The Subjective Probability of Being Labelled Criminal in Juvenile Corrections*
| Published date | 01 September 1979 |
| DOI | 10.1177/000486587901200306 |
| Author | Wolfgang L Grichting |
| Date | 01 September 1979 |
162
Abstract
ANZJ Crim (1979) 12
THE
SUBJECTIVE PROBABILITY
OF
BEING LABELLED CRIMINAL IN
JUVENILE CORRECTIONS·
Wolfgang LCrichting]
Anationally representative sample of 1837 youths detained in 42 juvenile correctional programs is
analyzed to determine the subjective probability of their being labelled criminal by people because
they were sent to a correctional program. Both status offenders
and
youths committed for more
serious offences are increasingly more afraid of being labelled criminal as they penetrate the juvenile
justice system
and
as the quality of interaction between youth
and
staff in these programs
deteriorates. This holds for first-offenders and recidivists alike. Ascribed properties are of secondary
importance in accounting for their perceived probability of being labelled criminal.
During the
past
decade
or so
we
have witnessed amajor switch in the
explanation of deviant behavior in general
and
of juvenile delinquency in
particular. Until the early sixties it 'was largely taken for
granted
that
whenever
someone violated a
norm
or -broke a
law
it was clearly
the
fault
ofthe
person
who elected to do so. In other words, it was the actual behavior that was seen as
the major cause for crime
and
delinquency. With the
advent
of the Great Society
and
its concomitant civil libertarianism the principles
of
individual freedom
both
of action
and
dissent were not only rediscovered
but
also emphasized at the
expense of the traditional law
and
order
doctrine. Thus it
became
perfectly
legitimate not only to question the validity of certain laws, rules
and
regulations
but
also to summarily dismiss the entire legal order as an expression of vested
interests of the
power
elite. With this, deviance in general
and
juvenile
delinquency in particular came to
be
seen as the necessary consequence of the
normative order, which
had
been
designed
and
redefined,
applied
and
enforced,
to strengthen
and
consolidate political strongholds safely
protected
by
an
ever
increasing bureaucracy. Having identified this great machiavellian conspiracy,
social reformers
drew
the ultimate conclusion
and
reduced
deviance to
"behavior so defined" (Becker, 1963). Assisted by the death-of-God theologians
they declared as relative the entire normative structure
and
categorically denied
• The data for this
paper
were taken from the National Assessment of Juvenile Corrections, aproject
supported by a grant (76JN-99-0001) from the Juvenile Justice
and
Delinquency Prevention
Operations Task Group, the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, US
Department
of
Justice,
under
authorizing legislation of the Omnibus Crime Control
and
Safe Streets Act of 1968
and the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974.
The
project was sponsored by
the Institute of Continuing Legal Education
and
the School of Social Work of the University of
Michigan; co-directors, Robert D Vinter and Rosemary C Sarri.
The
grantor's financial
support
does not necessarily indicate concurrence with the statements or conclusions
made
by the author.
The author takes full responsibility for the contents of this paper,
and
wishes to acknowledge the
valuable contributions of
Theodore
Newcomb,
David Street, Marty Heilweil, and Bill Barton.
tJames Cook University of North Queensland.
To continue reading
Request your trial