Does the Gender of the Intake Probation Officer Contextualize the Treatment of Black Youth?

• Author: Michael J. Leiber,Sarah Jane Brubaker
• Published date: 01 December 2010
• Date: 01 December 2010
• DOI: 10.3818/JRP.12.2.2010.51
• Subject Matter: Focus on Juvenile Justice



*





 



Michael J. Leiber

University of South Florida

Sarah Jane Brubaker

Virginia Commonwealth University

* Abstract

The presence of race differentials in case outcomes has recently been explained by a

focus on the characteristics of the decision makers within the context of the interplay

between discretion, a reliance on stereotyping, and the perceptions of decision mak-

ers. We continue this line of inquiry by assessing what effects the gender of the intake

off‌icer may have in understanding the treatment of male youth. Using data from ju-

venile court records within a single juvenile court jurisdiction, the research is guided

by two general questions. Do female and male off‌icers make similar intake decisions

once relevant legal and extralegal considerations related to the youth are controlled?

Do female and male off‌icers rely on similar legal and extralegal considerations and give

equal weight to those considerations when making intake decisions? The results from

our inquiry have implications for broadening the scope of the contexts of intake juve-

nile justice decision making, especially in terms of how the characteristics of decision

makers inf‌luence case outcomes. The implications of the results may also better inform

efforts that address the equitable treatment of youth in the juvenile justice system.

This article is part of a special section in this issue of JRP that focuses on juvenile justice.

The section was guest-edited by Nancy Rodriguez of Arizona State University and Phillip

Stevenson of the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission.

JUSTICE RESEARCH AND POLICY, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2010

© 2010 Justice Research and Statistics Association

Fo c u s o n Ju v e n i l e Ju s t i c e

P



The juvenile justice system has a dual goal of social control and social welfare

(Feld, 1999). Youth are to be held accountable for their involvement in delin-

quency, yet because of the doctrine of parens patriae, there is signif‌icant emphasis

as well on treatment and reform (Butts & Mears, 2001; Ward & Kupchik, 2009).

In this regard, decision makers not only take into consideration legal criteria but

also extralegal factors that may provide insights into the rehabilitative needs of

the youth. Assessments are made about the youth’s family, his or her progress in

school, and even the maturity level of the youth, most often captured by the youth’s

age. Decisions that are premised on perceptions of accountability and treatment

needs are diff‌icult to reconcile; they are also ripe for the interjection of racial, gen-

der, and other biases. Prior research indicates that white adolescents, for example,

are viewed as more immature, impressionable, and amenable to treatment than

African-American youth who commit the same crimes (Graham & Lowery, 2004;

see also Bridges & Steen, 1998; Steen, Bond, Bridges, & Kubrin, 2005).

Likewise, legitimate criteria, such as assessments about the family or age, have

also been discovered to negatively impact case outcomes for males and African-

Americans compared to females or whites, respectively (e.g., Bishop & Frazier,

1996; Leiber & Johnson, 2008; Pope & Feyerherm, 1993; Rodriguez, Smith, &

Zatz, 2009). These individual and interaction effects involving race appear to be

most pronounced at intake where discretion is greater than at any other stage

in the juvenile justice process (e.g., Bell & Lang, 1985; Bishop & Frazier, 1988;

Bishop, Leiber, & Johnson, 2010; Leiber, Bishop, & Chamlin, in press; Leiber &

Mack, 2003; Rodriguez, 2007).

The presence of race differentials in case outcomes recently has been explained,

at least in part, by a focus on the characteristics of the decision makers within the

context of the interplay among level of discretion, a reliance on stereotyping, and

the perceptions of decision makers (e.g., Leiber, Woodrick & Roudebush, 1995;

Tittle & Curran, 1988; Steen, Bond, et al., 2005). We continue this line of inquiry

by assessing what effects the gender of the intake off‌icer may have in understand-

ing the treatment of male youth.

Using data from juvenile court records within a single juvenile court jurisdic-

tion, the research is guided by two general questions:

1.

Do female and male off‌icers make similar intake decisions once relevant

legal and extralegal considerations of the youth are controlled?

2.

Do female and male

off‌icers rely on

similar legal and extralegal consider-

ations and give equal weight to those considerations when making in-

take decisions?

The results from our inquiry have implications for broadening the scope of the con-

texts of intake juvenile justice decision making, especially in terms of how the char-

acteristics of decision makers inf‌luence case outcomes. There may also be implica-

tions that can help inform efforts to address the equitable treatment of all youth in

the juvenile justice system. For example, a main goal of the federal initiative - the

Disproportionate Minority Contact (DMC) mandate – is the obtainment of data to