 2008). The juveniles’ lack of skills
and ability to sustain their self-respect and mental health causes additional concerns for adult

8. DRAFT OF LITERATURE REVIEW 8
facilities (Benekos & Merlo, 2008). Research shows that there is limited information available
about juvenile programming in the adult criminal justice system.
According to Altschuler and Brash(2004), emphasis on the concept of tougher penalties
for violent juveniles led to changes in policy that focused on incarceration by extending
sentences and allowing little or no emphasis to be placed on rehabilitation programs. The goal of
programming should be on providing the youth experiences that would promote positive
development and assist in their future reentry to society. To effectively do this, attention needs
to be given to the developmental stages of adolescents and programs should help the youth
develop the necessary skills to transition to adulthood successfully (Mears & Travis, 2004).
Effects of adult prison on juvenile offenders
Processing juvenile offenders in the adult criminal justice system is seen as an extreme
form of punishment (Johnson, Lanza-Kaduce, & Woolard, 2011). More juveniles are being
processed in the adult criminal court than in previous years due to the laws that now make it
easier to move violent juvenile offenders to adult courts (Washburn, Teplin, Voss, Simon,
Abram, & McClelland, 2008). Juveniles in the adult criminal justice system tend to be viewed
and treated differently than their adult counterparts (Myers, Lee, Giever, & Gilliam, 2011).
Once a juvenile is transferred to adult court it is believed that the juvenile is culpable for their
actions and should be punished accordingly (Jordan & Freiburger, 2010).One of the major
reasons for transferring juveniles with serious or violent crimes to the adult court system was to
increase the severity of punishment in hopes of lower rates of recidivism. Comparative studies
suggest that juveniles processed in adult court are more likely to commit additional crimes in the
future than those juveniles processed in juvenile court (Johnson, Lanza-Kaduce, & Woolard,

9. DRAFT OF LITERATURE REVIEW 9
2011). Based on these studies the adult criminal justice system may not be the appropriate
system to handle juvenile offenders (Myers, 2003).
Relevant Studies
Reports show that there have only been a few studies conducted that focused on the
effects of incarceration on juvenile offenders. The data from these studies were related to
institutionalization, disciplinary issues and victimization (Bishop, Frazier, Lanza-Kaduce, &
White, 2002; Forst, Fagan & Vivona, 1989; Singer, 1996).
A study by Tunnell (1990), addressed how juvenile offenders perceive juvenile versus
adult dispositions and how it affects them. The outcome of this study was that the juveniles
reported that the juvenile justice system through the use of counseling and life skill classes had
an effect on them when they felt that they had gained some type of life skill or positive outlook
for the future. The juveniles within the criminal system reported that they were affected by
dispositions due to the feeling of loss, not because of any type of gain (Tunnell, 1990).
Treating juvenile offenders as adults has become a common occurrence. Studies (Myers,
2003; Myers, 2001; Myers & Kiehl, 2001) show that members of society believe juvenile
transfers provide two advantages: harsher punishments and stricter public safety. Initially, it was
common that juveniles processed in adult court were released sooner than those processed by
juvenile court, however due to policy changes the transferred offenders are now given harsher
sanctions. This study provided results that were distinct from some older studies that revealed
support of reduced sanctions for juveniles processed in criminal court (Bortner, 1986; Champion,
1989;Emerson, 1981; Gillespie & Norman, 1984; Hamparian, Estep, Muntean, Prestino,
Swisher, & Wallace, 1982; Royscher & Edelman, 1981; Sagatun, McCullum, & Edwards, 1985).

10. DRAFT OF LITERATURE REVIEW 10
However, more recent studies support the idea of juveniles receiving harsher sanctions in adult
court (Fagan, 1990; Podkopacz & Feld, 1996).
Reentry Reentry refers to the process of offenders returning to their communities after
completing their term of incarceration. Reentry is an issue that has gained almost as much public
attention
as the increase in juvenile crime; however there is little literature referencing this experience
from the juvenile perspective, although adolescent and young adults are almost one third of the
individuals returning home after incarceration (Mears & Travis, 2004).
In America, there are hundreds of thousands of juveniles and young adults under the age
who are reintegrated into their communities on a yearly basis. The increased number of
individuals leaving secure confinement and returning back home can create undue hardship on
those communities. Unfortunately during their incarceration, many former offenders did not
receive the necessary treatment and services to be productive upon their release. Many of the ex-
offenders have limited education, little or no job skills, and undiagnosed mental health and
substance abuse issues (Mears & Travis, 2004). Juveniles reentering society tend to have
problems making a successful transition from a life of crime to a life without crime.
There are many challenges that anyone returning to a community after being away for a
period of time would face, such as locating a place to live, finding a job or attending school, and
reestablishing former relationships with family and friends (Sullivan, 2004).Unfortunately,
juvenile offenders also have a few other challenges that adults may not encounter. Juveniles have
developmental needs and concerns and because of their age they tend to play a different role in
their communities. Many of the challenges faced by adolescents are centered on developmental

11. DRAFT OF LITERATURE REVIEW 11
and social issues. Juvenile offenders are said to experience two transitions, incarceration to
reentry and adolescence to adulthood (Sullivan, 2004).
Research shows that the first six months after release is a very vital time in the life of an
ex-offender (Chung, Schubert, & Mulvey, 2007).It is during this initial period of time when the
juvenile experiences less structure and supervision that they may revert to prior behaviors if they
do not receive the appropriate guidance.The availability of aftercare services can be the one thing
that keeps a juvenile from re-offending. Therefore, it is imperative that well-established
community networks are accessible to help with the coordination of services (Sullivan, 2004).In
order for the field to understand and appropriately address the challenges of reentry additional
research will be necessary (Mears & Travis, 2004).
Implications for future research
Juvenile treatment programs may be the better option when looking at how to help or
rehabilitate all juvenile offenders. As many states move towards making laws that allow the
legal system to move the more serious juvenile offenders to adult court, researchers are finding
that the Juvenile programming toward rehabilitation has been very helpful (Lane, Lanza-Kaduce,
Frazier & Bishop, 2002). An exploratory study by Lane et al, (2002),involved gathering data
directly from juveniles who had lived this experience in order to gather real time data about what
they encountered. This study did lead to several hypotheses that could be used for future study.
They are (1) serious repeat offenders are affected more positively by long-term juvenile
treatment programs than by adult punishments; (2) as youth in juvenile facilities mature and gain
various skill sets they are able to more appropriately handle any issues that arise while being
incarcerated, whereas in adult prisons, youth tend to conform due to a loss; and (3) the statistics
from juvenile programs show that these programs have been successful in reducing recidivism.

12. DRAFT OF LITERATURE REVIEW 12
Summary
The number of juvenile offenders in adult facilities does not make up a large percentage
of the total prison inmates; however they tend to pose special challenges with respect to facility
policies and treatment programs. Juveniles in adult facilities are more likely to experience
situations that would cause psychologically harm than those in juvenile facilities; and they are
more likely to be denied access to other services because adult facilities tend to be less concerned
with rehabilitation than juvenile correctional facilities (Hinton, Sims, Adams & West, 2007).
There have been numerous questions about the ability of the criminal justice system to
appropriately handle adolescents due tothe distinct differences between adult and juvenile
offenders (Trulson, Caudill, Belshaw, & DeLisi, 2011). Studies suggest that there is a need for
adult facilities to provide developmentally appropriate treatment programs for juvenile offenders
(Murrie, Henderson, Vincent, Rockett, & Mundt, 2009).The purpose of this research will be to
determine whether or not the adult facilities in Tennessee are lacking the programs needed to
assist with the proper development of juvenile offenders.

13. DRAFT OF LITERATURE REVIEW 13
References
Altschuler, D. M., & Brash, R. (2004). Adolescent & teenage offenders confronting the
challenges and opportunities of reentry. Youth Violence & Juvenile Justice, 21(1), 72-87.
doi:10.1177/1541204003260048
American Psychological Association. (2002). Developing Adolescents: A Reference for
Professionals [Handbook]. Washington, DC: Author.
Beneros, P. J., & Merlo, A. V. (2008). Juvenile justice: The legacy of punitive policy. Youth
Violence and Juvenile Justice, 6(1), 28-46. doi:10.1177/1541204007308423
Bishop, D. M., Frazier, C. E., Lanza-Kaduce, L., & White, H. G. (2002).Juvenile transfers to
criminal court study: Phase 1 final report (DJJ mgmt report number 02-02). Tallahassee,
FL: Florida Department of Juvenile Justice.
Bortner, M. A. (1986). Traditional rhetoric, organizational realities: Remand of juveniles to adult
court. Crime and Delinquency, 32(1), 53-73.
Caeti, T., Hemmens, C., Cullen, F., & Burton, V. (2003). Management of juvenile correctional
facilities. The Prison Journal, 83, 383-405.
Champion, D. J. (1989). Teenage felons and waiver hearings: Some recent trends, 1980- 1988.
Crime and Delinquency, 35(1), 577-585.
Chung, H. L., Shubert, C. A., &Mulvey, E. P. (2007).An empirical portrait of community reentry
among serious juvenile offenders in two metropolitan cities.Criminal Justice and
Behavior, 34(11), 1402-1426. doi:10.1177/0093854807307170
Cocozza, J. J., & Skowyra, K. (2000). Youth with mental health disorders, issues and emerging
responses. Juvenile Justice, 7(1), 3-13.
Emerson, R. (1981). On last resorts. American Journal of Sociology, 87(1), 1-22.

14. DRAFT OF LITERATURE REVIEW 14
Fagan, J. (1990). Social and legal policy dimensions of violent juvenile. Criminal Justice and
Behavior, 12(1), 93-133.
Fagan, J. (2008). Juvenile crime and criminal justice: Resolving border disputes. Juvenile
Justice, 18(2), 81-119.
Forst M., Fagan., J., &Vivona, S. (1989). Youth in prisons and training schools: Perceptions and
consequences of the treatment custody dichotomy. Juvenile and Family Court Journal,
39, 1-14.
Gillespie, L. K., & Norman, M. D. (1984). Does certification mean prison: Some preliminary
findings from Utah. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 35, 23-34.
Gutman, L. M., &Eccles, J. S. (2007). Stage-environment fit during adolescence: Trajectories of
family relations and adolescent outcomes. Developmental Psychology, 43(2), 522-537.
doi:10.1037/0012-1649.43.2.522
Hamparian, D., Estep, L. K., Muntean, S. M., Prestino, R., Swisher, R. G., & Wallace, P. L.
(1982).Youth in adult court: Between two worlds. Columbus, OH: Academy for
Contemporary Problems.
Hinton, W. J., Sims, P. L., Adams, M. A., & West, C. (2007). Juvenile Justice: A system divided.
Criminal Justice Policy Review, 18(4), 466-484. doi:10.1177/0887403407304578
Johnson, K., Lanza-Kaduce, L., &Woolard, J. (2011). Disregarding graduated treatment: Why
transfer aggravates recidivism. Crime and Delinquency, 57(5), 756-777. doi:10.1177/
0011128708328867
Jordan, K. L., &Freiburger, T. L. (2010).Examining the impact of race and ethnicity on
sentencing of juveniles in the adult court.Criminal Justice Policy Review, 21(2), 185-201.
doi:10.1177/0887403409354738

15. DRAFT OF LITERATURE REVIEW 15
Jordan, K. L., & Myers, D. L. (2011). Juvenile transfer and deterrence: Reexamining the
effectiveness of a "get-tough" policy. Crime and Delinquency, 57(2), 247-270.
doi:10.1177/0011128708319111
Kupchick, A. (2006). The decision to incarcerate in juvenile and criminal courts.Criminal Justice
Review, 31(4), 309-336. doi:10.1177/0734016806295584
Kupchik, A. (2007). The Correctional Experiences of Youth in Adult and Juvenile Prisons.
Justice Quarterly, 24(2), 247-270. doi:10.1080/07418820701294805
Lane, J., Lanza-Kaduce, L. Frazier., C., & Bishop, D. (2002). Adult versus juvenile sanctions:
Voices of incarcerated youths. Crime & Delinquency, 48, 431-455. doi:10.1177/
0011128702048003004
Mears, D. P., & Travis, J. (2004). Youth development and reentry. Youth Violence and Juvenile
Justice, 2, 3-20. doi:10.1177/1541204003260044
Murrie, D. C., Henderson, C. E., Vincent, G. M., Rockett, J. L., & Mundt, C. (2009). Psychiatric
symptoms among juveniles incarcerated in adult prison. Psychiatric Services, 60(8),
1092-1097.
Myers, D. L. (2001). Excluding violent youth from juvenile court: The effectiveness of
legislative waiver. New York: LFB Scholarly.
Myers, D. L. (2003). Adult crime, adult time: Punishing violent youth in the adult criminal
justice system. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 1(2), 173-197. doi:10.1177/
1541204002250878
Myers, D. L. (2003). Controversies in criminal justice. In The house of last resort: Incarcerating
juveniles in adult prisons (pp. 321-329). Los Angeles: Roxbury.

16. DRAFT OF LITERATURE REVIEW 16
Myers, D. L., & Kiehl, K. (2001). The pre-dispositional status of violent youthful offenders: Is
there a "custody gap" in adult criminal court? Justice Research and Policy, 3, 115-143.
Myers, D. L., Lee, D., Giever, D., & Gilliam, J. (2011). Practitioner perceptions of juvenile
transfers in Pennsylvania.Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 9(3), 222-240.
doi:10,1177/1541204010391216
Podkopacz, M., & Feld, B. (1996). The end of the line: An empirical study of judicial waiver.
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 86(1), 449-492.
Puzzachera, C. & Kang, W. (2011).Easy assess to juvenile court statistics: 1985-2008. Retrieved
from http:/www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/ezajcs/
Royscher, M., & Edelman, P. (1981). Major issues in juvenile justice information and training:
Readings in public policy. In J. C. Hall, D. M. Hamparian, J. M. Pettibone, & J. L. White
(Eds.), Treating juveniles as adults in New York: What does it mean and how is it
working (pp. 265-293). Columbus, OH: Academy for Contemporary Problems.
Sagatum, I., McCullum, L. L., & Edwards, L. (1985). The effect of transfers from juvenile to
criminal court: A log linear analysis. Journal of Crime and Justice, 8, 65-92.
Singer, S. I. (1996). Recriminalizing delinquency: Violent juvenile crime and juvenile justice
reform. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Steinberg, L., Chung, H. L., & Little, M. (2004). Reentry of young offenders from the justice
system; A developmental perspective. Youth Violence & Juvenile Justice, 2(1), 21-38.
doi:10.1177/1541204003260045
Sullivan, M. L. (2004). Youth perspectives on the experience of reentry. Youth Violence and
Journal Justice, 2, 56-71. doi:10.1177/1541204003260047

17. DRAFT OF LITERATURE REVIEW 17
Teplin, L. A., Abram, K. M., McClelland, G. M., Dulcan, K., & Mericle, A. A. (2002).
Psychiatric disorders in youth in juvenile detention. Archives of General Psychiatry,
59(12), 1133-1143.
Travis, J., Solomon, A. L., & Waul, M. (2001).From prison to home: The dimensions and
consequences of prisoner entry. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
Tunnell, K. D. (1990). Choosing crime: Close your eyes and take your chances. Justice
Quarterly, 7, 673-690.
Vaughn, M. G., Freedenthal, S., Jenson, J. M., & Howard, M. O. (2007). Psychiatric symptoms
and substance abuse among juvenile offenders: A latent investigation. Criminal Justice
and Behavior, 34(10), 1296-1312. doi:10.1177/0093854807304624
Washburn, J. J., Teplin, L. A., Voss, L. S., Simon, C. D., Abram, K. M., & McClelland, G. M.
(2008). Psychiatric disorders among detained youths: A comparison of youths processed
in juvenile court and adult criminal court. Psychiatric Services, 59(9), 965-973.
West, H. (June 2010). Prison inmates at midyear 2009 (Report No. NCJ 230113). Bureau of
Justice Statistics: Statistical Tables website: http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/ezajcs
Wiebush, R., Wagner, D., McNulty, B., & Wang, Y. Le. (2005). Implementation and outcome
evaluation of the intensive aftercare program. Washington, DC: United States
Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Prevention, OJJDP.
Woolard, J., Odgers, C., Lanz-Kaduce, L., & Daglis, H. (2005). Juveniles within adult
correctional settings: Legal pathways and developmental considerations. International
Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 4, 1-18.