The treatment and service provided should lead to a change in the behaviour of the offender allowing them to continue a crime free life after their release. A positive factor of rehabilitation is the lower re-offending rate, compared to incarceration without rehabilitation. Therefore, rehabilitation will be more likely to deter future misconduct since it provides the offenders with other alternatives to crime and further might help them change their attitudes and behaviours allowing them to reintegrate better into society. However a negative factor of rehabilitation could be the costs of implementing rehabilitation programs within the correctional institutions. Many institutions can not afford to offer these programs (Allen, et al., 2015).
If a person constantly hears themselves being described as a criminal then they will behave in that manner to fulfill that label. Intervention at an early stage can help have been proven to be encouraging to this approach (Farrington, 2012). The aftercare programs in this new system are different. The focus in these programs are centered on gaining trust, building relationships, and having rehabilitating programs available. These new elements will help make the juvenile justice more restorative and rehabilitating to offenders who still have their entire life in front of them.
If however, these communities are included in the community development programmes and receive proper representation from local and central government, then the attitude and mindset of these individuals can change. Incarceration serves as a deterrent to crime, however, incarceration alone cannot effectively solve crime. Therefore, the justice system needs to incorporate supplementary programmes to better help in the rehabilitation of inmates. These programmes should seek to tackle the root of the problem so as to lower the chances of that individual re-offending. For example, if an individual committed an offense while under the influence of drugs, enrolling that individual in a drug rehabilitation programme can reduce that individual's chances of re-offending.
The reasons to decrease the practice of trying juveniles as adults include: the affect of prisonization; successful rehabilitative programs; and an overall decrease in juvenile offending. Delinquent adolescents can be a positive mark on the future of the United States, or they can be the habitual life-offender of tomorrow; thus, they need proper care and guidance to ensure they do not become the latter. The juvenile justice system represents, perhaps, the one time when society can intervene positively in the life of an individual whose run astray. Protecting society, no doubt, is a reverent goal, requiring the utmost attention-to-detail; however, at what cost should this goal be achieved? Incarcerating youth offenders—some as young as fifteen years of age—in adult prisons proves dangerous to the potential growth and level of rehabilitative capacity for these persons.
In answering the question, I will mention both structural and practical things that will help decrease delinquency in juvenile justice system as a part of criminal justice system in general. I recommend that local and state governments invest in school-based programs and after school programs as well as other evidence-based risk-targeted programs to reduce the problem. The rationale of the use of special program stems from the routine activity theory (Cohen and Felson, 1979). According the theory crime occurs when a suitable target, a motivated offender, and the lack of guardian converge in time and space. Also, situations they encounter in their daily lives influence their victimization chances.
This program served vulnerable—mostly white, poor, young, and m... ... middle of paper ... ...programs. The last priority in crime prevention is to invest time and attention in youths who have already begun a serious delinquent ‘career’. All of the programs we’ve considered up to now were designed to keep young people out of trouble in the first place. But it is also critically important to halt the downward slide of youths who are already in trouble. Hence, keeping troubled youth from becoming ‘chronic’ offenders by addressing, early on, whatever got them into trouble in the first place should be crucial part of any serious preventive strategy against crime.
This assessment would determine what level and type of supervision given to the young offender if given a custodial sentence and also the judge would put inconsideration the result the forensic psychologist gives as a result from the score the offender gets. Furthermore it’s used to evaluate their treatment and programmes they will get in order to reduce re offending (Wilson E and Hinks S, 2011). If an individual get a low score on their likely hood of them reoffending the judge might feel inclined to give them a lighter sentence such as community service because giving them a custodial sentence would increase their chance of reoffending because of the acquaintances they would have with offenders who were given a higher score and level of criminal activity significantly increases. In order to find out if a young offender is going reoffend there are two categories of risk factors that need to be put into consideration and they are static and dynamic. The section of risk factors that fall into the category of static risk is their historical which looks at whether there was an onset of violence from a young age and individual factors that increase risk and these are the gender of offender or dispositional in nature situational and other protectiv... ... middle of paper ... ...from the risk assessments.
Trying teens as adults removes them from the streets and allows others to feel a sense of security. When juveniles are given lenient sentences, it strengthens their belief that they can get away with a crime. Although, this perceived lack of accountability in the juvenile justice system is inaccurate. In fact, “ Since 1998, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) has helped States and communities implement accountability-based programs through the Juvenile Accountability Block Grants ( JABG) program” (“Juvenile Accountability Block Grants Program”). The JABG is a collection of programs targeted towards both the offender and the juvenile justice system to increase accountability for
Hobbs, Beccaria, and Bentham provided the foundation for modern deterrence theory in criminology (Mutchnick, Martin, Austin 2009). Those who support Deterrence Theory are of the opinion that the degree of punishment affects an individual’s choice to obey or violate the law. Beccaria held the belief that the certainty of punishment, even if it is mild in application, would deter individuals from committing crimes more so than the fear of a more severe punishment that is combined with the possibility of impunity. (Mutchnick,et al. 2009).
Under general deterrence, publicity is a major part of deterrence. Crime and their punishments being showing in the media or being told person to person can be used to deter crime. Specific deterrence is punishment to the individual to stop that individual from committing other crimes in the future. This type of deterrence is used to teach the individual a lesson whatever action that participated in. Specific deterrence is founded on a principle called hedonistic calculus meaning, “an assumption that human nature leads people to pursue pleasure and avoid pain” (Brown, Esbensen, & Geis, 2010, p 155).