Juvenile Boot Camps
Juvenile boot camps have been emerging more and more over the United
States throughout the most recent years. At the rate they keep
appearing, they seem as though they are here to stay. However, that
might not be the truth quite yet. Several groups believe that they
appear to be efficient and supportive to the youth at question. But
the public foresees boot camps as senseless and inadequate. Juvenile
boot camps do not always produce the results they are perceived to.
Primarily, they are not reducing the amount of crime that is intended.
Subsequently, these boot camps are wasting taxpayer’s money while
leading us to believe they are of great value to society. Last, the
ending result isn’t as outstanding as it should be.
Juvenile boot camps are not reducing the amount of crime that is
needed. “Boot camps fail to provide nurturing or promote independence,
in addition boot camps ignore teenagers desire for fairness and their
resistance to imposed structure” (Beyer 90). A person is a person
whether it is a teen or an adult, and every person is entitled to
fairness and their independence. With these boot camp enforcements,
teens are purposely rejecting their problems causing it to become a
bigger setback than an improvement. Statistics show that policies and
programs such as the strengthening and supporting of family stability
and after-school programs are much more reasonable options than boot
camps. (93). If actions were taken based upon the statistics, the
crime rate would show a notable decrease. Se...
... middle of paper ...
...e reinforcement and continual
positive out comes along with a positive environment tend to create
greater independent youths.
Even though youth boot camps now seem to be a growing and popular
solution to youth crime, they may not be the best long-term or cost
efficient solution. As of today, there are many other programs that
can be utilized to solve this growing problem of youth crime. Many of
these other programs deal with helping youths to clean up their acts
and teach them to be more responsible adults as well as training them
for a future of a crime free life. These programs help to stop the
problem before it may begin. First and foremost, boot camps do not
lessen the youth crime rate. Next, they have become more costly as
time goes by and last; teens tend to show no improvement after
finishing the program.
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.
Rather than robbing them of the chance to grow and become better human beings, though, the government has the ultimate responsibility to help transform these troubled youths into upstanding citizens—even if it is within the walls of a prison rather than a classroom or office building. Executing minors does nothing but remind us of America’s stubbornness to do what may take time but in the end is right.
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).
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
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.
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,
Since their beginning in 1983 in Georgia, boot camps have spread to half the States and have gained wide popular appeal for their "get tough" policies. Proponents of boot camps cite their potential for rehabilitating offenders and curbing future criminal behavior. Opponents caution that more information is needed on a variety of issues including costs and the potential for abuse of power. Research into boot camps began with a 1988 study of Louisiana's boot camp program and continued with a multi-site evaluation in 1989 (Cowels, 1995). Fueled primarily by growth in the number of offenders incarcerated during the past decade and changing views of the role of punishment and treatment in the correctional system. Shock incarceration programs, or "boot camps" as they have been more recently called, have emerged as an increasingly popular alternative sanction for nonviolent crimes.
Harassment, reckless endangerment, and burglary are all juvenile offenses. These juvenile offenses almost always stay on the juvenile’s criminal record, and the offenses displayed on a juvenile’s criminal record may cause employers, educators, and other authority figures to think less of the juvenile offender. As a viewer can see, this one mistake or lapse in judgment can ruin the juvenile offenders chance to further their success in life. For example, juvenile offenders may not obtain the dream job that they have always wanted, get into the college that they have always wanted to, or be eligible for a scholarship whether athletic or academic. However, there is a loophole in the juvenile justice system called teen courts. Teen courts give first-time offenders and some re-offenders a second chance because the offense (s) do not go on their criminal record, and their peers get to decide what sanctions the juvenile offender receives or performs. The big question that I am going to discuss throughout this essay is do juvenile offenders who appear before teen courts recidivate?
The quagmire of placing juveniles in adult facilities is the risk factors juveniles may experience while incarcerated. Being that juveniles are young and smaller to the adult offenders, they may be seen as a prey or easy target for rape, assault, mental issues which eventually leads to suicide. We must keep in mind that juveniles are youth meaning they are still a child, not an adult and should not be exposed to adult incarceration environment. Although it is cost saving to place juveniles and adults under one facility, it is unethical because they are not built and yet mentally ready and prepared to experience adult facilities. Alternative strategies are available to assist juvenile detainees such as healthcare, education, recreation, and work experience. The Juvenile Court Act of 1899 gave leniency to youth under the age of 16. Placing youth detainees with adult offenders will result in the reduction of rehabilitation services for youth, while increasing the rate of being a victim as a potential prey o...
Girls become delinquent for many different reasons then boys based on biological, social and cultural differences in each gender. From hormones and brain development, to the child’s upbringing by families, to the way girls are expected to act in public compared to boys; a different set of circumstances exists for the reasons why girls become delinquent compared to boys. Siegel, (2007, p.174) explains this by stating. “There are indications that gender differences in socialization and development do exist and that they may have an effect on juvenile offending patterns.”
Rehabilitative treatment has not always been seen as a right for juveniles. It hasn’t even been regarded as the best possible course of action for dealing with juveniles. This paper will explore the history of the juvenile system, define what rehabilitation is, and explore the balance between the benefits of rehabilitation and the interest of public safety.
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.
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.
The death penalty is punishment by execution, state-sanctioned and administered by the government in the United States. The death penalty can actually come in several different forms, including lethal injection, electrocution, lethal gas, firing squad, and hanging. However, the most commonly used in the United States is lethal injection (Death Penalty Information Center, 2016). This form of punishment was actually greatly influenced by Great Britain back in the 17th century, and the first execution of a juvenile offender, Thomas Graunger of Plymouth Colony, Massachusetts, occurred in 1642 (Death Penalty Information Center, 2016). The death penalty for juveniles have many reasons that are discussed regarding why the death penalty should not
Throughout the years kids have been committing terrible crimes that are just as bad as the crimes an adult would commit, sometimes even worse. These children have received life sentences with the possibility of no parole along with counseling and even rehabilitation. Many believe that putting an adolescent in jail with a life sentences is a cruel and unfair punishment. In the past couple of years the law has changed to those under 18 will not be sent to jail, only to a rehabilitation center or juvenile hall for no more than a year. People believe that is much more suitable for a teenager rather than keeping them locked away in jail for more than what they’ve lived.