Juvenile Justice, Policy, And Practice

In our reading (Juvenile Justice in America) it talks about a 1992 survey of law enforcement department’s product by G. David Curry and colleagues’ it says “the seventy-nine largest U.S. cities, 91 percent of respondents reported the presence of gang problems. These researchers estimated that there were 4,881 gangs with 249,324 gang members” and it also states “that juveniles made up 90 percent of the gang membership.” There have been seven stages identified for these emergent gangs with stage one being implementation. That is were gang leaders go to a new city to recruit juveniles to sell drug for money. They go into the low-income minority neighborhood where they promise their recruits protection and part of the profits from the drug sells.

There have been many studies conducted that examine ways in which the juvenile justice system responds to female offenders. Historically juvenile female offenders have been treated under status offense jurisdiction (Zahn et al., 2010, p. 10). United States Courts would exercise the principle of “parens patriae” to place the female in detention as a form of punishment for misbehavior (Sherman, 2012, pp. 1589-1590). This principle also remains prevalent as it pertains to how the juvenile justice system currently responds to juvenile female offenders.

The juvenile justice system exists to separate the youth from the adults that are imprisoned. The separation exists because of the different levels of maturity that are present between the two age groups. These young offenders are not arrested for the reason of punishment; they are arrested to be rehabilitated so they do not become habitual offenders later on in life. It gives them the opportunity to see what life will be like for them if they are to be adult offenders. With that being said, there are some instances where these young adults are to be tried as an adult offender with an adult punishment. Throughout most of history, young offenders were tried by the same courts as those that tried adults and were subject to the same sanction which does include execution and incarceration. (Masters, p 450, 2013) There are some places that truly believe that young criminals shouldn’t be treated like adults, such as in England. There is a law in affect called the “infancy defense” which says that children under the age of 7 are not to be tried as adults because they haven’t yet formed criminal intent. A child that was between the ages of 7 and 14 could be prosecuted but only if the prosecutor could prove that the child knew what they were doing was wrong. (Lectric Law Library, 2003) Lawmakers and social scientists found that those who were found guilty

Juveniles committing crimes is not a new issued being introduced to society; actually, it has been an issue for centuries. However, the big question is, should juveniles be tried in adult courts? Before answering, take into consideration every possible scenario that could have led them to commit the crime. For instance, were they the leader in the act? Did they participate in the crime? Was the juvenile even aware of what was taking place? Were they peer pressured? Did they have any other choice at the time? There are so many other questions we could consider when making a decision here.

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.

Juvenile justice is compared in chapter thirteen. In the nineteenth century, there was an increased number of children at risk and chronic poverty. This overall was a general concern because there was an increase of people in the “dangerous classes”. There was a child saving movement, in which the poor children represented a threat to the moral fabric of society. The nineteenth century was a time where they had a house of refuge. In this house of refuge, they had a society for the prevention of pauperism and they privately managed, but publicly funded. The development in the nineteenth century for juveniles was reform schools, work, basic education and they were segregated. Juvenile justice in the nineteenth century had a society for the prevention of cruelty to children in New York. In this society they were granted the authority to remove children from where ever they were being mistreated and they assisted the courts in making placement decisions. When it came to reforming the system back then the process was slow. From the beginning children were denied due process because the juvenile system is made for rehabilitation and not for punishment. The 1960’s was a time where the reform system was changed and that’s when family courts and U.S. Supreme Court decisions came into play.

In the second half of the twentieth century, the United States faced a problem of enormous impact on society negatively affecting families, the economy, and the future of American children: the vast, and ever-increasing number of youths being processed through the juvenile justice court system. In the years since the turn of the century, through implementation of legislation sponsored by activists, lawyers, community organizers, educators and other reformers focusing mainly upon curbing youth incarceration, and instead promoting community and social alternatives, the most recent trends reflect a stemming and actual decline of youths entering the United States juvenile justice system. Most recently, leading the way in the effort to decrease the number of children processed through the courts is the State of Georgia, recent legislation of which has drastically reduced the number of juveniles incarcerated by an amazing rate. This paper will analyze the importance of continuing this trend of a lower rate of juvenile arrests and incarceration by moving away from the practices in effect in the United States during the twentieth century that created the unsustainable increase in same; an exploration of whether or not these practices led the United States juvenile justice system away from its original policy mandate of

Bullying is an undesirable form of aggression that is mostly seen in kids of school ages in which one of the parties is less powerful. The aggressive behavior is normally repeated over a period of time. It has the power to have devastating, lasting problems. The purpose of this article is to provide a coherent analysis of the most recent research on bullying and to address the issues that still exist even when school-based programs have been implemented in schools since the 1980s.

The juvenile justice system is similar to the criminal justice system. This system is where juveniles are processed, and may be arrested after referrals for juvenile delinquency. Juvenile justice is very different in every state and can be very similar as well because every system has limited jurisdiction and that most focus on the offenders and not their offenses. Therefore, there are 51 juvenile justice systems in the United States. The United States has the juvenile justice system because children are very different than adults – in that they can be better receptive for change and also being easier to rehabilitate. Moreover, the main goal of the juvenile justice system is rehabilitation (Juvenile Law Center). The juvenile justice system is made up of police, courts, corrections, probation and parole services, as well as community-based programs to name a few (book).

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.

There are many things that contribute to youth being in conflict with the law such as mental health, there has been much reliance on the juvenile justice system to meet the needs of juvenile offenders with mental health concerns. It is really concerning that the number of youth with significant mental health needs involved with the juvenile justice system. The presence of these youth in the juvenile justice system poses significant challenges to the juvenile justice and mental health systems this is presenting a major crisis for the juvenile justice

Justice is what allows society to function by creating a suitable punishment for a crime. This punishment will stop others from pursuing said crime while hopefully making everyone happy with the punishment. The US has always had issues with how it runs its Justice Department and usually handles tough cases through the court system. At the top of this system is the Supreme Court who in the simplest terms has the final say on what's fair based on the Constitution. One of these tricky cases involve juveniles, whom are of a select age of teenagers that are considered adults when it comes to high-profile crimes, which do not reflect the ideas of equality. The majority of the Supreme Court aligns with the rationalization that juveniles are not adults and because of this the justice system provided an unfair and, quite a possibly, a cruel source of punishment towards juveniles.

Bullying victimization experiences are linked with many problems such as mental health , anti- social and addictive problems in the adulthood . In addition , it also creates problems with the socioeconomic development for the adults , for example , finishing school or college , marital disruption and unemployment . However , type of bullying victimization is different to/from men and women , which create different outcomes of each victim . For example , females are more likely to suffer negative and psychological impacts on the indirect bullying victimization than males . While males are more likely to engage in anti-social and addictive behavior than females due to the direct bullying victimization . Thus , prevention programs neglected addressing

The definition of bullying victimization is most often attributed to Daniel Olweus; who defined bullying victimization as an act in which a person is exposed to negative actions that are intended to inflict physical, mental or emotional distress (Olweus, 1994). One of the most significant consequences of bullying victimization is the observation that it occurs most often in repeated cycles that can affect the long-term emotional stability of the victim (Nansel, Overpeck, Haynie, Ruan, & Scheidt, 2003 ). Studies indicate that bullying victimization experiences often leave victims prone to defiant or delinquent behaviors, poor school performance, and anger or aggression problems (Nadel, Spellman., Alvarez-Canino, Lausell-Bryant,

Bullying can be hard to define, because research has shown that it comes in many forms which makes it difficult to find one set of characteristics that will describe a bully. Conclusively, studies have defined bullying as a set of repeated aggressive behavior that is intended to harm someone, which usually involves an imbalance of power between the victim and the perpetrator (Morgan, 2012, p. 174). Studies have shown that there are two distinct types of bullying, which is a direct form of verbal and physical aggression, and indirect, which often results in name calling, rumors and exclusion (Aluedse, 2006, p. 38). This form of peer victimization can have devastating effects on a child 's academic work and their physical and psychological well being (Limber, 2003, p. 23). In terms of gender, boys are more likely to be involved in physical bullying (direct) as for girls are more likely to be involved in indirect bullying (Wang et al, 2009, p. 371). Previous research indicates, that parents and friends are two important factors of social interaction associated with bullying and victimization among adolescences. Bullying is quite common among middle school children, because it is during this time that children go through puberty and hormonal changes. During this time students are looking to be accepted and fit into a specific group; however, when there is a lack of acceptance and esteem due to victimization, this can cause children to isolate themselves from those around them