American Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 27, No.

3, 1999

Adolescent Development and Juvenile Justice1

N. Dickon Reppucci
University of Virginia

The central question examined in this address is, "Do children's crimes make
them adults?" I begin by focusing on the concept and history of adolescence
in our society, I then examine the development and philosophy of the juvenile
justice system. Adolescent development and juvenile justice are brought to-
gether around the concepts of maturity, judgment, and competence, followed
by a brief introduction to some current research that we are engaged in
regarding the issues of adjudicatory and culpability competence. I conclude
with suggested directions for future work.
KEY WORDS: juvenile justice; adolescent development; decision making competence in legal
contexts; adolescent maturity.

My father was a juvenile delinquent. He grew up in the North End of

Boston, the son of Italian immigrants, and was permanently suspended
from school in the 7th grade for punching a principal. Although "street
smart," his formal education ended there. He took his first real job as a
trucker and joined the Teamsters Union at the age of 34 when I was born.
My mother, Betty Williams, a strong-willed and resourceful woman of
English heritage, and he were divorced when I was 11. He was a strong,
loud, and often overpowering man, and I was his only son. We seldom
talked. Still he more than once offered sound advice. He had commonsense.
His never to be realized dream was to become a defense attorney—my
two sons are now doing that! He once came to a lecture on juvenile offenders
that I gave at Harvard. He sat in the back of the room, listened for the
1
Invited Address delivered as recipient of the Distinguished Contributions in Theory and
Research in Community Psychology Award from the Society for Community Research and
Action (Division 27—Community Psychology; American Psychological Association) at the
American Psychological Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, California, August
16,1998.

307

0091-0562/99/0600-0307$16.00/0 © 1999 Plenum Publishing Corporation

308 Reppucci

2-hour lecture/discussion, and his only comment afterwards was "You don't
stutter!" He was really proud, although he never understood what a commu-
nity psychologist was. Many people don't!
I have spent most of my postgraduate career working on issues relating
to children, families, and the law. I was most fortunate to have Seymour
Sarason as a mentor for the 8 years I was a faculty member at Yale. Seymour
and I spent 10 minutes or so together over coffee most mornings—the most
exciting intellectual stimulation I have ever received! Seymour constantly
challenged me to do, to explore, to integrate, to write, and to listen. I've
called him ever since whenever I have needed a shot of wisdom!
Why do I begin my talk with these comments? Because I could not
possibly have been here today without these two men (and two women—my
mother who taught me to love books and learning, and Christine, my wife,
who has contributed in every way). Other significant contributors have
been my graduate students over the years whom I mention as I go along.
This can be a slippery slope because I do not want to neglect anyone, and
will try not to, but may still do so inadvertently.
Looking back, the major research and action focus of my Yale years
was on institutional change in human service organizations, especially the
public schools and juvenile correctional facilities. With my students, Terry
Saunders, Brian Sarata, Verne MacArthur, Rhona Weinstein, Carol Dweck,
Ross Rizley, and Steven Reiss, we had the audacity to attempt to bring
about change in several of these facilities based on scientific inquiry and
knowledge. We started by collaborating with the Connecticut Department
of Corrections in the creation of a minimum security facility for first-time
young offenders. We learned a lot, but accomplished very little, as indicated
by the title of a chapter that we wrote about this adventure—"We Bombed
in Mountville" (Reppucci, Sarata, Saunders, McArthur, & Michlin, 1973).
Then as a result of a real-world shooting incident, we embarked on a
research/action project to change the juvenile correctional facilities in Con-
necticut (Reppucci, 1973; Reppucci & Saunders, 1974). By the end of that
era, I knew more about what I did not know, had given up trying to devise
all-encompassing solutions, had learned the virtue of "small wins," had
developed a commitment to the use of research and theory to inform action,
and had learned that formulating meaningful questions was the critical job
of the inquiring social scientist and that tolerance of ambiguity was essential
for a community psychologist. As I have preached to my students ever
since, the core values of a community psychology, especially one interested
in public policy, are twofold: (a) seeking knowledge for the sake of under-
standing, and (b) using that knowledge for the sake of action (Reppucci,
1985).
The University of Virginia offered me the opportunity to develop a