Juvenile Justice Systems

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).

Minors are a diverse group that varies in terms of the severity of criminal acts they commit, the frequency with which they commit criminal acts, how early they begin their criminal career, and how long they commit these crimes for. For many minors, juvenile lawlessness is a short-lived flirtation that disappears as quickly as it emerges. It is common and even normal for minors to engage in trivial forms of misbehavior and delinquency as they mature through adolescence and enter adulthood. However, for some minors, juvenile lawlessness has a more troubling meaning.

The juvenile justice system and criminal justice system also known as the adult justice system is two different systems. The juvenile justice system is children who are under the age of 18 years old. After the age of 18, it is considered to be an adult it will enter through the adult justice system. There ate states that allows youth to stay in the juvenile justice system from age 18 until 21. The main differences between the juvenile justice system and criminal justice system is rehabilitation and parole.

Knowledge deters youth from committing offenses because youth will not want to be tried in the adult justice system. However, this should not happen because teenagers are not equipped to handle situations in the same methods at adults. According to the Juvenile Justice Center “The evidence now is strong that the brain does not cease to mature until the early 20’s in those relevant parts that govern impulsivity, judgment, planning, for the future, foresight, of consequences, and other characteristics, that make people morally culpable.” Juveniles cannot process or plan a crime in the same manner as an adult. The teenage brain is undergoing tremendous amount of growth in its ability to reason, make decisions and delay gratification. The teenage brain cannot be held responsible for actions like an adult

The American juvenile justice system had developed over the past century with a number of variables that makes it different from the adult criminal justice process. Juvenile justice advocates supports the differences on the youthful offenders. Juvenile crime policy over the course of the twentieth century talks about transferring the law’s conceptions of young offenders. Starting from the nineteenth century, many of the youths were tried and punished as adults. However, treatment of juveniles in the United States started to change. Reformers created a way where juveniles can be housed in special facilities. Their mission was to protect juvenile offenders by separating them from adults. Juvenile justice system focuses primarily on rehabilitation and help youths avoid a future of crime. Since then there have been many milestones and historical evolutions that can make juvenile justice an effective system.

“The cornerstone principle of the juvenile justice system in the United States is the idea that young people are different from adults.” (American Civil Liberties Union). Yet the current American juvenile justice system has, and continues to rely heavily on incarceration as means of deterrence and punishment, which is the same strategy used in the adult justice system. “Adolescents differ from adults in the way they behave, solve problems, and make decisions. There is a biological explanation for this difference. Studies have shown that brains continue to mature and develop throughout childhood and adolescence and well into early adulthood. Scientists have identified a specific region of the brain called frontal cortex, that controls reasoning and helps us think before we act, and is still

Are young offenders truly capable of understanding the consequences that their actions might cause? Sometimes the crimes that juveniles commit are horrendous, but does that mean they are no longer a child anymore? There are ways to investigate a child mental development. However, we must ask questions like how is the child raise? Who are their guardians? Is there any structure in their home? Is there any neglect and abuse? These questions can help us understand the history and upbringing to configure the state of mind of the child. When these question are answered we find out majority of the young offenders come from dysfunctional families, where there is no type of structure in their home. However, juvenile offenders should not be tried as adults because they have not fully matured and such as they will suffer physical and psychological damage.

Just like adult offenders with mental health, we also are faced with youth in the justice systems that have mental health issues as well. Seeing as mental health for youth reaches such a broad spectrum for young offenders and their brains are still maturing, unlike in adults, it is tricky to pinpoint main causes in a precise definition across the board. Being so, mental health is often misdiagnosed in young offenders. Some behaviours that are similar to adolescence growing up such as acting out are not taken serious nor seen to be a mental health disorder. In reality these corresponding behaviours could be underlying symptoms of mental health issues. Not only can these disorders be a genetic trait but they could also stem from traumatic experiences. These youth who seem to present or maybe sometimes not present with mental health often end up in our youth detention centres. These youth with mental health make up an extensive subgroup in our justice system. For a long time this has been a crisis because our courts were unaware of the impact and also don’t know how to address this issue. Trying to balance the needs of these youth, keeping their

The modern day Juvenile Justice System (JJS) in the U.S. evolved out of fragmented reform movements throughout the country that began in 1800 and continued into the 1900’s, Progressive Era. Out of the many movements that were occurring in various states, two pioneered approaches took place that could easily be considered the roots of the entire JJS. In 1824 in the state of New York, the New York House of Refuge became the nation’s first reformatory for children. For the first time, there was an alternative to placing young offenders within jails and it did not take long for other states to create their own versions to address growing concerns about incarcerated youth (Einstein Law, 2015). Next, Illinois in 1899 changed the way young offenders interacted with the court with the creation of the nation’s first juvenile court. For the first time the focus shifted from that of criminalization and punishment, to one of social support that provided guidance, care, and kept young offenders from almshouses and penitentiaries. In addition, the Illinois Juvenile Court removed the stigma of labels and afforded protections to the young by creating closed proceedings and using terminology such as petitions of delinquency, dispositions and adjunctions instead of criminal charges, sentences and trials to (Long, 1999). Once the idea of a formalized JJS took hold in the country very little changed until the U.S. Supreme court and Federal Government pass laws that regulated the entire

In most cases, I do not believe that the deterrence effect or threat of punishment works in preventing delinquent behavior. I say most cases because there is “evidence that deterrence measures can work with novice offenders who commit minor or petty offenses, more experienced and serious delinquents are harder to discourage” (Siegel Pg.68). The book, explains many different reasons to why deterrence may not be successful. For example, “the stigma of harsh treatment labels adolescents and helps lock offenders into a criminal career instead of convincing them to avoid one” (Siegel Pg. 67).  One of the main goals of the juvenile justice system is to reduce the recidivism rate among offenders and to potentially rehabilitate them as a whole and

The main legislation governing the youth justice system is the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, which sets out the system's primary aim which is to prevent offending and re-offending by children and young people. The 1998 Act developed the Youth Justice Board and also the Youth Offending Teams which can be found in every local authority in England and Wales. It is the belief that the main aim of the youth justice system is to prevent offending and re-offending by young people and children (National Audit Office, 2010).

Trying juveniles as adults will deter other juveniles from committing violent crimes. They must be fully mindful of their behavior and should understand their actions. If they are held accountable for their actions, other juveniles will see this as a deterrent. Criminal choices made by juveniles are treated to a lesser degree than that of an adult offender for reasons like their unformed character (Steinberg & Scott, 2003). The juvenile's behavior is out of character, and decision-making capacities are impaired by emotional disturbances, mental illness, retardation,

Teenagers are in a troubling transition from child to adult. This can mainly be seen in brain growth during this time period. Teens have a weird development pattern in the frontal lobe of the brain compared to adults. This frontal lobe affects general emotions and rational thinking. Based on research done by Assistant Professor of Neurology at the University of California, Los Angeles, School of Medicine Paul Thompson, “While research on brain-tissue loss can help us to understand teens better, it cannot be used to excuse their violent or homicidal behavior. But it can be used as evidence that teenagers are not yet adults, and the legal system shouldn’t treat them as such,” (Thompson 11). This in essence suggests that Juveniles should be treated in a different way then like adults as supported by the Supreme

According to Mandery, three differences would classify juveniles under the age of 18, not the worst offenders. First, there is “a lack of maturity and an underdeveloped sense of responsibility found in youth more often than in adults and are more understandable among the young” (Mandery, 2012, pg.265). This lack of maturity and an underdeveloped sense of responsibility is linked to a juvenile’s brain functions since it is not properly developed compared to that as an adult. According to Johnson and Colleagues, there is a direct link that exists between an “immature brain” and “immature behavior.” They claim that the prefrontal cortex of the brain is the last area to mature. Since the prefrontal cortex is not fully developed structurally and

Juvenile brain development studies have conclusively shown that our brains are not fully developed until we reach the age of 25. Research has shown that the white matter in the brain, which controls insights, judgment, self-awareness and empathy, is one of the last parts to fully mature. This lack of fully developed executive functions should be taken into account in the juvenile justice system.