Politicians who support get-tough responses to juvenile offenders have long claimed to have the full backing of
Question:
Politicians who support “get-tough” responses to juvenile offenders have long claimed to have the full backing of the general public, and that it is indeed the public that demands tougher dispositions (or sentences) such as military-style boot camps and longer terms in institutions to hold youth accountable for their transgressions. To be sure, there is public support for get-tough responses to juvenile delinquency, especially violent acts. But this support is not at the levels often claimed and, more importantly, not as high when compared to alternatives such as rehabilitation or treatment for juvenile offenders or early childhood or youth prevention programs. This overestimate of the punitiveness of the general public on the part of politicians and others has become known as the “mythical punitive public.”
New, cutting-edge research provides more evidence to substantiate the mythical punitive public—that is, that citizens are highly supportive of delinquency prevention and are even willing to pay more in taxes to support these programs compared to other responses. In a review of the public opinion literature, criminologist Frank Cullen and his colleagues found that the American public is generally supportive of delinquency prevention programs, especially for at-risk children and youth. They also found that public opinion is no longer a barrier —as it once was perceived to be — to the implementation of delinquency prevention programs in communities across the country.
In a study of public preferences of responses to juvenile offending, criminologist Daniel Nagin and his colleagues found that the public values early prevention and offender rehabilitation or treatment more than increased incarceration. As shown in Table 11-A, households were willing to pay an average of $125.71 in additional taxes on nurse home visitation programs to prevent delinquency compared to $80.97 on longer sentences, a difference of $44.74 per year. Support for paying more in taxes for rehabilitation was also higher than for longer sentences: $98.10 versus $80.97 At the state level, public support for the prevention option translated into $601 million that hypothetically could be used to prevent delinquency, compared to $387 million for longer sentences for juvenile offenders.
This study was based on a large sample of residents in Pennsylvania and used a highly rigorous methodology of public opinion polling known as contingent valuation (CV), which has many advantages over conventional polling methods. The contingent valuation approach allows for the “comparison of respondents’ willingness to pay for competing policy alternatives.”
In another innovative study to gauge the public’s preferences for a range of alternative responses to crime, Mark Cohen, Ronald Rust, and Sara Steen found the public overwhelmingly supported increased spending of tax dollars on youth prevention programs compared to building more prisons. Public support for spending more taxes on drug treatment for nonviolent offenders as well as police also ranked higher than support for building more prisons, but not as high as for youth prevention programs.
TABLE
Public Willingness to Pay for Delinquency Prevention versus Other Measures
Program | Average WTP per Household per Year | Statewide WTP per Year |
Longer sentence | $80.97 | $387 million |
Rehabilitation | $98.10 | $468 million |
Nurse visitation | $125.71 | $601 million |
Note: WTP = willingness to pay.
Source: Adapted from Daniel S. Nagin, Alex R. Piquero, Elizabeth S. Scott, and Laurence Steinberg, "Public Preferences for Rehabilitation versus Incarceration of Juvenile Offenders: Evidence from a Contingent Valuation Survey," Criminology and Public Policy 5:627-652 (2006), Table 2.
While the mythical punitive public appears to be just that, there is no denying that the general public do see some value in get-tough policies to tackle juvenile crime. But this new crop of public opinion research reveals — even more convincingly than past research—that there is a growing demand for early prevention programs and little demand for increased use of incarceration.
Question
If you were a politician, would these research findings influence your decision on the policy positions you take on juvenile crime? Explain.
Writing Assignment Write an essay about the strengths and limitations of using public opinion research as the basis for supporting a strategy that emphasizes prevention over punishment. Make sure to consider your answers to the Critical Thinking questions.
Sources: Francis T Cullen, Brenda A. Vose, Cheryl N. Lero, and James D. Unnever, “Public Support for Early Intervention: Is Child Saving a ‘Habit of the Heart’?” Victims and Offenders 2:108-124 (2007); Mark A. Cohen, Ronald T. Rust, and Sara Steen, “Prevention, Crime Control or Cash? Public Preferences Toward Criminal Justice Spending Priorities,” Justice Quarterly 23:317-335 (2006); Daniel S. Nagin, Alex R. Piquero, Elizabeth S. Scott, and Laurence Steinberg, “Public Preferences for Rehabilitation versus Incarceration of Juvenile Offenders: Evidence from a Contingent Valuation Survey,” Criminology and Public Policy 5:627-652 (2006); Julian V. Roberts, “Public Opinion and Youth Justice,” in Youth Crime and Youth Justice: Comparative and CrossNational Perspectives. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, vol. 31, ed. Michael Tonry and Anthony N. Doob (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004).
Systems analysis and design
ISBN: ?978-1118808177
5th edition
Authors: Alan Dennis, Barbara Haley Wixom, Roberta m. Roth