CONTACT US: Contact info
|
Citation |
Vincent GM, Lovins B. Criminol. Public Policy 2015; 14(1): 51-58. |
|
Copyright |
(Copyright © 2015, American Society of Criminology, Publisher John Wiley and Sons) |
|
DOI |
|
PMID |
unavailable |
|
Abstract |
Baglivio, Greenwald, and Russell's (2015, this issue) research is strongly needed for the justice field to design and test a structured decision-making (SDM) method for dispositional decisions. The idea of a disposition matrix is not a novel concept, but this is the first to be examined statistically for its association with later offending. Many state juvenile justice agencies have adopted untested disposition grids (for example, Massachusetts) or guidelines (for example, Washington) for sentencing in the interest of increasing objectivity and fairness. These grids tend to be based entirely on the type of offense for which the youth was adjudicated. Although these tools are a step in the right direction for ensuring objectivity and reliability, they often lack validity. Evidence shows that the severity of the offense for which one was convicted does not have a significant association with whether that youth will be adjudicated for a serious offense in the future (Mulvey et al., 2010). Indeed, Baglivio et al. (2015) report that 42% of their violent offenders were actually assessed as low risk for reoffending, whereas less than 20% of the violent offenders were high risk to reoffend (see Table 1 in Baglivio et al., 2015). We believe the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice's (FDJJ's) disposition matrix is the first step in the right direction to promoting disposition practices that are both objective and valid while maintaining some level of judicial discretion by permitting a fairly wide range of dispositions within each cell. We consider this as the "first step" because a disposition matrix can only go so far in ensuring youth receive the interventions necessary to protect public safety while reducing their future risk. Furthermore, as Baglivio et al. (2015) acknowledge, there are some limits to the conclusions that can be drawn about the association between the FDJJ disposition matrix and later offending because of the study design. These considerations led to recommendations for current use of the disposition matrix in practice and suggestions for future research. Language: en |