The Law And The Legal System

Imagine you are the director of health information services for a medium-sized health care facility. Like many of your peers, you have contracted with an outside copying service to handle all requests for release of patient health information at your facility. You have learned that a lobbying organization for trial attorneys in your state is promoting legislation to place a cap on photocopying costs, which is significantly below the actual costs incurred as part of the contract. (Case Study, p. 20)

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.

Durkheim even argued that the penal law expresses a society’s “collective conscience” (Luckenbill, 1992). Therefore, it is seen as just and fair to all members. According to Michalowski, the law serves all people equally (Schmalleger, 2012). It is not biased and works with the people to protect them from what they feel endangered of.

He feels that law and justice are important to sustain a society and they must reflect the moral conscience of the individuals.

To be sure, modern laws are made to express the general will, a will that aims at the common good. This means that laws in most cases intend to protect every social member’s rights under the principle of justice and fairness. For telling examples one need to look no further than American judicial system. The access to the two courts systems, one federal court and one state court, provides citizens with the greatest potential to have their legal problems

Currently each state and territory in Australia has its own individual legislation concerning juvenile crime. All state and territory laws do not conform to the Conventions on the Right of the Child and it is crucial that these laws are amended to better protect juveniles. The most effective reform that could be made is for each state and territory to amend their individual legislations to increase the minimum age to be criminally responsible from 10 to 12 with the doli incapax doctrine still being applied. Although it has been acknowledged that under the common law doctrine doli incapax, children between 10 and 14 are only criminally responsible if the individual is mature enough to realise the consequences of their actions, this assessment is left to the judge, often without expert knowledge from a phycologist (Amnesty International, 2015). Furthermore, it is crucial for Queensland to raise their maximum age from 17 to 18. This amendment will allow Australia to keep up with international standards while reducing Aboriginal crime in areas where crime rates are

concentrates that law is purely used to promote good by the state. Furthermore, law should

Criminal law is a construct of the government, enforced through tangible measures. In a democratic society, the government is elected by the citizens, and as such, laws are generally conceived with the aim to reflect whatever ethical or moral standards are presently acceptable. However, in order to be truly effective, some legislation must circumvent current sociological viewpoints in order to create laws that are genuinely in the best interests of society. This results in a delicate balancing act, as lawmakers attempt to weigh the views of the majority against the need for laws to be both reasoned and objective.

Any individual below the age of 18 can be termed as a child. However, any child above the age of 14 at the time of the crime can be tried as an adult. This age can even be lower and differs among states. For instance, the youngest ever recorded successful trial as an adult was of a 12-year-old (Alexford, 2015). Almost every such case starts in a juvenile court with a felony accusation. The court must direct hearings and make

Mistakes or murders? Children or criminals? Answering these questions requires much deliberation. Trying juveniles in adult court cases isn't orthodox. But such incidents are increasing in America. In 2014 two Wisconsin girls stabbed their classmate 19 times. The state found the twelve-year-olds guilty without considering psychological imbalances (Hanna, Jason). Natural instinct urges one to comply with the decision. However, certain circumstances change perspectives, but only when presented. Trying minors as adults isn't sensible and overlooks many conflicts. Juveniles aren't mentally developed, risk harm in jail, and don't receive adult rights.

The use of moving a child from the Juvenal Court system and placing them in the Adult Court system to stand trial for criminal offenses as an adult in a judicial process that has been happening, more and more, in the United States over the past 40 years (Kilkelly, 2016). The criminal charges that have faced the young offenders under the age of 18 moving them to receive harsh punishments from the Adult Court Systems in the United States are crimes such as rape, murder, and drug offenses just to name a few of them (Kilkelly, 2016).

Law must focus on how it is applied to specific groups in particular circumstances. Exposes contradictions in law and illustrates the ways that laws create and maintain the hierarchical society in which we live. 2.

Until the late 19th century, children were tried in criminal courts with adults. According to common law, the law regarded children under the age of

The crime that is committed should dictate the legal action inforced opinion a child. Although it is rare that a child commits an extreme crime it can occur. In ¨The Big Question: At what age should children be held responsible for their criminal acts?¨ by Nigel Morris there is evidence of several horrific crimes that a child commits. Two children ¨abducted and murdered [a] two-year-old¨ or that two kids ages of 12 and 13 ¨ stabbed to death Damilola Taylor, [age] 10¨ and even the 10 year old boy who was tried ¨for racially abusing an

Second, we must look at the affects of being a witness not only on the legal system but also on the child as an individual. Children could be further traumatized emotionally and physically by involvement as a witness. Finally, we need to closely look at how the legal system is set up and how well children fit into this system. Are witness procedures set up in a way that children can understand and accurately give their testimony? These are the things that need to be looked at closely to determine if children can be reliable and credible witnesses in court.