IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/povpop/v8y2016i4p330-367.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Neoconservatives and the Demise of a Humane Juvenile Justice Program: A Conversation About Social Science and Racism

Author

Listed:
  • Dave E. Kingsley

Abstract

Institutional racism often results in events such as an unjustifiable death of an African American citizen at the hands of the police. These events induce the leaders of the dominant white society to call for “a conversation about racism,” which results in no meaningful change. This article suggests that a meaningful conversation could be had about the influence of social science on U.S. criminal justice policy—especially juvenile justice. The focus of that conversation should be on neoconservative social science, which has had a major impact on the criminal justice system as it exists today. The author briefly highlights the leading neoconservatives of the last half of the twentieth century. The demise of the Achievement Place/Teaching‐Family model—a rehabilitative, nonpunitive, community‐based treatment program for youthful offenders—is discussed as an example of neoconservative utilization of inadequate science in their claim that “nothing works” in rehabilitation programs. It is argued that perceived inherent deficiencies in African Americans—as a “race”—were a fixation of leading neoconservative scholars.

Suggested Citation

  • Dave E. Kingsley, 2016. "Neoconservatives and the Demise of a Humane Juvenile Justice Program: A Conversation About Social Science and Racism," Poverty & Public Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(4), pages 330-367, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:povpop:v:8:y:2016:i:4:p:330-367
    DOI: 10.1002/pop4.163
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/pop4.163
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/pop4.163?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:povpop:v:8:y:2016:i:4:p:330-367. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1944-2858 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.