Abstract Dutch Adolescent Criminal Law (ACL) allows judges to impose juvenile sanctions on 18-to-23-year-olds, acknowledging their ongoing neurocognitive and psychosocial development. Forensic psychologists and psychiatrists play a central role in advising these decisions, yet no uniform guidelines exist for assessing developmental maturity. This study analyzed 431 forensic reports to identify which developmental functions are considered and how maturity is evaluated. While core functions such as impulse control and emotion regulation were often assessed, others such as sensation seeking were systematically overlooked or described with limited specificity. Results indicate that the majority of adolescents demonstrated age-inappropriate development across multiple domains. The findings highlight the need to improve current advisory practices and provide concrete recommendations for both clinical practice and future research. First, a structured yet flexible checklist is needed to ensure systematic and empirically informed assessment of all relevant functions. Second, clearer and more evaluative reporting could reduce uncertainty regarding developmental status and enhance the judicial use of expert advice. Third, incorporating complementary neuropsychological and neurophysiological assessment methods may enhance the precision and individualization of maturity evaluations. Finally, given the high prevalence of developmental delays within this population, further research should clarify which of these adolescents are most likely to benefit from a juvenile framework. Strengthening the conceptual and empirical foundation of ACL advisory practices will be crucial for developing, testing, and refining evidence-based guidelines that bridge the gap between developmental science and judicial decision-making.
Franse et al. (Wed,) studied this question.