Juvenile Delinquency - Research Paper Example

Juvenile Delinquency Juvenile delinquency can be defined as the illegal or antisocial behavior by adolescents or people under the age of majority, 18 years for most of the countries. Juveniles are those people who commit a crime but have not reached the age of majority or adulthood. The age of majority is usually predetermined in law especially for minor crimes. Committing a major crime may force the juvenile to be tried as an adult which means that the person may spend adolescence life in prison or serve a lifetime imprisonment. Delinquency is engaging in acts considered crimes by the law though it can also mean abandoned. When a person below the age of majority commits a crime frequently, he/she is tried and jurisdiction passed under a court system different from that trying and sentencing adults. The court has the obligation of determining the extent of risk the juvenile poses to the society and the advantages resulting from incarceration. There has being an increase of crimes committed by young people below the majority age and thus the need to examine the causes of and the best strategies and interventions designed to stop juvenile delinquency. History Before the 19th century, children were considered young adults and they had the obligation of observing the law and behaving accordingly. Children over 7 years of age who committed crimes were prosecuted in adults courts. If they were found guilty, there were no favors extended to them and they could be confined in the same prisons as the adult prisoners. By the 19th century, most of the countries created separate reform schools and work farms for the juveniles but others still confined the convicted children in adult prisons. In those days, the children were not rehabilitated while in prison. Their interaction with the adult prisoners ensured that they come out of prison as hardened criminals with increased criminal knowledge and resolution to indulge better in criminal activities. With time they became dangerous criminals and posed great security threats to the society (lawjrank, 2010). In the late nineteenth century, strides were made in trying of young convicts as adults. In 1899, the United States of America made legal history by establishing the first juvenile court in Chicago. This marked the beginning of a new era where children were tried and convicted differently from the adults. The established courts worked under two principles: juveniles lack the prerequisite maturity to take responsibility of their actions as compared to adults; and from the fact that their character is young and not yet fully developed thus can be rehabilitated to higher success rates compared to adult criminals. These two principles remain the benchmarks up to today of juvenile justice in US. However in the recent years there have being growing number of juveniles who are being tried as adults in much the same way that they could have been in the juvenile courts. This is in response to public outrage against the increasing numbers of violent crimes committed by children. Despite this, the rates of crimes committed by children have been on the downward trend since 1995. This is despite the belief held by the public that juvenile crime is out of control. The belief has resulted from television images like the shooting in Littleton of Columbine High School and the rampage of fifteen year old child who shot two classmates and both of his parents. The increasing violent crimes by children have forced states to adopt a get tough approach to juvenile justice since early 1990s. By the year 2003, most of the states had enacted legislation allowing prosecution of more children in the adults’ courts. There are provisions in law that allow prosecutors to try children as young as fourteen years as adults in certain circumstances. For instance, the California’s proposition 21 passed in the year 2000 allow prosecution of juveniles accused of felonies in the adult courts (Salekin, Rogers & Ustad, 2001). Stakeholders of Juvenile Delinquency The issue of juvenile delinquency requires the cooperation of different stakeholders in drafting, enactment and implementation of the law. There are various stakeholders of juvenile delinquency programs: youths; parents or guardians; county attorney; society; education system; and the juvenile. The youths are key stakeholders as they are the people committing juvenile crimes. If they commit a crime they are the ones the ones to be taken in juvenile courts. The parents or guardians are also active participants of the process as they have the responsibility of hiring a lawyer for their children for representation in the courts. Parents are responsible in providing the skill and support to their child during and after rehabilitation. With the proper guidance, the child will record improved social behavior and thus able to interact well with the societal members in a crime free life. Parental participation is paramount in changing the lives of the juveniles (Wasserman, Larkin, McReynolds, Lucas, Fisher & Santos, 2002). The county attorney holds the final decision of whether the juvenile will be prosecuted in the adults’ courts or in the juvenile system. The society at large has the responsibility of ensuring that the members of the community act in accordance with the law. The societal members have the responsibility of reporting any crimes committed and also help the convicted juvenile change his/her ways. Acceptance of the juvenile back into the society after undergoing rehabilitation will improve the life of the juvenile while rejection converts the juvenile back to the old criminal ways. The education system helps impart the knowledge on and how one can avoid crime. With a good educational curriculum, the number of juveniles convicted of crime will decrease immensely. Even if the judicial system, society, parents/guardians and fellow youths are willing to help the juvenile change his/her ways, the juvenile has to be willing to change. Without the urge to change by the juvenile, the efforts of the other stakeholders will be fruitless (Ncjfcj, 2010). Issues Addressed The juvenile justice system is very young in most of the countries and is faced with lots of challenges in legislation and implementation. There are issues that have not been well addressed by the system and others have satisfactorily been addressed. Among the issues of great concern is the placement option for the juveniles being prosecuted and serving imprisonment. This is in relation to the availability of resources to be used in rehabilitation as the juveniles have to undergo training to improve their lives in and outside prisons (Cruise, 2006). Also the legislation applicable during prosecution has been a challenge to the jury as some of the crimes require the young person accused of committing a crime to be tried in adult courts. The other issues are mental state of the juvenile, addiction treatment of the juvenile, rehabilitation training system, recidivism prevention and number of times that the accused has committed crimes (Buildingblocksforyouth.org, 2010). Juvenile Delinquency Interventions In order to retain a humane aspect in dealing with juveniles, as sensitive as they are, juvenile delinquency experts recommend social interventions place of judicial interventions. The reason for advocating for a more juvenile friendly approach is to mitigate the effect of breeding hard core criminals in the process, like observed in many judicial processes. Community interventions have been successfully adopted to reduce and mitigate juvenile delinquency, especially where all the stakeholders join hands to find solutions to the vices. Such interventions include those that aim at reducing the cases of juvenile delinquency at the local level for instance in the homes, neighborhoods and at schools. Multiplier effect of the sustained benefits is expected to leave a broader impact on the general population (Anstine et al, 1995). Examples of community intervention strategies include the following; Citizen mobilization: these are interventions designed to involve the public in crime prevention by addressing main risk factors, coming up with the necessary solutions to assist delinquency prevention. For instance, citizen patrols act as a derailment procedure since the locals have a direct interaction with possible delinquency behavior and are best suited to prevent its occurrence. Neighborhoods can also organize block watch programs which act as preventive measures. The principle idea is the close observation of suspicious behavior that the citizen has on a daily basis, and how it can be utilized in making impact to reduce juvenile delinquency (Anstine et al, 1995). Situational prevention: the authorities join hands with the locals to make the environment not conducive for delinquent behavior to occur, and if it occurs, it becomes very easy for the offender to be apprehended. For instance, target hardening is an intervention where barriers are created to make it hard for the juvenile offender to access a crime target (Becker et al, 2004). One such example is the introduction of steering locks in West Germany which substantially reduced car theft after the implementation. Comprehensive community interventions: the entire community that is affected by the delinquent behaviors pool resources together in a coordinated manner throughout the community. These measures are embarked by communities where crime and other juvenile delinquency appear to be a major setback to security and peace. Families and schools for instance find support from the media to highlight the dangers of juvenile delinquency as well as finding solutions to problems such as drug abuse. Mentoring has also been employed by various communities where adults who act as role models find time to talk and influence delinquent juveniles. Lack of commitment to school work has been addressed in various schools to reduce possible drooping out of school. Other area where intervention through mentoring has been effective is in drug abuse, violent behavior and negative peer pressure. Afterschool recreation programs: many NGOs and CBOs have engaged the youth to keep them busy and positive in a number of afterschool recreational programs. At the programs, juveniles learn skills to equip them with socially acceptable behavior as well as enable them steer from negative peer pressure. Drug abuse has successfully been tackled since idleness contributes to easy abuse (Moak et al, 2004). Policing strategies: police departments’ attempts to reduce juvenile delinquency have been faced by challenges of the changing lifestyles and technology. Policies to curb crime for instance have been made to take care of personal attitude, social networks as well as citizen involvement in policing. Fro instance, conspicuous colors on police cars have been used to derail some criminal instances when police are in sight. Public talks and involvement creates a feeling of police presence within the community. Policy change strategies: the state control over some exposing factors can be said to contribute to intervention measures where direct impact is felt by juvenile offenders. Delinquent behavior fro instance with regard to alcohol and tobacco can be regulated by government policies controlling their availability and marketing. For instance, where alcohol drinking age is raised, the vice considerably falls. Media interventions: campaigns can be run by media houses to effectively influence behavior in juveniles. Media influence is particularly high on the youth and the nature of campaign carried on reduces a particular delinquent behavior. Weighing Alternatives Educational programs targeting positive behavior: the advantage is that the key to behavior change is personal initiative and not the use of force. Judicial justice system may fail due to the apparent element of force. These measures may however face resistance due to identity crisis prevailing at that age (Burton et al, 2004). Recreational activities interventions are effective due to the active stage that the youth are in. A disadvantage lies in the group that hates interacting with the rest. Citizen mobilization gets the rare boost of unity of purpose where willingness by the majority prompts the minority to act in prevention of juvenile delinquency. Lack of responsibility always cripples such efforts since accountability issues come in the way. Situational prevention considerably reduces delinquent behavior especially if the target crime is controllable. However, it is not always possible to create physical barriers to all the targets. Mentoring contributes to behavioral change, in a friendly influence manner that tackles all forms of resistance. However, it becomes hard to be effected if the society lacks appropriate role models or when the role model cannot easily be reached. Policing strategies involve the community in identifying the specific areas of juvenile delinquency and assists to find specific solutions to the problems. A disadvantage to the strategy is the element of force before the intention of regaining positivity is achieved, which keeps off possible reforms as early as possible. Policy change by the government to create an impact on juvenile offenders is effective and cuts across the country making it uniform for the entire country. Lack of efficient watch on prevention measures however is an impediment to its realization. Media campaigns reach a wider number of victims and the huge influence can change possible offenders. Media on the other hand contradicts such humble efforts by undertaking contrary business which confuses the victims. Future Prediction Following the arrival of the digital revolution that the world is experiencing today, it can be predicted that social networks will be utilized in the dissemination and imparting of intervention skills. Liberalization of individual rights and privileges will be at a top height in the next two decades and judicial interventions will play a lesser role in shaping juveniles, but will still be important (Bizan et al, 2010). Communities may find it useful to regroup and find collective solutions since it has delivered in a segregated approach, characteristic in democratic countries. Counseling and guidance will continue to play a key role in formation of more complete individuals at the end of their school years. References Anstine P. S., Dudovitz B., Komro K. A., Perry C. L.,Toomey T. L., Veblen M. S. and Williams C. L., (1995), “A Home-based Prevention Program for Sixth Grade Alcohol Use: Results form Project Northland”, Journal of Primary Prvention, 16(2):125-147. DOI: 10.1007/BF02407336 Becker J. V., Figueredo A. J., Hunter J. A. and Malamuth N. M., (2004). “Developmental Pathways in Youth Sexual Aggression and Delinquency: Risk Factors and Mediators”, Journal of Family Violence, 19(4):233-242 Bizan S. L., Fay K., Lynch A. D., McPherran C., and Schmid K. (2010). “Trajectories of Positive and Negative Behaviors from Early- to Middle-Adolescence”, Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39(7):751-763 Buildingblocksforyouth.org (2010), Juvenile Justice Issues retrieved on 20th September 2010 from http://www.buildingblocksforyouth.org/issues/. Burton V. S., Craig H., Steiner B. and Wada J., (2004). “The Correctional Orientation of Community Corrections: Legislative Changes in the Legally Prescribed Functions of community Corrections 1992–2002”, American Journal of Criminal Justice, 29(2):141-159. Cruise, K. R. (2006). Special Issues in Juvenile Justice, Applied Psychology in Criminal Justice, 2(3), 177-204. Law.jrank.org (2010), Juvenile Law–History, retrieved on 20th September 2010 from http://law.jrank.org/pages/7956/Juvenile-Law-History.html. Moak S. C., and Moore N. T. and Wallace L. H., (2004). “Religion as an insulator of delinquency in schools” American Journal of Criminal Justice, 29(2):217-233 Ncjfcj.org (2010), Juvenile Delinquency Guidelines: Improving Court Practice in Juvenile Delinquency Cases, retrieved on 20th September 2010 from http://www.ncjfcj.org/content/view/411/411/. Salekin, R.T., Rogers, R., & Ustad, K.L. (2001). Juvenile waiver to adult criminal courts: Prototypes for dangerousness, sophistication-maturity, and amenability to treatment. psychology, Public Policy, & Law, 7, 381-408. Wasserman, G.A., Larkin, S., McReynolds, M., Lucas, C.P., Fisher, P., & Santos, L. (2002). The Voice DISC-IV with incarcerated male youths: Prevalence of disorder, Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent, Psychiatry, 41, 314-321. Read More