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