Abstract

This article provides a psychological analysis of the diversion policy, which gives a special status to juvenile offenders under the umbrella of the juvenile justice system. The juvenile justice system was created on the premise that juvenile offenders do not fully grasp the nature and consequence of their actions, that they are much more amenable to rehabilitation, and hence the juvenile justice system focuses on rehabilitation of juvenile offenders than punishment. In recent years, with the increased violence, incidence, and severity of the crimes committed by juvenile offenders and the age in which violent crimes are being committed by adolescents steadily decreasing, many have questioned the validity of the assumption and viability of the juvenile justice system. The critics charge that the arbitrary age definition of a juvenile is no longer tenable since children mature much more quick and the violent nature of their crimes suggests that they may not be amenable to rehabilitation. Review of the existing legal and psychological literature suggests that the previous assumption that juvenile offenders cannot fully grasp the nature and consequence of their action is not fully supported by empirical evidence. The current literature fails to provide conclusive evidence that juveniles are cognitively and socially immature and they are unable to understand the nature and consequence of their actions. The outcome of the conversion policy that focused on rehabilitation of juvenile offenders is inconsistent, showing both positive and negative results. With the mixed results, it is important to re-examine the fundamental premise and viability of the present juvenile justice system. It is necessary to modify the policy based on theoretically grounded, conceptually valid, and empirically supported research. Implications of the developing a rational and scientifically grounded legal system for adolescents that takes into account psychological research will be discussed.