Juvenile Justice: An Increasingly Complex Problem in our Society

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.

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.

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.

With this message directed towards juveniles, as well as the likely chance that juveniles whom are transferred to the adult criminal court system will result in some type of incarceration, this may lead to a deterrence of violent or misbehaved actions committed by juveniles in an attempt to avoid these prosecutions. These statements conducted by Urbina and White (2009), are statements to consider on the issue of a juveniles transfer to adult criminal court. Although there are strong facts to support this type of transfer for juveniles, Urbina and White (2009) also found that this might not be the best option in some cases. There have been studies that showed juveniles whom were transferred to the adult criminal court system and sent to adult jails were more likely to re-offend and with more serious crimes than did their juvenile counterparts (Urbina & White, 2009). With this study that was conducted, it adds doubt to the fact that juveniles should be transferred to the adult criminal court system. Although, at times, this may be the best option for serious and violent repeated offenders, it is not likely that this process will have a positive affect on the juvenile or the community. Urbina and White (2009) continue to lack strong argumentative evidence to show the exact times that transferring a juvenile to the adult criminal court system is the

These individual rights must be effectively balanced against these present and emerging community concerns: Widespread drug abuse among youth The threat of juvenile crime Urban gang violence High-technology, computer, and Internet crime (cybercrime) Terrorism and narcoterrorism Occupational and whitecollar crime

In this report, the President of Queensland’s Children’s Court, Michael Shanahan, provides an overview of juvenile justice in the period 2013-14. This includes a summary of the latest trends, which suggests a decrease in the number of youth offenders. Shanahan, a stakeholder in this issue, raises the idea that new amendments to the Youth Justice Act 1992 (Qld) creates a more punitive approach to sentencing, which can cause recidivism. While the first part of the report is not entirely objective, the reliability of the resource is restored after Shanahan’s overview with the many tables, statistics and graphs available to peruse. Of the many Children’s Court annual reports available to the public, this report is the most recent and contains

Australia's juvenile detention system is breaking apart. It's time we started seeing our wayward youth as young people needing support and rehabilitation rather than merely callous criminals to be punitively punished, degraded and demeaned writes Anna Tran.

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.

The juvenile system in the United States has a long history but varies from state to state. “It started around 170 years ago, with the opening of Massachusetts’ Lyman School for Boys in 1846 (Miller, 1991), American reformers began experimenting with a “new” approach to troubled youth” according to Patrick McCarthy author of the article “The Future of Youth Justice: A Community-Based Alternative to the Youth Prison Model”. The juvenile justice system has changed dramatically over the years, it has come a long way but we are still improving on the issues we have had in the past, currently have, and the ones we need to fix for future generations. The goal of this paper is to focus on the juvenile justice system in the state of New Mexico, where it started, what it currently is, and what changes could be implemented for a better future.

Queensland is well known for its contrasting position on the youth justice system, contravening with the Conventions of the Right of the Child (CRC) and disregarding recommendations made by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). The Juvenile Justice Act 1992 (QLD) is particularly scrutinized for containing legislation that states 17 year olds can be charged, tried and detained as an adults, giving courts the potential to overcharge punishments for juveniles and threaten their safety in adult prisons (). This legislation is not in the best interest of the child, fails to rehabilitate youth, is not fair, just or equitable and should therefore be amended to reach the standards of the United Nations and other Australian states. By analysing the key issues of the Juvenile Justice Act 1992 and examining the social implication of these issues on key stakeholders, the recommendation that Queensland should adopt America’s Intensive Supervision Program and change the definition of a child to include 17 year olds in the legislation can be made.

Juveniles have always been a touchy subject in the criminal justice system. Many would argue that they deserve to be treated and sentenced as adults while others believe that they can be rehabilitated and changed into fully functioning members of society. Florida has established a Juvenile Detention Alternatives initiative in order to support the vision that all juvenile justice offenders would have opportunities put in place to develop them into law-abiding adults. This initiative uses core strategies and decision-making skills based on data driven policies and practices that will reduce secure detention placements and promote healthy lifestyles for the youth while also enhancing public safety. A program established by the Department of Juvenile Justice in Florida hopes to do just that. Intensive Delinquency Diversion Services, also referred to as the IDDS, is offered to youth who are first time offenders. This intense community and home-based intervention hopes to deter offenders from becoming lifelong criminals. This paper will give a brief background the program, a summary and description of the program, a theory that supports the program, and finally policy implications of the IDDS program.

Young people represent the future of society. Consequently, they deserve respect and support while they develop in order to maintain a fair and just society. Therefore, it is the juvenile justice system’s responsibility to establish institutions and legislation to protect the important role that young people play in society. The system should also be driven by welfare and justice concerns as young people have special needs in regards to their age, and their physical, emotional and social development. It is essential that these welfare and justice concerns are addressed effectively by the system in order for young people to flourish. This essay will firstly assess the NSW juvenile justice system in regards to its treatment of young offenders in detention, in conjunction with its obligations under domestic and international law. Additionally, this essay will analyse evidence of welfare and justice concerns for youth offenders in detention in NSW. And furthermore, this essay will analyse the implications of youth detention on young offender’s and society. And ultimately argue that the NSW contemporary juvenile justice system is not driven by welfare and justice concerns. Given the fact that NSW has the highest rate of youth detention in Australia, and that there is overwhelming evidence to support the idea that youth detention carries detrimental physical and psychological consequences. Furthermore, the NSW juvenile justice system is not upholding the fact that young people

It is a common believe that adolescents require a special system thru which be processed because they are “youth who are in a transitional stage of development…young offenders that are neither innocent children nor mature adults…” (Nelson, 2012). Because juveniles are in a process of constant development sociologically, psychologically and physiologically, the juvenile court system focuses on alternative sentences and the creation of programs that will offer them rehabilitation instead of incarceration. However, in cases of extraordinary circumstances, the juvenile system shifts from looking at rehabilitation as a first choice to accountability and punishment (Read, n.d). All levels of society are collectively involved in delinquency

The Juvenile System has been around for a long time. The primary reason behind separating Juvenile from adult criminals is quite simple; the judicial system believes that the children are less culpable for their irresponsive behavior and they could easily be reformed as compared to adult offenders. The crucial role of the judicial system is to critically investigate, diagnose, and recommend treatments for the Juveniles rather than accrediting them. However, because of the increasing number of juvenile arrest for crimes committed by persons considered as a child, the attention that the given to a crime involving juveniles, the decreasing trust to the juvenile system itself and the lauder roar of the society for a safer place to live in,

The future of the juvenile justice system is uncertain. There is a struggle to try a find a way to serve the needs of the juvenile delinquents and issue them a punishment for violating the law. In order to improve the direction of the juvenile justice system, recommendations are needed regarding community involvement, law enforcement, courts, corrections, and the private sector. These recommendations address issues that the system is currently facing and offers solutions for the future. A justification of the system is also offered based on the histories, trends and causation theories.