A multiple family group intervention for first‐time juvenile offenders: Comparisons with probation and dropouts on recidivism

Quinn, William H.; Dyke, David J. Van

doi:10.1002/jcop.10085

Cited by 37 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 37 publications

(20 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Quinn and Van Dyke (2004) found positive results for Family Solutions on recidivism. Those juveniles who completed the program had a significantly lower recidivism rate (19.9%) than both Family Solutions dropouts (36.6%) and those who received traditional probation services (54.7%).…”

Section: Analysis Of Gender-non-specific Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 82%

Determining What Works for Girls in the Juvenile Justice System

Zahn

Day

Mihalic

et al. 2009

Crime & Delinquency

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite increasing attention on gender-specific programming for girls involved in the juvenile justice system, not much is known about the effectiveness of gender-specific programs. The authors review the evidence base for the effectiveness of programs for girls in custody or under supervision by examining the evaluation evidence for nine gender-specific programs (which exclusively target girls) and six gender-non-specific programs (which target both girls and boys). Through this process, the authors summarize the evidence of effectiveness available to researchers and practitioners, identify barriers to determining what programs work for adjudicated girls, and make recommendations for building a solid evidence base on what works for adjudicated girls.

show abstract

Section: Analysis Of Gender-non-specific Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 82%

Determining What Works for Girls in the Juvenile Justice System

Zahn

Day

Mihalic

et al. 2009

Crime & Delinquency

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 2008, law enforcement agencies in the United States made an estimated 2.11 million arrests of persons younger than age 18, with 30% being adolescent females (Conerly, Robillard & Braithwaite, 2006; Puzzanchara, 2009). Existing evidence suggests that recidivism often happens within six months following incarceration and treatment (Quinn & van Dyke, 2004). Juveniles are the most expensive population to incarcerate (Book, Thomas & Steinke, 2004) and also have the greatest risk of recidivism due to their transience and low psychosocial maturity (Kenny, Lennings & Nelson, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The deleterious effects of violence exposure should be addressed holistically, especially since many of the consequences are interrelated. Previous research suggests that there are several preventative factors that may help to reduce the rates of juvenile recidivism including educational remediation (Kollhoff, 2002; DuCloux, 2003), developing psychosocial skills (Abrams, 2006), and the implementation of family programs and intervention (Quinn & van Dyke, 2004). Due to the expense of implementing protective factors, many of these preventative measures have not been successfully introduced into the juvenile justice system.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Violence Exposure and Health-Related Risk Among African American Adolescent Female Detainees: A Strategy for Reducing Recidivism

Woodson

Hives

Sanders-Phillips

2010

Journal of Offender Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Juvenile crime and violent victimization continue to be significant social problems (Fitzpatrick, Piko, Wright, & LaGory, 2005); in that, adolescents, females in particular, are likely to participate in health related risk behaviors as result of having been victimized or exposed to a violent environment. Specifically, abuse, neglect, sexual molestation, poverty, and witnessing violence are well known risk factors for the development of trauma-related psychopathology and poor outcomes relative to delinquency, drug and alcohol abuse, and HIV risk behaviors

show abstract

“…as the victims of social harm) is scarcer, and tends to be concerned with: criminal justice procedural issues (Pearse et al, 1998); common trends in the characteristics of offenders (Bailey, Smith, & Dolan, 2001); the effectiveness of treatment programs (Liau, Shively, Horn, Landau, Barriga, & Gibbs, 2004;Quinn & Van Dyke, 2004); and, special groups of offenders, such as disabled offenders (Mason & Murphy, 2002). None of the above studies consider the 'criminal' could simultaneous be considered the 'victim', nor highlight the substantive injustices intrinsic to the criminal justice system.…”

Section: Community Psychology and Criminal Justicementioning

confidence: 93%

Community psychology and injustice in the criminal justice system

Duckett

Schinkel²

2008

Community & Applied Soc Psy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this short paper, we consider the partnership between psychology and the criminal justice system in Western societies and critically reflect on the notion of criminal justice as expressed in such a system. Focusing on how the criminal justice system operates in the UK, and in particular in Scotland, we consider the way the system criminalizes those who previously have been socially and economically disadvantaged. We ask whether community psychology has become negligent in the attention it brings to such a pernicious form of victim blaming and as such has shown insufficient critical engagement with systems that create social harm, and whether it is paying enough attention to the impact of a criminal justice system that is contributing to the creation of a more punitive, fractured and unjust society. Copyright # 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Key words: criminal justice; social justice; social harm; victim blaming PSYCHOLOGY AND LAWWhile there are three branches of psychology (almost) solely occupied with crime and the law-forensic psychology, legal psychology and policy-oriented psychological jurisprudence-psychologists working within these sub-disciplines rarely appear to adopt a critical stance towards the criminal justice system. Fox writes: '. . . [because] psychology and the law traditionally attribute problems to individuals rather than to societal faults, psychologists can become insiders within the legal system' (Fox, 1997, p. 221). The marriage between psychology and the criminal justice system is problematic in so far as it might extend the penetrative depth and breadth of their ideological underpinnings (inter alia, heightened individualism) into society and could magnify the effects of any social

show abstract

A multiple family group intervention for first‐time juvenile offenders: Comparisons with probation and dropouts on recidivism

Abstract: Ⅲ This study evaluated a multiple-family group-intervention program (MFGI) for first-time

Cited by 37 publications

References 37 publications

Determining What Works for Girls in the Juvenile Justice System

Determining What Works for Girls in the Juvenile Justice System

Violence Exposure and Health-Related Risk Among African American Adolescent Female Detainees: A Strategy for Reducing Recidivism

Community psychology and injustice in the criminal justice system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About