Juvenile Justice System - Coursework Example

Juvenile Justice System This paper gives a direct emphasis on the issue of Juvenile justice system basing on certain aspects. In Juvenile Justice System, there are several aspects that need to be explored to the fullest. These aspects may include the social and legal issues relating with Juvenile Justice System, the theoretical and empirical literature issues that are related to juvenile offender programs that are designed to address a current juvenile justice issue or problem, the multi-variant etiology of delinquency and the right innovative and progressive programs that are set to prevent or rehabilitate juvenile offenders. This paper satisfactorily explains the issues mentioned above with a lot of keenness. The historical development history of Juvenile Justice System is also noted down in this paper. The U.S.A’s definition of the Juvenile Justice System has a variation from state to state. This means that every state in the U.S.A has its own definition about the Juvenile Justice System. The system is subjected to individuals of ages between 6-10 years that is depending on the state and also to 18 years. But, in the eleven states, in U.S.A, they regard a juvenile as an individual who is under 17 years while North Carolina and New york, a Juvenile is a person who is under 16 years. It is then proved that the juvenile criminal majority ranges from 16 years to 18 years (American juvenile justice system, 2003). In France, article 122-8 of the criminal code defines the criminal irresponsibility of children less than 13 years. Additionally the young who have years ranging from 13 years to 18 years are regarded to be irresponsible but if the juvenile delinquent personality and circumstance approve, these young children can be subjected to a criminal sentence. There are four important requirements that were set up by the Federal Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Act that was set up in 1974. The first requirement is the deinstitutionalization of status offenders that is transferring them from the juvenile hall and moving them to community based or family based environments. The second requirement is segregation of a boundary between juvenile and the adult offenders through sound and the sight separation. The third requirement is the strong limitation of putting juveniles in the jails that are meant for the adults. This is designed for the Juvenile Justice System. The last requirement is protection of groups that are regarded to be minor from an overrepresentation in high security facilities (Lipsey et al., 2010). There was a little difference between how the children offenders and the adult offenders were treated until the twentieth century. The only consideration that was put in place was age so that an appropriate punishment but it was evident that juveniles were subjected to the same punishment with the adult offenders even death penalty. At this time is when there was a change in attitude towards juvenile offenders. Children who were criminals were then called delinquent child which changed from the criminal child. There was an emergence of courts which were built to preside over juvenile cases. These courts provided an opportunity to the development of the philosophy parens patriae. Under the identified philosophy of parens patriae, the behaviour of criminal activities was then seen as a denial of parental care and control. It meant that the parents to the juvenile offenders gave no or little parental care and advice to the children. Therefore, there was a rule that was set to give the state a role of supervising and control before serious crimes are committed by the juveniles. This concept of gaining control over juvenile parental care gave an allowance for treating the juvenile offenders differently from the adult offenders by the Judicial System. But, unfortunately, the philosophy of parens patriae did not give maximum solution to the issues of the juveniles (Clark et al., 1996). The treatment of the juveniles just remained as part of life especially in the judicial system. In the 1960, the supreme court of the U.S. addressed this issue (Juvenile Justice Legal Issues, 2013). In the current time, all states in the U.S. have the Juvenile code or the Children’s code that gives a provision of specific substantive and procedural rules designed for the juveniles in the juvenile justice system. And additionally apart from giving mandate on the state juvenile code requirements, the Supreme Court also mandated constitutional processes standards in juvenile proceedings (Lipsey et al., 2010). The youth service department which is under the Executive Office of Health and Human Services is subjected to detention, training, care diagnosis and custody of delinquent offenders who are juvenile. The main mission and objective of the youth service department is to offer a program that is comprehensive and coordinated in dealing with delinquent children and also youths who have been referred or either committed to the Department by the courts of law. The services provided are offered to promote advanced public safety and also to prevent crime through promotion of acquiring pro-social skills and also provide opportunities for juvenile offenders. These opportunities should be positive (Kate, 2008). The role of the youth service department is given authority by the general law c. 120 which is meant to employ several components which may include medical, psychological, dental, legal, social work, investigative, psychiatric and additionally other expert personnel. The code of Juvenile delinquency is found in article 52-84 of chapter 119 of the general laws in the state while chapter 120 contains the department and guidelines of giving treatment and rehabilitation to juvenile offenders (The federal Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Act, 2006). Additionally chapter 18A of the General law gives an establishment on the youth service department which is regarded as an agency incorporated in the executive office of health and human services (Lipsey et al., 2010). The juvenile delinquency has a brief history since its code and the juvenile courts were established in the year 1906 in a place known as Massachusetts. In regard to this code, it is noted that there was no existence of any comprehensive law but the only thing that existed was a legislation regarding juveniles (Juvenile Delinquency, 2013). It stated that children who committed crimes were treated on the same level as other criminals and hence the punishments were distributed on equal grounds even death sentence unless juveniles under seven years. The initial plan of the juvenile courts was to pose a different treatment to the children offenders. They treated children as individuals who needed care, direction and additionally guidance. They never intended to treat children as criminals (Kate, 2008). Juvenile offenders are children who have been denied the opportunity of getting care and direction. These children have lacked a role model or somebody to give them good advice and guidance strategies. That is the only reason as to why they are into criminal activities. Subjecting them to equal punishment as other offenders will mean exercising injustice to these kids hence it will not help them, but it will still subject them to hardships and they will adapt to prison life in that even if they get of jail they will still engage in criminal activities knowing that they will have no problems when in jail (Ramirez et al., 2010). The only better way to deal with such cases is to establish rehabilitation institutions that will help them engage in meaningful activities such as being educated on income generating activities such as playing football and many other activities. While in the rehabilitation centres, they should be subjected to motivational talks to motivate them and boost their morale. This will help them a lot. Works cited Americanbar.org, Juvenile Delinquency: Current Issues, Best Practices, and Promising Approaches 12 Dec 2013 retrieved from https://www.americanbar.org/newsletter/publications/gp_solo_magazine_home/gp_solo_magazine_index/juveniledelinquency.html American juvenile justice system Clark, H.B., Lee, B., Prange, M.E. & McDonald, B.A. (1996). Children lost within the foster care system: Can wraparound service strategies improve placement outcomes? Journal of Child and Family Studies, 5, 39-54. Kate J. W., (2008). Literature Review: Wraparound Services for Juvenile and Adult Offender Populations. Lipsey W. M., Howell C. J., Kelly R. M., Chapman G., Carver D., (2010) Improving the Effectiveness of Juvenile Justice Programs: A New Perspective on Evidence-Based Practice. Mass.gov, Juvenile Justice Legal Issues 2013 retrieved from http://www.mass.gov/eohhs/gov/laws-regs/dys/juvenile-justice-legal-issues.html Ramirez L. F., Juvenile (2010). Delinquency: Current Issues, Best Practices, and Promising Approaches The federal Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Act Read More