However, this approach did not prove itself as an effective solution for the rising crime rates among youth. As a result, the contemporary juvenile justice system is similar in many ways to criminal courts. The Juvenile Delinquency Prevention and Control Act of and the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of , both stress the importance of separation between noncriminal status offenders and those who are accused with criminal offences in terms of legal treatment.
Further changes in legislation defined a strict line towards young offenders. This approach involved, among others, reduced confidentiality for trial hearings which characterized the traditional juvenile justice system and contextual-based referral for criminal courts and adult correctional sanctioning in sharp contrast to the Act. That is, age alone is no longer the only parameter for the type of court and the subsequent procedures and punishment methods. These changes and others, which took place during the s, have positively affected the number of crimes committed by youth and reduced the number of juvenile murderers.
Nonetheless, despite the positive results of the punitive policies during the last decade, other findings may imply that this line may worsen the situation in the long run. Most of the criticism refers to the tendency to handle juvenile cases in the adult criminal justice and lockup systems, which may lead to increased criminal activities rather than reducing it. Nevertheless, we should rethink and adjust the policies in reference to empirical evidence, in order to achieve the highest effectiveness of preventing juvenile offenders to lifetime criminals.
That is, the nature and circumstances of juvenile delinquency raise into discussion several main inherent moral and ethical dilemmas: The Legacy of Punitive Policy.
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 6, pp. Youth under age 18 in the adult criminal justice system. National Council on Crime and Delinquency. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 32 4S , pp. Retrieved June 16, from http: Juvenile Offenders and Victims: These cases brought greater procedural focus to the juvenile courts, mandating due process and ensuring other constitutional rights for juvenile defendants.
With these protective gains, early policymakers next focused on prevention within local communities. Addressing rehabilitation issues and the role of the community, the focus for prevention was left to each local community. With no centralized federal, state, or local strategy to reduce delinquency, and no financial or technical support, initial efforts to control delinquency through community organizations was a relative failure, leading Congress to pass the Juvenile Delinquency Prevention and Control Act in Later revised in , and renamed the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, the goal of this act was to assist states and local communities by providing preventative, community-based services to youth in danger of becoming delinquent, to help train individuals in occupations providing such services, and to provide technical assistance in the field through the U.
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. The s brought a rise in violent crime rates and a new focus on cracking down on crime. The War on Drugs in the s also fueled the desire to get tough on crime and create a more punitive juvenile justice system.
Public fears mounted about youth who adopt a culture of violence. Despite subsequent acknowledgment that such fear was overstated, the public outcry made a lasting impression on the juvenile justice system and the way in which U. By the end of the s, almost every state had enacted a law that made it easier for a juvenile to be tried in adult court and face adult sentences by lowering ages for transfer or waivers for violent crimes.
The trend toward a more conservative approach to juvenile justice continues, with the marked exception of the death penalty. In , the case of Thompson v. Oklahoma set the precedent for juvenile sentencing when the U.
Supreme Court held that the execution of juveniles under the age of 16 was unconstitutional. As of , the United States was one of only a few countries to carry out the death penalty on those under age This changed in when, in Roper v.
This example Juvenile Justice System Essay is published for educational and informational purposes only.
Juvenile Justice essays In the society we live in today, juvenile justice is a nation wide concern of law enforcement. However to what extent the laws and penalties used towards the youth of today has been a major focus of many criminologists and organizations around the nation.
Free juvenile justice system papers, essays, and research papers.
This essay has been submitted by a law student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers. The juvenile justice system. There is definitely controversy over the juvenile justice system, and on whether or not they should focus more on rehabilitation or punishment. Juvenile Justice System Research Paper Posted on July 3, by admin Juvenile delinquency is a serious threat to the current and future safety of American society.
Juvenile Justice System Essay The U.S. juvenile justice system is currently designed to address the special needs of minors who engage in criminal acts but might not yet be held fully responsible for their behavior, as they are not yet legal adults recognized by society. Juvenile Justice Essay Juvenile justice has always been a controversial question because some people consider that children should be tried for crimes the same way the adults are since the harm is usually the same and, sometimes, the consequences are even more dramatic.