Evolution Of Juvenile Justice System Essay

It has been one hundred years since the creation of the juvenile court in the United States. The court and the juvenile justice system has made some positive changes in the lives of millions of young people lives over the course or those years, within the last thirteen years there has been some daunting challenges in the system.

It has been my experience in the jurisdiction where I serve that the juvenile courts heavily adhere to the due process model of criminal justice, being sympathetic towards the fact that the offender is a child, and not giving merit to the fact that said “child” committed a crime. It has become so commonplace that juvenile offenders can almost predict what will happen to them when they go before the judge. An unintended consequence of this is that many officers will, for most offenses, simply release the juvenile to the parent with an explanation of what occurred and hope that the parent disciplines the

In earlier Colonial days, children and teenagers behaving antisocially or found to have committed a crime were sent through the adult justice system, even children as young as seven-years old who were accused of doing wrong were put into prison with adults. But, over the centuries the juvenile justice system has changed tremendously from imprisoning children within the adult system. There are five periods of juvenile justice which changed the process of juveniles begin incarcerated with adults; the Puritan Period, the Refuge Period, Juvenile Court Period, Juvenile Rights Period, and the Crime Control Period.

There were several decisions made by the Supreme Court that formalized courts for juveniles, making them more like criminal courts. Formal hearings were required, juveniles who faced confinement were given the right to receive a notice of the charges being held against them, and also came along the right to be represented by an attorney. In the 1980’s the public noticed that juvenile crimes were rising and that the system was not effective. Soon states began implementing disciplinary laws, some which included a mandatory sentencing and automatically being sent to adult court for certain crimes committed.

The juvenile justice system is a complex web of people and agencies that process about billions of funds on a yearly basis. To understand the system requires that you have some sort of baseline knowledge of the trends that have shaped the system’s ability to function and the roles played by the various components of the system. This policy paper provides information on changes in the juvenile justice system and analyzes why the increased prosecution sentences of juveniles in adult court is another failed “get tough “policy and does nothing to focus on the best interest for the juvenile. Before the modern era, it appeared that children who committed crimes received no type of preferential treatment. They were adjudicated, punished, and imprisoned

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.

The Juvenile Justice System is seen by many as being ineffective in treating the youth of this country, the programs are outdated and there seems to be little, if any hope that these youth will stay on the right path once released back into society. This paper will discuss the history of the Juvenile Justice System as well as how it has evolved since its inception. We will also discuss the “waiver process” that is used when transferring juveniles into the adult system, and what,

“The juvenile justice system was first created in the late 1800s to reform United States policies on how to handle youth offenders. Since that time, a number of reforms - aimed at both protecting the "due process of law" rights of youth, and creating an aversion toward jail among the young - have made the juvenile justice system more comparable to the adult system, which is a shift from the United States’ original intent (2008,Lawyer Shop.com).” The

This paper takes a brief look at the history and evolution of the juvenile justice system in the United States. In recent years there has been an increase of juvenile cases being transferred into the adult court system. This paper will also look at that process and the consequences of that trend.

where children would receive individualized attention from a concerned judge (Anon, 2018). Yet by midcentury, public concern grew about the effectiveness of the juvenile justice system and the rise in crime, as major disparities in treatment began to arise, and were a direct result of the lenient system, which saw the fate of adolescents being determined by juvenile court judges whose mood or temperament would affect how they treated a certain case. By the 1970’s, the Supreme Court officially formalized the juvenile courts, yet the public once again began to perceive that juvenile crime was on the rise and that the system was still too lenient, resulting in punitive laws, including mandatory sentences and automatic adult court transfers for

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

The juvenile justice system is a foundation in society that is granted certain powers and responsibilities. It faces several different tasks, among the most important is maintaining order and preserving constitutional rights. When a juvenile is arrested and charged with committing a crime there are many different factors that will come in to play during the course of his arrest, trial, conviction, sentencing, and rehabilitation process. This paper examines the Juvenile Justice System’s court process in the State of New Jersey and the State of California.

The Juvenile Justice System is a system modeled to provide a legal setting where youths account for their wrongs or are offered official protection. A distinct juveniles justice system commenced in the United States over 100 years ago. The first juvenile court was established in 1899. The system is founded under a range of core principles. First, juveniles are different from adults and hence need to be handled differently by the Justice System. Second, it is argued that juveniles differ from one another. Therefore, juveniles require individualized treatment depending on their unique circumstances and situations. The neglected and abused youths ought to receive different treatment from those who have committed minor status offenses (Hess,

The Juvenile Justice System was established in 1899 when the first documented court hearing took place in Cook County, Illinois. This type of court system was designed to discipline, treat, and rehabilitate children under the legal age of eighteen, who are caught and/or convicted of committing crimes against society. Since its creation, many have argued for and against having two separate but parallel court systems. This essay will discuss the basic arguments in favor of and in opposition to the retention of the juvenile justice system.

According to The Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, “In the late 18th and early 19th century, courts punished and confined youth in jails and penitentiaries… youth of all ages and genders were often indiscriminately confined with hardened adult criminals...”. In fact, the separate justice system for juveniles is just over one hundred years old. The reformation of the juvenile system first started with the Child Saving Movement in the 1800s. By 1825, youth who were considered