No Criminal Situation Should Be Treated The Same?

For starters, children in the juvenile correction system are not rehabilitated for drug addictions or treated for mental health conditions. Being incarcerated does nothing positive for them. These children become stuck in the cycle of arrests and reoffending, in which every time they are brought back to a facility it is now exponentially harder for them to return to be a functioning member of society. In fact, there are kids who have been trapped “in this system for decades” (Mayeux). Obviously juvenile detention policies do not work, or these children would have been reformed and not have been in the same situation for so long. Young adults stuck in this cycle get released and then are immediately back where they started when they break another law, harming the teenager’s future, and endangering public safety (Mayeux). Society, in fact, would benefit from a rehabilitory stance on juvenile crime instead of a punishing one. Juvenile detention intervenes in these at-risk children’s lives in a way that actually turns them into criminals, by imposing stereotypes on them, and treating them like they are dangerous, and not worth fixing. The American perspective on juvenile crime needs to change, because the current program is not benefitting at-risk children, or

When a child is committed of a crime and must undergo punishment through the juvenile system they are being given the punishment with the thought of rehabilitation. As a child the goal for the state is to help them get back on their feet and stop the criminal behavior that is accruing in order to ensure that when they are an adult they will not still be committing these crimes. As soon as a minor has been committed of a crime and arrested for this crime the police submit an application for petition to Probation, probation them looks over the circumstances such as family life, history of crimes, and psychological state before deciding how the case should be handled. (Inside the Juvenile Justice System: 2014) If the case is thought to

There are five distinct philosophies to the punishment of criminal offenders. The deterrence model is based on the belief that punishment or threat of punishment will prevent citizens, offenders or non-offenders, from committing or recommitting crimes (Fagin, 2016), 2016). A real-life example of the deterrence model would be corporal punishment. Because the children who witnessed the punishment would not want to commit the act, and the child receiving the punishment would not want to recommit their crime, it was believed to be an effective strategy in forming school children’s behavior (Fagin, 2016). The belief that criminals cannot be rehabilitated, and it would never be safe to release them back into the community falls under the incapacitation philosophy of punishment (Fagin, 2016). The most common type of incapacitation is imprisonment. When offenders are imprisoned, they are unable to commit new crimes, and will no longer pose a threat to their communities. Rehabilitation on the other hand, is the belief that criminals can be cured of their criminality, and can be released back into the community (Fagin, 2016). Counseling, educational programs, and work skill programs are all different real-world examples of the rehabilitation model (Fagin, 2016). The aim of these programs is to help offenders get better and become a productive member of society. The idea of punishing criminals because they deserve to be punished fits into the retribution philosophy of punishment (Fagin, 2016), 194). An example of this philosophy today would be

The general deterrence concept was remarkable because punishment decreased crime. Ever since the number of police were put on the street, the delinquency rate has undergone a two-decade decline. Now, the problem occurs when certain youths continue to do crime after serving punishment. In some instances, experiencing punishment may actually increase the likelihood that offenders may commit new crimes. Especially for juveniles that live in troubled neighborhoods punishment will not lead to any drop on the crime rate. They care about committing crimes that are profitable and beneficial to them rather than worrying about getting

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.

Question: To what extent does the law balance out the rights of the victims, offenders and society in the criminal investigation process?

In order to properly address mandatory incarceration for chronic juvenile offender’s criminal activities, it is important to begin with psychological assessments and evaluations. Half of our youths have experienced some type of psychological trauma such as depression, PTSD, personality disorders, anxiety, anger issues, or dissociation, just to name a few (Moroz, K. 2009). In order to determine mandatory incarceration, all of these factors must be considered. I will agree with most of our society that is , if they are a danger to society and serious of the crime, they need to be put into detention, where they cannot cause harm but where they can received the right intervention program and mental health treatment for them, it’s the law. The juvenile justice system is to rehabilitate not punish young offenders. Punishment is not the answer in solving their delinquent behavioral patterns.

The juvenile justice system has long been in debate over whether its focus should be rehabilitation or punishment. From its birth in the early 20th century, the juvenile justice system has changed its focus from punishment to rehabilitation and back many times. Some say the juvenile justice system should be abolished and juveniles tried as adults, yet studies indicate punishment and imprisonment do not rehabilitate juvenile offenders; therefore, the juvenile justice system should remain

Since juvenile offenders are viewed as immaturity because their brains are not completely developed, they are considered as what is desired to be protected and educated in general. Minors are believed to be competent to be held responsible for their actions. Recently, it has been debated that juvenile offenders should be punished tougher like adult offenders or should not be punished tougher. The question is whether recent treatments are appropriate or not. If not, what kinds of treatments should provide for minor offenders to clean up their criminal behavior?

Most of the time, the system has proven itself to be unsuccessful in dealing with juvenile crimeMost often, the system is unsuccessful. “There are kids who are five times more likely to be raped or otherwise sexually assaulted in adult prisons than in juvenile facilities. The risk of suicide is likewise much higher for juveniles in adult jails.”(How to reduce crime Pg 3). When juveniles are sent to jail, they are still relatively impressionable from people in the prison, and may go back into crime after they’re released, hindering rehabilitation and just creating another violent criminal in the world. The court sentencing the criminal is also at

It is often said that Americas justice system is out of control by becoming too harsh on the offenders. This leads to an increasing number of our incarceration rate. More and more young adults are being sent to prison when they may not even be fully developed yet when it comes to understanding their actions. This system has led to young teens being sent to adult prisons where they are abused as well as people committing small crimes that are tried unfairly and sentenced to a lifetime of prison. the current justice system as a matter a fact, increases incarceration rates by providing ridiculous accusations of crimes and intense terms of punishment.

Currently to deal with juvenile offenders involved in the youth crime, there are two options available. The first option that prevails to a larger extent is known to us as incarceration while the second option that is slowly gaining trends is known to us as rehabilitation programs. This paper focuses on thorough analysis of both these options and the impact that they have on the offenders as well as the society as a whole. The paper also assesses the viability of these options in order to determine which of these will prove to be more effective and beneficial.

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).

In recent decades, juvenile crime has become somewhat of a controversy due to the young age and immaturity of these criminals. Incidences of juvenile crime skyrocketed in the 1980s and 1990s, and policymakers pushed for laws that sent children as young as thirteen years old to trial, and even made them eligible for prison sentences. The general public has expressed a common desire to reduce the incidence of juvenile crime and find effective legislation to discipline these youths, but there are questions about these methods. What is more effective, incarceration or rehabilitation? Does criminal punishment intimidate more youths away from a life of crime, and would productive rehabilitation efforts influence these youths to becoming more valuable members of society?

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