Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Restorative justice
Youth crime introduction
Youth crime introduction
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Restorative justice
When you think of the United States criminal justice system, two words come to mind: retribution and punitive. However on the other side of the spectrum is Australia. Australia which is very well known for its restorative criminal justice program has become the top country in regards to what a lot of people think the United States criminal justice system should become more like. Especially in regards to how juvenile offenders are treated in both countries. By looking at Australia’s restorative justice program in regards to juvenile offenders, maybe there can be a balance found between the United States punitive criminal justice system and Australia’s restorative justice program when looking at juvenile offenders. Restorative justice hasn’t …show more content…
Even though the focus throughout history in the United States has always been back and forth between rehabbing these offenders and punishing them, its focus seemed to be chosen on whether or not juvenile delinquency is considered a social problem during the time period or not. This differences did not emerge in Australia which makes the United States different in regards to juvenile offenders from the beginning of the country’s history. The earliest juvenile institution in the United States was the House of Refugees. This House was formed to put juvenile offenders to work, but it was based off of a culture view that juveniles who were in poverty are seen as potential offenders. However it was reformed when childhood was looked at as innocents in need of protection and treatment instead of miniature adults. After the House of Refugees was dismantled in the 1890s. The Juvenile Court Act in Illinois passed in 1899 which created the first juvenile court and stated that the welfare of the children is imperative. (Artello, Muschert, & Spencer, 2015) By recognizing that childhood was different from adulthood, the juvenile courts focused on rehabilitation for those offenders and the discovery that adolescence
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
A growing number of probation officers, judges, prosecutors as well as other juvenile professionals are advocating for a juvenile justice system which is greatly based on restorative justice. These groups of people have been frustrated by the policy uncertainty between retribution and treatment as well as unrealistic and unclear public expectations. As a primary mission, the balanced approach or policy allows juvenile justice systems together with its agencies to improve in their capacity of protecting the community and ensuring accountability of the system and the offenders . It enables the youths to become productive and competent citizens. This guiding philosophical framework for this policy is restorative justice as it promotes the maximum involvement of the community, victim, and the offender in the justice process. Restorative justice also presents a viable alternative to sanctions as well as interventions that are based on traditional or retributive treatment assumptions. In the policy proposal for restorative justice, the balanced approach mission assists juvenile justice system in becoming more responsive to the needs of the community, victims, and the offenders . Therefore, this paper considers how restorative justice reduces referrals of juveniles to criminal and juvenile justice systems and gives a proposal on the implementation of restorative justice in the community together with a number of recommendations. For instance, preliminary research reveals that application of restorative justice in schools significantly reduces school expulsions, suspensions, and referrals to the criminal justice systems. Restorative justice programs are an alternative for zero-tolerance policies for juveniles or youths .
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
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.
Lorraine Stutzman Amstutz states how schools that claim they are following restorative approaches through their policies in discipline are not necessarily restorative, but have enough flexibility to allow a restorative response.
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 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).
Throughout the years there has always been one question, what will we do with the juveniles when they entire the justice system? Here is the answer to that, the first juvenile court in the United States was established in Chicago in 1899 over 100 years ago. There have been significant modifications made to the juvenile court system since the late 1960’s due to Supreme Court decisions, federal legislation, and changes in the state legislation. Up until these changes were made, children who broke the law were treated the same as adult criminals. Children as young as seven years old who were accused of wrongdoing were imprisoned with adults. “In the early nineteenth century, the idea of reforming youth offenders took root in the United States & The House of Refuge in New York, which opened in 1824, was the first juvenile house of reform in the United States. This was the first attempt to house juvenile offenders in a separate facility and other States, like Maryland, would soon follow suit” ("History of the Juvenile Justice System," n.d.).
The concept of restorative justice became a game-changer in juvenile justice system. Through the course of time, professionals explored every possible methods and approaches that could positively affect the children without the expense of harming their future and wellbeing. The idea of restorative justice is “administer justice that focuses or repairing the harm done to the victim and the community. (Save the Children-UK, 2005)” The four guiding principles are to: (1) Repair and restore the balance within the community. (2) restitution for the victim. (3) Ensure that the offender understand and take responsibility. (4) Help the offender to change and improve. In South Africa, this is practiced in their community throughout
“Restorative justice is an approach to crime and other wrongdoings that focuses on repairing harm and encouraging responsibility and involvement of the parties impacted by the wrong.” This quote comes from a leading restorative justice scholar named Howard Zehr. The process of restorative justice necessitates a shift in responsibility for addressing crime. In a restorative justice process, the citizens who have been affected by a crime must take an active role in addressing that crime. Although law professionals may have secondary roles in facilitating the restorative justice process, it is the citizens who must take up the majority of the responsibility in healing the pains caused by crime. Restorative justice is a very broad subject and has many other topics inside of it. The main goal of the restorative justice system is to focus on the needs of the victims, the offenders, and the community, and focus
Over the years many laws and policies have been created and altered. As a result many activities have become illegal. With so many laws in place now, juvenile crime is also on the rise. More and more juveniles are being sent to prison than ever before. The goal of the juvenile justice system was to rehabilitate but now it is more focused on punishment. However, many rehabilitation programs are still in place to help delinquent juveniles get back on the path to becoming successful productive members of society. One program that comes to mind is the restorative justice program.
Walgrave, Lode. Restorative justice for juveniles: potentialities, risks and problms for research : a selection of papers presented at the international conference Leuven, May 12-14, 1997. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1998.
Presently, juvenile justice is widely acknowledged as being in a state of flux in the United States. The early 1990s saw the most substantial rise in violent crime committed by juveniles ever experienced in this country. On the heels of decades of skepticism about the effectiveness of parens patriae (the state as parent), this rise was the "proof" for many "experts" who believe that the juvenile justice system should be abolished. These skeptics reason that one criminal court could still have some latitude when sentencing younger offenders, but that kids are now committing adult crimes, so it is time to treat them as adults.
Juvenile crime is a term around the world that is difficult to pinpoint and although there are several definitions many fail to be concrete. There are many factors that play into sentencing juveniles or minors upon a crime committed. How old are they? Can they mentally form criminal intent? Are they old enough to no longer be treated as children? Some people would argue that a criminal is just that, regardless of age. Research on the other hand shows that juveniles have underdeveloped brains who at times have difficulty rationalizing decisions and weighing out consequences. It is important that these issues are addressed because of the implications this has on not only the juveniles but the community around them. These juveniles have the opportunity to be molded into functioning members of society, yet lack the necessary resources to do so. This occurs due to the negative connotation that comes with juvenile delinquents and their behaviors. Every country has their own ways of dealing with crime, and in particular juvenile delinquency, in this piece there will be an in depth analysis of the United States juvenile justice system and England’s juvenile justice system. Although there are many similarities between both developed countries England’s approach to juvenile justice is more effective long term by its implementation of rehabilitative and restorative programs. In return tackling the problem of high recidivism rates and reintegration into society.
When Mary Catherine Parris was told that I would be talking to her about restorative justice, her response was, “Is that a real thing?” (personal communication, September 23, 2015). Through this assignment I realized that restorative justice is not talked about within the criminal justice system. For both of the individuals I spoke with, the idea of restorative justice seemed like a joke. In trying to persuade them both that restorative justice is a real thing, I was met with very similar beliefs and comments from both individuals. They both believed that restorative justice would not work and believed that some aspects of the approach were completely useless (M. C. Parris, & R. Clemones, personal communication, September 23, 2015). The responses