Incarcerating Juveniles Into Adulthood

• Author: Simon I. Singer
• DOI: 10.1177/1541204002250871
• Published date: 01 April 2003
• Date: 01 April 2003
• Subject Matter: Article

10.1177/1541204002250871ARTICLEYouth Violence and Juvenile JusticeSinger / INCARCERATING JUVENILES INTO ADULTHOOD

INCARCERATING JUVENILES

INTO ADULTHOOD

Organizational Fields of Knowledge

and the Back End of Waiver

Simon I. Singer

Northeastern University

One of the consequences of waiver legislation is the long-term imprisonment of

juveniles. Little is known about juveniles subject to long-term incarceration and the

legal decision making that creates the conditions and length of their imprisonment.

Although there is an emerging body of research on the front end of waiver that draws on

theories of sentencing, there is little research on postsentencing decisions. Research on

the back end of waiver is needed to understand the effect of transferring juveniles to

criminal court. Legal decision making at the back end of waiver can be understood in

terms of the jurisdictional context of organizational knowledge. The effects of back-end

waiver decisions also need to be understood with respect to the reaction of juvenile

offenders to their long-term incarceration.

Keywords: waiver; sentencing juvenile murderers; long-term incarceration

One of the consequences of treating juveniles as if they were adults is the possibility

of their incarceration into adulthood. Only a segment of juveniles transferred to criminal

court actually receives sentences of imprisonment (Bortner, 1986). Among those juveniles

sentenced in criminal court, a proportion face minimum sentences of imprisonment that are

comparable to the dispositions that they might have received in juvenile court (Feld, 1990).

The disadvantage of criminal court sentencing for many juveniles is not the length of

sentence but the possibility of supervision by the criminal justice system through probation

or parole (Fagan, 1996).

Juveniles sentenced in criminal court are placed in the criminal justice system prior to

their age of majority and are at risk of rearrest either as juveniles or as adults. Criminal

justice officials are in a position not only to classify transferred juveniles at an earlier age

but to track their criminal history through probation and parole. Both of these subsystems of

criminal justice allow officials to identify offenders who are at risk of repeated criminal

behavior. But these adult systems of criminal justice require officials to make assessments

of offenders based on their earlier offenses as juveniles. We know little about the decision-

making process or the way that criminal justice officials consider the offender’s earlier

conviction as a juvenile.

115

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, Vol. 1 No. 2, April 2003 115-127

DOI: 10.1177/1541204002250871

© 2003 Sage Publications