This study analyzes how juvenile courts utilize gender-responsive approaches by examining stakeholder narratives about girls in the juvenile justice system. The study uses a directed content analytic approach to examine the extent to which stakeholder narratives align with gender-responsive principles related to content- and context-related needs. Findings revealed that stakeholders most commonly refer to girls’ family dysfunction, delinquency history, and the need for community-based services. Stakeholders were limited in their discussion of girls’ health and provision of trauma-informed care. Learning from stakeholders provides a unique lens to consider ways to integrate gender-responsive practices within the juvenile justice system.
American Bar Association and National Bar Association. (2001). Justice by gender: The lack of appropriate prevention, diversion, and treatment alternatives for girls in the justice system. American Bar Association and National Bar Association.
2.
AndersonV. R.DavidsonW. S.BarnesA. R.CampbellC. A.PetersenJ. L.OnifadeE. (2016). The differential predictive validity of the youth level of service/case management inventory: The role of gender. Psychology, Crime & Law, 22(7), 666–677.
3.
AndersonV. R.HoskinsK. M.RubinoL. L. (2019). Defining gender-responsive services in a juvenile court setting. Women & Criminal Justice, 29(6), 338–354.
4.
AndersonV. R.WalerychB. M.CampbellN. A.BarnesA. R.DavidsonW. S.CampbellC. A.PetersenJ. L. (2019). Gender-responsive intervention for female juvenile offenders: A quasi-experimental outcome evaluation. Feminist Criminology, 14(1), 24–44.
5.
AndrewsD. A.BontaJ.WormithJ. S. (2011). The Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) model: Does adding the good lives model contribute to effective crime prevention?Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38(7), 735–755.
6.
BainesM.AlderC. (1996). Are girls more difficult to work with? Youth workers’ perspectives in juvenile justice and related areas. Crime and Delinquency, 42(3), 467–485.
7.
BelisleL. A.SalisburyE. J. (2021). Starting with girls and their resilience in mind: Reconsidering risk/needs assessments for system-involved girls. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 48(5), 596–616.
8.
BelisleL. A.SalisburyE. J.KeenJ. (2022). Did they move on? An outcome evaluation of the gender-responsive program, Girls . . . Moving On. Feminist Criminology, 17(2), 223–251. https://doi.org/10.1177/15570851211065900
9.
BelknapJ.GaarderE.HolsingerK.WilsonC. M.CadyB. (2011). Using girls’ voices and words to study their problems. In KerrM.StattinH.EngelsR. C. M. E.OverbeekG.AndershedA. K. (Eds.), Understanding girls’ problem behavior: How girls’ delinquency develops in the context of maturity and health, co-occurring problems, and relationships (pp. 95–115). John Wiley and Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470977453.ch5
10.
BelknapJ.HolsingerK.DunnM. (1997). Understanding incarcerated girls: The results of a focus group study. Prison Journal, 77(4), 381–404.
11.
BloomB.OwenB.CovingtonS. (2004). Gender-responsive strategies: Research, practice, and guiding principles for women offenders (NIC No.018017). National Institute of Corrections.
12.
BloomB.OwenB.DeschenesE. P.RosenbaumJ. (2003). Moving toward justice for female juvenile offenders in the new millennium: Modeling gender-specific policies and programs. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 18, 37–56.
13.
Bond-MaupinL.MaupinJ.LeisenringA. (2002). Girls’ delinquency and the justice implications of intake workers’ perspectives. Women and Criminal Justice, 13, 51–77.
14.
Chesney-LindM.MorashM.StevensT. (2008). Girls troubles, girls’ delinquency, and gender responsive programming: A review. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 41, 162–189.
15.
Chesney-LindM.SheldenR. G. (2004). Girls, delinquency and juvenile justice. Wadsworth.
16.
CovingtonS. (2000). Helping women recover: Gender-specific treatment for substance abuse in community corrections. In McMahonM. (Ed.), Assessment to assistance: Programs for women in community corrections (pp. 139–170). American Correctional Association.
17.
DayJ. C.ZahnM. A.TichavskyL. P. (2015). What works for whom? The effects of gender responsive programming on girls and boys in secure detention. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 52(1), 93–129.
18.
FlaspohlerP.DuffyJ.WandersmanA.StillmanL.MarasM. A. (2008). Unpacking prevention capacity: An intersection of research-to-practice models and community-centered models. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3), 182–196.
GarciaC. A.LaneJ. (2010). Looking in the rearview mirror: What incarcerated women think girls need from the system. Feminist Criminology, 5(3), 227–243.
21.
HsiehH. F.ShannonS. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.
22.
Irvine-BakerA.JonesN.CanfieldA. (2019). Taking the “girl” out of gender-responsive programming in the juvenile justice system. Annual Review of Criminology, 2, 321–336.
23.
JavdaniS. (2021). Reducing crime for girls in the juvenile justice system through research-practitioner partnerships. Office of Justice Programs, National Criminal Justice Reference Services.
24.
JavdaniS.AllenN. E. (2016). An ecological model for intervention for juvenile justice-involved girls: Development and preliminary prospective evaluation. Feminist Criminology, 11(2), 135–162.
25.
KerigP. K.SchindlerS. R. (2013). Engendering the evidence base: A critical review of the conceptual and empirical foundations of gender-responsive interventions for girls’ delinquency. Laws, 2(3), 244–282.
26.
LipseyM. W.CullenF. T. (2007). The effectiveness of correctional rehabilitation: A review of systematic reviews. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 3, 297–320.
27.
MallicoatS. L. (2007). Gendered justice: Attributional differences between males and females in the juvenile courts. Feminist Criminology, 2(1), 4–30.
28.
MatthewsB.HubbardD. J. (2008). Moving ahead: Five essential elements for working effectively with girls. Journal of Criminal Justice, 36, 494–502.
29.
MillerR. L.ShinnM. (2005). Learning from communities: Overcoming difficulties in dissemination of prevention and promotion efforts. American Journal of Community Psychology, 35(3), 169–183.
30.
MorganM.PattonP. (2002). Gender-responsive programming in the justice system-Oregon’s guidelines for effective programming for girls. Federal Probation, 66, 57–65.
31.
RavoiraL.GrazianoJ.Patino-LydiaV. (2012). Urgent work: Developing a gender-responsive approach for girls in the juvenile justice system. Universitas Psychologica, 11(4), 1167–1181.
32.
SalisburyE. J. (2015). Program integrity and the principles of gender-responsive interventions. Criminology & Public Policy, 14, 329–338.
33.
WalkerS. C.MunoA.Sullivan-ColglazierC. (2015). Principles in practice: A multistate study of gender-responsive reforms in the juvenile justice system. Crime & Delinquency, 61(5), 742–766.
34.
WandersmanA. (2003). Community science: Bridging the gap between science and practice with community-centered models. American Journal of Community Psychology, 31(3–4), 227–242.
35.
YinR. K. (2010). Qualitative research from start to finish. Guilford Press.
36.
ZahnM.DayJ. C.MihalicS. F.TichavskyL. (2009). Determining what works for girls in the juvenile justice system: A summary of evaluation evidence. Crime and Delinquency, 55(2), 266–293.
37.
ZahnM.HawkinsS.ChianconeJ.WhitworthA. (2008). The girls study group—Charting the way to delinquency prevention for girls. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
