This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: rgue that the juvenile
court has proven itself incapable of protecting the rights of juveniles. Many youth advocates have
argued, on the other hand, that efforts to revitalize the individual treatment mission by improving
treatment programs, providing better needs assessment and case management, and enhancing
funding should be the primary focus (Krisberg, 1988; Palmer, 1992; McAllair, 1993). A third
approach, which is advocated in this document, is based on the assumption that the juvenile court
and juvenile justice system can best be preserved and improved by adopting a new, more
inclusive mission and framework for intervention that addresses sanctioning and public safety
needs and promotes a more viable approach to rehabilitation and offender reintegration
(Bazemore and Washington, 1995; Bazemore and Cruise, 1995; Maloney, Romig and Armstrong, 1988).
3. Ibid, note 2.
4. The terms “client” and “customer,” are used interchangeably throughout this document in
reference to victims, offenders, and communities. Althoug...
View Full Document
- Spring '10