Boot Camps and Juvenile Crime Five years ago, responding to an increase in serious juvenile crime, the state of Maryland initiated one of the nation's largest boot camp programs for teenage criminals. The program, called the Leadership Challenge, quickly became the model for other states. But last week, after reviewing a task force report that documented instances of physical abuse at their camps, Maryland officials appeared on the verge of conceding that the current initiative was a failure. Military-style discipline may work as punishment at juvenile boot camps, but it has not been effective as rehabilitation. The Maryland experience, together with problems in other states, has already led some states to close their boot camps and even to rethink how their penal laws treat young offenders. All in all, it is a remarkable turn of events for an idea that was once greeted as a breakthrough in the fight against juvenile crime There is increasing evidence that boot camps never worked. A national study last year by the Koch Crime Institute, a public policy group in Topeka, Kan., showed that recidivism among boot camp attendees ranged from 64 percent to 75 percent, slightly higher than for youths sentenced to adult prisons. Gerald Wells, a senior research associate at the Koch Institute, said of the report, "The shocking parts are the allegations of abuse, but the more alarming parts are the failures." Research has also shown, according to Mr. Wells and other penal justice experts, that these camps were grounded in a false and unexamined assumption. "People thought boot camps shaped up a lot of servicemen during three wars," Mr. Wells added. "But just because you place someone in a highly structured environment with discipline, does not mean once they get home, and are out of that, they will be model citizens." Boot camps have their roots in the 1970's, with the advent of large, well-organized and extremely violent street gangs. In response to these groups, many states began to imprison more young people. By the 1990's, as the number of repeat juvenile offenders rose to record levels, it became clear that prison sentences were not working. In 1994, nearly 10,000 juveniles were charged with criminal offenses, an all-time high. More than 2,300 of them were charged with murder, compared with fewer than 1,000 in 1980, according to th... ... middle of paper ... ...and they also need to learn respect, self-respect, discipline and a new way of conducting themselves in society," Ms. Townsend said. "Facilities that provide structure and discipline can be run effectively and have a role in our fight after juvenile crime." Many experts disagree, citing the expense of running such programs properly. "It's a budget issue," said Doris Mackenzie, a University of Maryland criminology professor. "They are popular in the public, people feel we should treat these kids tough, and everyone can get onto the bandwagon," she said. "But when it comes to this extra expense of doing the follow-up, we find, the money is not there." In any case, juvenile crime has been falling since 1994, after an overall drop in the nation's juvenile population. This will make it highly unlikely, say political observers, that voters will agree to pay for individualized rehabilitation. Much more likely, they say, is that the 27,000 young people who once went to boot camp each year will instead be sent to prison. As bad as boot camps have proved to be, Mr. Wells added, "once you start incarcerating kids, you have lost. But unfortunately, that is where we seem headed."
This is the reason what George did in Of Mice and Men is acceptable even if not liked. After the killing of Curley’s wife, Curley was mad and was obligated in his own mind to find moral retribution that would never be settled until Lennie was suffering and, after suffering, dead. This is a astonishing example of when George was obligated as primary carer and close friend to Lennie to help him pass as quickly and painlessly as possible. In a situation where someone is suffering, like Lennie, from some condition, we are obligated to help the person pass as painlessly as possible. This is why George has necessity to help Lennie pass and why mercy killing is justifiably acceptable.
The Panacea Phenomenon project has consequences, that’s can cause problems depending on the young adult, because they may have a different way of learning speeds and behaviors, the comprehension levels are all different. Harsh discipline replaces anger and confusion among teenagers and their behavior. Parents have a big role to play in their teenager’s life, as some parent’s work all day leaving the kids being raised on their own, with nanny’s or other after care programs where kids can learn from negative influences from other kids. As studies have shown, television also has a negative influence on a teenager’s life by influencing their outlook on life with crime programs and violence. Many people have question if boot camp should be a short term program or a life style for juvenile delinquents; many have agreed that boot camp can help give them some type of structure, will help them later on life. In the United States (U.S.), the General Accounting Office (1993) reported that 26 states were operating 57 boot camps for young adults in the spring of 1992. Boot camps could hold up to a total of 8,800 recruits. The American Institute for Research (1993), appraised boot camps and found that the goal of juvenile boot camps where not made to punish offenders, but to rehabilitate them,
Nell Bernstein, the author of Burning Down The House: The End Of Juvenile Prison has a very strong opinion about juvenile facilities. He believes that children do not learn to correct their behavior by being forced into these facilities because the main root of their behavior stems from their “broken” family structures, in more cases than not. This is supported from the text when he states “In fact multiple studies have shown that putting youth behind bars not only fails to enhance public safety; it does just the opposite, driving low-level delinquents deeper into criminality and increasing the likelihood that they will end up behind bars again and again.” Bernstein really tries to push his audience to agree with his opinion; to stop putting
After Lennie makes his mistake of killing Curley's wife the other characters want to brutally kill him being led by Curley but George who realises that this is a cruel way for Lennie to die and that he can’t save Lennie he decides that Lennie must have a merciful death. The reader infers when Curley says “ ‘I know who done it,[...][It was lennie].I know he done it. [...] I’m gonna get him. I’m going for my shotgun[...]I’ll shoot him in the guts’ ” ( 96). In this quote we understand that Curley plans on killing Lennie but in a more painful way than Lennie deserves. Thus George realizes that Lennie is about to be killed in a horrific way so he intervenes and kills Lennie in a peaceful way. This shows that mercy killing is to be done over the horrific way that Curley wants to take out Lenie. Because Lennie would have a much worse death than needed and Lennie could have put up a fight, George completes a mercy killing as the safest
Today not only do we have adults committing crimes, but millions of adolescents are committing the same crimes as adults. “Statistics show more than 1.1 million youths being arrested on a daily basis, and more than 800,000 youths belonging to different gangs (Siegel &Welsh, 2014).” It is the state juvenile authorities to deal with these children and the cost is massive. So states came up with programs to put a stop to kids becoming delinquents. With doing so they hope to save money and help kids.
Juvenile delinquency is a relatively new phenomenon. For this reason, society’s reactions and solutions to the problem of delinquency are also modern developments. The United States developed the first youth court in 1899 and is now home to many new and formerly untested methods of juvenile rehabilitation and correction. One of many unique programs within the Juvenile Justice system, boot camps are institutions designed to keep delinquent juveniles out of traditional incarceration facilities and still provide a structured method of punishment and rehabilitation. Boot camps developed in the early 1990s and quickly proliferated throughout the nation. Specifically, they are “…short-term residential programs modeled after military basic training facilities” (Meade & Steiner, 2010). Designed with the goal of reducing recidivism and preventing violent offenses, boot camps target non-violent individuals under the age of 18 and typically exclude already violent offenders. In theory, boot camps apprehend juveniles while they are committing minor delinquency and prevent more-serious crime by “giving the juvenile offender a more optimistic, community oriented outlook” (Ravenell, 2002). Fundamentally, boot camps have four central purposes; rehabilitation, punishment, deterrence, and cost control (Muscar, 2008).
Although putting juveniles into institutions, for many juvenile offenders occurred in the first decades of the 1900s, extensive use of probation for juveniles existed as well. As it does today, probation gave a middle ground nature for judges connecting release and placement in an institution. By 1927, trial programs for juvenile offenders existed in approximately every state. In the 1940s and 1950s, reformers attempted to improve the conditions found in most juvenile institutions. Alternatives to institutions emerged, such as forestry and probation camps. These camps provided a prearranged setting for male juvenile offenders, while emphasizing learning and occupational skills. Though, the efficiency of these options as alternatives to incarceration was dubious since they were not obtainable to the worst offenders. Yet, these changes marked the start of formal, community-based instruction that would turn out to be more extensive in following decades.
Boot camps for teenagers have become a popular disciplinary option for parents with adolescent children. Often recommended by counselors or by state justice systems as an alternative to juvenile detention centers, the boot camps are rigid military environments. Some are wilderness camps that teach young people survival skills in a military-like setting, while others are held closer to home. Many are state-run in conjunction with the justice system but many are also privately owned and operated. The boot camps have come under intense scrutiny because of suspicions of abuse and because dozens of teenagers have died of preventable causes at the camps. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) denounced adolescent boot camps because of the problems associated with them and because boot camps are generally unregulated and unsupervised by external inspectors. Unlike the boot camps for adults who consciously enroll in the military, teenage boot camps are highly problematic and ineffective in achieving their goals.
Boot camp programs operate under a military-like routine wherein young offenders convicted of less serious, nonviolent crimes are confined for a short period of time, typically from 3 to 6 months (Parent, 1989). They are given close supervision while being exposed to a demanding regimen of strict discipline, physical training, drill, inspections, and physical labor. All the programs also incorporate some degree of military structure and discipline. They follow new strict rules that they are not use to which include the following: (1) Basic training program inmates shall not enter the rooms of other inmates.
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
Lennie, if caught, would be locked up, or even killed. George killed him because that was honestly the best option for Lennie. In that time period, people with mental disabilities were not treated right, and if they hurt someone, they would be killed without mercy. Curley said that would “...shoot ‘im the guts”(96). Shooting someone in the guts isn’t a fast way to die. Curley had every intention to let him die slowly.George offered a quick, painless death. Some might say that he might be happy in an asylum, but back then, asylums didn’t treat the people there with care and
Introduction: Recidivism or, habitual relapses into crime, has time and time again proven to be an issue among delinquents, which thereby increases the overall juvenile prison population. This issue has become more prevalent than what we realize. Unless a unit for measuring a juvenile’s risk of recidivism is enacted and used to determine a system to promote effective prevention, than the juvenile prison population will continue to increase. Our court system should not only focus on punishing the said juvenile but also enforce a program or policy that will allow for prevention of recidivism. So the question remains, how can recidivism in the juvenile prison population be prevented so that it is no longer the central cause for increased juvenile delinquency? Simply put, we must create a means of measuring juvenile’s level of risk and in turn, form an effective rehabilitation program that will decrease their risk level for future recidivism.
...hows that most of the boys and girls showed success which gives hope because there is a program out there that is working. Hubner followed three capital offenders groups and of the seventeen boys and seven girls he followed, only two didn’t make it through the school and were sent to prison, the other fifteen were released, none have been re-arrested (Hubner, 2008).
The dilemma of juvenile incarceration is a problem that thankfully has been declining, but still continues to be an ethical issue. The de-incarceration trend has coincided with a decrease in crime. It is hopeful that our nation is changing the approach to the treatment of juveniles in the criminal justice system. It means we know what to do and what is working, now just to follow through and continue the change to creating a juvenile justice system that is truly rehabilitative and gives youth tools to be able to be positive members of
...(2004). Applying the principles of effective intervention to juvenile correctional programs. Corrections Today, 66(7), 26-29. Retrieved from http://ehis.ebscohost.com.proxy-library.ashford.edu/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=4bd9d7f2-8ac5-42c6-a100-a2443eda9cbf@sessionmgr4002&vid=1&hid=4213