The United States justice system predominantly uses imprisonment or incarceration in attempting to keep away dangerous persons and perpetrators of heinous crimes from our communities. The juvenile system in the United States is a corrective mechanism employed by different states to deal with delinquent acts by minors under that age of 18. However, the juvenile system has come under great criticisms in the manner in which minors are handled by the system. Experts argue that justice system is supposed to correct delinquent character in the society but not to inflict suffering upon such persons. In this sense, reformed persons can be reintegrated back to the society as upright and responsible persons of the society.
Comparison between the Bremen and Denver Juvenile Systems
In a recent study performed to compare juvenile systems between the United States system in Denver, Colorado and that of Bremen in Germany, several difference were found between the two systems. While the Denver system was found to be more punitive with minors facing long court processes and imprisonment, the Bremen system was a more diversion-oriented system.
This diversion-oriented system is quite common in Germany. First, the juvenile system only applies to young persons aged between 14 and 17. In this case, children aged below this bracket are not subjected to the justice system, unlike the US that covers from the age of 10. Additionally, young adults between the ages of 18 and 20 may be tried either as adults or minors. The court decides how this group is to be handled. Secondly, and perhaps the most important is the fact that in Germany it is common wisdom that adolescents should not be put into custody unless it’s the very last resort . For this reason the number of juveniles arrested in Germany is very low as compared to the United States. For instance, in the United States if a juvenile is found to be disorderly, that is, drunk in public or unruly character, such a juvenile is usually arrested. In contrast, a juvenile found be in disorderly conduct in Germany is not arrested.
The United States juvenile system has been found to be very punitive. In this regard the number of prisoners under the juvenile system in the United States has been increasing. Any offence perpetrated by a juvenile is either ticked or the offender is arrested and taken to court. Even if the offender is not put into custody, such offender faces some intermediate level of sanction such as community service. This system does not seem to correct the character, instead it simply punishes. Thus if the diversion-oriented system is introduced in the United States, it might help improve character among the juveniles.
In the United States, several counties and states have developed programs that are quite diversionary. For instance, Orange County in California has started a program called Early Intervention Programs that seeks to identify potentially chronic juveniles and attempts to provide corrective measures. The system takes juveniles who would face long term sentence in incarceration and puts them under different community programs. This program allows such juveniles to be put under community support programs in order to correct their character.
It is almost certain that a shift to diversion oriented system will impact case processing and case-flow management. In the German system, the reason for the success of the diversion-oriented measures is because the German system has proper documentation and registration of all persons within a community. In the United States however, changes in settlements and registration will make diversion-oriented measure difficult to keep track.
Conclusion
The Justice system is meant to reform offenders and not make them worse. The United Juvenile system has been found to be too punitive but not corrective and thus teenagers grow up to be ‘hardcore’ criminals. The juvenile justice could learn a lot from the Bremen system in order to improve its effectiveness.
Huizinga, D., Schumann, K., Ehret, B., & Elliott, A. (October 2003). Effect of Juvenile Justice System Processing on Subsequent Delinquent and Criminal Behavior: A Cross-National Study. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice/NCJRS.
Lipsey, M. W., Howell, J. C., Kelly, M. R., Chapman, G., & Carver, D. ( 2010, December). Improving the Effectiveness of Juvenile Justice Programs; A New Perspective on Evidence-Based Practice. Retrieved April 13, 2012, from cjjr.georgetown.edu/pdfs/ebp/ebppaper.pdf
