Take two states and compare their juvenile justice systems - Research Paper Example

When they enter the system it’s a totally new ballgame for them. They come in proximity of those adults who have already committed crime. This can exert a negative effect on the young. Juvenile justice system has also criticized on the grounds of less interactive, lack of respect for the defaulter, lack of inputs which could persuade or give a fair chance to the defaulter to correct his or her fault encouraging them to take a right course of action (Glass, 2012, pp. 1-5). Juvenile justice, as mentioned, varies from state to state and each state has its own jurisdiction for such system.

It has been said by the authors that the juvenile justice system in California is not racially neutral. This was one of the worst drawbacks which the California juvenile justice system suffered. The decision points suffered from the effect of race. The authors emphasized that, “Minority youth are more likely than the majority youth to become involved in the system”. There were several issues that needed to be directed based on this system. In comparison with the adult criminal justice, the juvenile justice lacked supervision and review.

On the contrary it had also been found that in the juvenile justice system there had been cases which witnessed no disparity amongst the young defaulter. But when inequalities prevailed it involved either large differentiation at some point of stage in the system or else followed a sequence of accumulations of comparatively minor divergences in processing with a moderately hefty net effect. Moreover the system prevailed in California was volatile in nature which allowed the disparity in the system.

The system lacked an analytical model which desirably would simplify the problems existed within the system (Pope & William, July 1995, pp. 1-15). However in the light of the above mentioned critic, the juvenile justice system in California was subjected to some recommendation which, if implemented, would help it to become a system with more fluidity. It lacked a systematic monitoring which if developed would facilitate the processing at each stage of the juvenile justice. Introduction of research program was suggested.

Consideration in training and development of the staffs of the system was highly suggested which would make improvement in dealing with minor offenders. Critical examination at local stages, if implemented, would lower the gap between the minority and majority youth. Restructuring of laws in the juvenile justice was advised where problems of inequalities prevailed. Workshop for the youth psychoanalysis might help them to come out of mental disorder if any. The jurisdiction itself was suggested to be strengthened enough to carefully evaluate the decision making at every stage and should make a note of the thing that their dealings were with the minors with an derailed mindset, but not with the criminals (Pope & William, July 1995, pp. 19-20). In this contrast author Muncie, 2008, said, “Juvenile justice systems throughout America now give greater weight to punishment as an end in itself” (Muncie, 2008, pp. 3). A comparative analysis can be done by comparing the juvenile justice laws prevailing in Florida.

In contrast with California juvenile justice law the Florida law was less flexible and followed extreme consequences. In many cases it was noted that the victims were tried in adult court and received imprisonment for life. The psychoanalysis part was not at all strengthened in the Florida law, rather