The debate on whether minors should be held in the same stature as adults for equal crimes is one that has been raging on for a long period. The debate is occasioned by the enticing argument that any form of societal and criminal misconduct should always be tackled by undertaking tougher punishments on offenders regardless of age. However, applying the same metric of punishment to juveniles as adults is not the solution. It is especially the case considering that research indicates that minors that receive adult sentences become more likely repeat offenders as opposed to those that go through the juvenile system (Maggi, 2008). Secondly, due to psychological and developmental factors, it is much easier to rehabilitate a minor as compared to an adult yet the adult prison system does not provide an appropriate environment to facilitate such rehabilitation. Therefore, treating juveniles as adults does not prevent criminal behavior in the future and as such, the solution lies in having a tailored juvenile system that is independent of the adults’ criminal justice system.
A tailored juvenile system offers the best chance for rehabilitating the minors. Rehabilitation is a better approach to assisting minors that find themselves on the wrong side of the law. As opposed to adult prison and jail systems, juvenile systems make it possible to create programs that incline the minors to accept the behavior and atone for their behavior while at the same time being accountable for their lawful actions. Having an independent juvenile system will also make it possible to have a highly specific and targeted approach by the community which would not be possible in an adult prison/jail system. The restrictions on such approaches in adult prison and jail systems are as a result of negative societal perceptions towards offenders and an actual poor record of reform witnessed in such adult institutions. By formulating community initiatives that are geared towards the juvenile system, it becomes easy to gain the
trust of the young offenders which increases the probability of such minors outgrowing their criminal tendencies (Richards, 2011). Having a tailored juvenile system as opposed to treating such minors as adults has some inherent benefits as discussed below.
Having a dedicated juvenile system leads to lower instances of repeat offenders in the future (Kumli, 2014). The reason for this assertion is both deductive and psychological. The aim of any criminal justice system is to lower the rate of crime in a particular jurisdiction which is the primary motivation behind for treating minor offenders in a similar manner as their adult contemporaries. It is because it is hoped that through the punishment undertaken, such offenders would experience behavior change. However, research has indicated that transferring of juveniles to criminal courts does not lower the probability of crime occurring in the future but rather increases the chances of an offender relapsing into crime once out of a penal institution. It is therefore evident that by resorting to treating minors as adults, the criminal justice system does not live up to its original mandate.
On the other hand, a dedicated juvenile justice system lowers the rate of repeat offenders due to the following reason. By providing specific and targeted community initiatives to the juvenile system, most of the minors can grow out of crime in the long run (Richards, 2011). It is because research shows that crime rates typically rise during the adolescent stage and falls as an individual approaches early adulthood (Richards, 2011). It is therefore possible to avoid future crime when a minor is in a juvenile environment. In an adult institution, there is a low probability that the age-crime curve will be respected since the prison environment is deemed as too violent to assist the juveniles transit into a crime free life.
A tailored juvenile justice system bears the advantage of ensuring public safety while at the same time rehabilitating the minors (Kumli, 2014). One of the principle roles of the criminal justice system is ensuring that the public is safe from offenders through incarceration. That pledge extends even in the event that the offender is a minor. However, the solution offers a double advantage. It is because such a system demands that a minor be locked away from the public. On top of the incarceration, the system through community initiatives also ensures that such minor offenders are afforded the opportunity to undergo rehabilitation in an environment suitable for juveniles. By lowering the probability of such offenders relapsing into crime, public safety is further enhanced even in the long run. It is unlike the situation in adult institutions in which chances of rehabilitation are low which raises the probability of an offender committing a crime after serving their full sentence which then lowers overall public safety in the long run.
Having a dedicated juvenile justice system lowers the stigma that such minors face. The doli incapax doctrine holds that children mature at different speeds and as such the extent in which they can differentiate between virtue and vice varies (Richards, 2011). It is therefore the case that in most instances, such minor offenders are not inherently capable of committing crime as opposed to their adult counterparts. Consequently, in the event that such minors is exposed to the adult justice system, they may bear the stigma of being perceived as outlaws even though it is evident from the doli incapax doctrine that committing crime is not innate to the minors. Societal perceptions towards juvenile institutions are less harsh when compared to adult institutions which therefore lower the level of stigmatization. It is especially the case considering that a dedicated juvenile justice system has some special characteristics that aim to protect the identity and dignity of the minor (Maggi, 2008). Such features include not revealing the identity of the incarcerated minor.
Therefore, adopting a unique approach towards dealing with minors is not a means of excusing them from their behavior. It is rather an admission that as minors, their inherent cognitive and developmental capacities cannot be held at par with those of adults especially if the aim is to rehabilitate such minors. Therefore, treating juveniles as adults does not prevent criminal behavior in the future and as such, the solution lies in having a tailored juvenile system that is independent of the adults’ criminal justice system
References
Kumli, K (2014). Juvenile justice. Frontline Retrieved August 20, 2016 from
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/juvenile/bench/whatittakes.html
Maggi, L (2008). Treating juveniles as juveniles. Project Right Inc Retrieved August 20, 2016
Richards, K (2011). What makes juvenile offenders different from adult offenders? Australian
http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi409.pdf
