A Separate Juvenile Justice System

Placing a juvenile in a detention center early in the court process increases the risk that youths will be found to be delinquent and damage their prospects for future success. A majority of the youths that are placed in these facilities pose little or no threat to the public and essentially do not need to be there. This portion of the juvenile court process is detrimental to the future and mental aspects of a youth’s life. We desperately need to change the way that we handle the juvenile court system because we are only reinforcing the delinquent behavior that these youths have been exposed to. We need to focus on the rehabilitation and prevention efforts for these youths not the punishment aspect and until then (insert a better ending).

This paper will look at the importance of Preventing Juvenile Delinquency and what different ideas, concepts and methods are available to those adolescents that are either at-risk already or those that can be in the future. Early prevention is the best method of slowing down the statistics of crimes among adolescents, by keeping them off of the streets and out of the justice system by providing the means to teach them to be productive rather than destructive.

The Juvenile Justice System was established in 1899 when the first documented court hearing took place in Cook County, Illinois. This type of court system was designed to discipline, treat, and rehabilitate children under the legal age of eighteen, who are caught and/or convicted of committing crimes against society. Since its creation, many have argued for and against having two separate but parallel court systems. This essay will discuss the basic arguments in favor of and in opposition to the retention of the juvenile justice system.

When a juvenile commits a crime, it is not considered a crime, however it is considered juvenile delinquency. A massive problem throughout the US is juvenile delinquent acts. Juveniles acting out in a delinquent manner can be caused by many things. However, there is not just one reason why a juvenile may commit these acts. Instead there are many reasons that could lead up to delinquency. In this essay, I will be discussing a few theories as well as ways juveniles may receive treatment.

The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice Office of Prevention and Victim Services provides voluntary youth crime prevention programs through the state of Florida. The Florida Department of Juvenile Justice mission is to increase public safety by reducing juvenile delinquency through operative prevention, intervention and treatment services that builds up families for a turn around of a brighter future of a troubled youth. The main functions of these programs as will be indicated in this paper are designed to reduce juvenile crime and protect public safety. These programs that will be stated main focused is to help those high-risk juveniles and those who display problem behaviors such as ungovernability, truancy, running away from home and other pre-delinquent behaviors. The state of Florida addresses these problems by contracting this delinquency programs prevention services and awarding grants to this local providers throughout the state of Florida.

The juvenile justice system was fashioned in the late 1800s; restructuring policies in the United States concerning adolescent offenders was a part of a progressive era in are history. Thereafter, many modifications designed at both safeguarding the "due process of law" rights of adolescence, and generating an antipathy to jail amongst minor. This dislike has made juvenile justice system more equivalent to the adult structure, a significant change from what it was intended for in the

Working together to safeguard children 2006 sets out how organisations and individuals should work together to safeguard and promote the welfare of children and young people in accordance with the Children’s Act 1989 and the Children’s Act 2004. It is important that all practitioners within settings and environments looking and caring after children and young people must know their responsibilities and duties in order to safeguard and promote the welfare of children and young people, following their legislations, policies and procedures.

To answer the research question whether waiver laws are consistent with the purpose of having a separate juvenile justice system, the research suggests that the answer is no. Primarily, they are not consistent with the, “best interest of the child” mantra that shaped the juvenile justice system (Flesch, 2004). It seems that prosecutorial and executive waiver laws are not consistent with the Supreme Courts decision to safe guard the child and society by ensuring that each child has a waiver hearing that accurately accesses the child’s ability to be rehabilitated by the juvenile justice system (McMillin, 2014). Instead, the waiver has been used as a vacuum to suck up non violent and violent offenders that would be better suited to stay in the

“The juvenile justice system was first created in the late 1800s to reform United States policies on how to handle youth offenders. Since that time, a number of reforms - aimed at both protecting the "due process of law" rights of youth, and creating an aversion toward jail among the young - have made the juvenile justice system more comparable to the adult system, which is a shift from the United States’ original intent (2008,Lawyer Shop.com).” The

So according to Barry Krisberg writer for Prospect.org, reforming the juvenile justice system started around 1899, when Illinois and Colorado established “Children’s Court.” The general idea was a alternative towards the treatment and care of young offenders. It was all started by a judge and a social activist by the names of Honorable Judge Ben Lindsey and Jane Addams, and a few unnamed influential women’s organizations and the bar association. This would currently take them approximately 20 years or more before their good intentions would be revamped by other advocates in the near future.

The goals of juvenile corrections are too deter, rehabilitate and reintegrate, prevent, punish and reattribute, as well as isolate and control youth offenders and offenses. Each different goal comes with its own challenges. The goal of deterrence has its limits; because rules and former sanctions, as well anti-criminal modeling and reinforcement are met with young rebellious minds. Traditional counseling and diversion which are integral aspects of community corrections can sometimes be ineffective, and studies have shown that sometimes a natural self intervention can take place as the youth grows older; resulting in the youth outgrowing delinquency.

Our current juvenile court system began in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The ultimate goal of having a separate court system for juveniles is to rehabilitate young offenders rather than punish them. The court also hopes to deter young offenders from preforming further delinquent behavior. Unlike the adult court system, juveniles do not have the right to a public trial by jury. Instead, they undergo an adjudication hearing where the judge rules whether the juvenile is a delinquent. Since this separation, several studies have been conducted to weigh the benefits and costs; such as effectiveness, efficiency, and cost of resources, of having two court systems. Is the United States juvenile court appropriate or should it be abolished? Abolishing the juvenile court system would mean juveniles and adults would both undergo the same criminal justice system. Rothstein states in his research that juvenile courts are a cost-effective way to handle less serious offenses by children (as cited in Acker, Hendrix, and Hogan, and Kordzek, 2001, p. 200). On the other hand, Robert Dawson (1990) argues that there are not enough legal differences between juvenile and adult courts for there to be a need for a separation, concluding that overlap between both systems is so great that having a juvenile court is unnecessary. Supporting this argument, Barry Feld (1997) calls the two systems “duplicative” (p 69).

The juvenile justice system is similar to the criminal justice system. This system is where juveniles are processed, and may be arrested after referrals for juvenile delinquency. Juvenile justice is very different in every state and can be very similar as well because every system has limited jurisdiction and that most focus on the offenders and not their offenses. Therefore, there are 51 juvenile justice systems in the United States. The United States has the juvenile justice system because children are very different than adults – in that they can be better receptive for change and also being easier to rehabilitate. Moreover, the main goal of the juvenile justice system is rehabilitation (Juvenile Law Center). The juvenile justice system is made up of police, courts, corrections, probation and parole services, as well as community-based programs to name a few (book).

This paper will discuss the history of the juvenile justice system and how it has come to be what it is today. When a juvenile offender commits a crime and is sentenced to jail or reform school, the offender goes to a separate jail or reforming place than an adult. It hasn’t always been this way. Until the early 1800’s juveniles were tried just like everyone else. Today, that is not the case. This paper will explain the reforms that have taken place within the criminal justice system that developed the juvenile justice system.

Finally, literature on the juvenile justice system often focuses on program implementation and effectiveness at addressing rehabilitation, as well as diversion techniques within the system (Greenwood, 2008). This review audits these problems in detail and establishes them within the bigger struggle in the juvenile justice system to rehabilitate youth offenders.