A Study On Juvenile Offenders

We’ve all seen it at least once. We’ve all passed by a middle or a high school and seen a police car on campus. Sometimes we even happen to see a teen in handcuffs getting detained. When you see things like this happen do you ever just stop and think whether students that are detained or incarcerated get the education they need? There are few experiences in the lives of children as critical as education. While all children learn directly and indirectly from their families, neighbors, and peers, formal education and school experiences provide the foundation and establish the trajectory for post-secondary education, employment, and wellbeing in adulthood. Historically, one group of students in the United States has received grossly inadequate education: children in juvenile correctional facilities. Little to nothing is known about educational programs in juvenile detention centers. Limited information is available on best practices for educating youth in the juvenile justice system whether committed or detained. Koyama cites that existing empirically based educational practices do not readily transfer to the unique environment of a secure setting or adequately address the intense needs of court-involved youth (ctd. in Koyama 36).

Studies suggest that there is a divide between the government and public response to juvenile incarceration. Bullis & Yovas (2005) state that support is given to correctional facilities to house juvenile offenders as a form of punishment (as cited in Shannon, 2013, p. 17). Individuals who support this perspective are often more likely to support the construction of more prisons and stern penalties on crime based upon the presumptions that youthful offenders are aware of the consequences of their actions (Drakeford, 2002 as cited in Shannon, 2013, p. 17). On the other hand, opponents of this perspective believe that incarceration creates an opportunity to rehabilitate the offenders (Huffine, 2006 as cited in Shannon, 2013, p. 18). This perspective supports the purpose of juvenile detention centers as “preparatory in nature – that is, offering services focused on the development of skills needed to return successfully to mainstream

The juvenile justice system can be dated back to the late 18th and early 19th century. Youths were confined to jails with mentally ill and hardened criminals because there were no other alternatives for them. Many of these youths were in these institutions for non-violent offenses. During this same time, many American cities had to find a solution to the overwhelming rate of child neglect. Today, there is still much debate about the well-being of youths in the criminal justice system. The juvenile justice system plays an important role in society because it allows youths the opportunity to change their behavior. The current system is effective in providing programs for juveniles in an effort to

In the last decade, the punitive and overzealous tools and approaches of the modern criminal justice system have seeped into our schools, serving to remove children from mainstream educational environments and funnel them onto a one-way path toward prison. These various policies, collectively referred to as the School-to-Prison Pipeline, push children out of school and hasten their entry into the juvenile, and eventually the criminal, justice system, where prison is the end of the road. Historical inequities, such as segregated education, concentrated poverty, and racial disparities in law enforcement, all feed the pipeline. The School-to-Prison Pipeline is one of the most urgent challenges in education today. (NAACP 2005)

Juvenile centers generally provide the same education to all students, which is a huge problem. If juvenile centers provide the same education to everyone, some students who are smarter than others will be learning at a slower pace than they would have normally. “In 2011, 5 percent of California students were able to earn a high school diploma while locked up, compared with 8 percent nationally” (Juvenile Justice System, 1). If each student’s education was tracked, that number would skyrocket. Using the new data from tracking the student’s education, juvenile centers could better create individualized education plans to provide for the varieties of intelligence of the incarcerated

In a news article by The Kansan, writer Jade Hudson Newson reports the correlation between high incarceration rates and discipline in high schools. Faculty member at Bethel College Gary Flory discusses the “School-to-Prison Pipeline” and the correlation between education and prison. Flory shares information about the inmates and what level of education they have and found that a majority of inmates did not have a high school diploma nor a GED. However; Flory makes sure to mention that it is not the lack of education that lands people in prison, but how they were punished in high school. Flory makes the connection that students who we suspended multiple times or expelled were more likely to drop out of high school.

Not only this but, “offenders who commit new offenses after court contact are at risk for a variety of poor developmental and life course outcomes, including school failure, out of home placements, occupational marginality, and long-term involvement in criminal activity” (Schwalbe 2004). As seen here, this is a downward spiral. Active reform has never before been at such a demand. As recidivism and juvenile delinquency continues to increase, not only will national crime rates and juvenile prison populations inflate, but the diminishing of an educated, safe, and economically stable society will also be affected regrettably. If juveniles whom continue to commit repeat criminal offenses lack school initiative, family support, and job exposure, than relatively as recidivism and juvenile criminal activity increases, our nation’s standard of living will consequently lower.

The United States leads the world in the incarceration of young people, there are over 100,000 youth placed in jail each year. Locking up youth has shown very little positive impact on reducing crime. Incarcerating youth have posed greater problems such as expenses, limited education, lack of employment, and effect on juveniles’ mental and physical well-being.

JUVENILE TRANSFER TO ADULT COURTS A Look at the Prototypes for Dangerousness, Sophistication-Maturity, and Amenability to Treatment Through A Legal Lens http://psycnet.apa.org.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/journals/law/8/4/373.html

Diving into an important aspect of criminal justice, I examined the cause/causes of juvenile delinquency, what others believe to be the best or most beneficial course of action for juvenile delinquency, and who has the most influence on juveniles, ages 10-18 years old in Vermont. Through a six question survey, I discovered an over whelming number of participants had indicated their belief that Vermont has an issue with juvenile delinquency. However, to my surprise, an impressive number of participants felt that Vermont did not have an issue with juvenile delinquency. Comparing my survey results to previous studies, it appears that, as a whole, the United States has seen a decrease in juvenile delinquency rates (Butts, J. A. 2013). Even

Measuring recidivism is vital not only to see what is working but also to show accountability to taxpayers for the funding that goes into operating these facilities. An article published by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), defines recidivism and details how it is measured. In doing so, the article elaborates on the common and varying ways in which recidivism is measured. The OJJDP defines recidivism as being comprised of two elements: 1) the commission of an offense, and 2) by an individual already known to have committed at least one other offense. In order for recidivism to be measured successfully, one must clarify and qualify both parts (Measuring Recidivism in Juvenile Corrections, 2016). The varying ways that states record recidivism data makes it hard to distinguish what exactly is being measured and comparing the

subjected to the juvenile justice system, but an alarming number of youths are transferred to

According to Alexander (2012), “About 70 percent of offenders and ex-offenders are high school dropouts, and according to at least one study, about half are functionally illiterate.” Literacy skills shaped young offender’ chances of succeeding in life, and in other words, their succeeding in life shapes outcomes of future generation. The importance of youth literacy associates with young offenders' chances of opportunities, career and life decision. At first, education and literacy development prepare youth for adaptation and surviving in the workforce, and therefore teachers and researchers seemed to find a link between literacy and deviance behavior (Williamson,). In following, Hopkins (2016) discovered that young offenders who struggle with

It is a common believe that adolescents require a special system thru which be processed because they are “youth who are in a transitional stage of development…young offenders that are neither innocent children nor mature adults…” (Nelson, 2012). Because juveniles are in a process of constant development sociologically, psychologically and physiologically, the juvenile court system focuses on alternative sentences and the creation of programs that will offer them rehabilitation instead of incarceration. However, in cases of extraordinary circumstances, the juvenile system shifts from looking at rehabilitation as a first choice to accountability and punishment (Read, n.d). All levels of society are collectively involved in delinquency

It may seem shocking that America has one of the highest crime rates per capita compared to other similar industrialized nations. Over the years, there have been many discussions and efforts in order to reduce this problem. Perhaps one of the more sensitive issues when discussing crime in America is the problem of juvenile crime. Recently, juveniles make up 3% of all felonies committed each year and 6% of all violent crimes (criminamerica.net). These statistics have troubled politicians for decades as they have worked to find a solution. Starting in 1994 the Clinton administration started putting stricter punishment on juvenile offenders, but it was quickly realized that this harsh punishment may not be the best solution. Various studies and programs put into action have shown that early prevention in a child’s life is much more effective and more cost efficient in reducing crime. Because of these efforts, juvenile crime has reduced 68% since the violent boom of the 1990s. In light of these discoveries, it is important for states to focus on these results in order to reduce crime.