Juvenile Delinquencies in the Contemporary World - Essay Example

Running head:  JUVENILE JUSTICE AND POLICING Juvenile Justice and Policing Insert         Insert Grade Insert 6 January 2012  Outline Introduction Juvenile justice Juvenile policing conclusion Juvenile Justice and Policing Introduction Juvenile delinquencies are common in contemporary world. Primarily, they are committed by minors below, leading to encounters with law enforcement. Ohio juvenile detention is rated as having the highest number of juvenile crimes in the United States, compared to other states (Asher, 2006, p.3). Needless to say, the causes of juvenile delinquencies may vary; some of these behaviors are learnt from peers, and according to Asher (2006, p.7), poverty is among the major contributing factors to such crimes. Children lacking basic needs are forced to engage in delinquent behavior in order to make ends meet. Nevertheless, these crimes cannot go unpunished. Juvenile justice system in the United States involves children below the age of 18 years; in Ohio, each county has a juvenile court, which tries juvenile offenders. The Ohio department of youth service confines juvenile offenders, and provides intervention programs among other juvenile justice services (Wonnacott & Wagner, 2008, p.1). Columbus is the capital city of Ohio, which is the largest state in the United States, and where juvenile offenses are common. Columbus public schools offer education for the detention centers, which comprise of youths. These juvenile detainees are offered education and religious services as well as recreation programs (Henderson, N.d). This paper will discuss juvenile justice and policing at length. Juvenile Justice The main purpose of juvenile justice system is to protect the public from offenders, hold the juvenile offenders accountable for their criminal activities, rehabilitate juvenile offenders, protect, and care for the juveniles, and protect the victims’ rights (Sartini, 2011). As a result, all the above factors must be balanced for justice to prevail. In 2011, the Ohio House of Representatives proposed some amendments to the juvenile system. The current laws require that some serious juvenile cases be transferred to an adult court for further prosecution; such cases involve murder and rape among others. However, the proposed policy will change the manner in which the serious juvenile crimes are handled; if the proposed legislation becomes law, then the judge has the power to decide which offenders should be tried in adult courts (Sartini, 2011). Needless to say, this proposed legislation brought about a debate, as Sartini argues that, the current laws provide fairness and justice to the victim. However, if the proposed legislation were made law, it would be unfair to some victims of serous crimes, for instance, murder and rape. According to Winacott & Wagner (2011, p.1), the Ohio, Columbus juvenile justice system involves a process that begins when a minor is arrested. These offenders are offered an alternative of participating in diversion programs, which include community services and continuous good behavior, which can be presented before a court. However, in some cases, the offender may not be offered diversion. In this case, he is placed in a juvenile center awaiting adjudication or disposition. Adjudication involves filing of criminal charges, which leads to a court hearing and the accused minor is found either delinquent or not delinquent. Disposition involves the juvenile being subjected to various sanctions, which depend on the age of the offender and the seriousness of a crime (Wonnacott & Wagner, 2008, p.2). In addition, a juvenile court can decide to commit felony offenders up to 10 years until they reach 21 years; here, the juveniles are placed in correction facilities. Direct placement is another option for the court; this results from lower level of a felony, whereby, the offender is placed in a correctional facility in a county. Probation entails returning the low-level offenders to the community, but under supervision by a probation officer. This includes reporting daily for community service, electronic monitoring, or house arrest among other requirements (Wonnacott & Wagner, 2008, p.2). Programming involves developing a re-entry program in the correctional facilities, which eases the offender’s entry to their homes by increasing their chances of succeeding in the future. This plan includes meeting several goals, for instance, academic requirements and occupational skills, and it is based on the offender’s commitment to change. Finally, a youth can only be released form a correction facility after completing the term of commitment issued by a court; however, some are released on supervised parole depending on the seriousness of their crimes. After some time, the youth’s parole status is taken off; however, incase he violates the conditions of the parole, he is sent back to the correction facility (Wonnacott & Wagner, 2008, p.3). This Ohio program enables the juvenile courts to consider providing community–based options as forms of correcting juvenile offenders. Cole & Smith (2007, p.393) add that, juvenile justice in the United States involves various procedures in different counties and states; however, despite the difference in procedures, the juvenile justice system in the United States is determined by the age of the client and the and the category of the crime. The age of a minor determines whether he should be tried in a juvenile court or an adult court; however, in some states, judges have the power to transfer the juveniles to adult courts. In Ohio, a juvenile can be transferred to an adult court as early as 14 years of age, while in Nebraska and Tennessee a juvenile can only be transferred to adult court starting from the age of 16 years (Cole & Smith, 2007, p.393). In 2010, Ohio counties formed a coalition that aimed at improving the juvenile justice system by emphasizing on juvenile detention alternative initiative. The initiative aimed at obtaining positive outcomes from the juveniles through better alternatives and promoting an effective legal representation in court (juvenile justice initiative Ohio, 2010). This means that the residents of Ohio are not satisfied by the current juvenile justice system, and as a result, pushing for reforms that will ensure that juveniles are treated fairly according to their rights. Juvenile Policing Juvenile justice system is a combination of detention, correction, treatment, and community services, all of which are aimed at ensuring that the juvenile offenders are protected and assisted towards a journey of success. The confinement of such youth in department of youth (DYS) facilities results to the state of Ohio spending $184 to lock up one youth, and the correction facility may admit a total of 1,778 youths daily (voices for children of greater Cleveland, N.d, p.1). Policing juveniles is not an easy task, as the level of juvenile offenders continues to rise; police are trusted with the responsibility of maintaining law and order by preventing crime. Juvenile offending awareness continues to draw attention to the juvenile justice system, with fear of youth violence (Myers, 2002, p.1). The role of the police in juvenile justice system is often overlooked; the police interaction with the juvenile offenders can either curb or increase crime. According to Myers (2002, p.2), some of the arrested juveniles may be released after being reprimanded, which they assume will solve the problem. Nevertheless, the police decide on how to handle juvenile offenders, and therefore, there are varieties of responses they can choose from. Therefore, police operate while dealing with juveniles, a police can decide to either use his authority or provide support and assistance (Myers, 2002, p.3) on two dimensions. Nevertheless, the police can decide to use community policing, which involves the residents of a neighborhood reporting any suspicious events. In the city of new Franklin Ohio, there exists a community-policing program, which involves a coalition between the police and the community. Here, residents have the responsibility of policing their neighborhoods; the residents are trained on various ways to recognize suspicious activities and they are expected to call the police (city of new Franklin Ohio, 2011). They are also trained on tips that prevent crimes in their neighborhood. In the city of Franklin, Ohio, juvenile diversion program is voluntary, and maximizes community resources; specialized contracts involve a juvenile offender, the parents, and the new Franklin juvenile diversion unit. It serves an alternative to the juvenile court system or having a juvenile record (city of new Franklin Ohio, 2011). This juvenile diversion program aims at preventing juvenile offenses and holding the juvenile offenders accountable for their crimes by giving back to the community through community service. Such partnerships between the police and the community are some of the strategies geared towards achieving an effective juvenile justice system. Myers (2002, p.7) adds that, in the United States, policing juveniles takes different forms, for instance, if a felony appears strong, the police are forced to make an arrest. They can also respond to a compliant request without having to arrest a juvenile, especially if the offense is of a low category. In addition, studies reveal that females are less likely to be arrested compared to their male counterparts (Myers, 2002, p.10). Police have a variety of decisions to choose from when dealing with juvenile offenders, including investigating, arrest, command, or to advise the juvenile. Conclusion Juvenile delinquencies are common especially in the United States, with Ohio state indicating high level of arrests. Nevertheless, there exists a juvenile justice system in Ohio, which requires the juvenile arrested for serious crimes such as murder or rape to be tried in an adult court. However, this law is facing oppositions and it is seen as a hindrance of the rights of minors due to its strict nature. Needless to say, juvenile offenders follow a process of juvenile justice of Ohio, which involves arrest, diversion, probation, Adjudication, disposition and release depending on the weight of the crime committed. In addition, juvenile policing is common in the United States, whereby, the police are involved in arrests or release of these offenders. From the research above, it is clear that police have a variety of options to choose from when dealing with juveniles offenders. They can arrest, command, investigate or advice the offenders depending on the level of the offense. Community policing is another effective approach to curbing juvenile crime; residents are trained on how to identify suspicious activities, and thereafter reporting to the police. Nevertheless, effective juvenile justice and policing system is necessary to curb juvenile delinquencies, but the use of authority and support while dealing with juveniles is vital. References Asher, J. (2006). Exploring the relationship between parenting styles and juvenile delinquency; Miami University. Retrieved from http://etd.ohiolink.edu/send-pdf.cgi/Asher%20Jeff%20A.pdf?miami1165594171 City of new Franklin Ohio. (2011). The police department; new Franklin. Retrieved from http://www.newfranklin.org/index.php/departments-services/police Cole, G & Smith, C. (2007). Criminal Justice in America. Edition5, Cengage Learning publisher. Retrieved from http://books.google.co.ke/books?id=41w-dnG_xHsC&pg=PA393&dq=how+the+juvenile+justice+system+operates+in+Ohio&hl=en&sa=X&ei=kZQvT7OYK-S5iQe3nYSdBg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=how%20the%20juvenile%20justice%20system%20operates%20in%20Ohio&f=true Henderson, H. (N.D). Franklin county juvenile detention centre. Retrieved from http://www.fccourts.org/drj/juvdet.html Juvenile justice initiative Ohio. (2010). juvenile detention reform in Ohio. Retrieved from http://www.vfc-oh.org/cms/site/cbf66f9164d1a0de/index.html Myers, S. (2002). Police encounters with juvenile suspects: Explaining the Use of Authority and Provision of Support. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/205125.pdf Sartini, T. (2011). The Columbus dispatch. Should Senate pass reforms of juvenile-justice system? No: Changes would remove uniformity and fairness from bind-over process. Retrieved from http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/editorials/2011/06/03/juvy-con-art-gqvct92u-1.html Voices for children of greater Cleveland. (N.d). juvenile justice is youth development. Retrieved from http://www.vfcoh.org/cms/resource_library/files/2d3e9348a125eb60/juvenilejustice_3_8.pdf Wonacott, M., & Wagner, J. (2008). Juvenile justice and WIA youth services. Retrieved from http://jfs.ohio.gov/owd/WorkforceProf/Youth/Docs/Juvenile_Justice_WIA_Youth_Svcs.pdf Read More