Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Cause and effects of youth homelessness
Compare and contrast juvenile justice and restorative justice
Compare and contrast juvenile justice and restorative justice
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Cause and effects of youth homelessness
Juvenile Justice, Homelessness and Remand
YOUTH ACTION ADVOCACY AND POLICY ASSOCIATION
By Andrew Kyu Sun Choi
“Youth Action Advocacy and Policy (YAPA) is the peak organisation representing young people and youth services in NSW. YAPA works towards a society where all young people are supported, engaged and valued (Youth Action Advocacy and Policy Association, n.d.)”
Executive Summary
Young people have increasingly been subjected to remand when navigating through the juvenile justice system (Vignaendra et al., 2009). The causal relationship between youth homelessness and remand remains to be at the heart of this predicament (Richards, 2011). The enactment of the Young Offenders Act 1997 (NSW) has attempted to reorient the public discourse around restorative justice to balance the needs of both juvenile offenders and the public at large. The corollary to the effect of this legal paradigm has been a shift towards detention as a last resort for juveniles. Despite this, the high incidence of homelessness amongst juveniles, weak legal protections for housing security and a corresponding lack of state-sponsored accommodation have exacerbated pre-trial custodial sentencing. This report will contest to the notion that a recalibration of the discourse around young offenders within a right-based framework delivers greater recourse within the criminal justice system towards both protecting and serving the best interests of homeless juveniles.
The Issue and its Context
The Young Offenders Act 1997 (NSW) s 7 has enshrined Articles 2, 3, 6 and 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of a Child (1984) 1557 UNTS 3, cementing principles of non-discrimination, acting in the ‘best interests...
... middle of paper ...
...f_htm/publications/research/May%202009%20recent%20trends%20in%20legal%20proceedings%20for%20breach%20of%20bail%20juvenile%20remand%20and%20crime%20FINAL.pdf.
Weatherburn, D., McGrath, A. and Bartels, L. (2012), ‘Three Dogmas of Juvenile Justice’, University of New South Wales Law Journal, Vol. 35, pp. 779-809.
Wong, K., Bailey, B. and Kenny, D.T. (2010), Bail Me Out: NSW Young People and Bail, Youth Justice Coalition, Marrickville, viewed 23 March 2014, http://www.yjconline.net/BailMeOut.pdf.
Wood, J. (2008), Report of the Special Commission of Inquiry into Child Protection Services in NSW, NSW Department of Premier and Cabinet, Sydney, viewed 24 March 2014, http://www.dpc.nsw.gov.au/publications/news/stories/?a=33794.
Youth Action Advocacy and Policy Association n.d., About Youth Action, YAPA, Sydney, viewed 21 March 2014, http://youthaction.org.au/about/.
2011). Some research suggests that the recent prevalence of targeted youth work is further stigmatizing the young people involved (Scanlon et al 2011; Jenkinson 2013). It is the role of the youth worker to challenge these negative agreements, to help young people find their truth. Rogers (1980) and Ruiz (2012) describe a process where a person, e.g. youth worker, values the significance and worth of another person. Through this acceptance the young person will begin to adopt a similar attitude and they will experience a rise in self-worth. Thus, they create a new agreement, that they are worthy of being valued and cared for.
This an extremely well written and powerful book written by Edward Humes. Humes shared his thoughts, observations, and criticisms about the juvenile justice system after a “riveting ride” through the Los Angeles Juvenile Court within his book, “No Matter How Loud I Shout.” The manner in which the book is written makes it fairly easy to read, demanding your attention while allowing for a simple follow along. I feel as if the book has given me much more insight and broader knowledge of the juvenile justice system, particularly the juvenile court system of Los Angeles.
Vito, Gennaro F., and Clifford E. Simonsen. Juvenile justice today. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/Prentice Hall, 2004. Print.
Young people who face family problems, parental separation in the beginning, lack of support and encouragement by society and lack of self-esteem may end up in the youth justice system. The existing youth justice framework is totally unable to map out the solution where the young offenders can get rid of this all social problems and pass a happy righteous life.
Most young offenders get into trouble with the law only once. But the younger children are when they first break the law, the more likely they are to break the law again (Statistics Canada study, 2005). The Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) attempts to acknowledge that different youth need different sentences within the justice system, while ensuring that it is fair and equitable for them. Many people, both in Canada, and around the world, believe that youth are not reprimanded harshly enough for the crimes they commit and that they are, in general, are able to squeeze through the justice system without punishment. Others, believe that the justice system does not treat youth fairly and punishes them without acknowledging that rehabilitation
Butler, Frank (2010) ‘Extinguishing All Hope: Life-Without-Parole for Juveniles’, Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 49: 4, 273-292
It was during the mid nineteenth century in England when the parliament initially recognised juvenile delinquency as a distinctive social phenomenon and accepted the responsibility not only for young offenders, but also for the children who, though not in trouble with the law, required full care and protection. Children who stood before the courts were no longer seen as little adults but were seen as beings in their own rights who were entitled because they lack full responsibility for their actions. Through this change in status it accomplished the introduction of reformatory rather than punitive treatment. A reformatory system undoubtedly distinguishes a child’s offence from an adult crime replaced penal systems which made little dedicated provisions for children. This departure culminated in Herbert Samuels Children Act 1908 (Margaret May 2002). The Children Act 1908 represented a key step in the progress of the idea that children were a special category of problem. Through the establishment of Juvenile Courts which were criminal courts in terms of the procedures and giving them jurisdiction over the care and protection issues. The Juvenile Courts became the family law courts which dispensed family justice. The courts and the state can intervene for the first time in working-class family life when children are seen to be immoral, conditions which were regarded as neglect included: truancy, begging, being beyond control etc...
The Legal Status of Sixteen and Seventeen Year Old Youth in Ontario. Toronto, Ont.: Canadian Foundation for Children Youth and the Law (Justice for Children & Youth), 1993. Print.
This paper will discuss the history of the juvenile justice system and how it has come to be what it is today. When a juvenile offender commits a crime and is sentenced to jail or reform school, the offender goes to a separate jail or reforming place than an adult. It hasn’t always been this way. Until the early 1800’s juveniles were tried just like everyone else. Today, that is not the case. This paper will explain the reforms that have taken place within the criminal justice system that developed the juvenile justice system.
Vandergoot determines that the reasoning capacity of an adolescent, the ability to make legal decisions, and filter unnecessary information is unclear to a juvenile in the justice system; the vagueness of youth stepping into the courts prevents them from fully participating in the justice system. ( Vandergoot, 2006). As a result of this impreciseness youth encounter Vandergoot concludes a separate justice system allocated for youth to adhere to adolescent needs. Vandergoot discusses the Youth Criminal Justice Act a justice system devised to adhere to youth needs. She summarizes the system that benefits young offenders in contrast to adult offenders. Vandergoot concludes “the goals of the youth legislation…its major objectives are reducing the use of incarceration for young offenders…the YCJA emphasizes restraint, accountability, proportionality, and discretion… it encourages use of extra judicial measures” ( Vandergoot, 2006, p30). Vandergoot determines that the objectives of the Youth Criminal Justice Act is in the interest of youth, however, she accounts for the long term effect on adolescence as well. Vandergoot concludes the emotional and social consequences as youth interact with the system. Vandergoot claims the system leaves juveniles “debased”, suffering an “assault on their self-image”, that “block or snares in the adolescent psyche”, ultimately lowering their motivation and self-esteem which advances youth to have the “they think I’m bad I’ll show them I’m bad” mentality(Vandergoot, 2006). The mentality that derives from direct encounters with the youth justice system, often damages the adolescence completely disregarding the purpose of a youth justice system. Mary Vandergoot’s Justice for Young Offenders Their Needs, Our Responses clearly emphasizes the need
Jenkins Jennifer “On Punishment and Teen Killers.” Juvenile Justice Information Exchange, 2 August 2011. 7 May 2014.
In 1899, the nation’s first juvenile court for youth under the age of 16 was established in Chicago to provide rehabilitation rather than punishment. By 1925, following the Chicago model, all but two states had juvenile courts whose goals were to turn youth into productive citizens utilizing treatment that included warnings, probation, and training school confinement(Cox et al. 2014, p.2). Treatment lasted until the child was “cured” or turned 21. Although judges spoke with the offending children and decided upon the punishment, the lack of established rules and poor rehabilitation led to unfair treatment. In 1967 “ U.S. Supreme Court case of In re Gault held that juveniles were entitled to the same constitutional due process rights as adults, beginning a national reform in juvenile justice and the system was repaired to afford children many of the same rights that adults have in court” (Cox et al. 2014, p.4). Also, state legislatures passed laws to crack down on juvenile crime, as recently, states have attempted strike a balance in their approach to juvenile justice systems as research suggests that locking youth away in large, secure juvenile facilities is ineffective treatment towards different genders in which it doesn’t provide appropriate rehabilitation.
In all the analysis, the youth justice policy analyst has to judge the use of specific words and their interpretations conveyed and the interpretations captured by society and formalise a method which in all way tries to curb the spread of wrong interpretation. Moral panic, demonization, and politicisation are of invaluable use for the youth policy analyst as the interpretations of these words makes most of the difference in the way juvenile crime is viewed and accepted by society at large.
John P. Wright, Kären M. Hess, Christine H. Orthmann. "Juvenile Justice." Cengage Learning; 6 edition, 2012
Stokes, D. 2004. Submission to the Youth Justice Agency. [Online] Available from: www.youthreach.ie [Accessed 7th May 2012]