Net-Widening and the Diversion of Young People From Court: A Longitudinal Analysis With Implications for Restorative Justice

Abstract

Internationally, many youth justice systems aim to divert young people from court through informal mechanisms, such as police cautions and restorative conferences. Among other things, diversion avoids the potentially criminogenic effects of formal contact with the criminal justice system. However, in some instances, the sum of court appearances and diversionary procedures indicates an overall increase in the numbers of young people having contact (formal or informal) with the criminal justice system — a phenomenon known as net-widening. This article summarises previous debates about the risks of net-widening. It then presents results from analysis of over 50,000 police records pertaining to young people's contact with the Tasmanian criminal justice system between 1991 and 2002. Across that decade, court appearances markedly reduced, while a corresponding increase in diversions was recorded. There was no evidence of net-widening. However, there was a significant increase in detention orders. Implications for policy and future research are considered.

Effects of restorative justice pre‐file diversion legislation on juvenile filing rates: An interrupted time‐series analysis

“…There is evidence, for instance, that juvenile justice reforms in San Francisco during the 1990s increased the use of diversion and deferred prosecution practices but reduced neither the juvenile detention population nor racial disparities in the population (Macallair & Males, 2004). Other studies of restorative justice diversion programs in Canada (Bonta, Wallace-Capretta, Rooney, & McAnoy, 2002) and Australia (Prichard, 2010) have not found evidence of a net-widening effect. Morris (2002) contended that the net-widening claim is entirely dependent on the focus and implementation of restorative justice diversion programs, such as whether they are used to address serious offenses or only minor offenses.…”

Civil Citation

“…Although several studies have found support for the negative effects of net widening, the literature is far from conclusive. A number of studies have found either mixed or no effects of net widening with diversion programs (Barnhorst 2004; Doob, Sprott, and Greene 2003; Dunford, Osgood, and Weichselbaum 1982; Lipsey et al 1981; Mainprize 1992; Prichard 2010). For example, Prichard (2010) examined over 50,000 police records pertaining to youth contact with the Tasmanian criminal justice system between 1991 and 2002.…”

“…A number of studies have found either mixed or no effects of net widening with diversion programs (Barnhorst 2004; Doob, Sprott, and Greene 2003; Dunford, Osgood, and Weichselbaum 1982; Lipsey et al 1981; Mainprize 1992; Prichard 2010). For example, Prichard (2010) examined over 50,000 police records pertaining to youth contact with the Tasmanian criminal justice system between 1991 and 2002. It was found that not only did the number of court appearances reduce substantially; there was also a concomitant rise in youth participation in diversion, indicating diversion was replacing traditional court appearance (Prichard 2010).…”

“…For example, Prichard (2010) examined over 50,000 police records pertaining to youth contact with the Tasmanian criminal justice system between 1991 and 2002. It was found that not only did the number of court appearances reduce substantially; there was also a concomitant rise in youth participation in diversion, indicating diversion was replacing traditional court appearance (Prichard 2010).…”

Institutionalizing Restorative Justice in New Zealand's Criminal Justice System: Gains, Losses and Challenges for the Future

“…Such resistance is largely driven by concerns that state mechanisms will overwhelm any role for communities or non-state actors, despite egalitarianism and community involvement being central tenets to restorative justice (Boyes-Watson, 2010;Mansill, 2013;Wood & Suzuki, 2016). A further concern is that incorporating a restorative process into conventional adversarial justice procedure could broaden the reach of harmful punitive measures in the name of restorative justice , and lead to netwidening, which is particularly concerning for young people who otherwise could be diverted from state systems entirely (Prichard, 2010).…”