ABSTRACT
The juvenile crime rate has made a significant increase in America as children as young as eight years old are committing violent crimes. The juvenile justice system was first created to keep children out of adult prisons and to rehabilitate the children so that they will become productive non-criminal adults. This system has not been effective. Children are impacted by many factors when faced with decisions in today’s society. They are not as developed and lack the reasoning capability like adults. Thus, new approaches to juvenile justice must be instilled throughout the country in order to prevent more and more crime. These new approaches should include community based programs Community based programs would ensure the supervision of juvenile offenders and also provide services for them outside of the justice system. Intervention and diversion programs, functional family therapy, restorative community programs and evidence based treatment programs are proven programs to assist juvenile offenders and prevent them from becoming adult offenders.
Introduction . 4
Factors influencing juvenile offenders 6
History of Juvenile Justice .. 8
First wave 8
Second wave .. 8
Third wave . 9
Solutions 10
Intervention and Diversion . 10
Functional family therapy and multisystemic therapy 11
Restorative community and evidence based treatment programs .. 12
Summary 13
INTRODUCTION
America’s biggest problem in today’s society is the ever-rising crime rate and the toll it takes on our economy. Our youths have developed a criminal conscious at earlier ages, sometimes even as young as 8 years old. As if the problem we have with adult offenders wasn't enough, now we deal with a bigger threat and the generations to come. In this paper, we will explore the history of adolescent offenders and how we handled them in the justice system. We will take a look at the influences and impacting factors on youths, ultimately concluding with a proper way to brighten this generations future.
Implementing a more effective way to deal with young criminals is the most important task at hand. The way our justice system sees adult offenders is compared similarly to our outlook on juveniles, when in fact this should not be true. This paper intends to suggest more fundamental and effective ways to treat these young criminal minds, and help shape their future to hopefully never see the inside of penitentiary walls.
A brief history into how our juvenile justice system came to be will be offered within the text, showcasing the development and implementation of law upon our young criminals. Has our country’s implementation of juvenile justice in correlation to adult justice been successful enough or are we taking steps in the wrong direction? This question serves as one of the bases of this term paper. In our pursuit to justice we will explore the current state of justice when dealing with adolescent offenders, and the outcomes of the treatments and sentencing that have been put into use.
A major issue at hand is the fact that as time has been going on juvenile delinquency and crime rates have gotten worse and worse. This could only lead to presume that something in our juvenile justice system is simply not working. In this study we will look at the way most cases are handled and how the final decision by the judge is reached. What factors come into play when figuring what route to take with the criminal?
The incarceration of youths is not only harmful to the child’s future but to the community. In 2008, over 93,000 young people were incarcerated and states spend about $5.7 billion each year imprisoning youth, even though the majority are held for nonviolent offenses. ("Justice Policy Inst.," 2010) This is unacceptable and should not be a contributing issue to our societies problem. From findings in research it seems to show that the answer to criminal youths is to throw them behind bars and forget about them. Juvenile offenders are not the same as adults yet are treated the same. The $5.7 billion spent on jailing youths could have been used for more profound and time-worthy uses.
Thirty-three U.S. states and jurisdictions spend $100,000 or more annually to incarcerate a young person, and continue to generate outcomes that result in even greater costs. ("Justice Policy Inst.," 2010) In a race to slow fiscal expenditure and create a better chance for adolescent offenders, steps need to be taken in another direction such as treatment and community based programs for youths.
Another issue to be addressed is the mindset of the prison systems and those who run them. In efforts to make more money the prisons load up with more bunks, almost shelving convicts like bread down the grocery aisle. Morally they look at criminals, both adult and adolescent, as dollar signs fueling their impenetrable fortresses. In regards to adults their criminal behavior is the result of actions taken and decisions made. There was a right and a wrong and they consciously chose to break the law. In the courtroom there is less mercy because the adult has the power to make rational choices while weighing the consequences. Shouldn't it be different for minors?
FACTORS INFLUENCING JUVENILE OFFENDERS
Factors such as demographics including financial, educational, and geographical will be covered to demonstrate the multi-leveled facets of how minors are influenced towards criminal behaviors. Motive is what drives a criminal’s behavior and actions. Children are extremely responsive to environmental and peer pressures. Due to the nature, a child’s motives should carefully be considered. A young adolescent for instance at school wants to fit in with his peers and stay on top of the newest fads, yet one could not afford or one’s family cannot afford such costs. This child would be prone to theft and left pressured by his environment to make irrational choices to steal. This is the case with other offenses such as violence and drug use.
Children are significantly different than adults in every aspect. Juveniles tend not to focus on future consequences, instead they have a keen eye for the here-and-now. This makes them more apt to put significant weight on risks and benefits that are immediate and to ignore future consequences . Juveniles are less risk averse than adults. Juveniles also have a less capable of controlling impulsive behavior. And, they also experience more rapid and extreme mood swings which impairs decision making even more. Furthermore, juveniles are biologically different in brain development. At the time of adolescence, the brain is still developing and changing significantly .
As covered earlier, adults have lived long enough to know right from wrong, to know good from bad. In an adolescent’s young years, they are less experienced in this field and can easily lean towards making bad decisions in times of rationality. Peer pressure and manipulation are extremely harmful to a young mind and unfortunately very effective. In regards to the defenses in perception between adults and minors, Justice Kennedy noted that “the same characteristics that render juveniles less culpable than adults suggest as well that juveniles will be less susceptible to deterrence.” ("Opinion of the Court," 2005)
The benefits of punishment and isolation of a criminal should be weighed against the effects of imprisonment on a teenager. A non-violent adolescent criminal who would, most likely, integrate in a society with a developed criminal culture, would only suffer more consequences of seeing life behind bars. Even for a one-time violent offender, who was too young to make a rational decision, would presumably grow up learning and living a life of crime in the penitentiary.
Seeing that the best investment anyone can make and perhaps the smartest would be investing in the minds of our generations to come, this research topic holds great importance. The topic of juveniles and the problems we face with criminals that are minors is quite broad yet the question regarding if what we are doing with them is what narrows it down. Are we efficiently dealing with young criminals by serving justice while taking the youths life course into consideration? This question has been asked repeatedly as we see more and more offenders losing their future over mistakes they made as a kid.
HISTORY OF THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM
There are essentially for key waves involved in the transformation of juvenile delinquency and the juvenile justice system. The first wave would date all the way back to around 1899 when Jane Addams founded the modern juvenile court in Chicago.
Addams argued for a separate legal system for juveniles that would guide and teach them the proper way to behave rather than just locking them away in jails ("Jane Addams - Juvenile Justice," 2010). Children are unique from adults and the idea was to no longer deliver punishment but to think of the best interests of the child and administering restorative actions.
The early juvenile justice system included informal and non-adversarial hearings. The proceedings did not include basic due process rights . Juveniles had no right to notice, no right to an attorney, no right to confront witnesses, and no right against self-incrimination. Additionally, there was no requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt as in the adult system. Justification for the lack of these rights was that they were not needed in non-adversarial proceedings that was aimed as rehabilitation. Ultimately, the lack of constitutional rights was acknowledged by the Supreme Court of the United States, and there was pressure to reform the juvenile justice system.
Young offenders have been described as have the worst of both worlds, neither receiving the treatment and care once envisioned by the juvenile justice system nor the natural legal protections of adults. The court decision of in re Gault would become the second wave of change in the world of young criminals. The decision made by the US Supreme Court in 1967 would guarantee due process rights for juveniles. In its opinion, the Court underscored the importance of due process, stating that it “is the primary and indispensable foundation of individual freedom” and that “the procedural rules which have been fashioned from the generality of due process are our best instruments for the distillation and evaluation of essential facts from the conflictingdata that life and our adversary methods present.” In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1, 20 (1967). The Court noted that, had Gault been 18 at the time of his arrest, he would have been afforded the procedural safeguards available to adults. The Court closely examined the juvenile court system, ultimately determining that, while there are legitimate reasons for treating juveniles and adults differently, juveniles facing an adjudication of delinquency and incarceration are entitled to certain procedural safeguards under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment ("Facts and Case Summary - In Re Gault," n.d.).
In the 1980’s, the press and politicians at the time used youth violence and delinquency to stoke the flames of fear into society. As this boiling and bubbling of the public’s worry ensued the use of harsh and stringent policies of the past came to use, and unfortunately enough the minority youth and children of color took the burden of this. This would become the third wave leading onto change in the juvenile justice system.
The number of youth under the age of 18 years sentenced to time in adult prisons soared in the wake of "get tough" reforms that included widespread legislation relaxing the requirements for transferring young offenders from juvenile courts to adult criminal courts, where mandatory minimum sentences and other factors make incarceration more likely. That population remains historically high today, despite a recent decline in the number of youth sent to adult prisons. ("Juvenile Justice: Rethinking Punitive Approaches To Addressing Juvenile Crime - Office of Child Development - University of Pittsburgh," n.d.)
Beginning at the turn of the century many punitive practices still remain, yet a new fresh understanding is held in attempt to balance economic efficiency, accountability, and public safety while still aiming to improve outcomes for children, their families, and the communities they live in. Preventing juvenile delinquency offers several benefits in addition to sparing youth from the consequences of committing crimes. ("Juvenile Justice: Rethinking Punitive Approaches To Addressing Juvenile Crime - Office of Child Development - University of Pittsburgh," n.d.) The fact that many of today’s adult criminals started out as young juvenile offenders shows a relationship with early intervention. With the use of preventing juvenile delinquency interventions can also have the power to reduce adult crime.
SOLUTIONS
America incarcerates more juveniles than any other country in the world. The cost of confinement of juveniles both to the juveniles and to the community is more than burdensome. Detaining juveniles, placing them with other offenders or with adult criminals has proven unsuccessful. Incarcerated juveniles are at risk of victimization, suicide, developmental disruptions, educational disruptions and other negative impacts. Incarceration increases anti-social behavior and the risk of future criminal behavior. The system of juvenile justice needs to look to rehabilitate young offenders.
Many new programs have been created in the past couple of decades to address rehabilitation of juveniles without incarceration. Community based programs would ensure the supervision of juvenile offenders and also provide services for them outside of the prison system. These programs reduce recidivism and result in better outcomes for the life of juveniles. . Community based programs would include intervention programs, diversion, functional family therapy, restorative community programs and evidence based treatment programs.
Intervention and diversion can direct children away from the juvenile court system and into programs in the community. Rather than immediately placing the juvenile offender into the juvenile justice system, alternatives are available. This concept was created as a result of studies showing that once a juvenile is involved in the juvenile court system, further delinquency is more likely to occur (Abrams, 2013). Intervention and diversion programs would aim to educate the juvenile and assist him or her in creating better relationships.
Functional family therapy and multisystemic therapy are two other community based programs for juvenile offenders aimed at rehabilitating the child. Functional family therapy targets the juvenile’s family and assist the family with becoming a better unit. Life skills training, problem solving, family therapy and cognitive behavioral therapy are included in this type of program. Individuals in these therapeutic programs learn to become more involved in school, learn to improve rational and moral reasoning, and learn to improve skills necessary to handle difficult situations. Treatment is not only offered for first time offenders but for youth facing mental health issues, substance abuse and violence.
Restorative community and evidence based treatment programs for juvenile offenders are other methods of treatment to divert the juvenile offender away from the juvenile justice system. These programs are offered in the school and in the community. The goals of these programs are to “develop self-discipline, prevent and correct misbehavior and respond to chronic behavior problems” . Community based programs have proven successful in rehabilitating juvenile offenders and preventing recidivism (Abrams, 2013).
The key ingredients to successful community based programs include the acceptance of every youth into the program. The program is accessible and flexible for the youth. The program works to empower the youth. There are individual services provided for every participant. Family focused services are essential. The program ensures that youth are provided with work opportunities and connections to the community. And, the program seeks to build the youth into a competent adult. With these ingredients, community based programs can not only save the community from a crime ridden future but can save children from chaotic unstable lives.
SUMMARY
The juvenile crime rate has made a significant increase in America as children as young as eight years old are committing violent crimes. The juvenile justice system was first created to keep children out of adult prisons and to rehabilitate the children so that they will become productive non-criminal adults. This system has not been effective. Children are impacted by many factors when faced with decisions in today’s society. They are not as developed and lack the reasoning capability like adults. Thus, new approaches to juvenile justice must be instilled throughout the country in order to prevent more and more crime.
These new approaches should include community based programs Community based programs would ensure the supervision of juvenile offenders and also provide services for them outside of the justice system. Intervention and diversion programs, functional family therapy, restorative community programs and evidence based treatment programs are proven programs to assist juvenile offenders and prevent them from becoming adult offenders.
References
Brooks, C. C., & Roush, D. (2014, March 01). Transformation in the Justice System. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 23(1), 42-46. Retrieved March 15, 2016, from
ERIC.
Butler, F. (2010, January 01). Extinguishing All Hope: Life-without-Parole for Juveniles.
Community-Based Alternatives. (2016). Retrieved from Juvenile Justice Information
Exchange: http://jjie.org/hub/community-based-alternatives/
Corwin, J., & Stewart, J. (2002). Juvenile Crime Prevention: Play By the Rules - A New
Plan. Journal of Correctional Education, 53(2), 74-76. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/41971074
Dynes, M., Domoff, S., Hassan, S., Tompsett, C., & Amrhein, K. (2015, December). The
Influence of Co-offending Within a Moderated Mediation Model of Parent and eer
Predictors of Delinquency. Journal of Child & Family Studies, 24(12), 3516-3525.
doi:10.1007/s10826-015-0153-3
Evans, S., Simons, L., & Simons, R. (2016, January). Factors that Influence Trajectories
Of Delinquency Throughout Adolescence. Journal of Youth & Adolescence,
45(1), 156-171. doi:10.1007/s10964-014-0197-5
Facts and Case Summary - In re Gault. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.uscourts.gov/
educational-resources/educational-activities/facts-and-case-summary-re-gault
Jane Addams - Juvenile Justice. (2010). Retrieved from
http://law.jrank.org/pages/12152/Addams-Jane-Juvenile-justice.html
Justice Policy Inst. (2010). Retrieved 2016, from
http://www.justicepolicy.org/research/category/38
Juvenile Justice: Rethinking Punitive Approaches To Addressing Juvenile Crime - Office
of Child Development - University of Pittsburgh. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://ocd.pitt.edu/Default.aspx?webPageID=248
Krisberg, B. (1995, August). Legacy of Juvenile Corrections. Corrections Today.
Retrieved from
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+legacy+of+juvenile+corrections.-a017340467
Monahan, K., Steinberg, L., & Piquero, A. R. (2015). Juvenile Justice Policy and Practice: A
Developmental Perspective. Crime and Justice, 44(1), 577-619. Retrieved from
http://doi.org/10.1086/681553
Opinion of the Court. (2005, March 1). Retrieved February 3, 2016, from
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/pdf/03-633P.ZO
Ryan, J., Perron, B., & Huang, H. (2016, January). Child Welfare and the Transition to
Adulthood: Investigating Placement Status and Subsequent Arrests. Journal of
Youth & Adolescence, 45(1), 172-182. doi:10.1007/s10964-015-0305-1
Scott, E. S., & Steinberg, L. (2008). Adolescent Development and the Regulation of
Youth Crime. The Future of Children, 18(2), 15-33. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/20179977
Simpson, A. L. (1976, July). Rehabilitation as the Justification of a Separate Juvenile
Justice System. California Law Review, 64(4), 984-1017. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3479922
Youngblood, M. K., & Jacobson, A. (2000). Juvenile justice sentencing: Are there
alternatives? (Master's thesis, University of North Texas). ProQuest Dissertations
and Theses, 498-498 p. Retrieved February 23, 2016, from ProQuest Criminal
Justice.
