Serious crimes such as murder, burglary and rape have raised questions as to whether the young offenders should face severe punitive treatment or the normal punitive measures in juvenile courts. Many would prefer the juveniles given harsh punishment in order to discourage other young people from engaging in similar activities and to serve as a lesson to these particular offenders. However, results from previous studies indicate such punitive measures were neither successful nor morally acceptable. Instead, the solutions achieved have unfairly treated the youths and compromised the society status (Kristin, page 1). Several studies conducted to determine impacts of transfers of cases from juvenile courts to adult criminal courts for trial and potential sentencing indicate higher recidivism rates among the offenders. This is because of the notion the youth possess on the strictness on the adult courts. They believe trials on these courts end up in harsh punishment for offenders. In a way, adult punishments scare youth away from committing major crimes. However, studies show that short term punishments imposed on young offenders in adult courts propagates the offenders to commit even more crimes that are serious after their sentence terminates. This results from interactions with other crimes bearer behind bars who are convicted for far much worse crimes than they are. In addition the young offenders continued to commit crimes at a higher rate and more often than earlier on (Shari, page 1). Another study seeking to establish effective deterrence to delinquency found out that most states transfer youths aged fourteen years and above, who have committed serious violent offenses to adult court systems. Many of the states apply the th... ... middle of paper ... ...ing with young minds and punishing them in juvenile courts may be of advantage to the young people and at the same time reduce propagating them into developing a violent future in criminal activities. Correctional facilities that address and cater for the juveniles are the way forward to streamlining the youths (Kristin, page4). Works Cited Jeff Slowikowski. An Effective Deterrent to Delinquency: Juvenile Transfer Laws. Juvenile Justice Bulletin. 2000. Kristin Rhodes: The Criminal Prosecution of Juveniles: A Philosophical Reappraisal of Adolescent Agency. Lethbridge Undergraduate Research Journal. Volume 3 Number 2. 2008. Lonn Lanza-Kaduce and Donna M. Bishop. Juvenile Transfer to Criminal Court Study. A Report to Florida Department of Juvenile Justice. 2002. Shari Miller-Johnson, Joel Rosch. Research on Future Offending: Juvenile or Adult Court. 2010.
The adult system’s shifts leaked into the juvenile system, causing an increase in incarcerations even when delinquency rates were declining at the time. Juvenile reform legislations prompted more compulsory sentencing and more determinate sentences for juveniles, lowering of the upper age of juvenile jurisdiction, considerable ease in obtaining waivers to adult court for juvenile prosecution, and made it easier to gain access to juvenile records as well. Furthermore, it led to greater preoccupation with chronic, violent offenders, which in turn led to a redirection of resources for their confinement. Thereby, the absence of reliable criteria for identifying such offenders tends to stereotype all delinquents and is more likely to raise the level of precautionary confinements. These three major shifts in juvenile justice policy demonstrate the power and depth of traditional beliefs about the causes and cures of crimes in U.S. society. It also shows how the system can bend for a time in the direction of new approaches to prevention and control. Today, we are presently in a time of conservative responses where the prevailing views about crime express beliefs about prevention, retribution, and incapacitation that are profoundly rooted in our
The modern teen court concept began in the early 1970’s when a small number of local communities in America began to establish the first Global Youth Justice programs (Peterson, p. 2). In 1994 there were 78 youth court programs in existence. As of March, 2010, there are over 1,050 youth court programs in operation in 49 states and the District of Columbia. Teen courts serve as a “diversion” program used to divert first time offenders away from a lifetime of criminal activity. The primary function of most teen court programs is to determine a fair and restorative sentence or disposition for the youth respondent. Although the primary function of teen courts is to rehabilitate offenders, some may wonder if teen courts are actually beneficial to young offenders.
Within the last five years, violent offenses by children have increased 68 percent, crimes such as: murder, rape, assault, and robbery. Honestly, with these figures, it is not surprising at all that the Juveniles Courts focus less on the children in danger, and focus more on dangerous children. This in fact is most likely the underlying reasoning behind juveniles being tried as adults by imposing harsher and stiffer sentences. However, these policies fail to recognize the developmental differences between young people and
The problem of dealing with juvenile justice has plagued are country for years, since the establishment of the first juvenile court in 1899. Prior to that development, delinquent juveniles had to be processed through the adult justic3e system which gave much harsher penalties. By 1945, separate juvenile courts existed in every single state. Similar to the adult system, all through most of the 20th century, the juvenile justice system was based upon a medical/rehabilitative representation. The new challenges of the juvenile court were to examine, analyze, and recommend treatment for offenders, not to deliver judgment fault or fix responsibility. The court ran under the policy of “parens patriae” that intended that the state would step in and act as a parent on behalf of a disobedient juvenile. Actions were informal and a juvenile court judge had a vast sum of discretion in the nature of juvenile cases, much like the discretion afforded judges in adult unlawful settings until the 1970s. In line with the early juvenile court’s attitude of shielding youth, juvenile offenders’ position was often in reformatories or instruction schools that were intended, in speculation, to keep them away from the terrible influences of society and to encourage self-control through accurate structure and very unsympathetic discipline. Opposing to the fundamental theory, all through the first part of the century, the places that housed juveniles were frequently unsafe and unhealthy places where the state warehoused delinquent, deserted, and deserted children for unclear periods. Ordinary tribulations included lack of medical care, therapy programs, and even sometimes food. Some very poor circumstances continue even today.
What is important to understand in terms of the difference between the juvenile and adult system is that there is a level of dependency that is created between the two and the juvenile system focuses on how to help rather than in prison individuals at such a young age. However, it usually depends on the type of crimes that have been committed and what those crimes mean for the families and how they impact the greater society. The adult system distinguishes between dependence and delinquency mainly because there is a psychological transition that occurs with juveniles that is not always a predictor of a cyclical life of crime. However, if an adult is committed to the justice system, there can be a dependency of delinquency and a cycle of crime that is more likely to be sustained at that age and level of cognitive ability than in comparison to a juvenile. The reasoning behind this is important is that it is focused on maintaining a level of attention to the needs and capacity abilities of individuals living and working in different types of societies (Zinn et al., 2017).
Though crime, in general, is on the decline there are specific crimes and group offenders that are actually increasing. Specific crimes such as hate crimes, those crimes motivated by hostility to the victim as a member of a group, based on color, creed, gender, or sexual orientation, and juvenile crimes have become escalating debates. Lionel Tate, a 12-year-old boy at the time of his actions, is a suitable case to investigate. Using his case, I will address the increase in juvenile delinquency, the contributions to the malice acts, the severity of the crimes being committed by youth, and possible, yet reasonable repercussions.
“Well-run juvenile detention centers help adolescents develop insight, change their behavior and develop goals for themselves that they can pursue when they are released” (“The Purpose of a Juvenile Detention Center”).
In today's society juveniles are being tried in adult courts, given the death penalty, and sent to prison. Should fourteen-year olds accused of murder or rape automatically be tried as adults? Should six-teen year olds and seven-teen year olds tried in adult courts be forced to serve time in adult prisons, where they are more likely to be sexually assaulted and to become repeat offenders. How much discretion should a judge have in deciding the fate of a juvenile accused of a crime - serious, violent, or otherwise? The juvenile crime rate that was so alarming a few years ago has begun to fall - juvenile felony arrest rates in California have declined by more than forty percent in the last twenty years. While California's juvenile population rose by a half a million since the middle and late 1970's, juveniles made up less than fifth-teen percent of California's felony arrests in 1998, compared to thirty percent in 1978; according to the Justice Policy Institute. The juvenile arrests have dropped back, even as the population of kids between ages of ten and eight-teen has continued to grow, and the number of kids confined in the California Youth Authority (CYA) has fallen. With all the progress our society has made in cutting back in juvenile crimes there is still a very serious problem. But if locking kids up is the best way to address it, how do we explain a drop in crime when there are more teens in California and fewer in custody? First we must look at the economy around us. With so many job opportunities available more and more teenagers find honest ways to keep busy and make money. Our generation has a brighter future than the generation a decade ago. Next we look at successful crime prevention efforts: after-school programs, mentoring, teen outreach programs, truancy abatement, anti-gang programs, family resource centers. There is evidence that these programs are beginning to pay off. Sending more, and younger teens through the adult court system has been a trend across the country in reaction to crimes, such as school shootings and violent rapes. Yet evidence shows that treating youth as adults does not reduce crime. In Florida, where probability wise more kids are tried as adults then in any other state, studies found that youth sent through the adult court system are twice as likely to commit more crimes when they're release...
A deep look into juveniles in adult prisons. Touch bases on several smaller issues that contribute to juveniles being in and effects of adult prisons. The United States Bureau of Prisons handles two hundred and thirty-nine juveniles and their average age is seventeen. Execution of juveniles, The United States is one of only six countries to execute juveniles. There are sixty-eight juveniles sitting on death row for crimes committed as juveniles. Forty-three of those inmates are minorities. People, who are too young to vote, drink alcohol, or drive are held to the same standard of responsibility as adults. In prisons, they argue that the juveniles become targets of older, more hardened criminals. Brian Stevenson, Director of the Alabama Capital Resource Center said, “We have totally given up in the idea of reform of rehabilitation for the very young. We are basically saying we will throw those kids away. Leading To Prison Juvenile Justice Bulletin Report shows that two-thirds of juveniles apprehended for violent offenses were released or put on probation. Only slightly more than one-third of youths charged with homicide was transferred to adult criminal court. Little more than one out of every one hundred New York youths arrested for muggings, beatings, rape and murder ended up in a correctional institution. Another report showed a delinquent boy has to be arrested on average thirteen times before the court will act more restrictive than probation. Laws began changing as early as 1978 in New York to try juveniles over 12 who commit violent crimes as adults did. However, even since the laws changed only twenty percent of serious offenders served any time. The decision of whether to waive a juven...
The goals of juvenile corrections are too deter, rehabilitate and reintegrate, prevent, punish and reattribute, as well as isolate and control youth offenders and offenses. Each different goal comes with its own challenges. The goal of deterrence has its limits; because rules and former sanctions, as well anti-criminal modeling and reinforcement are met with young rebellious minds. Traditional counseling and diversion which are integral aspects of community corrections can sometimes be ineffective, and studies have shown that sometimes a natural self intervention can take place as the youth grows older; resulting in the youth outgrowing delinquency.
As minors commit violent crimes without being held accountable, they can grow up to be real criminals and they can be very dangerous. Without a solid foundation of what is right and wrong, these minors will grow up believing that their actions are the norm. For this reason, minors need to be held accountable. They need to be taught that they cannot get away with their crimes. In 2007, courts with juvenile jurisdiction handled an estimated 1.7 million delinquency cases. Delinquency cases include vandalism, shoplifting, robbery, and murder. These are just some of the crimes minors can commit. This was up by forty-four percent from 1985. If a minor grows up believing that crime is acceptable, they will repeat the pattern. Without interrupting the pattern and making them accountable, these minors will always have a twisted sense of right and wrong. A sense of what is right and wrong is important and can be learned at any age. Minors learn very young, what...
This paper describes the various legislations and movements that were established in 19th century to address the issue of juvenile justice system. It outlines the challenges faced by the legislation and movements and their implications in addressing the issues of the juvenile justice system.
According to Donna M. Bishop( 2003) of the University of Chicago criminal justice system “Transfer of juvenile defendants to criminal courts for adult prosecution has traditionally been justified on the grounds that the juvenile court is ill equipped to handle two classes of offenders. In cases of seriously violent crimes, the public has historically demanded heavy penalties that exceed the authority of the juvenile court (Tanenhaus, forthcoming). While commission of a repugnant act neither transforms a young o...
The United States has been affected by a number of crimes committed by juveniles. The juvenile crime rate has been increasing in recent years. Everyday more juveniles commit crimes for various reasons. They act as adults when they are not officially adults. There is a discussion about how juveniles should be punished if they commit heinous crimes. While many argue that juveniles who commit serious crimes, such as murder, should be treated as adults, the fact is, juveniles under the age of eighteen, are not adults, and should not be treated as such.
Much controversy exists on the question of whether a juvenile criminal should be punished to the same extent as an adult. Those who commit capitol crimes, including adolescents, should be penalized according to the law. Age should not be a factor in the case of serious crimes. Many people claim that the child did not know any better, or that he was brought up with the conception that this behavior is acceptable. Although there is some truth to these allegations, the reality of this social issue is far more complex. Therefore we ask the question, "Should childhood offenders of capitols crimes be treated as adults?"