Gender Bias in the Juvenile Justice System

The rise in juvenile arrests of females has prompted some researchers to closely examine reasons as to these increases. Some researchers have cited gender bias in their research of female juvenile crime and processing. Gender bias occurs in juvenile justice when females are disproportionately charged with certain crimes or sanctioned harsher than males for crimes they commit based on their gender (Justice by Gender: The Lack of Appropriate Prevention, Diversion and Treatment Alternatives for Girls in the Justice System, 2001). A study of the handling of juvenile court cases in Hawaii found some bias to be present. At the early points of handling, it appeared that gender had no effect on decision making once all relevant legal factors were held constant. However, the data collected further suggested that a girl was likely to be more harshly sanctioned than her male counterparts once she got past the early stages. Girls were more likely to receive harsh dispositions for relatively minor offenses, particularly for running away from home. In addition, girls were more likely than boys to be formally disposed and detained for minor crimes and status offenses. The study also found that seriousness of the crime was found to have more of an impact on girls than boys (Chesney-Lind & McDonald, 2001).

According to the American Bar Association and the National Bar Association, girls are disproportionately charged with status offenses. Also, when girls are first charged with a status offense such as running away or curfew violation, they may ultimately be driven deeper into the criminal justice system. Between 1988 and 1997, the use of detention for girls increased 65% as compared with a 30% increase for boys. There is additional evidence that shows girls are being detained for less serious offenses than boys and are more likely to be sent back to detention after release (Justice by Gender: The Lack of Appropriate Prevention, Diversion and Treatment Alternatives for Girls in the Justice System, 2001).

There are two conflicting theoretical reasons that gender may affect decision making with in the juvenile justice system, particularly with law enforcement. The first reason is that girls may receive harsher treatment than boys because it is less socially acceptable for girls to deviate than for boys to (Rosay, 2003). This goes to the dated saying, boys will be boys. A boy's minor delinquent actions may be deemed as more of a rite of passage in many circles, whereas a girl's delinquent behavior is less socially acceptable because they are considered to be blurring the traditional gender roles. Virtually half of all arrests of girls are for status offenses or shoplifting. The practice of criminalizing the adolescent behavior of young females is not a new idea. Throughout history girls have been the subjects of social control and defiant, sexual, and unruly girls have been punished publicly. Historically, this form of patriarchy has kept females in a "second-class citizenship." Girls have been repeatedly singled out for sexual activity and curfew violations are often considered an allied behavior to such activities (Dohrn, 2004).

A second theory of the way young females are treated in the juvenile justice system conflicts with the first one drastically. Girls may receive more lenient treatment than boys because the juvenile justice system may, often as an expression of chivalry, act to protect girls from its influence (Rosay, 2003). Under this theory, particularly male judges, law enforcement, and juvenile officers, may be easier on the female offender to keep her in the traditional role of a young girl. Young girls are not supposed to become offenders so personnel in the juvenile justice system may take actions to ensure that is unlikely to happen. Research by Rosay on gender effects in the Alaska juvenile justice system suggests that both views are present at different points of juvenile processing in urban and rural jurisdictions (2003).