Causes Of Delinquency In The 1950's

A difficult challenge to the juvenile justice system and child welfare system is working with adolescents with comorbid difficulties, causing these adolescents to becoming at risk for incarceration and involvement with the juvenile and adult justice system. The juvenile justice system appears to be having a challenging time in determining how to respond and treat adolescents with mental health and substance use. "Many

The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) is the principal federal program through which the federal government sets standards for juvenile justice systems at the state and local levels. It provides direct funding for states, research, training, and technical assistance, and evaluation. The JJDPA was originally enacted in 1974 and even though the JJDPA has been revised several times over the past 30 years, its basic composition has remained the same. Since the act was passed in 1974, the JJDPA focused solitary on preventing juvenile delinquency and on rehabilitating juvenile offenders.

One of the programs they review is the Multisystemic Therapy (MST) program. To prevent juveniles from repeating the same crimes they would keep them in the community instead of locking them away in jail. The juveniles would have family therapy, individual therapy, group therapy, and other types of support. As a result, “MST participants had a rate of recidivism of 22.1 percent…the individual therapy group which had a recidivism rate of 71.4 percent…those that participated only temporarily in the MST program also had a reduced recidivism rate of 46.6 percent compared to the control delinquent group MST participants had a significantly lower recidivism rate” (May, Osmond, and Billick 298). This programed showed that like the J RIP the delinquent juvenile who get help from their community are more likely to not go back to crime. The review also mentions, “one of the main goals of MST is to decrease the juvenile delinquents association with other delinquent youths, while facilitating familial support through communication and guided problem solving” (298). Because most criminals gain support from other criminals and learn new ways to commit crimes from them by keeping the influence away it shows the juveniles that that’s not the best route to

The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, established in 1974 and most recently reauthorized in 2002, created a partnership between the federal government and the states to protect youth in the juvenile and criminal justice system, address delinquent behavior, and improve community safety by preventing juvenile crime and delinquency. The JJDPA is responsible for the operation of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency prevention, provides a juvenile justice planning and advisory system in each state, and provides federal funding for delinquency prevention and improvements in state and local juvenile justice programs. Under the JJDPA there are four major streams of funding for the Federal-State partnership: (JJDPA, 2007)

This being passed down generation after generation proves that Willie Lynch was right about that it pass through from generation after generation as though it runs through each African American person runs thicker than blood.

Juvenile institutions and programs have changed over time. There are also juvenile programs that necessarily do not punish juvenile’s delinquents but instead help modify their behavior to avoid recidivism. Certain treatments and methods regarding how to deal with these dangerous young offenders were fixed and improved to make these institutions and programs more effective in changing the lives of these young

Per Klug (2001) by 1925, 48 states had juvenile courts closely following the Chicago Juvenile Court. But “changes were made when the policy makers and the public were dissatisfied with the effectiveness of the treatment techniques available to juvenile justice practitioners” resulting in waiver situations instead of adjudication (Klug, 2001, p. 100). The juvenile court system started moving away from rehabilitating a child, instead it was looking like the adult criminal justice

After all the devastation brought about by the Great Depression and World War II, Americans desired and sought for a return to normalcy during the 1950s. With men away at war and women pursuing jobs, the rate of divorce skyrocketed as families were being split apart. Juvenile delinquency rose in great numbers due to the lack of parental supervision during wartime. This evoked fear in the American people that the survival of the “traditional American family” was in jeopardy. Thousands of women were pushed out of the workforce and back into their homes as returning soldiers resumed their positions on the job. Suburban housing flourished as the notion to conform spread across the country. The 1950s was a period of conventionality, when both men and women practiced strict gender roles and complied with society’s expectations in attempts to recreate the “American Dream”. The concept of the “Ideal Woman” created a well-defined picture to women of what they were supposed to emulate as their proper gender role in society. A woman was told her primary interest was everything but herself. She was expected to cook, clean, take care of the kids, and be a loving wife who waits for her husband to come home in order to adhere to his needs. Taking time to care for herself was never in the picture. The idea of conformity trapped these women in suffocating boxes that allowed no room to breathe. The pressure put on women to be the core of the entire family while keeping her husband happy was

Historically, courts have punished and confined youth of all ages and genders in jails and penitentiaries. With few options available, youths were indiscriminately confined with hardened adult criminals in large, overcrowded, and lifeless penal institutions. Work by pioneering penal reformers eventually led to change. The Missouri Model of juvenile justice was born after a 1969 federal report condemned "quasi-penal-military" atmospheres found in juvenile jails (Mendel 2010). Institutions that follow the Missouri Model focus on restorative justice, access to group treatment, individual therapy, and a humane environment. Juvenile offenders have basic necessities such as food and shelter, but also have access to education, recreation, health care, and counseling, all provided in a safe atmosphere. The Missouri Model of juvenile justice was initially intended to be a pilot program in Missouri, but has now spread its influence and success to California, New Mexico, Louisiana, and Washington D.C (Lombardi 2011).

For offenders with mental health impairment, TJJD’s institutional facilities are staffed with mental health professionals in order to provide services that meet the needs of each juveniles. For those diagnosed with severe mental health issues they are most likely placed in Corsicana Residential Treatment Program. The immediate goal is to treat the youth’s mental health impairment. Once this is accomplished the focus of treatment is on changing the delinquent and criminal patterns within the juvenile’s behavior. The final goal within treatment concerns reintegrating youth with his or her family. Unfortunately handling juveniles with mental health problems pose a particularly difficult problem for TJJD. However, according to TJJD the specialized

Some supported this idea for the sake of the children’s wellbeing, others just simply feared immigrant street youths. As a result of this, Illinois was the first state to have established a separate court system for juveniles in 1899. In these new courts, specially trained judges had many choices in how to deal with the youthful offenders. Judges acted more like the juveniles’ parents rather than giving out harsh punishments dominated for the next century. During this period, the law defined any person less than sixteen years of age a juvenile. Rather than prosecuting the juveniles for a crime, the new juvenile courts placed them in reform schools or with foster parents. The juveniles would remain in the courts supervision until age twenty-one. Thanks to the help of reformers, juvenile court judges now have many sentencing choices such as probation, issuing fines, sending offenders to juvenile correction institutions or foster homes, referrals to day treatment or social skills classes, mental health programs, or community service. A judge often orders a combination of these treatments. Repeat offenders can be declared delinquents and removed from their homes and placed in foster care or a state facility, but, “The most harsh treatment a judge can order is commitment to a secure reform facility.” (Hanes and Hanes 351). A secure reform facility is defined as a place where juveniles are locked up for the duration of his or her sentence. “These facilities are often called youth development centers.” (351). Though rehabilitation is the goal of the juvenile justice, these centers resemble prisons and serve to protect the community from the delinquents. The length of time juveniles serve in these secure facilities can vary. “A teen sentenced in Juvenile Court may be locked up for a crime but only for

While legislative attempts to properly address and correct boot camp abuses and inadequacies, there are several promising alternatives to these private military style facilities. Multi-systemic therapy, which aims to keep offenders and their families together and works on problems in a practical home setting, avoids the problems that come with returning juveniles from restricted settings to the real world. A report done by the Wisconsin Council on (Children and Families) revealed that programs that promote a supportive family environment in the community are most effective at reducing recidivism and encouraging positive adolescent brain maturation. The courts have other sentencing options for juvenile offenders, juvenile offenders can receive incarceration, treatment, and probation.( Allison Pinto, Ph.D., Monica Epstein, Ph.D., Paul Lewis, B.B.A., Kathryn Whitehead,

The American Juvenile Justice System is still fairly new. The first juvenile court was established shortly over a century ago in 1899 in Chicago, Illinois. During its formation, the philosophies concerning juvenile justice shifted from a punitive standpoint to a more rehabilitative approach (McCarter, 2011). This was the court’s first attempt to acknowledge the distinctive cognitive and maturity levels between children and adults. Therefore, juvenile courts were meant to function as civil courts instead of criminal courts, placing minimal focus on the offenses committed by juveniles and instead focusing on their

2. The characteristics and backgrounds of the people served by this program are diverse populations, underserved, at-risk adolescents and delinquent juveniles between the ages of 11 and 18 including their families. These individuals lacked resources, were a challenge to help, and appeared unmotivated to change. A common factor these underserved populations held together were upon entrance to social services individuals expressed emotions of anger, hopelessness, and resistance to treatment.

The social environment of teens holds an enormous influence on how the teens act and behave. Teens are easily influenced by their surroundings and they look to others for guidance. Their behavior results from that of the parent and peer influences. Parents play a particularly influential role in their child’s life and it is up to them to make sure that they are leading their sons or daughters in the right directions. A teen’s peers also play a large role in how the teen behaves when the parents are not around. A teen’s social environment, consisting of family and peers, plays a vital role in their life, therefore becoming the ultimate cause of juvenile delinquency.