Child Justice Act : Child And Youth Care Centers Or Prisons

These cases both received national and international attention but the notoriety of the cases should not detract from the poorly thought out public policy that supports the rendering of such excessive and non-individualized punishments to juveniles. In a society that is focused on law and order it has become acceptable for the prosecution of all criminals defendant, including juveniles, to be controlled by automatic, legislatively determined sentencing that places politicians, not judges, in the position of deciding who is incarcerated, who should be tried and punished as adults, and who should be sent to a juvenile program for possible rehabilitation. On the juvenile level, led by politicians who rose to power on a law and order platform, state laws were changed so that sentencing decisions on juveniles that were once based on child development theories are now based on strict statutory construction. This was clearly demonstrated in the Tate case

The criminal justice system approaches young offenders through unique policies to address the challenges of dealing with juvenile offending. They take special care when dealing with juveniles in order to stop them from repeat offending and stop any potential bad behaviour which could result in future. Juveniles have the highest tendency to rehabilitate and most adopt law-abiding lifestyles as they mature. There are several factors influencing juvenile crime including psychological and social pressures unique to juveniles, which may lead to an increase in juvenile’s risks of contact with the criminal justice system.

A juvenile or “youthful inmate” as defined by the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (PREA) is any person under the age of eighteen who is under adult-court supervision and incarcerated or detained in a prison or jail. While PREA defines a juvenile as under the age of eighteen the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 (JJDPA) allows the states to set their own definition of a juvenile (Lahey). This discrepancy in the definition of a juvenile has caused problems and slow progress with states coming towards compliance with PREA. States, such as North Carolina, South Carolina, New York, Missouri, Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, Texas and Louisiana have set the upper limit for a juvenile at sixteen. Texas, recently has agreed to comply with the terms of PREA. Louisiana automatically prosecutes seventeen year olds as adults, even for minor offenses (Neustrom). Sentencing juveniles to adult prison is risking the juvenile’s safety by putting them in a situation where they are vulnerable and more likely to be physically or sexually assaulted, commit suicide and it also causes an increase in the recidivism.

Juvenile justice is the section of law that applies to persons under the age of 18 not capable of receiving sentencing in the adult court system or old enough to be responsible for criminal acts committed in society. In most states the age of criminal culpability is 18 however, the age requirement can be set lower in accordance to certain crimes and statutes set by the state the juvenile lives in. Juvenile law is primarily run by state law and most states enforce a specific juvenile code the system follows. The juvenile justice system primarily focuses on rehabilitation

Approximately two million adolescents a year are arrested and out of that two million, 60,000 of them are incarcerated according to the American Journal of Public Health. The 60,000 incarcerated adolescents each year are being tried as adults in court because of the serious crimes they have committed. The crimes they have committed are anything from armed robbery to murder. Some juveniles might be first time offenders and others might be repeat offenders. Crimes have always been a major issue in the United States and can cause controversy in the criminal justice system. Charging a minor as an adult in criminal court varies from state to state based on each state’s jurisdiction. Some states consider anyone up to the age of 18 still a juvenile and would not be charged as an adult in criminal court, but other states may charge a juvenile as an adult at the age of 16 or 17. Jordan (2014) states, “Although states already had methods for transferring youth to the adult system, as a result of the growing fear of juvenile violence, most states implemented new laws to increase the number of youth entering the adult criminal system’ (Bernard & Kurlychek, 2010; Torbet et al., 1996)” (p. 315). While it sounds beneficial to incarcerate more adolescents in the adult criminal justice system to avoid juveniles from committing crimes in the future, that is not always the case. Incarcerating these juveniles can be life changing in a negative

The law had defined a line between juvenile and adult offenders. In the United States, if you are under the age of 18 and get into trouble with the law then you will have to face the Juvenile Justice System. Although the age requirement varies amongst states juvenile institutions and programs were created to help treat those who are in trouble with the law. There are several types of Juvenile Institutions and programs. Some provide harsh punishment for young offenders while others focal point emphasizes on treatment and prevention. There are several juvenile correctional facilities such as, training schools which are long term facilities for housing juveniles and serve as a function analogous to adult prisons (Thompson, 2013); Group homes, which resemble a dormitory type of living for juveniles while allowing them to engage in the society with limited participation, and even Detention centers. Juvenile detention centers detain young offenders sentenced by a juvenile court. They are reserved for the most dangerous offenders.

In America we sometimes house juveniles and adults in the same prison system. In the state of Wisconsin in 2014, we have incarcerated 121 minors into the adult system. While incarcerating these juveniles in the prison system some may wonder how does it affect a juvenile, Also what problems do they face while in prison and lastly, how has their life change for better or worse after they are released back into society.

Juvenile Justice Centers do not help the children in the centers in any way, and they do not care about the children either. These centers do more harm than good. They do not support children with learning disabilities, emotional and behavioral problems, and health issues. Also, it is very hard to get a high school diploma, and even to finish high school while locked up.

Is going through worse than what you have done the right way learn from your mistake? Well, whether you agree or disagree, this is what most Juvenile Justice Centers are like. But the real question is; is this all beneficial for the troubling kids who commit crimes? I say it isn’t, because they are getting put into worse shape, they are not given help to overcome their behavior and actions, and they have no support for what they are going through.

How can a 15 year old boy be sent to an adult prison for the rest of his life? In order to answer that question we must first understand the history of the Juvenile Justice System. Social conditions during the progressive era, 1890-1920, were characterized by large waves of immigration and an increase in children left wandering in the streets (Reuters, 2011). According to Reuters, hundreds of indigent children were left to find ways to survive in a new place with little to no assistance, from family or government, many typically ended up getting involved in criminal activity. This led to a large increase of children in the adult court systems, as children were treated and punished like adults many were sent to adult institutions. For instance, under English common law, children who were under the age of 7 were considered to lack the cognitive capacity to know and understand the aftermath of their actions. Therefore, without criminal intent, or mens rea, such adolescent children were not capable of committing a crime. Juveniles older than 14, were considered adults, subject to the full weight of the law and punishment, including the death (Soulier and Charles). Nineteenth-century reformers had become uneasy about the effects of immaturity and development in juvenile cases. In response to the rise in

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.

Some jurisdictions require the child to be over a certain age and charged with a felony, while others permit waiver if the child is over a certain age regardless of offense. Still yet, others have no conditions. Juveniles can be tried in all stated in one of three ways: 1. Concurrent Jurisdiction: the prosecutor has the discretion of filing charge offenses in either juvenile or criminal court. 2. Excluded offenses: the legislature excludes from juvenile court jurisdiction certain offenses that are either very minor, such as traffic or fishing violations, or very serious, such as murder or rape. 3. Judicial waiver: the juvenile court waives its jurisdiction and transfers the case to criminal court. Barry Feld, Juvenile Law Scholar, suggests that waivers to adult court be mandatory for serious crimes. Those espousing the crime control model believe that the overriding purpose is protection of the public, deterrence or violent juvenile behavior, and the incarceration of serious youthful offenders in the adult criminal justice system. The rehabilitative justice model view this as an attack on the juvenile justice system, but crime control advocates consider such steps a necessary response to a rising juvenile violence rate. Life in Adult Prison The Southwest Multi County Corrections Center, a two-story adult jail is the largest maximum-security program for juveniles under federal authority. The BOP pays

By law adolescents are not able to vote, purchase tobacco or alcohol, join the armed forces, or sign a legal contract. Children are not permitted the same rights and responsibilities as adults because the law recognizes their inability to make adult decisions. The law acknowledges that children are unable to handle the consequences that come along with the rights that adults have. By allowing them to be charged as adults is holding them to a double standard. Telling them that they are not old enough to enjoy the same luxuries as adults, but they can experience the same punishment as adults if they commit a crime. The law acknowledged the inability of children to make decisions but still allows them to suffer the same consequences as adults. Research demonstrates that transferring children from juvenile court to adult court does not decrease recidivism, and in fact actually increases crime. Instead of the child learning their mistake they are more likely to repeat it. Juvenile detention centers have programs that help reconstruct young minds and help them realize where they went wrong. Prison does not offer this same opportunity. (Estudillo, Mary Onelia)

Institutional or residential placement is the most restrictive type of placement used in juvenile justice. A distinguishing characteristic of institutional placement is that it restricts youth’s access to the community (Elrod & Ryder, 2014). Today secure institutions are not only used for many youths charged with and adjudicated for serious juvenile offenses, but also for those charged with and adjudicated for minor offenses. Juvenile corrections institutions represent the most restrictive option available to juvenile courts. These institutions vary in the extent to which they focus on custody and control (Elrod & Ryder, 2014). Some of these institutions employ a variety of security hardware and structures such as perimeter fencing or walls, and surveillance and detection devices such as motion detectors, sound monitors and security cameras. These juvenile institutions are classified as secure facilities or closed facilities and closely resemble secure

Juvenile justice has proved to be as imprudent as it is practical. Snyder and Sickmund (1999) found that as early as 1825, there was a significant push to establish a separate juvenile justice system focused on rehabilitation and treatment. The procedure continued to stay focused on the rehabilitation of a person, even though financial support and assets sustained to hold back its achievement. In reaction to rising juvenile crime rates in the 1980s’, more corrective laws were approved (Snyder and Sickmund 1999). In the 1990s, the United States legal system took further steps regarding transfer provisions that lowered the threshold at which juveniles could be tried in criminal court and sentenced to adult prison (Snyder and Sickmund 1999). Furthermore, laws were enacted that allowed prosecutors and judges more discretion in their sentencing options; and confidentiality standards, which made juvenile court proceedings and records more available to the public (Snyder and Sickmund 1999), were reduced.