Children and Young people Traditionally the legal the legal age of adulthood was 21 but in the past 20-30 years most jurisdictions have lowered this age to 18. Article 1 of the Convention on the rights of the child (CROC) states that anyone under the age of 18 is child. Also the Children and young person’s (care and protection) Act 1998 (NSW) defines a ‘young person as someone aged between 16-18. These definitions are important because laws treat children and young people differently to adults. Before the late 19th century children committing criminal acts were treated in the same way as adult offenders. The concept of an age before which a person could not be held criminally responsible -doli incapax – did not exist, and children as …show more content…
Another legal mechanism is the children’s court. Across NSW there are 13 children’s magistrates siting in seven specialists children’s court there also five children’s registrar appointed under the children’s court Act 1998(NSW) to assist in administration of matters before the court. Trade unions are organisations of workers who act together to maintain their rights to good working condition. The Australian council of trade unions (ACTU) provides information about pay and conditions, health and safety issues, apprentice- ships and training and negotiating employment contracts for young people entering the workforce for the first time. Trade unions are a Non-Legal mechanism for protecting rights of children and young people. The kids Helpline are just one of the many organisations from which children and young people in crisis can seek advice. It is a non-legal mechanism just like trade unions. It offers 24hr free telephone and online counselling. If children and young people come into contact with the criminal justice system, it usually through interaction with a police officer when being arrested or questions about some matter. Seventy eight per cent of the 843 children and young people surveyed said that the police rarely treated young people with sufficient respect. It could be argued that children and young people l on the whole do not have good relationship with the police. Young
The processing of these crimes help to embed the key of legal knowledge in the mind of a child hoping to shape their future actions. NSW age of criminal responsibility is defined by statute as 10 years of age, which is recognised in Children’s (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW). Meaning that a child under 10 years of age cannot be charged for a crime. The basis of this is the recognition of the immaturity and exposure of children and their inability to form the requisite criminal intent known as mens
There are a number of legislations which address the needs of young people leaving care with provisions that are in place to help them through life transitions. The Children and Young Persons Act 2008 focuses on older young people and those who are leaving care. Providing the necessary legislative support to improve the care system in England. Ensuring that stability and continuity in every aspect of a child's care. This act proposed to reform the statutory framework for the care system involving children and young people as much as possible regarding decision making, giving them a voice so that they are heard. Resulting in the improvement of care standards.
In today's society juveniles are being tried in adult courts, given the death penalty, and sent to prison. Should fourteen-year olds accused of murder or rape automatically be tried as adults? Should six-teen year olds and seven-teen year olds tried in adult courts be forced to serve time in adult prisons, where they are more likely to be sexually assaulted and to become repeat offenders. How much discretion should a judge have in deciding the fate of a juvenile accused of a crime - serious, violent, or otherwise? The juvenile crime rate that was so alarming a few years ago has begun to fall - juvenile felony arrest rates in California have declined by more than forty percent in the last twenty years. While
2.3 –Demonstrate ways of supporting children and young people to take responsibility for their own health, safety and security.
7-15 year old (in some cases, a maximum of 17years) young people are confined under this Law. The courts, as the judicial role of parents, had to decide whether the young people should bear the consequences for their crimes. If the judge found that the minor's conduct had constituted a crime, then he could order him or her into the juvenile correctional homes until the relevant authorities agreed the criminal juvenile could be released. The law assumed the responsibility of the parents that they should determine the care of young people in terms of education and the linkages with their families (Sayson, 2006, p.6).
Juveniles are individuals who have not reached adulthood, they are still considered to be children. For that reason, officers who work with juveniles need different skills then the ones used on an adult, to approach them. This paper will discuss skills and characteristics needed as an officer when working with juveniles, why officers need to possess skills that differ from officers who work with adults, and would an officer who has worked 20 or more years with adults successfully transition into becoming a successful juvenile officer.
Young adults pass perception on everyone they encounter. Law enforcement organizations are prime subjects to their perceptions. During my twenty years of service as a New York City Police Officer, I have encountered daily hassles, uncooperative behavior and hostile behavior. In essence, a general lack of no respect for police authority. I interacted with young adults in various capacities from minor to felonious crimes, domestic disputes, rowdiness and other calls for service that may alter their opinion of police. The purpose of this study
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.
Doli Incapax however, doesn’t end once a young person reaches the age of 10. From the ages of 10-14 it is a common law presumption that a minor does not possess the necessary knowledge to have a criminal intention. This is known as a rebuttable presumption. This presumption lies in favour of the young person just as if they were under the age of 10, however, the other party can rebut it if they are able to show sufficient evidence to disprove this. This can be done a fair few ways. One of the ways to rebut Doli Incapax is by looking at the young persons criminal record. Previous offences that are linked to the present offence (e.g. robbery and assault) can be used to rebut Doli Incapax. Another way to rebut Doli Incapax is by interviewing the young person. This must be done so however, in the presence of an adult, if it not, the evidence may be inadmissible in court. The interview process will involve a police officer questioning the juvenile about their knowledge of the offence. If the juvenile admits they were aware that the offence was a criminal matter, Doli Incapax is rebutted. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CROC) supports this idea of the age of criminal responsibility and Australia has ratified legislations proposed referring to this idea. The Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW) lays out the minimum age of criminal responsibility, although there are occasional debates within the public to reduce this age. Doli Incapax is
Cyp core 3.3: Understand how to safeguard the well being of children and young people
Discuss the ideology underpinning policy and practice for children and young people and demonstrate an awareness of constructs of childhood and adolescence from either an educational or care perspective.
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
Juveniles can be tried as adults for crimes ranging from kidnapping, murder, rape, arson, robbery, torture, assault, and more. Some of the cases that are sent to adult court are petty crimes, such as: underage drinking, possession of a controlled substance, and other minor crimes. The question is whether they should be tried as adults. These are all adult actions, on one hand, and may lead a person to wonder what brought a child to commit these crimes. One might further inspect that if a child or teenager is engaged in so-called “adult” activities, what kind of activities might a child choose to be involved in adulthood? What is the child’s background? Can you blame the child of a heroin addict for having access to drugs at a young age? Can you blame the child of a murderer for acting out? Yes, everyone has a choice even a child.
Serious crimes such as murder, burglary and rape have raised questions as to whether the young offenders should face severe punitive treatment or the normal punitive measures in juvenile courts. Many would prefer the juveniles given harsh punishment in order to discourage other young people from engaging in similar activities and to serve as a lesson to these particular offenders. However, results from previous studies indicate such punitive measures were neither successful nor morally acceptable. Instead, the solutions achieved have unfairly treated the youths and compromised the society status (Kristin, page 1).