Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Theoretical framework on juvenile delinquency
many theories of juvenile delinquency
Theories of Juvenile crime
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Theoretical framework on juvenile delinquency
I. Summarize each of the theories posited in this chapter. In the early days of Juvenile justice a theory of criminology was developed to explain crime and why it was committed. The Classic School of Criminology developed after Cesare Bonesana Beccaria published an essay titled “On Crime and Punishment” and was followed by Jeremy Bentham’s “An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation” (Bartollas, 2014, p.51) The general idea of this school of thought is that human have the ability to make the right choice, if not we will be punished. The theory is that if juveniles know the consequences, they would choose not to commit a crime. If juveniles continue to commit crimes, then they needed to be punished not receive treatment. …show more content…
This theory is based on Sigmund Freud’s theories of juvenile behavior in relation to a specific psychological profile. This theory focuses on the immaturity of juveniles and their ability or inability to make a decision based on primitive drive, aggression and emotional experiences that can affect a juvenile 's psyche into adulthood. There are many other factors that play into Psychoanalytical Positivism such as familial conflicts, antisocial behaviors and difficulty with authority figures.(Bartollas, 2014, p.54-55) Jack Katz took this one step further stating in his book “Seduction of Crime” that many are seeking an exciting experience when committing crime. Katz states committing a crime to a juvenile establishes their place in society and the experience is sensual.(Bartollas, 2014, p.55) Another classification within the Psychoanalytical Positivism is the psychopath or sociopath personality. A complete clinical designation was written by Hervey Cleckley for a sociopathic personality. This personality is described as the undesired and spurn child, who is unable to make a trusted connection with others. Robert D. Hare took this one step further and created a personality checklist.(Bartollas, 2014, p.55) This list contained significant character traits for a sociopathic personality, such as lack of remorse, impulsivity, lack of responsibility for actions, lack of empathy, ability to manipulate others and …show more content…
Juveniles in my experience are not rational. Depending on the age of the juvenile, most do not have the cognitive faculties to make a rational decision. Berraria and Betham’s theory that punishment was meant to deter the crime and to make an example, so others would not commit the same crime does not work on all juveniles.(Bartollas, 2014, p.51) Many juveniles feel that the punishment, if caught, does not outweigh the benefit of the act. There is a primitive compulsion to push the limits. However not all juveniles have the same upbringing, role models or leadership in their lives. “Many view themselves as lawbreakers recognizing the opportunity and engage in events that lead up to the presentation of opportunities to break the law. These people are more likely to find themselves in a situation where it makes sense to consider whether the opportunity is worth pursuing”. (Schneider,
There is a great deal of controversy over the trying and sentencing of juvenile offenders today. Many will argue that because the severity of Juvenile crimes has risen, the severity of its consequences should rise; however, no matter how serious the crime is, juvenile offenders tried as adults receive far worse than they deserve. The majority of Juveniles tried as adults are hardly given any form of human rights. Adult jails are not the environment children should have to experience, especially those sentenced for misdemeanors and nonviolent crimes. There are other solutions to reducing juvenile crime. It does not take adult court to straighten out kids on the wrong path. Most children are not even able to recognize that what they had done is wrong. There may be no perfect solution to reducing juvenile crime, but there are ways far more effective than adult trying and sentencing.
It is expected that at a young age, children are taught the difference between what is right and what is wrong in all types of situations. The majority of Supreme Court Justices abolished mandatory life in prison for juveniles that commit heinous crimes, argued this with the consideration of age immaturity, impetuosity, and also negative family and home environments. These violent crimes can be defined as murder, rape, armed robbery, aggravated assault and the like depending on state law. With these monstrous acts in mind the supreme court justices argument could be proven otherwise through capability and accountability, the underdevelopment of the teenage brain and the severity of the crime. Juveniles commit heinous crimes just like adults
The youth justice system’s functions are to not only regulate the laws and ramifications of crime in the youth population, but to rehabilitate and reintroduce these juveniles into society. Of the three criminological explanations that can shape a juvenile justice system; individual, situational and social structural, social structural implications is by far the most effective ideology in shaping a modern youth justice system. Shaw and McKay (1942) emphasize in their studies that youth deviance is strongly linked to the social structure they belong to. In support of this theory, Cunneen and White (2011) state that crime is a social phenomenon that can not be directly connected to a person’s individual or personal biology. With that being said, there are a number of theories that can be best used to construct a youth justice system from a social structural angle, including; social strain or social disorganization, social bonds and differential association theories. Each of these theories, from their own theoretical angle, can provide framework and ideologies on how to better the youth justice system in a number of facets in order to target modern youths’ social structural and delinquency struggles.
The Youth Justice System carry out the processes for prosecution, conviction and punishment. Within the youth justice system, there are abounding considerations made when young people break the law. These considerations can be referred to as principles, which are the fundamental base of something (Oxford Dictionary, 2016), in this case, the criminal justice system. The principles that are considered include public protection, risk assessment, punishment, rehabilitation, justice and welfare. The focal point of this essay will be to determine whether justice or welfare should take precedence when providing a response to the law breaking of children and young people.
There are many issues with crime and violence in the United States, but very few are more controversial than the issue of juveniles in crime. How are juveniles getting involved in crime? What is causing America’s youth to do things that their parents should’ve instilled as morally wrong? What are ways to control and possibly eliminate these issues that affect the way we live? For the past century, criminologists have been studying juvenile related crime and a few theories have come up. These theories have, in the mid to late 20th century, been shaped into models. There are three main models dealing with juvenile crime and violence that will be gone over in pages to follow of this paper: Noninterventionist Model, Rehabilitation Model, and Crime Control Model. In this paper, the reader will see what each model discusses, and how they apply to today’s youth. At the end each model’s description, the reader will learn what I personally think about how the specific model would work. Being a recently turned 20 year-old, I feel I can give an accurate view of how, or if, the crime model would work. Living in both extremely rural(Mokane Missouri), and very urban(St Louis) has taught me a great deal about what really goes on in a juvenile’s head, and what sorts of actions would truly help to decrease crime rates among juveniles. I will give examples from the readings of chapter 13 of Making Sense of Criminal Justice: Policies and Practices, and I’ll conclude with my opinion of which model I believe works best to cope with juvenile crime.
Life course criminology theory arose when Robert Sampson and John Laub discovered an earlier study on Unraveling Juvenile Delinquency (1950). Unraveling Juvenile Delinquency was a research
As discussed in depth, there are all types of crimes that are committed by young offenders these days and the offenders possess a number of different characteristics. There have been many theoretical crime explanations that have been formed over the years that attempt to explain the reasoning behind the question of why certain individuals, both young and old, are more prone to commit crimes. The discussion of punishment practices are also important because it displays the many approaches that have been taken to ensure that juvenile delinquents are being treated fairly, but punished and rehabilitated all simultaneously. Many methods fall under this kind of approach referred to as the restorative justice approach such as neighborhood conference committees, victim impact panels, sentencing circles, and community impact panels which all attempt to rehabilitate the offender, but also to involve members of society including the victims/survivors of crimes (Siegel, 2009). It is believed and hoped with the continuation of processes, practices, and programs in place such as these that juvenile crime will eventually decrease bringing more order to our society as a whole. Overall, this paper strives to bring awareness to juvenile delinquency by
Federal standards define any young offender under the age of eighteen who commits a crime is define as a juvenile delinquent. And the important differences between adults and young people, that a one-size fits all method is not desirable and will not make the situation better. Our justice system also accomplishes an important symbolic function by establishing principles of behavior. It formally defines the right and wrong for citizens and frees them from the responsibility of taking vengeance, thus avoiding the escalation of feuds within communities. The system protects the rights of free citizens by honoring the belief that individual freedom should not be denied without good cause.
As minors commit violent crimes without being held accountable, they can grow up to be real criminals and they can be very dangerous. Without a solid foundation of what is right and wrong, these minors will grow up believing that their actions are the norm. For this reason, minors need to be held accountable. They need to be taught that they cannot get away with their crimes. In 2007, courts with juvenile jurisdiction handled an estimated 1.7 million delinquency cases. Delinquency cases include vandalism, shoplifting, robbery, and murder. These are just some of the crimes minors can commit. This was up by forty-four percent from 1985. If a minor grows up believing that crime is acceptable, they will repeat the pattern. Without interrupting the pattern and making them accountable, these minors will always have a twisted sense of right and wrong. A sense of what is right and wrong is important and can be learned at any age. Minors learn very young, what...
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
Juveniles are not mature enough or developed psychologically, and, therefore, do not consider the consequences of their actions. In the article, “Startling Finds on Teenage Brains” by Thompson,
In the second article “Cruel Punishment for Juveniles” the authors hold a different view from Linda J. Collier. Treating juveniles as adults only helps society to forget that they are really still kids. They feel that subjecting children to adult punishment is cruel and unusual. They think, “Most youthful wrong-doers do not become adult criminals. There are turning points----quality education, well paid work, stable marriage------ that helps young offenders become law-abiding adults.” (Pg. 637) Certain community youth programs that deal with kids have shown to work in dealing with juveniles.
Youth justice is a complex concern. There are many different ways to approach it — and just like anything else, everyone believes that their model is the most effective for reducing crime. Q’oranka Kilcher, an American actor once said “[…] it’s important for us as a society to remember that the youth within juvenile justice systems are, most of the time, youths who simply haven 't had the right mentors and supporters around them - because of circumstances beyond their control.” This seems fair. Youth may not be able to control their circumstances, but should they be responsible for their own actions and be punished? Or, should they be supported and encouraged in order to get rehabilitated? Different opinions influence different models. Four
Juvenile delinquency is one of the major social issues in the United States today. Juvenile delinquency, also known as juvenile offending, is when “a violation of the law committed by a juvenile and not punishable by death or life imprisonment” (Merriam-webster.com). Although we have one justice system in America, the juvenile system differs from the adult juvenile system. Most juvenile delinquents range from as low as the age of seven to the age of seventeen. Once the delinquent or anyone turns the age of eighteen, they are considered an adult. Therefore, they are tried as an adult, in the justice system. There are many different reasons why a child would commit crime, such as mental and physical factors, home conditions, neighborhood environment and school conditions. In addition, there are a variety of effects that juvenile justice systems can either bad effects or good effects. Finally there are many different solutions that can reduce juvenile delinquency. As a result, juvenile delinquency is a major issue and the likeliness of it can be reduced. In order to reduce juvenile delinquency there has to be an understanding of the causes and the effects.
There are many theories that attempt to explain the phenomenon of juvenile delinquency and the factors that cause it. There is, and has been, a great amount of young people who engage in delinquent behavior throughout the nation and worldwide. What exactly is the catalyst that incites these young people to commit crime and stray from the ethical norm established in society? Are all youth susceptible to the temptation of deviant behavior or is it just some? Theories suggest different possible etiologies, which include: social factors, biological factors, psychological factors and physiological factors, among other things that may mold a child into a juvenile delinquent.