More handpicked essays just for you.
The five periods of juvenile justice history
Essays on the juvenile justice system
Essays on the juvenile justice system
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The history of the juvenile system started many years ago, before any of us within present society were born. The juvenile justice system is defined as, “A system to handle juveniles separate from the adult offenders, based on the concept of parens patriae, which was used as the basis for giving the court the authority to take over supervision of children when their parents failed to provide care and guidance.” (Seiter) The word parens patriae means “parents of the nation,” established in 1601 to allow officials to take charge of delinquent children and place them in poorhouses or orphanages to gain control of them; in the more modern times, this doctrine was expanded as the basis for juvenile court and correctional systems to take responsibility
The Juvenile Court Period (1899-1960). “The juvenile justice system was not created until Illinois passed the Juvenile Court Act, the first court was established in cook County (Chicago) in 1899. The use of a separate juvenile court, initiated in Cook County, proved to be popular, and by 1925 all but two states had established juvenile courts or probation departments separate from their adult systems.” (Seiter) This was to be done for the best interest and well-being for juveniles and their environment by separating them from adult offenders. This is done because juveniles are not adults and therefore they should not be housed with them in an institution. The Juvenile Rights Period (1960-1980). This was a period of time of many changes for juvenile justice such as; “Due Process; Kent vs U.S. (1966)-Waiver Requirements for transfer, In re Gault (1967) Right to Counsel, Right against self-incrimination, Right to confront witness. In re Winship: “Beyond a reasonable doubt” required for conviction in criminal cases, Breed vs Jones: Double
Juvenile Justice
The main focus of the period was, “Shift from medical (treatment) model to justice model and “get tough” attitude; “best interests” of society gained ascendancy over those youths; Supreme Court approves of preventive detention for youths-Schall decision (1984); emphasis on deterrence and just deserts.” (Hess, Orthmann and Wright) As times have changed, so has the actions and crimes of juveniles. Juveniles are presently doing more drugs, using alcohol, as well as school shootings and other crimes within society. In the case of Schall vs Martin (1984), “states have the right to place juveniles in preventive detention to protect society when the juvenile is dangerous.” (doctor.com) When a juvenile is to be dangerous for a crime that they have committed, it is best that they are to be detained within a juvenile facility until their time of trial, to face the crime that they were to commit. The period that I think was the most influential to the evolution of the juvenile justice system is, The Crime Control Period (1980-
Juvenile Justice History
Present). I state this because, all five periods of juvenile justice history are important and each has served as a good and basic foundation from one period to the next. Each period is to be a learning process that can be used to what was to work and what was to fail. Within todays’ society, there are to be more programs and laws that are to be available to help troubled juveniles. This
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
Juvenile Justice Reforms in the United States. (n.d.). Retrieved September 20, 2011, from Juvenile Transfer to Criminal Courts: http://www.ojjdp.gov
Bartollas, Clemens and Miller, Stuart J. (2014). Juvenile justice in america (7 ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, 58-60.
Vito, Gennaro F., and Clifford E. Simonsen. Juvenile justice today. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/Prentice Hall, 2004. Print.
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 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.
The rehabilitation model and parens patriae failed to prevent delinquency, and so the courts began to shift their methods to suit the times. The Supreme Court handed down a series of decisions in the 1960s and 1970s providing due process rights to juveniles. Some of the rights involved included right to counsel, a right to confront witnesses, and a notice of charges. Congress also took action during this time period, passing the JJDP Act in 1974. This law granted funding to juvenile justice programs, and enforced deinstitutionalization of status offenders and non-offenders, mandating that delinquents not be held with adult
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 juveniles 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 to understand their actions or be provided a second chance.
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.
The book “No Matter How Loud I Shout” written by Edward Humes, looks at numerous major conflicts within the juvenile court system. There is a need for the juvenile system to rehabilitate the children away from their lives of crime, but it also needs to protect the public from the most violent and dangerous of its juveniles, causing one primary conflict. Further conflict arises with how the court is able to administer proper treatment or punishment and the rights of the child too due process. The final key issue is between those that call for a complete overhaul of the system, and the others who think it should just be taken apart. On both sides there is strong reasoning that supports each of their views, causing a lot of debate about the juvenile court system.
The goals of juvenile corrections are too deter, rehabilitate and reintegrate, prevent, punish and reattribute, as well as isolate and control youth offenders and offenses. Each different goal comes with its own challenges. The goal of deterrence has its limits; because rules and former sanctions, as well anti-criminal modeling and reinforcement are met with young rebellious minds. Traditional counseling and diversion which are integral aspects of community corrections can sometimes be ineffective, and studies have shown that sometimes a natural self intervention can take place as the youth grows older; resulting in the youth outgrowing delinquency.
Youth and juvenile crime is a common and serious issue in current society, and people, especially parents and educators, are pretty worried about the trend of this problem. According to Bala and Roberts, around 17% of criminals were youths, compared to 8% of Canadian population ranging between 12 to 18 years of age between 2003 and 2004 (2006, p37). As a big federal country, Canada has taken a series of actions since 1908. So far, there are three justice acts in the history of Canadian juvenile justice system, the 1908 Juvenile Delinquents Act, the 1982 Young Offenders Act, and the 2003 Youth Criminal Justice Act. In Canada, the judicial system and the principle of these laws have been debated for a long time. This paper will discuss how these three laws were defined and why one was replaced by another.
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.
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.
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…).