Young People Desistance

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

Rehabilitation for at risk teens has been an ongoing issue that runs deep in certain communities. When kids at young ages are exposed to stress and have to cope early on with dysfunction they are denied the opportunity to mature and conditioned to commit thinking errors that perpetuate a young offender into an adult offender. To find ways to break this cycle John Hubner accounts his time on the Giddings State School Capital Offenders Program and how a group of counselors are able to combine many strategies in rehabilitating young offenders who have committed serious crimes. Young people convicted of serious crimes are often transferred to adult prisons that institutionalize young people to prison life only increasing the likely hood of

The role of theory in contemporary youth justice practice is crucial in shaping and conceptualising relationships between youth and crime. It provides a structure for how youth justice is practiced and helps make sense of today’s issues surrounding the topic.

Youth choosing to engage in criminal behavior is not a new phenomenon. Youth who choose to do this repeatedly are referred to as re-offenders. The age and the sex of the offender also contribute to the recidivism rate and the types of consequences. Other contributing factors in recidivism include the relationship the youth has with peers or parents, whether they abuse substances, and the racial origins of the young offender. There is a wide spectrum of consequences and different ways in which treatment attempts to aid re-offenders. Re-offenders commit various crimes and differ greatly in their response to treatment.

Correctional treatment programs have long been thought not to be effective in lowering the recidivism among criminals; Martinson (1979). Researchers have done countless studies and surveys only to find out that many of these studies and programs work and nearly the same number of programs do not work, depending on what component was or was not a part of the studies. Knowing that all programs does not work for all criminals is a no brainer, however, finding a good mixture of what does work and for what percentage of criminals is a beginning to duplicate that program with a few minor adjustments in the programs.

Youth are often confronted with socio-economical and political challenges including poverty, ethic and minority status and are often cited as at risk for committing long-term community problems like rise in crime due to substance abuse, school drop-out and several forms of academic failures, delinquencies, criminal offenses and unemployment (e.g. Grisso, Vincent & Seagrave, 2005; Champion & Mays, 1991; Fellmeth, 2002). According to Grisso and his colleagues (2005), the argument that in order to help young offenders that were placed under rehabilitation centers reconnect to community and avoid recidivism is to provide them education and employment opportunities upon release. It is in this area where mentoring programs to

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.

Rehabilitation is facilitated by the offering of courses, to help the offender address his/her behaviour which society has labelled as “wrong” or inappropriate (Peterson, 1989; Shaffer, 1993). Therefore, a con of the strategy may be that the offenders are unable to access courses that could assist them in rehabilitation. Another purpose of the detention centre for young people may be through the use of a military structure to try and impress on them that they have done wrong (Munice, Hughes & McLaughlin 2002).

This paper will explain similarities and differences between juvenile and adult offender treatment approaches and programs. It will explain tow similarities and differences related to treatment approaches and treatment programs. It will also include an insight gained as a result.

As part of the requirements for a degree in Criminal Justice at the State University of New York at Buffalo, I have to conduct a research study. This research looks at the effects of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy on recidivism rates.

Therefore, numerous interventions have been designed to address and redirect specific behaviors of delinquent youth who are at-risk for recidivism or who have been incarcerated and are facing greater involvement within the juvenile justice system (Youth.Gov, 2017). More importantly, not every intervention works with every youth offender. The key is to focus on each youth as an individual and not as a population.

To this end conventional youth justice practice has been significantly challenged. Where restorative practices have been introduced there has been a considerable departure from the long established roles within the system. The interactive dynamic between young person and practitioner is fundamentally different in this process. Consequently, there needs to be considerable training provided for practitioners to be effective in this new approach. The centrality of the victim –offender interaction requires skilful facilitation. The professionals may have difficulty in letting go of their need to control and appear to ‘know best’ what the solutions are. It is important to recognise that a facilitator allows others to reach conclusions and action plans. To be restorative is to adjust ones sense of purpose over identity as a professional, and over belief systems, not just intellectually, but in how you act in relation to others and this can only be learned from experience. Establishing the centrality of the restorative approach in youth justice can certainly be seen as a

The goals of juvenile corrections are too deter, rehabilitate and reintegrate, prevent, punish and reattribute, as well as isolate and control youth offenders and offenses. Each different goal comes with its own challenges. The goal of deterrence has its limits; because rules and former sanctions, as well anti-criminal modeling and reinforcement are met with young rebellious minds. Traditional counseling and diversion which are integral aspects of community corrections can sometimes be ineffective, and studies have shown that sometimes a natural self intervention can take place as the youth grows older; resulting in the youth outgrowing delinquency.

The available empirical evidence suggests that intensive supervision programs have not reduced the rates of re-offending (Paparozzi & Gendreau, 2005). This is partly due to the fact that these programs often target low-risk offenders, contrary to the research which suggests that high-risk offenders are most likely to benefit from intensive institutional and community-based correctional interventions (Paparozzi & Gendreau, 2005). I would like to note that although this may sound contradicting to what I have written prior about high-risk offenders, the program I am working with in Yorkton is geared towards high-risk offenders and that the research that I have found claims it is not. Even though there is research that suggests this, since I have started in the program, I have seen some major transformation with individuals. I did, however, find some evidence that this program has been effective. A 1998 report found considerable evidence to support the premise that a period of supervised transition from prison to the community enhances public safety and the rehabilitation of offenders. In particular, the process of selection for parole based on the assessment of risk to re-offend and

Children and young adults usually don’t have the mentality to seek and utilize rehabilitative programs because they usually don’t want to acknowledge or don’t even realize that they have issues to be treated. We as adults need to show these troubled youth that we care about them and their futures, as they will one day become the leaders of our