In Society, many are concerned about the high percentage of crimes that are committed, we tend to turn immediately to our youth thinking that if we somehow manage to keep youth under control we will deter crimes. As discuss in chapter 9 and the OJJPD reports, the juvenile justice system had determined that by waiving and transferring minors who commit crimes to criminal courts to be tried and punished like an adult, there would be a decrease on violent crimes. On the other hand, there are many intake alternatives and diversion programs that can be considered instead of crowding up the criminal courts with juveniles delinquents. Research have point out various types of studies, which makes a comparison of the effects on youth who were transferred to adult criminal court with those who were retained in juvenile justice system. In the processes, youth were matched with their age, gender, race, and prior offense history through automated data systems. By doing so, it concluded that it was more likely to see an increase recidivism in youth when they were transferred to criminal courts than to see an end of it. Therefore, placing youth in criminal court will give that young person less opportunity to regained the possibility to become a better citizen. It is clearly that placing "kids" in adult jails, gives them the urge to learn how to be tough and defend themselves by proving to real criminals that they can be "good" criminals too, making them want to reoffend when they get
Juvenile delinquency has become a controversial issue within the Criminal Justice system. In the United States, juvenile delinquency refers to disruptive and criminal behavior committed by an individual under the age of 18. In many states, a minor at the age of 16 to 17 ½ can be tried as an adult. Once the individual reaches adulthood, the disruptive and criminal behavior is recognized as a crime. However, the criminal justice system has divided juvenile delinquency into two general types of categories that has brought upon controversial issues of inequality and corruption. Yet, putting young individuals in juvenile detentions facilities seems to open the door for them to commit more crimes in the future. Therefore, under certain circumstances juveniles should be tried as an adult.
With this message directed towards juveniles, as well as the likely chance that juveniles whom are transferred to the adult criminal court system will result in some type of incarceration, this may lead to a deterrence of violent or misbehaved actions committed by juveniles in an attempt to avoid these prosecutions. These statements conducted by Urbina and White (2009), are statements to consider on the issue of a juveniles transfer to adult criminal court. Although there are strong facts to support this type of transfer for juveniles, Urbina and White (2009) also found that this might not be the best option in some cases. There have been studies that showed juveniles whom were transferred to the adult criminal court system and sent to adult jails were more likely to re-offend and with more serious crimes than did their juvenile counterparts (Urbina & White, 2009). With this study that was conducted, it adds doubt to the fact that juveniles should be transferred to the adult criminal court system. Although, at times, this may be the best option for serious and violent repeated offenders, it is not likely that this process will have a positive affect on the juvenile or the community. Urbina and White (2009) continue to lack strong argumentative evidence to show the exact times that transferring a juvenile to the adult criminal court system is the
These individual rights must be effectively balanced against these present and emerging community concerns: Widespread drug abuse among youth The threat of juvenile crime Urban gang violence High-technology, computer, and Internet crime (cybercrime) Terrorism and narcoterrorism Occupational and whitecollar crime
he juvenile justice system has to deal with juveniles committing violations against civil and criminal law in their community. When compare to the adult criminal justice system, they are more harsher to the offenders than the juvenile justice system. I believe the juvenile justice systems should be more like the adult criminal justice system to a certain extent. It all depends what kind of crime was committed and if the juvenile had the intention of committing the crime. Of course if it's not a serious crime, I think parens patriae could be great for juveniles in need of support. There has been many philosophical differences about juvenile offending, and the one many people fall on is the status they are living in. Whether they come from an
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
When thinking of reforming the juvenile justice system one has to think; what can we do to make this better for everyone involve? There are some programs that can be implemented when trying to make a change in the juvenile system. The main thing is getting parents or the guardian more involved in the child’s whereabouts. Secondly the community where the youth will have a place to go and have something more constructive to do to keep them out of trouble. Law enforcement can get involved in giving ride along and having visits to the local jails or prisons from the youth to talk to some of the inmates. Crime in life isn’t racist at all it has a no age limit, no certain gender and no social status for most of those whom decide to partake in a criminal activity. From the beginning juveniles have been an issue with law enforcement, the question has always arisen of whom will take control without cruel and unusual punishment and assist with the rehabilitation and prevention future crime actions.
Studies suggest that there is a divide between the government and public response to juvenile incarceration. Bullis & Yovas (2005) state that support is given to correctional facilities to house juvenile offenders as a form of punishment (as cited in Shannon, 2013, p. 17). Individuals who support this perspective are often more likely to support the construction of more prisons and stern penalties on crime based upon the presumptions that youthful offenders are aware of the consequences of their actions (Drakeford, 2002 as cited in Shannon, 2013, p. 17). On the other hand, opponents of this perspective believe that incarceration creates an opportunity to rehabilitate the offenders (Huffine, 2006 as cited in Shannon, 2013, p. 18). This perspective supports the purpose of juvenile detention centers as “preparatory in nature – that is, offering services focused on the development of skills needed to return successfully to mainstream
One may argue that if juveniles are to commit an adult crime, they should be punished as an adult. Defensively, there are many reasons why they are mistaken. The juvenile justice system has the right to keep an adjudicated delinquent imprisoned until their 21st birthday. This punishment is just for those in juvenile prisons. “It is certainly long enough to serve the needs of public protection, and enough time to rehabilitate a child. Indeed, studies routinely show that in these cases, the juvenile justice system protects the public better than the criminal justice system” (Schwartz). Likewise, the opposing side may also believe a juvenile who commits a felony should be punished as an adult. This statement is wrong juveniles brains are not fully
The juvenile justice system is a foundation in society that is granted certain powers and responsibilities. It faces several different tasks, among the most important is maintaining order and preserving constitutional rights. When a juvenile is arrested and charged with committing a crime there are many different factors that will come in to play during the course of his arrest, trial, conviction, sentencing, and rehabilitation process. This paper examines the Juvenile Justice System’s court process in the State of New Jersey and the State of California.
There are many similarities and differences between the adult and juvenile justice systems. Although juvenile crimes have increased in violence and intensity in the last decade, there is still enough difference between the two legal proceedings, and the behaviors themselves, to keep the systems separated. There is room for changes in each structure. However, we cannot treat/punish juvenile offenders the way we do adult offenders, and vice versa. This much we know. So we have to find a way to merge between the two. And, let’s face it; our juveniles are more important to us in the justice system. They are the group at they
Juveniles committing crimes is not a new issued being introduced to society; actually, it has been an issue for centuries. However, the big question is, should juveniles be tried in adult courts? Before answering, take into consideration every possible scenario that could have led them to commit the crime. For instance, were they the leader in the act? Did they participate in the crime? Was the juvenile even aware of what was taking place? Were they peer pressured? Did they have any other choice at the time? There are so many other questions we could consider when making a decision here.
This article discussed diversion programs, which helps adolescents who have been arrested for first-time misdemeanors. These diversion programs use group counseling as a mandatory component of sentencing demonstrates initial success in reducing recidivism rates in national outcome studies. The goal of these diversion programs is to keep adolescents out of the juvenile justice system whenever possible (Lipsey, Howell, Kelly, Chapman, & Carver, 2010). These diversion programs divert adolescents from entering the juvenile justice system and offer alternatives to formal disciplinary action (Chantoe & Manton, 2014).
The juvenile justice system is similar to the criminal justice system. This system is where juveniles are processed, and may be arrested after referrals for juvenile delinquency. Juvenile justice is very different in every state and can be very similar as well because every system has limited jurisdiction and that most focus on the offenders and not their offenses. Therefore, there are 51 juvenile justice systems in the United States. The United States has the juvenile justice system because children are very different than adults – in that they can be better receptive for change and also being easier to rehabilitate. Moreover, the main goal of the juvenile justice system is rehabilitation (Juvenile Law Center). The juvenile justice system is made up of police, courts, corrections, probation and parole services, as well as community-based programs to name a few (book).
The purpose of this paper was to examine how sentencing juveniles with adults have a negative impact on youth. According to the results, juveniles housed with adults are twice as likely to commit suicide due to the harsh environment. Plus the youth’s likely to reengage in crime upon released from adult prisons. This paper also concentrates on programs that have an impact on juveniles, highlighting equally ineffective and effective. Youth attending ineffective programs such as boot camps are more likely to reenter the life of crime compared to juveniles who attend effective programs, which reduce recidivism rates in youth. The history of the juvenile justice system and intervention programs are important because it shows the developments in
In recent decades, juvenile crime has become somewhat of a controversy due to the young age and immaturity of these criminals. Incidences of juvenile crime skyrocketed in the 1980s and 1990s, and policymakers pushed for laws that sent children as young as thirteen years old to trial, and even made them eligible for prison sentences. The general public has expressed a common desire to reduce the incidence of juvenile crime and find effective legislation to discipline these youths, but there are questions about these methods. What is more effective, incarceration or rehabilitation? Does criminal punishment intimidate more youths away from a life of crime, and would productive rehabilitation efforts influence these youths to becoming more valuable members of society?