Juvenile Justice System in America - Research Paper Example

Juvenile Justice System The Name of the Class (Course) Professor (Tutor) The Name of the School (University) The City and State where it is located The Date Juvenile Justice System Introduction According to the reports presented by the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice (2014, np), the crimes committed by youths have been on the decline since 1990. Such latest development has motivated various jurisdictions to take another look at the practices that were largely adopted between 1980s and 1990s. Today, policymakers in the United States have been engaging in the processes that seek to modify the juvenile justice system. Specifically, the modification process focuses on reducing institutional confinement and improving community-based interventions. Between the 18th and 19th centuries, youth criminals were punished and confined in jails and prisons meant for people who have committed serious crimes such as murder. They were also mixed with adults, hardened criminals and the mentally ill people in the same facility. Such facilities were also characterized by overcrowding and poor status of equipment. Most young offenders were also jailed due to lack of a better option. Such unfavorable conditions motivated public outcries that opposed the juvenile justice system at the time. In particular, reformists such as Thomas Eddy and John Griscom rallied the support of the community together to oppose what they believed was a flawed justice system for juveniles. They campaigned for the establishment special jail facilities and better systems where young people could be prosecuted. These campaigns led to the establishment of the house of refuge in 1825. The house of refuge was meant to contain youths who were poor, destitute and vagrant, especially ones who were thought to be headed in the direction of delinquency. The New York house of refuge is perceived by many scholars as important because it influenced the development of juvenile justice system in the country. The popularity of the house of refuge was so high such that twenty-five similar facilities were established in different parts of the country. This paper attempts to present an outline of juvenile justice system in the United States. The paper also seeks to discuss how the law punishes young people who take alcohol or abuse drugs in the same country. Lastly, the paper will provide examples where juvenile justice system may be applicable. The Outline of the Juvenile Justice System in America The official enactment of the juvenile justice and delinquency reform law occurred in 1974 in the United States (Finley, L. L. 2006, 146). The new policies aimed to improve the status of the juvenile justice system. Particularly, the new law focused on establishing a conventional system that can be applied across all the states of the United States. The juvenile justice and prevention office was established around the same period to facilitate the implementation of the reforms. To date, the juvenile justice system has undergone through a number of policy amendments. The last amendment occurred in 2012. The policy reforms contain directives regarding the expected treatment of juvenile offenders. The factors highlighted in the policy reform included de-institutionalization, segregation, and jail and lockup removal as well as over-representation of minority youths (Lawrence, R., & Hesse, M. 2010, 19). The objective of the new policy was based on the theory that asserts that juveniles are not able to provide an informed consent for the activities they undertake. Therefore, they are largely seen as products and victims of environmental circumstances. For that matter, they should not be treated as adults. The underlying theory towards reforming the juvenile justice system is supported by the rationale maintained by the court system (PBS, 2014, np). The court system maintained that the development process of young people is different from adults. For that matter, they cannot be subjected to the same treatment. The rationale of the reform process was also based on the fact that youths tend to exhibit compliant behavior. They can easily be persuaded by environmental circumstances to commit criminal activities. When it comes to punishment of young people, a number of debates occur in the country. People delve into discussions that explore the reasons whey juveniles commit criminal activities. Such discussions also focus on determining what causes the criminal behavior of juveniles. In fact, the existence of a number of questions regarding juvenile punishment has been the basis for the constant reformations of the juvenile justice system in America. Arguably, most juvenile criminal activities take place within the period when young people transitions into adulthood. It can also be asserted that young people are vulnerable to exploitation at that moment. The transition period is also characterized by the availability of opportunities, positive and negative turnarounds as well as redirection. All such factors can form a platform where young people can commit criminal activities. Most professionals maintain the opinion that the transition is a process that involves principal life course trajectories. The life course trajectories include factors such as education, work, the formation of families and residence among others. Consequently, such life pressures facilitate the likeliness of engagement in criminal behaviors. In other words, this is the time when youths who had started to engage in criminal behaviors continue to involve in such characters. It may also signify a reform in the behavior of such youths depending on the influential environmental factors. Other categories of young people begin to commit crimes when they have fully transitioned into adulthood. A description of the behaviors of juveniles is based upon the static theory. The theory asserts that the sequence of emergence of behaviors can be predicted and occurs around the same ages for many individuals. This theory explains that the behaviors of juveniles begin to take shape from young ages and are largely influenced by the relationship between a child and a parent. On the other hand, life-course developmental models assert that the constantly changing social environment influences young people to engage in criminal activities. This theory also puts more emphasis on the experiences of young people as one of the major drivers towards engagement in criminal behaviors. In this context, the importance of parental guidance comes into perspective. For instance, adequate and proper parental guidance is required to counter the habits picked by young people from various social relationships. This theory also asserts that life experiences are subjective in this circumstance. The subjective life experiences include the development of an individual’s identity. They also include the development of cognitive and emotional processes as well as the ability to make rational choices around circumstances. In general, all the theories that have been developed with the aim of understanding the behavior of young people emphasizes on the influential role of environmental factors. The reforms in the juvenile justice system are based on the notion that young people are vulnerable during their transition to adulthood. The reforms are also based on the notion that the behavior of young people can be motivated by the social, environmental factors as well as their relationships with their parents. Under the new reforms in the juvenile justice system, the access to public records of juvenile offenders is restricted. The strategy aims to prevent stigmatization of the juvenile offenders because it may derail the rehabilitation process. In fact, the new system emphasizes on the privation of the court proceedings that involve juvenile offenders. The casework followed by the system includes psychological aspects. In other words, the system considers the history of juvenile offenders to determine their cases. Their cases include unique social, psychological and physical needs. Young offenders who are accused of various crimes are required to attend hearings other than trials. The outcomes of such hearings are based on social factors affecting the accused individuals. Unlike the systems in the 18th and 19th century, the court has a number of options when it comes to punishing young offenders. For instance, the law enforcement agencies have the option of initiating preventative detention. They also have the option of detaining youths as a strategy for ensuring their safety. The detention of youths can also be a strategy for enhancing safety in a community where juvenile offenders live. The individualized nature of the juvenile justice system compels the law enforcement agencies to judge young offenders delinquently rather than guiltily (PBS, 2014, np). In this context, sentencing is a factor that is dependent upon various circumstances. Sentencing may include a number of community-based and residential alternatives. The determining factors include the individual history of the offender. They also include the severity of the offenses committed by such people. Lastly, the disposition in the sentencing also depends on the significant rehabilitative components. The court is allowed to send a juvenile offender to the facility for a specific period. Juvenile offenders may be released following a successful assessment of their behavior after the rehabilitation program. Correspondingly, the juvenile offender may also participate in a rehabilitative until it is convincingly established that he or she has attained the majority age. The disposition may also include a component of reinstitution and may target other people beside the offender. Such people may include parents or guardians. Such offenders are integrated back into their respective communities through paroles and surveillance strategies. In the system that centers on deterrence of criminal behavior, rehabilitation has been considered as the main agenda. In this context, the assertions developed and maintained by policy makers in the field is that criminal sanctions should be appropriate to the crimes committed. Under de-institutionalization, run-away and alcohol and substance abuse are considered as status crimes (Lawrence, R., & Hesse, M. 2010, 19). Such offenses are treated with an exception. In other words, such offenders may not be held or confined by the authority. Under segregation, young offenders who have been jailed should not be mixed with adult offenders. They should also eat in different dining halls and follow separate routes while in jail. In other words, they should not share anything with adult offenders. This strategy aims at preventing sexual assault and bullying of young people in prison by adult offenders. The jail and lockup removal factor leads the justice department to detain juvenile offenders in separate facilities. According to the act, the justice department should take a maximum of six hours to identify process, interrogate and transfer young offenders to juvenile prisons. The theory is that young offenders can be treated better if they are detained in separate facilities from adult offenders. Lastly, the law directs the state to reduce the rate of confinement of minority groups. Specifically, the rate of confinement of minority groups should correspond to the population of such minority groups (Lawrence, R., & Hesse, M., 2010, 19). The Punishment of Juvenile Alcohol and Substance Abusers The federal law of the United States sets the minimum age of drinking at 21 years. It means that it is a federal offense for people who are under 21 to be caught in possession of alcoholic substances. The national minimum drinking age was first enacted in 1984. Various studies tend to agree that the number of deaths associated with youth drinking reduced significantly after the law had been enacted. Specifically, the high death rates resulted from drinking and driving. Three offenses are associated with the minimum age drinking policy. Underage individuals are not allowed to purchase, be in possession or consume alcoholic substances. They are also not allowed to falsify their ages with the intention of qualifying for the purchase of alcohol. One of the approaches used to respond to the violation of rules regarding underage drinking includes sanctions. The main of objective of the sanctions is to convey social norms regarding the acceptable behavior (Bonnie, R. J., & O'Connell, M. E., 2004, 3). Under the juvenile justice system, the dispositions regarding underage drinking has three purposes. Firstly, the disposition should protect the public. The rationale for this purpose is that an alcohol impairs the judgment of the related abusers. The assertion can be confirmed by the fact high rate of road accidents that are associated to alcohol abuse. In other words, alcohol makes people make irrational decisions that could harm the abusers and other people. The second purpose of the disposition is that it should hold the offender accountable for violating the alcohol act. Taking responsibility of the act is the first step towards a successful rehabilitation from such acts. Thirdly, the disposition focuses on rehabilitating the juvenile to be in possession of alcohol or related crimes. Various states within America have different sanctions for juvenile offenders. For alcohol abusers, the sanctions are dependent on the specific nature of the crime committed. For instance, most states determines which category offense was committed by a juvenile offender. The categories of the crimes include possession, consumption, purchase and lying about one's age (Bonnie, R. J., & O'Connell, M. E., 2004, 5). The severity of sanctions varies, with some considered as civil while others criminal. The severity also depends on whether the sanctions need to be adjusted to fit the nature of the committed offense. The age of the offenders also determines the severity of the sanctions in some parts of the country. When a juvenile is found in possession of alcohol, the case may be handled by the juvenile court or a diversion program. The referral of the case is largely determined by the age of the offender. Other determining factor includes the nature of the offense and the adjudicative structure of the state where the crime was committed (Bonnie, R. J., & O'Connell, M. E., 2004, 7). The philosophies in these settings are different and may determine the nature of the sanctions imposed on the juvenile found in possession of alcoholic substance. Youths who fall between the 18 and 20 years are prosecuted by criminal court because they have exceeded the age limit that is stipulated in the juvenile justice system. One of the main goals of the criminal court is punished individuals whose offenses have been established and confirmed through a competent prosecution process. Therefore, the offenders are likely to receive formal verdicts. The records of the trial process and the offenses may also remain on permanent records even after completion of the sentence. The criminal court issues dispositions such as fines, incarcerations and participation community programs. Other forms of disposition include mandatory education and treatment or rehabilitation programs. The cases of the juvenile offenders who fall below 18 years are referred to juvenile courts for hearing. From the onset, alcohol and drug abuse is considered as a status offence young people who are below the age of 18 years. The theory of the argument is that young people cannot consent to what their actions. Economic, political and social contexts have been perceived as factors that influence the actions of people (Elrod, P., & Ryder, R. S. 2011, 50). Such theories tend to excuse young offenders from taking responsibilities of their behaviors. The increase in the rate of adolescent alcohol and substance abuse has influenced new opinions regarding how the challenge may be addressed by the state (Butts, J. 2004, 3). In the criminal courts, the severity of the offenses concerning alcohol and drug use is measured against the number of repletion of such offenses. For instance, the special courts allow the young alcohol and substance abusers to change their behaviors. They are taken through rigorous rehabilitative procedures. Their charges may be reduced or dropped upon a conclusive determination of changed behavior (Butts, J. 2004, 2). The nature of the legal punishments advances when such offenders repeat the crimes (Butts, J. 2004, 3). Juvenile offenders who repeat similar crimes after the rehabilitative program may b given serious legal penalties. The drug and alcohol courts perform functions that surpass the typical court mandates. They coordinate the cases of every juvenile offender who have abused drugs or alcohol (Butts 2004, p. 4). They also supervise the probation programs to verify the participation of the offenders. They manage review meetings and establish periodical hearings to ascertain the progress of the clients. Lastly, they conduct random tests for drugs and alcohol to verify the compliance of the offenders to rehabilitative procedures (Butts, J. 2004, 4). Diversion programs are largely considered as options to formal case hearings and trials and sanctions among others. Such programs aim to keep young offenders out of the juvenile justice system while holding them accountable for their actions at the same time. They are also known as pre-trial programs. They include community services, parental involvement, and education programs. Others include mandatory supervision, counseling and reinstitution among others. In return, the offenders are expected by the pre-trial services officers to abide by the stipulated rules and regulations pertaining to the program. The program is mainly meant for the offenders who have committed simple crimes. However, juveniles who have committed severe crimes may face the criminal or juvenile court depending on his or her age. The PTD program is mostly applicable for juveniles who have committed criminal acts for the first time. Following a conclusive assessment of the behavior of the offender after the program, the juvenile court may decide to proceed with the case or drop it. For instance, if the offenders manage to convince the pre-trial service officer that he or she has changed, then the case may be dropped by the juvenile court. However, there are juveniles who are below 21 years who are not eligible to the PTD program. Such categories include individuals who are drug addicts, public corruption defendants as well as those who have committed criminal acts in previous circumstances. Most underage youths who have already admitted to their offense such as the use of alcohol substance are tried in teen courts. Mostly, they fall between the age group of 10 and 17 years and are first-time offenders. The rationale for teen courts is that such offenders are less likely to repeat their offenses if they are engaged in court proceedings that enhance appropriate influence from peers. In the United States, alcohol-related offenses are among the most common offenses handles by teen courts. Sanctions issued by the juries in the teen courts include financial reinstitution, attending counseling programs, house detention and participating in community-based programs among others. Teen courts and juvenile courts also focus on addressing the origin of problems. For instance, alcohol abuse among juveniles may result from peer influence. Similarly, juveniles who consume alcohol may do so as a result of a stressful situation at home. They may also consume alcohol because of the permissiveness of regulations at home. Maybe the parents are not strict enough. Maybe they do not monitor the activities of their children. The teen and juvenile court could pass recommendations to the appropriate social service if it determined that the behavior of the juvenile is influenced by parents. Drug abuse among juveniles is considered as a serious case of behavior malfunction. Most juveniles found in possession of drugs are usually arraigned in juvenile drug courts. The related drug abuse cases include consumption or purchase. Professionals maintain the opinion that behavior change can be achieved through the combination of sanctions and adequate monitoring. The related rehabilitation program includes the participation from other members of other members (Bonnie, R. J., & O'Connell, M. E., 2004, 15). Juvenile drug abusers are required to attend treatment programs, attend drug tests and attend regular status hearing. The programs work effectively when the guilt of the offenders has been established. The establishment of the guilt status of the young offender allows the court to apply adequate authority that would influence the rehabilitation process. Conclusion A similar juvenile justice system such as the one described in the preceding discussion may be applicable in cases where the underage people are found to be in possession of weapons. In the United States, young people are not allowed to own guns. The argument is that they incapable of making rational decisions regarding the usage of weapons. Illegal Possession of guns is also treated as a status offense. However, under-age people who commit serious crimes such as murder, violence and rapes cases face severe penalties than rehabilitation. The strategy is seen by the justice department as a means of deterring the repeat of such cases. Specifically, such offenders are prosecuted in adult courts (Flowers, B. R. 2002, 5). Reference List Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, 2014. Juvenile Justice History. Retrieved December 9, 2014, from http://www.cjcj.org/juvenile/justice/juvenile/justice/history/0 Bonnie, R. J., & O'Connell, M. E., 2004. Effectiveness of Sanctions and Law Enforcement Practices Targeted at Underage Drinking Not Involving Operation of a Motor Vehicle. National Academies Associations, pp. 1-35. Flowers, B. R., 2002. Kids Who Commit Adult Crimes: Serious Criminality by Juvenile Offenders. Psychology Press. Butts, J., 2004. Juvenile drug courts and teen substance abuse. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute Press. Elrod, P., & Ryder, R. S., 2011. Juvenile justice: a social, historical, and legal perspective. Sudbury, Mass, Jones and Bartlett Publishers. Lawrence, R., & Hesse, M. 2010. Juvenile justice: the essentials. Thousand Oaks, Calif, SAGE Publications. Finley, L. L. 2006. Encyclopedia of juvenile violence. Westport, Conn, Greenwood Press. PBS. (2014, January 1). Juvenile Vs Adult Justice. Retrieved December 9, 2014, from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/juvenile/stats/juvvsadult.html Read More