859

WAIVER TOCRIMINALCOURT

Juvenile transfer to adult court is the process by which

some youths who are viewed by juvenile court judges as

inappropriate for the juvenile justice system are trans-

ferred to adult court. The decisions to transfer a youth to

adult court are typically based on concerns about public

safety balanced against considerations of youth devel-

opment. The rationale for waiver is fourfold: (1) separate

severely antisocial from amenable youths, (2) ensure

public safety, (3) remove youths unlikely to be amenable

within the juvenile court time frame, and (4) hold mature

adolescents accountable for their conduct. There are

various mechanisms for waiver, including juvenile

waiver, prosecutorial filing, and automatic and reverse

transfer. The standards applied in each transfer mecha-

nism are typically based on the criteria outlined by

Judge Abe Fortas in Kent v. United States(1966). These

standards are used by judges in determining whether a

youth should be transferred to adult court.

Since the inception of the new juvenile justice sys-

tem, psychology has played a role in the evaluation of

juvenile offenders. Psychology’s link to the waiver

process is important because it increases the likelihood

that individual characteristics will be considered prior

to waiving jurisdiction of youth. An important compo-

nent of the evaluation is for mental health professionals

to suggest what types of treatment might allow for

prosocial change. With respect to policy, psychologists

can inform the courts about new mechanisms or ways

of processing and treating severe offenders that would

allow for potential change in their problem behavior

and their healthy development.

This entry discusses the rationale for waiver, the

various mechanisms for waiver, the standards that are

applied by judges in determining whether a youth

should be transferred to adult court, and the criteria

that underlie each standard. In addition, it describes

the relationship between psychology and the waiver

process and highlights the contribution to evaluation

that mental health professionals can make by suggest-

ing what types of treatment might allow for positive

change. Psychology can also help inform policy on

the waiver process.

Historical Purposes

of Waiver of Jurisdiction

The rationale for and the juvenile court’s interest in

upward waiver for certain juvenile offenders is fourfold.

First, the juvenile justice system was initiated to reha-

bilitate delinquent youths. Transfer mechanisms have

always been available to avoid the inclusion of youths

whose potential dangerousness might detract from the

rehabilitative efforts of programs that were designed to

benefit errant children and adolescents. Thus, the waiver

mechanism was used as a safety valve to remove certain

youths who were thought to detract from a system that

was intended to treat and improve youths who were

believed to be amenable to intervention.

Second, the juvenile justice system is responsible for

protecting the public. In most states, the juvenile justice

system must release youths in its custody when they

reach a certain age (typically 17 or 18 years), depend-

ing on the laws pertaining to particular offenses. If it is

thought that a juvenile is unlikely to be rehabilitated

prior to turning 18 (the most common age after which

W

W-Cutler (Encyc)-45463.qxd 11/18/2007 12:44 PM Page 859