Rhetorical Analysis Of Juvenile Justice Summary

The overall sense that the reader gets from this book is that growing caseloads, inadequate facilities, and arbitrary “get-tough” laws are rendering the juvenile justice system in California and elsewhere in America ultimately ineffective. Redeemable kids are sent to adult prisons to “criminal college” to become more hardened and violent instead of being rehabilitated. Extremely violent kids are kept within the juvenile system to be released at twenty-five, based solely on whether they are over or under the age of sixteen. Abandoned or neglected kids are sent to languish within a broken foster care system, to be raised in group homes with deplorable

If we choose to do nothing, our prison conditions will continue to bring about health hazards for the inmates. Stevenson strongly advocates for a more humane approach to youth justice and is strongly against trying minors as adults. The juvenile justice system needs to place more emphasis on support and correction than on punishment, taking into account the vulnerabilities and developmental differences of young offenders. In addition, it is important to convert juvenile correctional facilities into therapeutic and educational settings that target the underlying causes of misbehavior. In order for these children to become successful individuals, the primary components of juvenile detention have to be educational opportunities, psychological services, and rehabilitation programs (Hanink, 2018).

The book; Just Mercy, by Bryan Stevenson, evaluates the ideas of false accusation of innocent people (pg.33), women unjustly treated in prison (pg.239), as well as, cruel and unusual sentences for crimes committed during adolescence (pg.256). In recent years, the punishment for adolescents has been analysed, questioned, and changed to help promote fairer trials for juveniles and minors. These harsh sentences are caused by; fear of increased violence in incarcerated adolescents (pg.159), differentiation of social class (pg.155), and racial discrimination (pg.154). In Just Mercy, on page 159, it states, “ Influential criminologists predicted a coming wave of ‘super-predators’ with whom the juvenile justice system would be unable to cope” (Stevenson

Juvenile delinquency has been a problem in the United States ever since it has been able to be documented. From 100 years ago to now, the process of juvenile delinquency has changed dramatically; from the way juveniles are tried, to the way that they are released back into society, so that they do not return back to the justice system (Scott and Steinberg, 2008). Saying this, juveniles tend to

Juveniles at CCJTDC are also not given the opportunity to exercise the third central human capability. It is evident they do not have the ability to move freely from place to place, and as mentioned before, are not secure against violent assault, including but not limited to sexual assault. One can argue that the general public is not guaranteed safety, and question why deviant misbehaved children should be protected from it. Although it is true children that have violated the law should not be rewarded, it is troubling for this to occur in a government run center. America is not a nation that supports abusive government authoritative figures over its people. Even given the circumstances, human dignity must still be maintained. The promotion

The United States sentences more juveniles to death than any other nation in the world (Justice, 2009) and our juveniles are being sentenced as young as ten years of age. These are juveniles being tried as adults, and something has to change and change fast. The younger generation is supposed to be our future leaders. How will our juveniles or the citizens of this country prevail if this continues we won’t be able to because most of our future leaders will be prisoner. (B, 2005)

Today’s juvenile court system handles most cases involving those under the age of 18-year-old. This was not always the case and the ideal of a separate court system for adults and children is only about 100 years old. When looking at the differences that set juvenile courts apart, it is important to study the history and see how it developed over time.

Juvenile Justice Reform “America’s criminal justice system isn’t known for rehabilitation. I’m not sure that, as a society, we are even interested in that concept anymore.” Although Steve Earle was speaking against the death penalty when he said this, his words apply to the juvenile justice system as well. The process of being incarcerated into this system is flawed, however the problems inside the detention will be the focus of this paper. Beginning with the trial itself, discrimination shows itself within minutes.

There would be a constitutional issue because juvenile have certain constitutional rights at negotiation, such as the right to a lawyer and the right to challenge and interrogate witnesses, but they have no right to a trial by jury. The subject of juvenile’s rights is poorly defined in the courts, somewhat because the public as a whole has not decided how much independence to grant juvenile. When most juvenile’s supporters talk about juvenile’s rights, they are not stating to the same rights detained by adults, such as the rights to vote. Instead, they mean that more importance should be placed on juvenile’s standing as “regular persons” eligible of benefits under the law as providing in the United States Constitution and its Bill of Rights.

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.

Placing a juvenile in a detention center early in the court process increases the risk that youths will be found to be delinquent and damage their prospects for future success. A majority of the youths that are placed in these facilities pose little or no threat to the public and essentially do not need to be there. This portion of the juvenile court process is detrimental to the future and mental aspects of a youth’s life. We desperately need to change the way that we handle the juvenile court system because we are only reinforcing the delinquent behavior that these youths have been exposed to. We need to focus on the rehabilitation and prevention efforts for these youths not the punishment aspect and until then (insert a better ending).

There are three ways cases are sent to adult court, there is concurrent jurisdiction where certain cases can be tried in either juvenile or adult court, statutory exclusion, where certain offenses are automatically tried in adult court and judicial waiver where a hearing is held to decide whether the case will be transferred (Seigel & Welsh, 2011). While the process does differ from State to State there are some basic guidelines “…states that have transfer hearings provide a legitimate transfer hearing, sufficient notice to the child’s family and defense attorney, the right to counsel, and a statement of the reason for the court order regarding transfer” Seigel & Welsh, 2011).

Although based on the adult criminal justice system, the juvenile justice process works differently. Juveniles can end up in court by way of arrest, truancy or for curfew violations or running away. A youth may also be referred to the juvenile court system by school officials or a parent or guardian for being continuously disobedient. The juvenile justice process involves several different steps including intake, detention, adjudication, disposition and aftercare following release from a juvenile correctional facility. In this paper we will breakdown the numerous steps involved in the juvenile justice process as well as compared some

In today's society juveniles are being tried in adult courts, given the death penalty, and sent to prison. Should fourteen-year olds accused of murder or rape automatically be tried as adults? Should six-teen year olds and seven-teen year olds tried in adult courts be forced to serve time in adult prisons, where they are more likely to be sexually assaulted and to become repeat offenders. How much discretion should a judge have in deciding the fate of a juvenile accused of a crime - serious, violent, or otherwise? The juvenile crime rate that was so alarming a few years ago has begun to fall - juvenile felony arrest rates in California have declined by more than forty percent in the last twenty years. While

On the other hand, the advocates of the juvenile system believe that because children are not fully mentally or physically developed, they are not therefore accountable for their actions in the same way as adults (Ainsworth, 1995, p.932-933). Juvenile criminality for them is “youthful illness” brought about by external forces like environment or impoverished living conditions. Donna Bishop, an advocate of the juvenile justice system, encourages states to give these juveniles “room to reform.” She believes that a policy that is designed to discard youth in the middle of the transition to adulthood is uncharacteristic of a fair government (Bishop, 2000, p. 159). Supporters of this kind of reform program for juveniles are not amenable to the transfer to adult court