Pros And Cons Of Juvenile Incarceration

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

Regardless of what you might see on TV the verdict of “not guilty by the reason of insanity” is an immensely rare plea for anyone. A majority of offenders with a mental illness still end up incarcerated. Even though the United States only makes up 5% of the world's population we account for 25% of the world's prisoners. Which converts to 2.2 million prisoners and about 1.2 million of those people have a mental illness (Fellner). Mental illness within our jails and prisons has become very prevalent within our correctional systems over the last 10 years. The number of men and women who have a mental illness that end up in jail or prison grows day by day. For those who do not go into the prison with a mental illness, will very likely develop some form of mental illness after being released from incarceration. The mentally ill do not belong in prison, the purpose for incarceration is retribution, incapacitation, deterrence and rehabilitation, and though it is originally meant for all of these purposes, it has lost its meaning. Correctional facilities are not built to provide treatment for the mentally ill, and the people who have been diagnosed with a mental illness cannot get the long-term treatment they need inside of a prison cell.

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.

The most excellent official course of action for dealing with juveniles engaged in status offenses such as drinking, smoking, breaking curfew, running away from home, truancy, in my opinion, is community service. Juvenile status offenders should be rehab, in my opinion, working the drug and alcohol centers for adults, mental consumer centers, and hospitals, so that they can get a feel of what life can be like from breaking the lesser offenses. The above offenses are not severe crimes; however, these offenses can lead to a more serious crime, which may involve criminal punishment. Why can the justice system stop juvenile engagement status offenses before it becomes a significant problem? When corporal punishment was removed from schools and household, juveniles saw their day of justice as a right in court.

Treatments include but are not limited to: “Brand name” family therapies, diversion, probation, or residential placement. These treatments that youths complete are key to saving money in the future due to reducing the need for future incarceration and the costs that come with it.

The law had defined a line between juvenile and adult offenders. In the United States, if you are under the age of 18 and get into trouble with the law then you will have to face the Juvenile Justice System. Although the age requirement varies amongst states juvenile institutions and programs were created to help treat those who are in trouble with the law. There are several types of Juvenile Institutions and programs. Some provide harsh punishment for young offenders while others focal point emphasizes on treatment and prevention. There are several juvenile correctional facilities such as, training schools which are long term facilities for housing juveniles and serve as a function analogous to adult prisons (Thompson, 2013); Group homes, which resemble a dormitory type of living for juveniles while allowing them to engage in the society with limited participation, and even Detention centers. Juvenile detention centers detain young offenders sentenced by a juvenile court. They are reserved for the most dangerous offenders.

In August of 2004, Robert Acuna was sentenced to the death penalty. His crime? Shooting his two elderly neighbors, James and Joyce Carroll, "execution style" and then proceeding to steal their car (Liptak). This heinous crime only adds to the current debate: should juveniles be sentenced as adults? The answer is yes, there should be no leniency displayed towards minors who commit the same serious crimes as adults. Although young, juveniles should be capable of understanding the serious extent of the crime they commit. Sentencing juveniles as adults will prevent perpetrators of major crimes, such as mass murder, from walking free. Furthermore, judges have enough experience to know whether to try a minor as an adult or not. Juvenile sentencing as adults is not a wrong but rather a form of justice in the face of rising teen violence.

For offenders with mental health impairment, TJJD’s institutional facilities are staffed with mental health professionals in order to provide services that meet the needs of each juveniles. For those diagnosed with severe mental health issues they are most likely placed in Corsicana Residential Treatment Program. The immediate goal is to treat the youth’s mental health impairment. Once this is accomplished the focus of treatment is on changing the delinquent and criminal patterns within the juvenile’s behavior. The final goal within treatment concerns reintegrating youth with his or her family. Unfortunately handling juveniles with mental health problems pose a particularly difficult problem for TJJD. However, according to TJJD the specialized

Knowledge of a person's criminal past, while it can indeed provide fair and needed insight into that person's character, may also be counterproductive in that it can create an obstacle impeding a changed efforts at reformation and rehabilitation. (Mouzon, 2008) If I were the state senator for the State of Tennessee, changing the laws concerning juvenile records and their accessibility, I would start by accessing all the pros and cons. Unlike adult criminal proceedings, juvenile court hearings are often closed to members of the public and records are usually confidential, protecting children from carrying the burdens of their delinquent activity into adulthood. However, having a juvenile criminal record can follow you for the rest of your life,

The United States leads the world in the incarceration of young people, there are over 100,000 youth placed in jail each year. Locking up youth has shown very little positive impact on reducing crime. Incarcerating youth have posed greater problems such as expenses, limited education, lack of employment, and effect on juveniles’ mental and physical well-being.

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.

This paper will discuss the history of the juvenile justice system and how it has come to be what it is today. When a juvenile offender commits a crime and is sentenced to jail or reform school, the offender goes to a separate jail or reforming place than an adult. It hasn’t always been this way. Until the early 1800’s juveniles were tried just like everyone else. Today, that is not the case. This paper will explain the reforms that have taken place within the criminal justice system that developed the juvenile justice system.

The juvenile justice system in America has been through numerous phases of growth. In recent years, it has endured extensive changes that have taken place as a product of reforms made to revitalize the innovative principle of juvenile justice, the idea of bringing individual justice and treatment to the heart of the system. This assessment of related literature looks particularly at the accessible studies on juvenile detention centers in order to prove the negative effects of taking a disciplinary approach in juvenile justice. It starts with an historical evaluation in order to place the increase of detention centers in context. This paper subsequently goes on to talk about detailed problems

Every process has room for improvement, but the juvenile justice system can be altered by adding in possible solutions of what can be done to help this problem in American society. About 100 years ago, juveniles were always tried as adults. Now, that the government has altered the system for the better, the government knows that trying juveniles as adults is not always justified. It depends on the crime, but the majority of the time, juveniles are often always tried as juveniles, based solely on their age. Not only that has changed; the process of juvenile justice has changed as well to better help the juveniles in the system. The rights of juveniles in the system have changed so that the children can improve their lives once they are out of the system. Even though the process has changed and the rights have improved for the juveniles, there are still many improvements to be made. Studies show that recidivism rates are in fact going down, but the rate can always be better so that juveniles do not return to a life of crime.

In Miller v. Alabama (2012), the United States Supreme Court determined that mandatory life sentences without the possibility of parole is unconstitutional to juvenile offenders. This decision is agreeable upon because adolescents do not receive the opportunity to reform themselves. As the Court suggests, life in prison violates the Eighth Amendment, which accounts for a ban on cruel and unusual punishment. However, juveniles still must be held accountable for their actions and should be sentenced to a fair verdict according to their crime, whether they are an adult or not.