907 resultados para Juvenile probation
Resumo:
"Statistical and other data on the state juvenile justice system."
Resumo:
"July 1996."
Resumo:
In the late 1980s, Harris County, Texas began experiencing an escalation of drug-related activities. Various indicators used in this analysis tracked drug-related trends from 1989 to 1991 to determine patterns for comparison of local (Houston/Harris County, Texas) to national levels.^ An important indicator of the drug scenario was drug-related activities among youths, which increased during the period of this study. The Harris County Juvenile Probation Department showed that among arrests for drug-related activities, felonies increased from 25% in 1988 to 53% in 1991. With the rise in drug-related crimes, and substance abuse among the student body, school districts were forced to institute drug education programs in an effort to curtail such activities.^ Law enforcement agencies in the county saw increased demands for their services as a result of drug activities. Harris County Sheriffs Department reported a 32% plus increase in drug-related charges between 1986 and 1991. Houston Police Department reported an increase of 109% for the same period.^ Data from the Harris County Medical Examiner, the National Institute of Justice's Drug Use Forecasting System (Houston), and drug treatment facilities around Houston/Harris County, Texas indicated similar drug usage trends. Over a four-year period (1988-91), the drugs most frequently detected during blood and urine analyses were cocaine, followed by marijuana, heroin, LSD, and methamphetamines.^ From 1988 to 1991, most drug rehabilitation organizations experienced increased demands for their services by approximately 35%. Several other organizations experienced as much as a 70 percent increase. Males accounted for roughly 70% and females about 30% of persons seeking treatment. However, the number of females pursuing treatment increased, thereby reducing the gender gap.^ Blacks in Houston/Harris County were at higher risk for drug usage among the general population, but sought treatment more readily than other ethnic groups. Whites sought treatment in similar numbers as Blacks, but overall the risk appeared smaller because they made up a larger portion of the Houston/Harris County population.^ This analysis concluded that drug trends for the Houston/Harris County, Texas did not follow national trends, but showed patterns of its own. It was recommended that other communities carry out similar studies to determine drug use trends particular to their local. ^
Resumo:
Mode of access: Internet.
Resumo:
In July 2006, the Irish Parliament passed legislation aimed at tackling anti-social behaviour following a perceived increase in the problem. The new provisions are based on existing law and practice in England and Wales. However, the legislation includes a framework for dealing with juveniles that differs in a number of respects from that which exists in England and Wales. This article examines how the Irish legislation proposes to treat juveniles engaged in antisocial behaviour and contrasts this with the English approach.
Resumo:
Mode of access: Internet.
Resumo:
"Sponsored by Children's Bureau ... in cooperation with: the Council on Social Work Education, Rutgers University, Graduate School of Social Work, National Association of Training Schools and Juvenile Agencies [and] National Probation and Parole Association."
Resumo:
"The brief which appears as comment following each section was prepared by Francis H. Hiller"--foreward.
Resumo:
This report considers extant data which have been sourced with respect to some of the consequences of violent acts and incidents and risky behaviour for males living in regional and remote Australia . This has been collated and presented under the headings: juvenile offenders; long-term health consequences; anxiety and repression; and other chronic disabilities. Additional commentary resulting from exploration, examination and analyses of secondary data is published online in complementary reports in this series.
Resumo:
Due to their similar colonial histories and common law heritage, Australia and Canada provide an ideal comparative context for examining legislation reflecting new directions in the field of juvenile justice. Toward this end, this article compares the revised juvenile justice legislation which came into force in Queensland and Canada in 2003 (Canada, Youth Criminal Justice Act, enacted on 19 February 2002 and proclaimed in force 1 April 2003; Queensland, Juvenile Justice Act, amended 2003). There are a series of questions that could be addressed including: How similar and how sweeping have been the legislative changes introduced in each jurisdiction?; What are likely to be some of the effects of the implementation of these new legislative regimes?; and, how well does the legislation enacted in either jurisdiction address the fundamental difficulties experienced by children who have been caught up in juvenile justice systems? This article addresses mainly the first of these questions, offering a systematic comparison of recent Queensland and Canadian legislative changes. Although, due to the recentness of these changes, there is no data available to assess long-term effects, anecdotal evidence and preliminary research findings from our comparative study are offered to provide a start at answering the second question. We also offer critical yet sympathetic comments on the ability of legislation to address the fundamental difficulties experienced by children caught up in juvenile justice systems. Specifically, we conclude that while more than simple legislative responses are required to address the difficulties faced by youth offenders, and especially overrepresented Indigenous young offenders, the amended Queensland and new Canadian legislation appear to provide some needed reforms that can be used to help address some of these fundamental difficulties.
Resumo:
Much current Queensland media rhetoric, government policy and legislation on truancy and youth justice appears to be based on ideas of responsibilisation – of sheeting responsibility for children’s behaviour back onto their parents. This article examines the evidence of parental responsibility provisions in juvenile justice and truancy legislation in Queensland and the drivers behind this approach. It considers recent legislative initiatives as part of an international trend toward making parents ‘responsible’ for the wrongs of their children. It identifies the parental responsibility rhetoric appearing in recent ministerial statements and associated media reports. It then asks the questions – are these legislative provisions being enforced? And if so, are they successful? Are they simply adding to the administrative burdens placed on teachers and schools, and the socioeconomic burdens placed on already disadvantaged parents? Parental responsibility provisions have been discussed at length in the context of juvenile offending and research suggests that punishing parents for the acts of their children does not decrease delinquency. The paper asks how, as a society, we intend to evaluate these punitive measures against parents?