History of Juvenile Justice
*created in the late 1800’s to reform U.S. policies regarding youthful offenders
*early on children were treated as chattels of adults without any rights
*if found guilty they were sentenced just as adults were
*New York City House of Refuge, the first youth prison opened in 1825
*during the 1800’s the juvenile justice system exercised its authority within a “parens patriae” which meant state as parent or guardian role. The state assumed responsibility of parenting the children until they begin to show changes
*Many refuge homes were similar to orphanages
*the refuge houses provided education, physical exercise, and supervision
*Illinois adopted the first juvenile code in 1899 and established the country’s first juvenile court
*prior to 1900 at least ten children under the age of fourteen had been executed
*Illinois law focused on the offender’s character rather than the offense
*the mission of juvenile courts was to make the youth productive citizens
*in the 1920’s professional and mental health services available through the courts were expanded
*Kent vs. U.S.(1966) was the first case requiring a special hearing before any transfers to adult court
*In re Gault(1967) case that determined the constitution requires separate juvenile justice system with certain standard procedures and protections
*by 1970’s a major conservative reform movement emphasized deterrence and punishment. Conservatives wanted vigorous prosecution of serious and violent offenders
*Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (1974) started to decriminalize, deinstitutionalize, and eliminate court authority over status offenders. They wanted to separate juvenile offenders from adult offenders believing that they were learning criminal behavior from the adults.
The Juvenile Justice system, since its conception over a century ago, has been one at conflict with itself. Originally conceived as a fatherly entity intervening into the lives of the troubled urban youths, it has since been transformed into a rigid and adversarial arena restrained by the demands of personal liberty and due process. The nature of a juvenile's experience within the juvenile justice system has come almost full circle from being treated as an adult, then as an unaccountable child, now almost as an adult once more.
The focus of the juvenile justice system is to rehabilitate juvenile offenders, rather than to imprison and punish like the systems adult counterpart. According to Caldwell (1961) the juvenile justice system is based on the principle that youth are developmentally and fundamentally different from adults. This has lead to the development of a separate justice system for juveniles that was initially designed to assist troubled juveniles providing them with protection, treatment, and guidance. When performing as it is designed and up to the initial intentions, the juvenile court balances rehabilitation (treatment) of the offender with suitable sanctions when necessary such as incarceration. According to Mack (1909) the focus of the juvenile justice system has shifted from “how can we help the child”, “why did the child commit the crime” to “was the crime committed”. According to Griffin (2008) in some cases juveniles may be required to be “transferred” to adult court. The prerequisites for transfer to adult court are the duty to protect the public from violent youths, serious crime, and the lack of rehabilitation chance from the juvenile court. According to Flesch (2004) many jurisdictions handle the issue of serious juvenile crime by charging juveniles as adults. Charging a juvenile as an adult is done by a method which is called waiver to adult court. This waiver allows adult criminal court to have the power to exercise jurisdiction over juveniles and handle the juvenile’s case as an adult’s case would be tried. According to Flesch (2004) a juvenile is both tried and if convicted of the crime the juvenile will be sentenced as an adult when his or her case is waived from the juvenile court. Waiver to adult court initially was viewe...
Remy, Richard C., Gary E. Clayton, and John J. Patrick. "Supreme Court Cases." Civics Today. Columbus, Ohio: Glencoe, 2008. 796. Print.
Juvenile Justice Reforms in the United States. (n.d.). Retrieved September 20, 2011, from Juvenile Transfer to Criminal Courts: http://www.ojjdp.gov
The Progressive Era ignited one’s greater desire for family unity however, teenager delinquency was increasing. Judge Benjamin Barr Lindsey is noted for one’s contribution to the American family with the creative plan of Juvenile Court Systems which was formed in 1901(Campbell, 1978). Judge Lindsey wanted to insure that minors would not be punished through adult judicial systems. The Juvenile Court Systems currently offers more services than originally planned. Juvenile Court provides services which protects neglected and abused minors and also is responsible for collecting child support payments.
In 1899, the juvenile justice court system began in the United States in the state of Illinois. The focus was intended to improve the welfare and rehabilitation of youth incarcerated in juvenile justice system. The court mainly was focused on the rehabilitation of the youths rather than punishing them being that they still have immature ways and still growing. Specialized detention centers, youth centers, and training schools were created to treat delinquent youth apart from adult offenders in adult facilities. “Of these, approximately 14,500 are housed in adult facilities. The largest proportion, approximately 9,100 youth, are housed in local jails, and some 5,400 youth are housed in adult prisons” (Austin, 2000).
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.
A movement has started in our country to renovate the juvenile justice system. This movement wants to erase any differences between young offenders and adult criminals. Almost all fifty states have changed their juvenile justice laws, allowing more youths to be tried as adults...
Juvenile Courts in the United States find their origins in English custom and law. As early as the 16th century, poor laws and chancery courts were meant to protect minors, either through allowing the government to take custody, or protect their property rights respectively. These actions were justified by the legal philosophy parens patriae, which holds that the government is the true guardian of the needy and infirm, including dependent children, which gives the government authority to act on behalf of a child. This philosophy was the original guiding principle that the juvenile system held at the turn of the 20th century, although the juvenile system began to shift back towards crime control and the adult system during the late 20th century.
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.
The Illinois Juvenile Court Act of 1899 was the first juvenile court established in the United States (Locked Up…). The juvenile court was created to handle the offenders on the basis on their rather than their crime. In the 1980’s and 90’s many states passed laws to try teens as adults (Should Juveniles…). The court system served to the minors under the age of sixteen. The courts didn’t typically support disciplinary actions. The people in charge did everything in their power to not have the victim spend time in a juvenile detention center or better yet prison. Remedial sentences were the most common types of discipline (Locked Up…).
Stevens J, Opinion of the Court, Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U.S. 844 (1997) [1]
Humes, Edward. No Matter How Loud I Shout: A Year in the Life of Juvenile Court. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996.
The historical development of the juvenile justice system in the United States is one that is focused on forming and separating trying juveniles from adult counterparts. One of the most important aspects is focusing on ensuring that there is a level of fairness and equality with respect to the cognitive abilities and processes of juvenile as it relates to committing crime. Some of the most important case legislation that would strengthen the argument in regard to the development of the juvenile justice system is related to the reform of the justice system during the turn of the 19th century. Many juveniles were unfortunately caught in the crosshairs of being tried as adults and ultimately receiving punishments not in line with their ability
America is no stranger for juveniles being tried as adults. The first known case being in 1642; Thomas Granger, 16, who had sex with a mare, cow and some goats was hanged in Plymouth Colony, Massachusetts.1 He was America's first documented execution of a child offender and the debut of the juvenile death penalty.1 The youngest girl to be executed was 12-year-old Hannah Ocuish who was hanged for killing a 6-year-old white child in 1786.1 Finally, James Echols, was the last execution in 1964 who was executed for rape two years later at the age of 19.1