The Juvenile Community Corrections Population Is Experienced A Tremendous Growth Over The Past Two Decades

In an attempt to keep juveniles out of prisons and focus on reforming the offender, many different rehabilitation programs became popular. Boot camps are one of the most popular forms of crime prevention and rehabilitation for juvenile delinquency. Many people believe that these boot camps are a beneficial alternative, citing that they effectively reduce costs and recidivism rates. Whether or not these camps are effective is a highly debated issue and has been for several decades. After researching many different boot camps throughout the United States, the statistics are clear, they do not prove to be effective in reducing recidivism rates, helping change the behavior of the offenders, or reducing costs. Nonetheless, these programs enjoy continued popularity both on a government as well as a private level.

Juvenile delinquency is a relatively new phenomenon. For this reason, society’s reactions and solutions to the problem of delinquency are also modern developments. The United States developed the first youth court in 1899 and is now home to many new and formerly untested methods of juvenile rehabilitation and correction. One of many unique programs within the Juvenile Justice system, boot camps are institutions designed to keep delinquent juveniles out of traditional incarceration facilities and still provide a structured method of punishment and rehabilitation. Boot camps developed in the early 1990s and quickly proliferated throughout the nation. Specifically, they are “…short-term residential programs modeled after

There are many similarities and differences between the adult and juvenile justice systems. Although juvenile crimes have increased in violence and intensity in the last decade, there is still enough difference between the two legal proceedings, and the behaviors themselves, to keep the systems separated. There is room for changes in each structure. However, we cannot treat/punish juvenile offenders the way we do adult offenders, and vice versa. This much we know. So we have to find a way to merge between the two. And, let’s face it; our juveniles are more important to us in the justice system. They are the group at they

My chosen career path is to become a Juvenile probation officer. Juvenile probation officers work with youths that have been placed on probation and or have been court order to attend an alternative consequence school to continue their education. Most juvenile probation officers work with youths at a particular stage of their probation process, for an example supervision or investigation. This paper will cover information on the juvenile justice system and my career choice by touching bases with my interviewee a Juvenile Probation Officer Shelvin McGill the agency he is employed with as well as its clientele, I will also speak on the job description and responsibilities, his theory-of-use, and briefly touch on why he chooses this line of work, and his educational background.

Juvenile correctional systems have many different components and some are likely to be affected with a primary focus on rehabilitation. Today the United States falls short of providing adequate public juvenile facilities. With a focus on punishment, the need for new facilities will continue to rise. Switching the primary focus to

Longer Sentences One potentially harmful outcome for transferred adolescent offenders is a longer or harsher sentence than they might have experienced if they had remained in the juvenile justice system. Both sides of the political spectrum seem to believe that this is the case. Those in favor of “get tough” policies promote long sentences for youth and see transfer to the adult system as a method to achieve this end. Meanwhile, those opposing adult sentences for juveniles imply that transfer to adult court produces long confinement in an adult facility. Although clearly there are adolescents who receive extended stays in adult correctional facilities that could not be imposed on them if they stayed in the juvenile justice system, the overall impact of transfer on extending institutional confinement for all adolescents involved in this process is not totally clear. For one thing, about 20 percent of transferred adolescent offenders receive probation in adult court (Bishop, 2000). For those who receive adult sentences, some evidence exists that juveniles who are transferred receive harsher or more punitive sentences compared with those who remain in the juvenile justice system (Kupchik, Fagan, and Liberman, 2003; Kurlychek and Johnson, 2004; Myers, 2003), possibly because the mere knowledge that a youth was transferred may convey a heightened level of risk to the judge, who may address it through a longer sentence (Kurlychek and Johnson, 2010). Males (2008), however, tracked 35,000 releasees from the California Department of Juvenile Justice and reported that juveniles were released from the adult system after a shorter time served than youth who were sentenced for the same offenses in the juvenile justice system. Whatever the increased chance of extended incarceration might be with processing in the adult court, it is still clear that many adolescents who are processed

The juvenile justice system was founded on the belief that juveniles should be rehabilitated from committing crime. It was the belief of the government that juveniles do not posses the cognitive reasoning of adults, therefore should not be punished as adults. The juvenile court was formed in 1899 with the belief that the government needs to play a more active role in the rehabilitation of juveniles. This belief held strong up until the 1980's when President Ronald Reagan took office. The beliefs in juvenile rehabilitation were fading and an alternative was rapidly being put into motion, juvenile incarceration. Juveniles being incarcerated was not

As described by Kelly Peterson juvenile probation officers work with high risk teens along with their peers, family, work, school and involved activities. People like Kelly do there best to try and keep juveniles out of the adult system and further criminal systems. Over the course of Kelly’s visit she talked about many things some main points being; Her caseload and how she manages it, the main kinds of cases she deals with, and the court experience of people in the juvenile system.

Through the court systems in the United States there is a major distribution of probation between the juvenile court system and the adult court system. More than 70,000 juveniles were incarcerated in youth prisons or detention in 2010. Case studies show that more than 500,000 juveniles are taken to confinement centers every year. Not including the juveniles who by pass the detention center and make their way into the adult court system where they are later tried. Juveniles stand out of any prison that they may be asserted to because most acts are created by those younger than the age of 18 those juveniles are allowed to be trialed under the administration of the juvenile court until age 21. Prison is not a place most juveniles while be able to with stand. So the juvenile judges process a variety of different legal options to incorporate both the safety needs of the juvenile while also dealing with the well-being of the community and the rehabilitant needs of the juvenile. In some cases, the state will even pay jails to not allow juveniles to be accepted into their facilities. Juveniles are adequately still labeled as children no matter how grown they may think of themselves as. The mind of a person does not mature appropriately until that person reaches their premature twenties. An Arkansas study documented that juveniles who were formerly imprisoned for a crime were about 15 time more likely to constrain another crime. Probation has been a more efficient route when dealing

As the overwhelming majority of research studies show, the adult criminal justice system is not equipped to meet the needs of youth offenders at all stages of the process, from trial to sentencing options to incarceration. The findings of the research show that justice is not served by forcing juveniles through a system never intended to process youth and that transfer laws have exacerbated the problems they sought to address.

America’s juvenile justice system has been around for ages and has had problems since its creation. The courts have failed to devise a way to help juveniles and keep them from even entering the justice system. More often than not, juveniles are forgotten and never dealt with until they reach the point where they are either going to be placed within the system or receive some sort of diversion or alternative. This is where the problem exists. There needs to be more communication between the different levels of the juvenile justice system. Particularly between the officers that may arrest these juveniles, the probation officers that deal with them, and of course the judge in the court system. The juvenile court is supposed to have provided due process protections along with care, treatment, and rehabilitation for juveniles while protecting society. Yet, there is still considerable doubt as to whether the juvenile justice network can meet these goals (Cox, Allen & Hanser, 2013).

When most people think about the American criminal justice system some of the first things that come to mind is corruption of officers and courts, or jails with prisoners. One of the last things that come to mind is the juvenile justice system. Nevertheless, nothing is more important than the juvenile justice system because the juveniles within the system are the future working class and citizens of America. Therefore, it is important that they receive the necessary punishment and rehabilitation to move past mistakes they previously made. However, there are aspects that push against the goal of rehabilitation in the juvenile justice system such as the misuse or lack of money, the harshness of the punishment, and the programs within the

Within the past decade,nearly every single state has altered its juvenile program in reply to observed increases in serious, persistent, and pugnacious youth crime. These adjustments weaken the power of juvenile courts as legal decisions and statutory adjustments transfer more youths from juvenile courts to criminal courts so that youthful offenders can be sentenced as adults. Corrections to juvenile sentencing regulations perpetuate the punitiveness of sanctions made accessible to juvenile court judges. Supplementary strategies seek to "combine"or merge, juvenile and criminal court power and sentencing power above pugnacious youthful offenders. These "get tough" strategies alter the numbers and varieties of juveniles confined in mature and juvenile correctional abilities and pose fundamental setbacks for administrators in both systems; accelerate the functioning within the procedural integrity amid the juvenile and convict justice systems; and corrode the rationale for a distinct juvenile court.

Boot camps became a force to be reckoned with in the 1980s. It was at first imagined as a powerful apparatus for settling behavioral issues of high schoolers. This approach was gotten from the military style of rectifying the conduct of blundering individuals from the military. Boot camps for young people have turned into a well known disciplinary alternative for guardians with juvenile kids. Regularly prescribed by instructors or by state equity frameworks as a contrasting option to adolescent confinement focuses, the boot camps are unbending military situations. Some are wild camps that show youngsters ingrained instincts in a military-like setting, while others are held nearer to home.Youth camps are short projects that may last from 3 to 6 months. The juvenile is usually housed in an office alongside other youth guilty parties. Surrounded in a prison like atmosphere, the goal of these camps are to produce youth that are productive in everyday life. Juvenile delinquency is one of the additionally glaring issues confronting the children of this generation. At present, the quantity of juveniles everywhere throughout the world has developed into disturbing extents.

Juvenile delinquency has been a problem in the United States ever since it has been able to be documented. From 100 years ago to now, the process of juvenile delinquency has changed dramatically; from the way juveniles are tried, to the way that they are released back into society, so that they do not return back to the justice system (Scott and Steinberg, 2008). Saying this, juveniles tend to