Juvenile Justice History

According to T. Williams at https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/29/us/us-prison-population.html?_r=0, (2016). “The number of inmates held in state and federal prisons, fell to its lowest level since 2005 dropping by 2.7 percent.” However, while adult crimes seem to be decreasing. The opposite can be said about juvenile related crimes which seem to be increasing. In this paper, I will be providing my reasons as to why I believe juvenile related crimes are going up, as well as talk about two programs that are working to keep at risk youth out of the criminal justice system.

It has been one hundred years since the creation of the juvenile court in the United States. The court and the juvenile justice system has made some positive changes in the lives of millions of young people lives over the course or those years, within the last thirteen years there has been some daunting challenges in the system.

The juvenile justice system was fashioned in the late 1800s; restructuring policies in the United States concerning adolescent offenders was a part of a progressive era in are history. Thereafter, many modifications designed at both safeguarding the "due process of law" rights of adolescence, and generating an antipathy to jail amongst minor. This dislike has made juvenile justice system more equivalent to the adult structure, a significant change from what it was intended for in the

The act’s framers were concerned with the framework of the juvenile justice system. Believing that they could restrain juvenile delinquency through prevention rather than punishment, they increased the quality of the juvenile justice system. Policy specified that, “kids should be treated as kids” (Ravenell, 2002). However, rising crime rates throughout the late 1970s and 1980s lead to disillusionment with the system. The public became concerned that juvenile justice policy was too lenient. Practitioners scrambled to enact harsher penalties in an effort to slow the rising juvenile crime rates. The new policies restricted lenient punishment such as probation and lead to an increase in incarceration rates (Meade & Steiner, 2010).

The United States juvenile justice court was based on the English parens patriae adopted in the United States as part of the legal tradition of England. But the efforts of the state to rehabilitate juvenile offenders with institutional treatment with the houses of refuge and reformatories failed. Today, the United States has 51 different juvenile court systems; the laws and statutes vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Thus, each state’s approach to handle the youth offenders is responsible for how the youth offenders will experience the justice system. Both the past and the present approaches to deal with juvenile offenders have shaped today’s juvenile justice system.

Virginia and Missouri seem to have similar models of juvenile rehabilitation. Both systems emphasize youth rehabilitation over punishment. However, there are clear distinctions. In class and in our book, we have covered the Missouri Model in depth. However, we have not covered much of the Virginia Model. A comparison of the two will tell us what the Virginia model does right and what it can learn from Missouri. The Missouri Model took a different route than other state juvenile corrections models had and, as a consequence, became nationally known for its actions. In the 1980s, leaders of the juvenile justice reform focused on rehabilitation and less on punishment. As a result, key changes that institutions in other states had strived for became real.

During the Johnson administration in the 1960’s the Youth Service Bureaus was a crime prevention program that integrated social welfare and social control programs (Hinton, 2015). The Bureau linked crime control and poverty policies and operated with traditional public welfare centers, but they were designed to reign in potential offenders and aid troubled youth. They targeted potential juveniles that were susceptible to delinquency (Hinton, 2015). Because of the Safe Streets Act in 1968, the U.S. had the highest incarceration of juveniles compared to any industrialized nation (Hinton, 2015). According to Hinton (2015) the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Act of 1974… was a preemptive measure…that laid the basis for new penal practices and

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 first dilemma we have to realize is that chance does not cheap, and with so many budgets cuts the “State and local leaders, are faced with severe budget shortfalls in a slowed economy, and they have begun cutting juvenile justice programs and sending more youthful offenders to juvenile prisons in order to close budget gaps” (Soler, Shoenberg & Schindler, 2009).

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.

The Juvenile Justice System was created as a separate network from the Criminal Justice System so that juveniles could be treated differently from adults but still be held accountable for their crimes. This system takes more of a rehabilitative approach to help the juvenile offenders rather than to simply punish them because the goal is to keep the youth on the right path and prevent them from becoming lifelong criminals. While the goal remains the same, different states have different laws in place and other methods when it comes to rehabilitation as well as punishment. Punishment for juveniles always sparks debate because many people argue that punishments such as the death penalty and life in prison should not apply to the youth because of their age. Others argue that without this kind of punishment there would be no fear for juveniles in committing serious crimes which would lead to an unfair practice of justice. An unfair practice of justice occurs across the juvenile justice system already in which race, gender, and ethnicity plays a huge role in determining how far into the system a youth goes. Changes have to be made to this system in order for improvement to be seen but it has to start from the beginning where the juveniles first come into contact with the system.

The juvenile justice system is always changing and developing new ideas. The first example of a change or development can be the status offense reform. The basis of this are they are trying to keep the non-delinquent kids form the juvenile justice system. Some examples of status offenses are skipping school, or running away – offenses that are not illegal for adults. These offenses can lead to possibly detention, which might do very little to rehabilitate or change the issues that juvenile has. How this can all change is to bring these troubled kids to community based services to make them learn that it is possible to change and become a better person. Some other examples of changes or developments in our juvenile justice system (that I won’t go into detail about) are the quality of aftercare and how the system is trying to reduce racial-ethnic discrepancies and making it fairer for everyone (models for change).

Incarcerating juveniles in prisons with adult prisoners is a grievous injustice. According to the Department of Justice there are approximately 4,200 persons younger than 18 that are inmates in adult jails, and 1000 inmates age 17 or younger in the custody of state prions at the end of 2014 in the United States (OJJDO Statistical Briefing Book). The data reported from the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction indicates that in 2010-they received 2,439, which is higher than the totals previously reported by the OJJDO. The Juvenile Justice Delinquency and Prevention Act of 1974 amended in 2002 added mandates that dictate the importance of removing juveniles from adult prisons, and more pointedly that juveniles should not have any contact

By law adolescents are not able to vote, purchase tobacco or alcohol, join the armed forces, or sign a legal contract. Children are not permitted the same rights and responsibilities as adults because the law recognizes their inability to make adult decisions. The law acknowledges that children are unable to handle the consequences that come along with the rights that adults have. By allowing them to be charged as adults is holding them to a double standard. Telling them that they are not old enough to enjoy the same luxuries as adults, but they can experience the same punishment as adults if they commit a crime. The law acknowledged the inability of children to make decisions but still allows them to suffer the same consequences as adults. Research demonstrates that transferring children from juvenile court to adult court does not decrease recidivism, and in fact actually increases crime. Instead of the child learning their mistake they are more likely to repeat it. Juvenile detention centers have programs that help reconstruct young minds and help them realize where they went wrong. Prison does not offer this same opportunity. (Estudillo, Mary Onelia)

The juvenile justice system was founded on the belief that children are different from adults; therefore, the justice system and corrections sanctions for juveniles should acknowledge the differences. “Rising juvenile crime rates during the 1970s and 1980s spurred state legislatures across the country to exclude or transfer a significant share of offenders under the age of eighteen to the jurisdiction of the criminal court” (Fagan, 2008). The acknowledgement of these differences should be the bases for a proper juvenile justice system. The examination of the juvenile justice’s systems history, trends, and causation theories will provide an insight into the future of the juvenile justice system.