未成年人社区矫正

新时代“枫桥经验”为基层社会治理提供了根本遵循。未成年人社区矫正作为基层治理的重要内容，关乎罪错未成年人的教育挽救与社会稳定。《社区矫正法》实施后，基层实践仍存在矫正项目针对性不足、社会组织参与度欠缺、多元主体协同虚化等短板。新时代“枫桥经验”以“党建引领、多元共治、三治融合”为核心，其“以人为本、源头治理”的逻辑与未成年人矫正本质高度契合。基于二者适配性，研究提出优化进路：价值导向从“惩罚矫正”转向“恢复性治理”，打造场景化项目、多元协同、网格化监管的精准矫正体系，培育“专业+本土”队伍，为提升矫正质效、促进未成年人回归社会提供理论与实践指导。

在未成年人行为偏差低龄化与《家庭教育促进法》实施的双重背景下，家庭监护缺失已成为导致未成年人触法及重复违法的关键诱因。然而，当前未成年人社区矫正实践常陷入“重行为管控、轻家庭修复”的误区，强制亲职教育（家庭教育指导）面临法律强制力虚置、指导内容同质化严重、多元主体协同断裂等“落地难”困境。本文旨在探索家庭教育指导制度嵌入社区矫正的实务路径。通过分析现行法律规范与执行现状，文章提出构建“嵌入与协同式行为矫正”的新范式。其创新之处在于：一是主张建立“监护人履职评价与惩戒机制”，通过设立监护档案将软性指导转化为刚性义务，解决“管不了”的难题；二是提出基于家庭环境评估的“精准画像”策略，对不同类型的失职家庭实施分级分类干预，解决“教不好”的问题；三是建议利用数字化手段打通司法、学校与社工组织的信息壁垒。研究旨在通过修复家庭微生态，实现从未成年人“单向矫正”向家庭“双向治疗”的转变，从源头上降低再犯风险。

文章主要以国内社区矫正工作中的社会工作介入情况分析为本体对象，试图厘清社会工作介入社区矫正的主要工作内容、必要性，以及司法机关和社会各方对于社工介入工作的支持力度，社工在社区矫正工作中发挥的专业性如何，试图探索在社区矫正社会工作领域如何构建自己的话语权。通过文章进一步了解社会工作在介入社区矫正工作的过程中如何更好地发挥专业性，如何与司法机关保持密切联系，又与司法机关有一定独立性，使社工有自己的话语权，更方便与服务对象建立信任关系，以期为进一步的研究作一简单的回顾性综述。

Adolescents are developmentally distinct from adults in ways that merit a tailored response to juvenile crime. Normative adolescent brain development is associated with increases in risk taking, which may include criminal behavior. Juvenile delinquency peaks during the adolescent years and declines in concert with psychosocial maturation. However, current U.S. approaches to juvenile justice are misaligned with youth's developmental needs and may undermine the very psychosocial development necessary for youth to transition out of crime and lead healthy adult lives. In this article, I discuss empirically supported and efficacious responses to juvenile crime in the United States, as well as opportunities for further developmental reform of the juvenile justice system. Developmentally appropriate responses to juvenile crime prioritize community-based corrections and engage youth's social context in the rehabilitative process. The juvenile justice system shares the responsibility to prepare youth to live fulfilling, productive adult lives; that responsibility can be achieved by partnering with developmental scientists to inform juvenile justice practice and policy.

… of community correction programs for juvenile offenders in China. Reflecting on its development over the past two decades, the existing community correction … into the community. This …

Millions of individuals are currently incarcerated in the United States. However, little is known about the effects of incarceration on personality development, particularly during the critical life stage of adolescence. In a large longitudinal sample, adolescents and young adults (N = 7,736) regularly completed personality measures and assessments of court-ordered punishments over more than 10 years. Using propensity score weighting and multilevel growth curve modeling, we found that personality prospectively predicted the likelihood of incarceration and court-ordered community service. Specifically, individuals who were higher in sensation seeking, impulsivity, and depressive symptoms were more likely to be incarcerated-results for community service youth mostly mirrored these findings. Mixed evidence was found for patterns of trait change. Incarcerated, community service, and nonoffending youth were similar in several ways-all increased on sensation seeking and self-esteem and decreased on impulsivity over the 10-year period. However, between-person models found that incarcerated youth evidenced a greater decrease in depressive symptoms and a slower decrease in impulsivity, and youth assigned community service increased more quickly on sensation seeking than their nonoffending peers. Within-person analyses also suggested personality differences; for example, sensation seeking was lower after incarceration while impulsivity was higher compared with before. Overall, this work highlights that personality predicts incarceration and court-ordered community service in youth and that personality changes linked with these experiences do not have a uniformly "corrective" pattern of change, with few effects observed overall and some in seemingly unfavorable directions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

The emergence of COVID-19 placed immediate pressure on the juvenile justice system to adapt to changes in case processing and decision-making practices. Juvenile probation agencies were tasked with quickly altering their policies and practice to abide by local public health measures. As probation supervision is the most common disposition in the juvenile justice system, there is both an empirical and practical need to understand the impact that COVID-19 has on a variety of issues surrounding the supervision and provision of services for juveniles. Using self-report survey data from juvenile probation directors across the United States, the current study examines (a) the biggest challenges faced by juvenile probation agencies during the pandemic, (b) the strategies implemented in response to these challenges, and (c) the most pressing issues currently facing the field of juvenile community corrections. Results have the potential to inform future agency decision-making when adjusting juvenile probation policy and practice.

Objectives Using meta-analysis to determine the effect size of the recidivism rate of participants in community correction programs that are conducted entirely in community settings. Methods Following the Preferred Reported Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA), 25 qualified studies contributed 35 independent effect sizes. Results Full participation in a program significantly reduced the recidivism rate. Participant age was a significant moderator of heterogeneity. Those aged over 18 have lower recidivism rates. Interventions that fully follow the Risk-Need-Responsivity (RNR) design principles achieved similar results to those that did not. Recidivism rates increase more than 12 months after the program ends. Conclusions The effectiveness of community correctional programs varies depending on the participant’s age. The RNR principles are not golden. The above factors should be carefully considered when conducting intervention design in the future. Results should be interpreted with caution due to the literature’s high heterogeneity and low quality.

… This crime-reducing outcome is also explained by a senior judge who has worked in a juvenile court for eight years, who says: In dealing with juvenile delinquency, we usually have a …

This study aims to evaluate the legal effectiveness of diversion mechanisms within Indonesia’s juvenile justice system, particularly in relation to the state’s commitment to restorative justice principles. Although a comprehensive legal framework is in place—namely Law No. 11 of 2012 and Supreme Court Regulation (PERMA) No. 4 of 2014 (Peraturan Mahkamah Agung)—the implementation of diversion remains limited, with only 14.1% of juvenile cases resolved through this mechanism. This gap reveals a significant disconnect between legal norms and practical enforcement. The study employs a normative-qualitative legal research method, utilizing document analysis of statutory regulations and institutional reports from the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, the Indonesian Child Protection Commission (KPAI), the Directorate General of Corrections, as well as secondary sources including academic literature, media coverage, and official documentation. Thematic analysis was applied to identify structural, cultural, and institutional barriers in the implementation of diversion. The findings highlight three major issues: (1) regional disparities in the application of diversion, especially between urban centers and disadvantaged (3T) areas; (2) structural obstacles, including a shortage of trained personnel, lack of proper mediation facilities, and weak interagency coordination; and (3) the persistence of a retributive and legalistic legal culture among both law enforcement officials and the general public, which impedes the acceptance of restorative approaches. This study makes a significant contribution to the discourse on juvenile justice reform by emphasizing the need for systemic support and cross-sectoral collaboration to ensure the effective realization of diversion. Policy implications include the strengthening of training programs, infrastructure development, and public legal education. The originality of this research lies in its integrative evaluative framework, which combines legal, institutional, and socio-cultural analysis, offering a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of diversion in Indonesia.

This study examines the effectiveness of non-custodial sanctions within Indonesia’s juvenile justice system, with a particular focus on the implementation of restorative justice in Bengkulu Province. Grounded in Law No. 11 of 2012 on the Juvenile Criminal Justice System (UU SPPA) and international instruments such as the CRC and Tokyo Rules, the research explores the normative, institutional, and empirical dimensions of diversion and community-based sanctions for children in conflict with the law. Adopting a socio-legal methodology, the study combines doctrinal analysis with qualitative fieldwork involving 25 semi-structured interviews with judges, prosecutors, police investigators, correctional officers, and community leaders, complemented by direct observations of diversion sessions and the analysis of court and institutional documents. The findings reveal a strong normative commitment to restorative principles but highlight significant gaps in practice due to limited institutional capacity, inconsistent inter-agency coordination, and persistent cultural stigmas. Diversion programs in Bengkulu have demonstrated positive impacts on rehabilitation and social reintegration, particularly when supported by families and local communities. However, the absence of standardized procedures, integrated data systems, and adequate professional training undermines long-term sustainability. The study concludes that meaningful juvenile justice reform requires not only legal and procedural refinement but also transformative engagement with societal attitudes and sustained investment in supportive infrastructure. It further offers concrete policy recommendations to strengthen the restorative justice ecosystem and promote a more humane, rights-based approach to juvenile justice in Indonesia.

This meta-analysis examines the official recidivism effects of two types of community sanctions in youth justice, namely community service and behavioural intervention programmes. Two analyses were conducted: a comparison between the effects of community sanctions and custodial sanctions, versus a comparison between the effects of community sanctions and dismissals. Following a systematic literature search, data extraction and analysis, mean effect sizes were calculated utilizing (log) odds ratio as the main effect measure. To explore heterogeneity, a meta-regression was conducted with four moderator variables: methodological rigour, referral stage, main focus of sanction and sample risk level. The hypotheses were that recidivism would be significantly lower for delinquent youth subject to community sanctions compared with those subject to custodial sanctions, but that differences in recidivism between delinquent youth subject to community sanctions versus dismissals would be insignificant. In total, 23 studies were deemed eligible for inclusion (Ncust = 7, Ndism = 16). Final results were in favour of the hypotheses, namely, significantly lower recidivism rates for community sanctions compared with custodial sanctions, and no significant differences for community sanctions compared with dismissals. For both comparisons, the 95% confidence interval indicated the effects varied from just below zero to substantially in favour of community sanctions. Finally, moderator analysis revealed that studies of lower methodological quality and mixed referral stages were more likely to report larger effect sizes.

Community sanctions are increasingly preferred over detention for juveniles, yet outcomes remain inconsistent. This study proposes that psychotypology, defined by reflection, forecasting/goal-setting, value orientation, subjectivity (agency), motivational set, and coping style, determines resocialization potential under non-custodial sentences. A sample of N = 600 juveniles in Ukrainian probation (suspended sentences) was assessed using projective future tasks ("My Day in Five Years"; "25 Desires"), Heckhausen's Achievement Motivation Test, an assertiveness-under-frustration measure, and structured value/agency indices. A four-type classification was derived and distributions compared using Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests. Four psychotypes were identified: situational (n = 160), context-dependent (n = 220), personally conditioned (n = 150), and impulsive (n = 70). Situational youths combined subjectivity and achievement motivation with moderate reflective/forecasting deficits and expressed remorse; they scored higher in reflection and forecasting than all other groups (p = 01). Context-dependent youths showed absent subjectivity, avoidance motivation, low reflection/forecasting, and group-led offending, indicating the lowest resocialization potential. Personally conditioned youths demonstrated strong subjectivity and achievement orientation but egoistic values, low reflection, and frequent aggression, suggesting ambivalent outcomes. Impulsive youths displayed weak forecasting, low subjectivity, avoidance motivation, and frustration-driven aggression. Across profiles, reflection and prospective control emerged as primary indicators of readiness for change.

Although community sanctions have become a popular alternative to custodial sanctions in youth justice, primary questions about the recidivism effects of community sanctions remain unanswered. The current study aims to fill this gap through a quasi-experimental analysis of 2-year recidivism differences between 4,425 youth subject to community sanctions versus custodial sanctions in the Netherlands in 2015 and 2016. Recidivism was analyzed in terms of overall, serious, and very serious recidivism for the full sample, a low risk subsample, and a medium-high risk subsample. Findings indicate that youth subject to community sanctions are less likely to recidivate overall, and less like likely to recidivate seriously than youth subject to custodial sanctions. Community sanctions were found to be particularly beneficial for preventing very serious recidivism among low risk youth. Additionally, it was found that medium-high risk youth subject to community sanctions are less likely to recidivate overall, and less seriously than medium-high risk youth subject to custodial sanctions. Implications of these findings for future research and practice are discussed.

… Therefore, we aim to introduce/ select non-custodial measures and concepts tailored to … Probation for juveniles is administered by the various states’ Ministry of Youth and Social …

… with chronic and violent juvenile offenders, substance‑abusing juvenile offenders, adolescent … Evaluations of the effectiveness of MST with chronic and violent juvenile offenders have …

Objectives This meta-review integrates the findings of meta-analyses and systematic reviews to explore the effect of intervention programs on recidivism for juvenile offenders. Methods The systematic literature search gathered 48 meta-analyses and systematic reviews from 53 research reports, contributing 56 independent effect sizes for analysis. These effect sizes were statistically integrated, and five moderators of theoretical and methodological importance were tested using meta-regression. Results On average, intervention programs are associated with a significant reduction in recidivism ( r _ Φ = −0.09, p < 0.001) for juvenile offenders who participate in a program compared to those who do not. However, reductions in recidivism significantly vary between the levels of criminal justice system, characteristics of juvenile offenders, types of program modalities, and methodological quality. Conclusions Results indicate that intervention programs can be an effective approach to reducing recidivism for juvenile offenders, especially when combined with a rehabilitative program modality.

This meta-analysis evaluated judicial interventions for juvenile delinquency certified by the Netherlands Youth Institute with “initial indications” for effectiveness. Ten (quasi-)experimental studies examining TOOLS4U, Multidimensional Family Therapy (MDFT), Multi Systemic Therapy (MST), Only You Decide who you Are (OYD), Responsive Social Skills Therapy (Re-SST), and Responsive Aggression Regulation Therapy (Re-ART) were synthesized. The overall effect was small, positive, and significant (g = 0.22; 95%CI: 0.02, 0.42). Responsive cognitive behavioral therapy (Re-SST and Re-ART) and the sports-based intervention OYD seem effective, whereas social skills training (TOOLS4U) and family-based systemic interventions (MDFT and MST) seem ineffective. However, effectiveness of family-based programs can possibly be enhanced if youth at medium-to-high risk for delinquency is treated for 6 months or longer, which aligns with the Risk-Need-Responsivity model. Better program delivery and general instead of specific offenses were associated with larger effects. We advocate a stronger evidence-based RNR approach to juvenile delinquency in the Netherlands. Plain language summary Effectively preventing juvenile delinquency in the Netherlands Juvenile delinquency remains a serious issue in the Netherlands. Preventive interventions have proliferated, but many lack strong theoretical foundations and research support. The Netherlands Youth Institute (NYI) continuously monitors all available evidence for intervention effectiveness and certifies those showing initial indications of effectiveness. This study analyzed that evidence to better understand the overall effectiveness of preventive interventions against Dutch juvenile delinquency. Only six interventions currently offered to Dutch juveniles were certified by the NYI and reported on delinquency: TOOLS4U, Multidimensional Family Therapy (MDFT), Multi Systemic Therapy (MST), Only You Decide who you Are (OYD), Responsive Social Skills Therapy (Re-SST), and Responsive Aggression Regulation Therapy (Re-ART). Their combined effectiveness proved to be small. Responsive cognitive behavioral therapy (Re-SST, Re-ART) and the sports-based intervention OYD seem effective, while social skills training (TOOLS4U) and family-based systemic interventions (MDFT, MST) seem ineffective. However, family-based program effectiveness may improve if youth at medium-to-high delinquency risk are treated for at least six months. Better program delivery and targeting general rather than specific offenses yielded larger effects. Practitioners should emphasize an evidence-based approach to effectively prevent Dutch juvenile delinquency and make research-informed decisions. The Dutch national quality framework, NYI-certified interventions, and Risk-Need-Responsivity model principles are the key to strengthening practice. Since many of the included interventions are also implemented internationally, this research is of international importance.

Although cognitive-behavioral interventions have reduced the risk of substance use, little is known about moderating factors in children with disruptive behaviors. This study examined whether aggressive preadolescents’ inhibitory control and intervention engagement moderates the effect of group versus individual delivery on their substance use. Following screening for aggression in 4th grade, 360 children were randomly assigned to receive the Coping Power intervention in either group or individual formats. The sample was primarily African American (78%) and male (65%). Assessments were made of children’s self-reported substance use from preintervention through a six-year follow-up after intervention, parent-reported inhibitory control at preintervention, and observed behavioral engagement in the group intervention. Multilevel growth modeling found lower increases in substance use slopes for children with low inhibitory control receiving individual intervention, and for children with higher inhibitory control receiving group intervention. Children with low inhibitory control but who displayed more positive behavioral engagement in the group sessions had slower increases in their substance use than did similar children without positive engagement. Aggressive children’s level of inhibitory control can lead to tailoring of group versus individual delivery of intervention. Children’s positive behavioral engagement in group sessions is a protective factor for children with low inhibitory control.

There is ongoing debate about whether specialized treatment is effective to reduce sexual recidivism in juveniles who have sexually offended (JSOs). Although most treatment programs are based on cognitive behavioral therapy principles for preventing sexual offending, accordant scientific evidence is poor. Following CONSORT guidelines, the present study aimed to evaluate two versions of a short-term outpatient treatment program for JSOs in Switzerland: (a) the Therapy Program for Adequate Sexual Behaviors Version 1 (ThePaS-I), which included offending-specific skills training; (b) the ThePaS-II, which included general socioemotional skills training. Based on changes in self-reported mental health, sexual behaviors, victim empathy, and therapist-rated risk, as well as comprehensive data on sexual and general recidivism, we found some similarities regarding the effects of the two treatments. ThePaS-II showed better short-term changes in self-reported mental health than the ThePaS-I. However, JSOs in the ThePaS-I showed lower rates of sexual reoffending (but not general reoffending) after treatment than those in the ThePaS-II. Despite some methodological limitations, the current findings favor offending-specific skills-based therapy over general skills-based ones for preventing sexual reoffenses. The findings may encourage further methodologically sound studies to examine different treatment approaches for juveniles and adults who have committed criminal offenses.

Juvenile delinquency is a pressing problem in the United States; the literature emphasizes the importance of early interventions and the role of the family in preventing juvenile delinquency. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework, PudMed, and Scopus, we included 28 peer-reviewed articles in English between January 2012 and October 2022. We evaluated the existing literature regarding the risk factors, protective factors, and interventions related to juvenile delinquency. We searched articles that discussed reducing juvenile delinquency and recidivism in the U.S. and coded them into four overarching themes: ‘family conflict and dysfunction’, ‘neglect and maltreatment’, ‘individual and family mitigating factors’, and ‘family- and community-based interventions. We found that family conflict and dysfunction and neglect and maltreatment were two primary predictors of juvenile delinquency. Notably, higher academic achievement and strong and positive parental relationships were factors that protected against delinquency amongst at-risk youth. Interventions that yielded optimal efficacy in curbing recidivism included family-based interventions, specifically family therapy, and community-based interventions. Considering multi-dimensional factors that affect delinquent behaviors, interventions should consider the influence of family, peers, neighborhood, schools, and the larger community.

Objectives To investigate whether psychosocial interventions for justice-involved youth are equally effective at reducing delinquent behavior for males and females. Methods We used meta-analysis to test for gender differences in intervention effects for justice-involved youth, including 10 randomized controlled trials that permitted assessment of gender-specific effect sizes. Results Findings show interventions were ineffective at reducing delinquency overall d  = -0.006, p  = .921. Moreover, there was no significant difference in recidivism outcomes by gender, Q  = .071, p  =  .790 ; psychosocial interventions for justice-involved youth yielded null effects for males, d  = 0.006, p  = .933, and females, d  =  - .027, p  = .785. Conclusions This study is the first meta-analysis focused on gender differences in intervention effects for justice-involved youth. Our findings suggest a need for further study to better understand what works for reducing recidivism among juvenile justice-involved males and females.