d juvenile court cases, increased public concern about crime, and criticism of the existing juvenile justice system. This came at a time when the Kennedy Administration was taking an activist approach by raising the issues of juvenile justice to the national level (McGarrell 7). One of the consequences of increasing teenage crime and drug use has been a new intolerance expressed in the juvenile justice system through programs emphasizing punishment. Rehabilitation had been a strong objective in juvenile justice even after it had become discredited for adult offenders, with the idea being that rehabilitation should be possible for young offenders before they become too hardened. Much of this intention has withered away to be replaced more and more by mandated prison sentences and an emphasis on punishment. By 1983, 48 states and the District of Columbia had taken away much of the discretion of judges in setting sentences: "Mandated prison sentences have displaced a host of indeterminate sentences and unreliable parole board decisions" (Bennett 68).
Some of the new approaches involve degrees of supervision as alternatives to incarceration, and the concept of supervision has been analyzed in different settings to determine whether or not it can be considered an effective treatment. Wiebush, for instance, examines juvenile intensive supervision with a study of the 18-month recidivism of juvenile felony offenders who were placed into an intensive supervision program instead of being committed to an institution. Wiebush notes that while intensive supervision programs have been very popular, there have been few empirical studies to examine their effectiveness as interventions. He finds the lack of data troubling for several reasons. First, he notes that the policy debate over the most appropriate response to serious juvenile offenders has not been resolved, and data on the effectiveness of various alternatives is needed. Second, h...