Clinical evaluations for transfer of juveniles to criminal court: current practices and future research

Adjudicative Competency in a Juvenile Population

“…The finding that the scores earned by juveniles were lower than those earned by adults supports prior research that found juvenile competency to stand trial to be poorer than that of adults on other measures (Cooper, 1997;McKee, 1998;Savitsky & Karras, 1984). Additionally, the significant differences between age groups noted in the present study are similar to those reported in previous studies of juvenile competency to stand trial (Cowden & McKee, 1994-1995McKee, 1998;Savitsky & Karras, 1984).…”

“…Additionally, no information was collected regarding past or present mental health problems. Other researchers (Cooper, 1997;Cowden & McKee, 1994-1995 have found that such problems are correlated with competency to stand trial.…”

Juvenile waiver to adult criminal courts: Prototypes for dangerousness, sophistication–maturity, and amenability to treatment.

“…Judging from the literature on criminal recidivism among adolescents, it appears that child forensic psychologists evaluating these young offenders are in a unique position to illuminate factors that might provide the court with information relevant to dispositional outcome and to recidivism risk. We agree with the recommendations that transfer evaluations be performed only by specially trained clinicians (Kinscherff & Tobey, 1996; Kruh & Brodsky, 1997). Clinical child psychologists conducting such evaluations should have training and a focus in forensic psychology.…”

Psychological Assessment for Adult Sentencing of Juvenile Offenders: An Evaluation of the RSTI and the SAVRY

“…Based on our results, psychological criteria that clinicians may assess (namely, risk, criminal sophistication, treatment amenability, and protective factors), as well as clinicians’ own judgments of these criteria, are significantly associated with adult sentencing decisions. Until recently there were very few well-validated tools available for transfer assessments despite the influence they may carry (Kruh & Brodsky, 1997). Results from the present study suggest that constructs such as risk, criminal sophistication, and treatment amenability, as defined by the RSTI and the SAVRY, are associated with adult sentencing decisions made by the courts.…”