The relative contribution of court-ordered mental health reports and legal factors in determining young offender dispositions was examined. Poor quality of home conditions and severity of substance abuse, as coded from mental health reports, significantly increased the odds of receiving custody over a term of probation once legal factors were controlled. Legal factors significantly predicted probation length, whereas mental health factors only made a small contribution through externalizing behavior problems. The overall concordance between clinicians' mental health recommendations and court dispositions was 67.5%. Although these results suggest mental health reports influence disposition decision making, this influence is more limited than expected given that the purpose of these reports is to assist such decision making. The implications and limitations of these findings are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Achenbach, T. M. (1991a). Manual for the child behavior checklist/4-18 and 1991 profile. Burlington: University of Vermont, Department of Psychology.
2.
Achenbach, T. M. (1991b). Manual for the youth self-report and 1991 profile. Burlington: University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry.
3.
Andrews, D. A. , Robblee, M. A., Saunders, R., Huartson, K., & Robinson, D. (1987). Some psychometrics of judicial decision-making: Toward a sentencing factors inventory. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 14, 62-80.
4.
Andrews, D. A. , Robinson, D., & Hoge, R. D. (1994). The youth level of service inventory: Manual and scoring guide (Report No. 6). Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Carleton University, Laboratory for Research and Evaluation in the Human Sciences.
5.
Butcher, J. N. , Williams, C. L., Graham, J. R., Archer, R. P., Tellegen, A., Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Kaemmer, B. (1992). MMPI-A (Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory for adolescents): Manual for administration, scoring, and interpretation. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minneapolis Press.
6.
Carrington, P. J. , & Moyer, S. (1995). Factors affecting custodial dispositions under the young offenders act. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 37, 127-162.
7.
Cohen, L. E. , & Kluegel, J. E. (1978). Determinants of juvenile court dispositions: Ascriptive and achieved factors in two metropolitan courts. American Sociological Review, 43, 162-176.
8.
Doob, A. N. (1992). Trends in the use of custodial dispositions for young offenders. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 34, 75-84.
9.
Doob, A. N. , & Beaulieu, L. A. (1992). Variation in the exercise of judicial discretion with young offenders. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 34, 35-50.
10.
Epstein, N. B. , Baldwin, L. M., & Bishop, D. S. (1983). The McMaster family assessment device. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 9, 171-180.
11.
Exner, J. E., Jr. (1995). Rorschach workbook for the comprehensive system (4th ed.). Asheville, NC: Rorschach Workshops.
12.
Gresham, F. M. , & Elliot, S. N. (1990). Social skills rating system: Manual. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service, Inc.
13.
Hoge, R. D. , & Andrews, D. A. (1996a). Assessing the youthful offender: Issues and techniques. New York: Plenum.
14.
Hoge, R. D. , & Andrews, D. A. (1996b). The youth level of service/case management inventory (YLS/CMI): Intake manual and item scoring key (Revised). Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Carleton University, Department of Psychology.
15.
Hoge, R. D. , Andrews, D. A., & Leschied, A. W. (1995). Investigation of variables associated with probation and custody dispositions in a sample of juveniles. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 24, 279-286.
16.
Horwitz, A. , & Wasserman, M. (1980). Formal rationality, substantive justice, and discrimination. Law and Human Behavior, 4, 103-115.
17.
Jack, L. A. , & Ogloff, J.R.P. (1997). Factors affecting the referral of young offenders for medical and psychological assessment under the young offenders act. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 39, 247-273.
18.
Jaffe, P. G. , Leschied, H. W., Sas, L. E., & Hustin, G. W. (1985). A model for the provision of clinical assessments and service brokerage for young offenders: The London family court clinic. Canadian Psychology, 26, 54-61.
19.
Jesness, C. F. , & Wedge, R. F. (1985). Jesness inventory classification system: Supplementary manual. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
20.
Kelly, T. M. (1978). Clinical assessment and the detention, disposition, and the treatment of emotionally disturbed delinquent youths. Journal of Criminal Justice, 6, 315-327.
21.
Kueneman, R. , & Linden, R. (1983). Factors affecting dispositions in the Winnipeg juvenile court. In R. R. Corrado, M. LeBlanc, & J. Trepanier (Eds.), Current issues in juvenile justice (pp. 219-235). Toronto, Canada: Butterworths.
22.
Kueneman, R. , Linden, R., & Kosmick, R. (1992). Juvenile justice in rural and northern Manitoba. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 34, 435-460.
23.
Leschied, A. W. , & Gendreau, P. (1994). Doing justice in Canada: YOA policies that can promote community safety. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 36, 291-303.
24.
Leschied, A. W. , & Wormith, J. S. (1997). Assessment of young offenders and treatment of correctional clients. In D. R. Evans (Ed.), The law, standards of practice, and ethics in the practice of psychology (pp. 233-255). Toronto, Canada: E. Montgomery.
25.
McDermott, J. (1983). The serious juvenile offender: Problems in defining and targeting. In J. R. Klugel (Ed.), Evaluating juvenile justice (pp. 67-90). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
26.
Marshall, I. H. , & Thomas, C. W. (1983). Discretionary decision-making and the juvenile court. Juvenile Court Journal, 34, 47-59.
27.
Niarhos, F. J. , & Routh, D. K. (1992). The role of clinical assessment in the juvenile court: Predictors of juvenile dispositions and recidivism. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 21, 151-159.
28.
Osborne, S. (1984). Social inquiry reports in one juvenile court: An examination. British Journal of Social Work, 14, 361-378.
29.
Phillips, C. D. , & Dinitz, S. (1982). Labeling and juvenile court dispositions: Official responses to a cohort of violent juveniles. The Sociological Quarterly, 23, 267-278.
30.
Quinsey, V. L. , & Maguire, A. (1983). Offenders remanded for a psychiatric examination: Perceived treatability and disposition. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 6, 193-205.
31.
Sanborn, J. B. (1996). Factors perceived to affect delinquent dispositions in juvenile court: Putting the sentencing decision into context. Crime and Delinquency, 42, 99-113.
32.
Sohissel, B. (1993). Social dimensions of Canadian youth justice. Toronto, Canada: Oxford University Press.
33.
Simourd, D. J. , Hoge, R. D., Andrews, D. A., & Leschied, A. W. (1994). An empirically based typology of male young offenders. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 36, 447-461.
34.
SPSS for Windows; Version 6.1.3 [Computer Software]. (1995). Chicago: SPSS, Inc.
35.
Stouthamer-Loeber, M. , & Loeber, R. (1988). The use of prediction data in understanding delinquency. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 6, 333-354.
36.
Thomas, C. W. , & Cage, R. J. (1977). The effect of social characteristics on juvenile court dispositions. The Sociological Quarterly, 18, 237-252.
37.
Webster, C. D. , Menzies, R. J., Butler, B. T., & Turner, R. E. (1982). Forensic psychiatric assessment in selected Canadian cities. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 27, 455-462.
38.
Williams, W. , & Miller, K. S. (1981). The processing and disposition of incompetent mentally ill offenders. Law and Human Behavior, 5, 245-261.
39.
Winters, K. C. (1991). Personal screening experience questionnaire. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
