ans to deal stringently with juvenile crime, the fact of the matter is that many people in and out of government are becoming convinced that certain juveniles who commit certain kinds of crimes are unlikely to benefit from the kinds of sentencing and treatment that juveniles typically receive in juvenile courts (Feld, 1990, 1993).
Part of the problem as identified by Feld (1990, 1993) is that juvenile courts are increasingly perceived as reoriented toward punitive responses to juvenile crime rather than original functions as an informal welfare agency. Feld (1993) has pointed out that even before juvenile offenders were being diverted from juvenile to adult criminal courts, there were criticisms levied against juvenile courts for their failure to effectively devise rehabilitation schemas that prevented juvenile recidivism.
Klein (1998) argues that as a nation, Americans are becoming more and more receptive to the idea of trying a juvenile in adult court and incarcerating a youth with older, more serious criminals for a greater portion of his life. This is due to a disturbing increase in violent juvenile crime and recognition that the long-established rehabilitation and welfare focus of the juvenile justice system with its emphasis on individualized treatment has not succeeded in staving off what some analysts see as an epidemic of violent juvenile crime.
It is in this general background that the present study is positioned. The next section of this report will examine the literature regarding juvenile transfer, with special attention to its incidence and effects on both juveniles and adult courts themselves. Subsequent sections of the study will present a research methodology and anticipated results of the proposed data-gathering methodology.
In general, the argument to be advanced herein is that while the transfer of juvenile offenders to adult courts may be an appropriate response to certain types of particular...