Which Substance and What Community? Differences in Juvenile Disposition Severity

Abstract

There is a need in the literature for research describing disposition severity differences between specific drug and alcohol law violations within the context of community characteristics. We conducted an exploratory study of prosecutor-reported juvenile disposition severity by both specific drug charge and community context using a national sample of prosecutors from communities surrounding schools participating in the nationally representative Monitoring the Future survey. Results indicated (a) strong within-and between-substance disposition severity variance as well as (b) evidence for differential effects of both prosecutor case load and community characteristics, including community income, ethnicity, and region.

Evidence for Connections Between Prosecutor-Reported Marijuana Case Dispositions and Community Youth Marijuana-Related Attitudes and Behaviors

“…As noted previously, prior research has indicated strong relationships between community sociodemographics and prosecutor-reported juvenile marijuana possession case outcomes (Terry-McElrath et al, 2005; Terry-McElrath & McBride, 2004). However, in the current analyses, community sociodemographic variables (other than region) did not significantly relate to youth marijuana-related attitudes and beliefs.…”

“…Given that significant and consistent findings were observed between reported implementation of marijuana policy and marijuana-related outcomes, the next step was to examine whether similar relationships would be found between marijuana policy predictors and non-marijuana outcomes. The first step in these analyses was to conduct simple weighted correlations at the community level between the marijuana possession ODSL and similar ODSLs created as part of earlier research for alcohol possession and cocaine possession (Terry-McElrath et al, 2005). Not surprisingly, results showed that the strongest correlations were found between prosecutor-reported marijuana and cocaine case outcomes ( r = 0.46, p < .001, n = 77).…”

“…Detailed information on study sampling and related procedures for the MTF study can be found in Bachman, Johnston, O’Malley, and Schulenberg (2006) and Johnston et al (2005); similar information on the processes for collecting and coding the prosecutorial data can be found in Terry-McElrath and McBride (2004) and Terry-McElrath et al (2005). Briefly, the sample for the study included 173 public schools (and their surrounding communities) in their second year of participation with the MTF study, for a total of 19,933 students.…”

“…Independent variables were chosen that would cover a range of case outcomes and theoretical approaches to juvenile delinquency: (a) frequency of use of diversion to drug treatment (representing a public health approach to drug policy; Des Jarlais, 2000), (b) frequency of waiver to criminal court (representing a strong deterrence/prohibitionist policy; Weiner et al, 1999), and (c) overall severity of case outcomes within the juvenile court system, ranging from fines and community service through probation and placement in a juvenile facility (Terry-McElrath et al, 2005). In addition, two separate variables exploring the lower end of adjudication severity within the juvenile court system were retained: (d) frequency of use of fine, and (e) frequency of use of community service.…”

“…Little is known about the possible relationships between state or community drug policy variance and substance use at the community level. Available research on community-level juvenile substance policy has documented significant differences by substance and community sociodemographics in terms of access to treatment and adjudication severity (Terry-McElrath et al, 2005; Terry-McElrath & McBride, 2004). …”