Juvenile Justice Thinking Vs. First Order Thinking

In the United States of America today when a person has been committed of a crime they are trialed through a system to conclude if they are guilty as well as determine their best fit punishment of due to the crime. From what most people know when an adult is put through this process they have the right to a quick and speedy trial with a jury to determine if they are guilty and they are given their punishment. However, within our system the process of punishment and sentencing is significantly different if the defendant of the crime is under the age of 18, if they are under 18 they are legally considered a child and are not put through the same system and punishment with which adult are. They are but through what we call a juvenile court system.

Children that are born into poverty and less than desirable conditions are more times than not, destined to become involved in the juvenile justice system. This may be due the child’s destructive behaviors or for placement out of concern for the child’s safety and well-being. Neglect and abuse is more prevalent in disadvantaged environments and causes sometimes-irreversible emotional problems. For whatever reason the child enters the system, we know that it is not a place for youth to grow, be nurtured and become productive members of society.

Today 's concept of the juvenile justice system is relatively new due to significant modifications in policy overtime. The justice system has been trying to figure out effective ways to treat juvenile criminal offenders successfully for years. The justice system did not always have a special category for juveniles and their crime. Juveniles was once treated as adults when they committed crimes and were subjected to harsh punishments. "The juvenile court was the culmination of efforts of the positivist criminologists and Progressive activists. It was designed to address the individual needs of delinquent children, provide care and rehabilitation, and ensure that they could go on to live lawful, productive lives. The Illinois legislature

In the paper I will be comparing the juvenile and the adult justice systems, there are several differences between the two systems. I will be discussing many aspects within the justice systems. These include but not limited to terminology, due Process rights, arrest to corrections, juvenile crime compared to adult crime, age limits and waivers to adult system and different community correction options available to offenders.

1. Chapter 13 is a historical look at the concept of juvenile justice. What did you learn from reading this chapter?

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.

The act of justice is to provide both fairness and equality for both the victim and offender. With the increase of juvenile offenders, the YOA was enhanced therefore forming the YCJA, which would ultimately focus on ending the cycle of recidivism among young offenders, and as a result of the YCJA being introduced, 42% of overall crime by youths had been declined from the year 2000 to 2014. In doing this the YCJA’s main goals were and still are to recuperate the youthful offenders by focusing on rehabilitation and reintegration, and looking at the underlying cause of the crime. Although not acknowledging the suffering and constant fear that the victim and community go through, as the result of the crime.

In the 1960s, several imperative cases opposed the behavior of youths in the court system (Koroknay-Palicz, 2016). In re Gault a landmark decision acknowledged that juveniles should be guaranteed a fair trial like adults. In the case of Gault, in 1967, the court concluded that if Gault would have been 18 years of age, at the time he was apprehended, he would have received the same due process rights as an adult (Koroknay-Palicz, 2016). The court also determined that there were legitimate reasons for considering juveniles and adults differently (Koroknay-Palicz, 2016). This 15-year-old juvenile delinquent made a dramatic stain on the juvenile justice system of today. Juveniles who were facing an adjudication of incarceration and delinquency were granted the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause (Koroknay-Palicz, 2016).

The juvenile justice system was founded with the goal to serve the best interests of the child, with an understanding that youth possessed different needs than adults. Over the course of our semester we have come across various research studies that proves that the adult system is not well equipped to house and rehabilitate the delinquents. These studies have shown that more juveniles that are transferred to the criminal justice system ends up back in the system, which means the recidivism rate is higher for those who are treated in the juvenile facility compared to those who are transferred to the adult. Researchers and academics overwhelmingly agree that the transfer policies disproportionately affect youth of color. Youth in the adult system are convicted and incarcerated at higher rates compared to their counterparts in the juvenile justice system and they also tend to receive harsher sentences. Transferred juveniles experience high rates of pretrial detention are often detained or incarcerated in adult facilities, where they have no access to resources vital to their development, and are at an unacceptably high risk for assault and abuse.

I agree that society has their own views on illegal behaviors of juveniles and juvenile justice system. Judges the arresting officer on the crime scene all make a decision in the juvenile delinquent cases. Correctional officer also makes decision once the juvenile gets convicted and sent to a juvenile detention center. In North Carolina, a juvenile can be tried as an adult at the age of 17 in their courts.

The four models that the juvenile justice system has devised to deal with juvenile crime are the following: Treatment Model, Justice Model, Crime Control Model, and Balance and Restorative Justice Model. Although they all have similarities, they also have significant differences. I do not believe that the Treatment Model is the best method of handling juveniles when they commit a crime. Personally, I do not agree with the state having to take care of the children as if it was the parents. This is a burden on the state that I do not believe to be cost efficient.

There are few things worse than hearing that your child has been arrested. The news is probably startling, scary, and intimidating. While you might be feeling anxious and nervous, it is important to remain calm. If your child is ever arrested, it is important that you know a little bit about the juvenile court system, so that you do not make matters worse. If your child is arrested, here are four things you should do:

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.

The modern day Juvenile Justice System (JJS) in the U.S. evolved out of fragmented reform movements throughout the country that began in 1800 and continued into the 1900’s, Progressive Era. Out of the many movements that were occurring in various states, two pioneered approaches took place that could easily be considered the roots of the entire JJS. In 1824 in the state of New York, the New York House of Refuge became the nation’s first reformatory for children. For the first time, there was an alternative to placing young offenders within jails and it did not take long for other states to create their own versions to address growing concerns about incarcerated youth (Einstein Law, 2015). Next, Illinois in 1899 changed the way young offenders interacted with the court with the creation of the nation’s first juvenile court. For the first time the focus shifted from that of criminalization and punishment, to one of social support that provided guidance, care, and kept young offenders from almshouses and penitentiaries. In addition, the Illinois Juvenile Court removed the stigma of labels and afforded protections to the young by creating closed proceedings and using terminology such as petitions of delinquency, dispositions and adjunctions instead of criminal charges, sentences and trials to (Long, 1999). Once the idea of a formalized JJS took hold in the country very little changed until the U.S. Supreme court and Federal Government pass laws that regulated the entire

1. I 'd recommend you begin your paper with a paragraph that states both your theory and your approach. Share that the juvenile justice system should take into account the evidence that a juvenile 's brain--specifically the white matter that controls the brain 's executive functions-- has not completely formed. You will layout the biological evidence for this and then through the use of a recent case show the gaps in the current court system as well as make recommendations for how to address youth in the juvenile system in a more effective manner.