Source: (2013) UNSW Law Journal. 36(3): 839-862.

This article is divided into three parts. Part II critically examines each of the three assumptions about youth justice identified by Weatherburn, McGrath and Bartels, and the authors’ claim that these assumptions are ‘so widely accepted and so rarely challenged they might fairly be described as dogmas’.7 Part III considers whether these three assumptions can be fairly viewed as ‘the pillars on which juvenile justice policy in Australia currently rests’ as Weatherburn, McGrath and Bartels suggest. Part IV considers the way forward for youth justice policy in Australia. (excerpt)