Summarize The Juvenile Justice System

Placing a juvenile in a detention center early in the court process increases the risk that youths will be found to be delinquent and damage their prospects for future success. A majority of the youths that are placed in these facilities pose little or no threat to the public and essentially do not need to be there. This portion of the juvenile court process is detrimental to the future and mental aspects of a youth’s life. We desperately need to change the way that we handle the juvenile court system because we are only reinforcing the delinquent behavior that these youths have been exposed to. We need to focus on the rehabilitation and prevention efforts for these youths not the punishment aspect and until then (insert a better ending).

It has been one hundred years since the creation of the juvenile court in the United States. The court and the juvenile justice system has made some positive changes in the lives of millions of young people lives over the course or those years, within the last thirteen years there has been some daunting challenges in the system.

Over 1/3 of the 11,000 index crime arrests were juveniles under the age of 16.

Today’s juvenile court system handles most cases involving those under the age of 18-year-old. This was not always the case and the ideal of a separate court system for adults and children is only about 100 years old. When looking at the differences that set juvenile courts apart, it is important to study the history and see how it developed over time.

Youth justice practitioners are guided by a planning and assessment framework (Asset plus) providing specialists with indispensable information and documentation. With reference to the Asset plus, it was drafted and endorsed by the Youth Justice Board (YJB) to holistically provide motivation to young offenders within the process of intervention (Daniel 2014). Furthermore, (Boyle et al 2010) highlighted on important factors which reflect on practitioner’s responsibility to identify and assess young offenders. In fact, Boyle and colleagues were able to explain in their research analysis that, as facilitators, practitioners can diagnose and engross positive ambitions that an individual pose. Thus, giving much emphasis on inherent objectives and consequently developing a strengths-based methodology. However, not only the implementation of diverse tools to try and modify young offender’s behaviours can be useful, but other models, arrangements and interactions that are applicable to targeted youth programs can also be

The juvenile justice system was subject to a lot of corruption and civil rights violations in its early stages. Juveniles did not have the same rights as adults and could be forced into terrible living or working conditions. With no child labor laws, delinquent juveniles could be sentenced to forced labor in factories or to houses of refuge. With the ruling of Ex Parte Crouse, the state took ultimate responsibility of children and send them to these institutions, even against the will of the parents. Some of these institutions, such as houses of refuge may have started with good intention, but they ultimately led to rampart corruption and abuse of juveniles.

The Juvenile Justice system, since its conception over a century ago, has been one at conflict with itself. Originally conceived as a fatherly entity intervening into the lives of the troubled urban youths, it has since been transformed into a rigid and adversarial arena restrained by the demands of personal liberty and due process. The nature of a juvenile's experience within the juvenile justice system has come almost full circle from being treated as an adult, then as an unaccountable child, now almost as an adult once more.

Referring to aspects from Goldson and Muncie’s (2006) article on “a youth justice with integrity” (pp. 99-102), the essay will argue that section 38 of the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) should incorporate a risk-needs responsivity model (RNR) to the sentencing structure. Moreover, this addition should replace the 2012 amendments of section 38, which incorporated deterrence and denunciation into sentencing practices (s. 38(2)(f)). This amendment has the potential to increase recidivism rates, as it does not properly address the special needs that some youth’s may have. In relation, section 38 exemplifies the proportionality of the punishment (s. 38(2)(c)), which could be potentially affected

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

The juvenile justice system can be dated back to the late 18th and early 19th century. Youths were confined to jails with mentally ill and hardened criminals because there were no other alternatives for them. Many of these youths were in these institutions for non-violent offenses. During this same time, many American cities had to find a solution to the overwhelming rate of child neglect. Today, there is still much debate about the well-being of youths in the criminal justice system. The juvenile justice system plays an important role in society because it allows youths the opportunity to change their behavior. The current system is effective in providing programs for juveniles in an effort to

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.

The juvenile justice system is always changing and developing new ideas. The first example of a change or development can be the status offense reform. The basis of this are they are trying to keep the non-delinquent kids form the juvenile justice system. Some examples of status offenses are skipping school, or running away – offenses that are not illegal for adults. These offenses can lead to possibly detention, which might do very little to rehabilitate or change the issues that juvenile has. How this can all change is to bring these troubled kids to community based services to make them learn that it is possible to change and become a better person. Some other examples of changes or developments in our juvenile justice system (that I won’t go into detail about) are the quality of aftercare and how the system is trying to reduce racial-ethnic discrepancies and making it fairer for everyone (models for change).

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.

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