Bad Kids Race And The Transformation Of Juvenile Court

Youth and juvenile crime is a common and serious issue in current society, and people, especially parents and educators, are pretty worried about the trend of this problem. According to Bala and Roberts, around 17% of criminals were youths, compared to 8% of Canadian population ranging between 12 to 18 years of age between 2003 and 2004 (2006, p37). As a big federal country, Canada has taken a series of actions since 1908. So far, there are three justice acts in the history of Canadian juvenile justice system, the 1908 Juvenile Delinquents Act, the 1982 Young Offenders Act, and the 2003 Youth Criminal Justice Act. In Canada, the judicial system and the principle of these laws have been debated for a long time. This paper will discuss how

With the escalation of murders and rapes committed by minors as seen in recent years the people are looking for the right answer. Public concern over the effectiveness of the juvenile courts when dealing with these offenders has brought about change in the justice system. (Stolba, 2001). The courts now, are quicker to transfer a juveniles’ case to adult court than when the juvenile system was first formed. There stands a conflict of interests within the two court systems. Juvenile courts are to protect the rights of youths determined incapable of adult decisions. The primary concern is that the youth be rehabilitated and not become a repeat offender. Thus, protecting the child from incarceration with adult criminals and any possible future victims. The concerns of the adult court is to make sure the convicted offender pays for their crime and that the victim gets justice. Rehabilitation is not a primary concer of the adult justice system.

According to Bartollas & Miller (2008) the challenges and unique issues the juvenile justice system face in the 21st century includes improving condition of confinement, fair treatment for children of color, health care, security, children with mental health issues, reducing overcrowding, securing resources for programs that work. Funding is a big challenge

In this paper, I will be discussing both the juvenile and the adult justice systems. There are several differences between the two systems, which may surprise you. I will be discussing many aspects within the justice systems. These include Terminology, Due Process rights, the process of Arrest to Corrections, Juvenile crime compared to Adult crime, age limits and waivers for the adult system and the different community correctional options, which are available to the offenders. The two systems share many of the same terms but not all terms are shared by both systems. In summary, the juvenile justice system and the adult justice system, vary in many ways and are alike in many ways.

The research done for this paper examines different studies of juveniles and their place in the United States’ justice system based on their race, gender, and social class, as well as looks into policing tactics that may be beneficial to the affected youths. By looking at a wide variety of academic journals and books it was clear to see that youths are looked upon and treated differently depending on what their race is, the sex that they were born, or their family’s economic standing. Resulting in the outcome of these youths being treated more harshly than others due to aspects about themselves that are out of their control. Doing further research into the juvenile justice system and how it is structured to help certain youths while neglecting others, it is clear that the treatment of minority youths is entirely unjust and that a reform of this system is, without question, necessary, not only to maintain an even and fair justice system for juveniles, but also to help these minority youths strive in their lifetime rather than fall victim to a life of crime.

As a contrast, there are many differences between the adult and juvenile justice system. These differences consist of the right to a jury, the right to post bail, leniency of evidence, different court proceedings, the right to a public trial, and rehabilitation efforts. As for the purpose of this paper, we will dissect the differences of the two systems. Many appeals have been filed under the notion that a right to a jury should be upheld for juvenile offenders. The courts have voted against this action time and time again. These appeals are made on the assumption that, as noted earlier, adult crimes should be tried as adult crimes. However, the court rules on this matter while keeping the rehabilitation efforts of the juvenile courts in mind, as opposed to the more punitive measures. Their desire to see kids treated as kids are defined with their upholding of the law, and pushing rehabilitation to its max. But should rehabilitation be the prime focus when the act is of adult capacity; even in a child’s body? I do not think so. What are the percentages of rehabilitation success with adults for committed capital offenses? How are they going to differ when a child partakes in them? I think there is a

Often times, people in America understand that minority youths are excessively represented in the justice system. Unfortunately, this occurs at every level of the justice system. Not only does it occur in from initial contact with the police, it continues through incarceration. In many cases, young juvenile minority are being discriminated, they come from corrupted developing countries with high levels of crime, and the majority of white youths are from wealthy families.

Whether equality in the nation’s educational system has ever been achieved is greatly debated. For many students inequality persists, particularly for those viewed as a minority, low-income or disabled, as avenues to a worthwhile education remain limited or in severe cases closed all together. To compound the issue many of these students either drop out of school or are pushed out because of delinquency matters. As a result, many end up becoming involved with the juvenile justice system, often faced with labels and stigmas that will follow them well into adulthood. However, how did this new face of inequality come into existence? To answer this we must look at the nations “tough on crime” approach, school disciplinary systems, and the

It has been proven across this country that the ratio of minorities to whites in jails and prisons is overwhelming. In 2010, African-American males were 6 times more likely than white males to be in jails and prisons as there were 678 white male inmates per 100,000 and 4,347 black male males per 100,000 locked away (Drake, 2013). This is up from 1960, when black males were 5 times more likely to be incarcerated (Drake, 2013). The ratio in the juvenile criminal justice system is not any better as in 2011, “African-American youths were 160% more likely to have been referred to juvenile court for a delinquent offense, 13% more likely to have been petitioned for formal case processing, 8% less likely to have been adjudicated, and 11% more likely to have had their petitioned cases waived to the adult system for criminal prosecution” (Howell & Hutto, 2012). These high ratios have caused a blame game across this country.

Did you know, that in the United States alone, Over 200,000 children are charged and imprisoned every year as adults? Early in the 20th century, most states established juvenile courts to rehabilitate and not just punish youthful offenders. The system was designed for children to have a second chance at their lives. “A separate juvenile-justice system, which sought to rehabilitate and not just punish children, was part of a movement by progressives to create a legally defined adolescence through the passage of child-labor and compulsory education laws and the creation of parks and open spaces.”(How to reduce crime Pg 1) Although the view on juveniles committing brutal crimes is nearly inconceivable, it is not a solution to give juveniles adult consequences because the effects of the adult system on juveniles are not effective.

According to Caldwell (1961) the juvenile justice system is based on the principle that youth are developmentally and fundamentally different from adults. According to Mack (1909) the focus of the juvenile justice system has shifted from “was the crime committed” to “why did the child commit the crime”, “how can we help the child”. When performing as it is designed and up to the initial intentions, the juvenile court balances rehabilitation (treatment) of the offender with suitable sanctions when necessary such as incarceration. According to Griffin (2008) in some cases juveniles may be required to be “transferred” to adult court. In this paper I am going to discuss the three primary mechanisms of waiver to adult court: judicial waiver

When thinking of reforming the juvenile justice system one has to think; what can we do to make this better for everyone involve? There are some programs that can be implemented when trying to make a change in the juvenile system. The main thing is getting parents or the guardian more involved in the child’s whereabouts. Secondly the community where the youth will have a place to go and have something more constructive to do to keep them out of trouble. Law enforcement can get involved in giving ride along and having visits to the local jails or prisons from the youth to talk to some of the inmates. Crime in life isn’t racist at all it has a no age limit, no certain gender and no social status for most of those whom decide to partake in a criminal activity. From the beginning juveniles have been an issue with law enforcement, the question has always arisen of whom will take control without cruel and unusual punishment and assist with the rehabilitation and prevention future crime actions.

In today’s society there has been an increase in the crimes committed by juveniles. Most juveniles have underlining factors that have caused them to choose this type of lifestyle. Many children in the juvenile system have come from impoverish stricken neighborhoods and are festered with gang activity which has made them a product of their environment. The minds of adolescents do not allow them to see how they are affecting their lives. A study was conducted, and according to the article, “Adolescents in Adult Court: Does the Punishment Fit the Criminal?”, when children mature, they will look back at their past and possibly leave their surroundings. Think about two people committing the same crime, both with the same thought process and ability to make decisions, except one is a juvenile and the other is grown. Due to the lack of experience in decision-making or the time to evaluate the situation like the adult, the youth should be viewed as irresponsible. The fact that a child’s mind is still maturing should reassure people that they will not be the same person incarcerated a few years later.

“The debates over the welfare versus justice models for juvenile justice have been superseded by a proves of simultaneous broadening of welfare concerns, as well as the promulgation of the ideology of the justice model. Young people are seen as being in need of guide and assistance (the welfare aspect), while at the same time offending is seen to be the result of calculated decisions by rational actors (the justice aspect)” (McElrea, 1994). The justice model is focused around the idea that the criminal justice system ought not be concerned with offender rehabilitation, however ought to constrain itself to the reasonable administration of disciplines fitting to the seriousness of the wrongdoing perpetrated. The justice model has been executed through determinate sentencing laws, sentencing rules and appeal court

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.