Preventing Delinquency And Its Effects On Society

Juveniles are the most impressionable beings within society because they are still learning and evolving as they mature. Those that continue along the right path are able to see the fruits of their labor by continuing to go to school and progressing in the right path. However, there are those that choose to enter other areas such as criminal activities and gangs. Prosecuting these individuals only to see them back in the same position some time later is not the ultimate goal of the juvenile justice system. Delinquency prevention and intervention programs are able to mold the juvenile so that they conform to the norms of society and go on to lead productive lives.

This paper will look at the importance of Preventing Juvenile Delinquency and what different ideas, concepts and methods are available to those adolescents that are either at-risk already or those that can be in the future. Early prevention is the best method of slowing down the statistics of crimes among adolescents, by keeping them off of the streets and out of the justice system by providing the means to teach them to be productive rather than destructive.

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

Studies suggest that there is a divide between the government and public response to juvenile incarceration. Bullis & Yovas (2005) state that support is given to correctional facilities to house juvenile offenders as a form of punishment (as cited in Shannon, 2013, p. 17). Individuals who support this perspective are often more likely to support the construction of more prisons and stern penalties on crime based upon the presumptions that youthful offenders are aware of the consequences of their actions (Drakeford, 2002 as cited in Shannon, 2013, p. 17). On the other hand, opponents of this perspective believe that incarceration creates an opportunity to rehabilitate the offenders (Huffine, 2006 as cited in Shannon, 2013, p. 18). This perspective supports the purpose of juvenile detention centers as “preparatory in nature – that is, offering services focused on the development of skills needed to return successfully to mainstream

To ascertain whether practitioners attribute the desistance of young people from offending behaviour to the effective practice of targeted youth programs. Young offender’s recidivism has been said to be the consequence of ridiculous control programs attracting reduced compliance from young offenders according to (Kempen and Young 2014). Practitioners competences has been put under scrutiny with critiques such as (Andrews, Donald and James 2010) and (Petrosino et all 2010), alleging that they sometimes deviate from their professional requisites. Much of the criticism was specifically for the private practitioners rendering inconsistent treatment regime, lacking commitment to the recommended practice. Thus, this evident knowledge gap has failed young offenders to satisfy the targeted programs aims of desisting from antisocial behaviours and other criminal activities (Woods et al

Incarceration rates in the United States, and closer to home – in Ohio, have been rising at astonishing rates over the last 20 years. Rising incarceration rates stem from increased sentencing of non-violent crimes, little attention to rehabilitation within most prison walls, and extremely high recidivism rates. The problem of the increasing prison population touches many areas of our society – from reduced workforce to increased state funding for prisons to the adverse effects on children growing up in single-parent households – but has received little public or political attention. Looking at this issue from a social capital standpoint it is important to understand that “social capital keeps bad things from happening to good kids” and then applying this to communities with many families affected by having a member in the penal system (Putnam 296). The rate of recidivism is also increasingly high and an area that must be addressed to move forward in a productive way to ending this problem. When looking at data provided by Ohio’s Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, the current penal population is almost 50,000 individuals (49,789 as of 11/13/2012) (DRC). The average cost of keeping a non-violent offender in prison is approximately $26,000 per year (CEPR). Calculations based on these estimates show that incarceration is costing Ohio approximately $1.3 billion each year. With such a financial burden on Ohio, it is time that this issue was taken seriously and actively

There are currently two programs specifically in Henderson County which I am writing this paper about. One of the programs is the local Boys and Girls Club of Henderson County and the D.A.R.E. Program of Henderson County. I decided to write about local programs because it would give me the opportunity to learn more about juvenile delinquency prevention programs within my own community. Both programs are a huge staple within Henderson County and are two of the most important juvenile delinquency prevention programs within Henderson County.

Introduction: Recidivism or, habitual relapses into crime, has time and time again proven to be an issue among delinquents, which thereby increases the overall juvenile prison population. This issue has become more prevalent than what we realize. Unless a unit for measuring a juvenile’s risk of recidivism is enacted and used to determine a system to promote effective prevention, than the juvenile prison population will continue to increase. Our court system should not only focus on punishing the said juvenile but also enforce a program or policy that will allow for prevention of recidivism. So the question remains, how can recidivism in the juvenile prison population be prevented so that it is no longer the central cause for increased

San Jose Police Chief, Bill Landsdowne, stated that, “[l]ocking up kids is the easiest way. But once they get in the juvenile justice system, it’s very hard to get them out” (Holman & Ziedenberg, date). Detaining youth, in particular non-violent offenders, has more of a negative, long-term impact on youth as well as the community. With the inception of the Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative, the use of retribution is being pushed aside for more restorative and rehabilitation efforts. States that have embraced this initiative are finding that not only are the numbers of youth being detained decreasing but that alternatives to detention are providing opportunity for juveniles to become productive members of the community. All this effort without increasing risk to the community and safety issues. More importantly this initiative works in addressing the underlying issues causing delinquent behavior.

Aos, Phipps, Barnoski, & Lieb (2001) states, “Coordination of Services (COS), provides an educational program to juvenile offenders and their parents (for example, families below the poverty line). The goals of COS are to deter juveniles from delinquent behavior, get them to set goals, review the strengths of the individual and their family, and explain what resources are available” (S. Aos, P. Phipps, R. Barnoski, and R. Lieb 2001). Moreover, Aos, Phipps, Barnoski, & Lieb (2001) asserts, “Of the 342 youth in the sample, 63 re-offended with a misdemeanor, and 13 re-offended with a felony. These low recidivism rates make it less likely to observe statistically significant differences between the groups.” (S. Aos, P. Phipps, R. Barnoski, and R. Lieb 2001).

For many years, people have debated what is the best course of action when it comes to juvenile offenders, whether it is in the community’s best interest to incarcerate our youth for the safety of the community or do we spend our resources on rehabilitation in order to protect our future? Many people believe that safety and security of the society is most important which may be why as American’s we rely heavily on incarceration compared to any other nation. People have failed to notice, however, that incarceration is ineffective, very costly, and far from the original perspective of juvenile justice. By rethinking our current approach to juvenile justice, we can fix our recidivism numbers, budget problems, and in the long run

The Adult Correctional system in the United States is growing at an alarming rate due to the increase in recidivism among adults. How do we combat the problem? The answer is quite simple. We start at the very beginning when the adults are involved in the Juvenile Justice System, under the age of eighteen. Juvenile delinquency is an ongoing issue within the United States that presents a challenge, not only to the respective court, but to the correctional system. It is often thought that the Juvenile System is separate from the criminal justice system due to the age of the youth. However, a lot of the same laws apply in Juvenile Court. A delinquent can be adjudicated with an offense and given a determinate or indeterminate sentence should the court feel that the youth should enter into the legal custody of the respective State. There is a strong correlation

Juvenile offending is a concern in society today. Juveniles account for approximately 19% of the population but are responsible for 29% of criminal arrests (Cottle, Lee, & Heilbrun, 2001). Crime overall has been found to be decreasing throughout the last two decades. The issue is that the rate in which adult crime is decreasing is significantly greater than the rate in which juvenile crime is decreasing. Since the rate of juvenile crime is so high, juvenile delinquents are seen as predators and many believe they lack morals. The way in which media of today’s society constructs juvenile delinquency impacts the views of a community towards their youth and youth offenders. Media presents an inaccurate image of youth offenders as violent predators (Rhineberger-Dunn, 2013). This inaccurate image significantly promotes the myths that juvenile crime is rising, juveniles commit crimes that are primarily violent, and that juveniles are highly effected by recidivism and continue committing crimes into adulthood (Bohm, & Walker, 2013). It has already been stated though that crime rates have been decreasing over the last two decades so the first myth is refuted. The myth that juveniles primarily commit violent crimes is also very off. In most cases, juveniles are involved in property crimes and although there are some violent crime cases, they are very rare. When these rare violent crimes do occur, youth can be tried in adult court. The

Characteristically, juvenile delinquency follows a similar path just like normal adolescent development and children tend to follow delinquent and criminal behavior rather than engaging in it randomly. Research has shown that there are two types of delinquents, those in whom the onset of severe antisocial behavior begins in early childhood, and those in whom this onset coincides with entry into adolescence. With either type, these developmental paths give families, communities, and systems the opportunity to intervene and prevent the onset of antisocial behaviors and justice system involvement (APA, 2017).

The development of preventive strategies will necessarily follow from an understanding of delinquency's root causes. If social structure is a key factor in the development of juvenile delinquency, then prevention will entail addressing issues regarding place, identity, or socioeconomic status. For example, if poverty is considered a significant causative factor, then taking steps such as providing jobs, job training, and perhaps additional welfare benefits becomes an important social concern. By eliminating poverty, society will thus