Week 3 Assignment: Final Paper Outline

Rose2015

Assignment2AnnotatedBibliography.pdf

Home >Law homework help >Criminal homework help >Week 3 Assignment: Final Paper Outline

Running Head: JUVENILE 1

Annotated Bibliography

Miranda Smith

CRJ301: Juvenile Justice

Professor Florence Ferguson

02/07/2021

JUVENILE 2

Arora, A. (2019). Juvenile Crime and Anticipated Punishment. Available at SSRN 3095312.

Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3095312

Difference between treatment and punishment concept

For a long time, the United States Juvenile Court has struggled with intrinsic

contradictions between its function in harshly punishing delinquent offenses and its

responsibility to serve as an organizational setting that results in meaningful, substantive

improvements among young people who commit those violations. Presumably, the main goal of

a Youth Justice Structure should be to ensure the welfare of the public and simultaneously make

positive improvements to the film clearly of juvenile criminals to minimize the likelihood of

potential delinquent tendencies being displayed. The Juvenile System in the U.s. places a great

deal of emphasis on optimizing juvenile criminals' conditions to act as active and productive

people in society. To regulate juvenile activity, juvenile programs employ elaborate

interventions.

Correctional care and civic monitoring are three of the most usual steps taken to produce

effective outcomes. Policies related to state punishment primarily revolved around criminals and

rehabilitative forms of personalized incarceration in the 2000s. The global rate of crime saw a

large spike in the 1960s, forcing the state to take more drastic action to deter suspected

perpetrators from breaking the law. In unison and implemented offense-based punishment

strategies, several federal and state governments acted.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3095312

JUVENILE 3

Lundh, K. M. (2018). Treating non-violent juvenile offenders with mental illnesses: community-

based diversion programs vs. traditional residential placement facilities. Retrieved from

https://minds.wisconsin.edu/bitstream/handle/1793/78116/LundhKayleigh.pdf?sequence=

Types of treatment for violent and non-violent juvenile crimes

Mediation is the first method of therapy; a substantial body of science states that

Perpetrator Reconciliation Services can become an important technique for rehabilitating youth

crime in human services. As per the Office of Criminal Delinquency and Justice Reduction, in

the quest for adequate care for juvenile criminals, the use of boot camps, better known as shock

detention, has grown into a potential method for recovery and retribution. Community-Based

Tuck Treatment One of the 1974 Criminal Delinquency and Justice Reduction Act's objectives

was that recovery strategies must begin to use community-based approaches for juveniles

processed by the juvenile court.

Types of punishment options for violent and non-violent juvenile crimes

The first form is home detention or home detention, where, with some provisions for

areas like schooling and therapy visits, the judge requires the minor to stay at home. The other is

placing with someone like a parent or legal guardian in which you are staying with a family or in

a household or a foster home ordered by the court. The correctional hall in which you are advised

to stay in a detention center for a brief amount of time is another sentence. A sentence could also

be rehabilitation, where you might be told to stay for several months in a youth detention center

and be placed on probation. The final penalty is secured correctional institutions, where you can

https://minds.wisconsin.edu/bitstream/handle/1793/78116/LundhKayleigh.pdf?sequence=3

JUVENILE 4

be ordered to remain in a protected juvenile prison for a prolonged period for more severe

offenses.

Lipsey, M. (2019). The primary factors that characterized effective interventions with juvenile

offenders: A meta-analytic overview. Victims & Offenders: An International Journal of

Evidence-based Research, Policy, and Practice. 4(2) 124-147. Retrieved from

https://heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/crpp17&section=17

Most effective for reducing recidivism in juvenile offenders

I found a comprehensive meta-analysis that sequenced a study of successful and

unsuccessful strategies to mitigate recidivism in juvenile as I studied this subject. Rehabilitation

is the safest way to decrease recidivism, rather than deterrence. Lipsey's study has established

seven prevention philosophies; monitoring involving close tracking, deterrent involving deterring

re-offenses by sensationalizing harmful effects (Lipsey, 2019). Discipline is another interference.

Therapeutic services are also available; restitution, therapy, counseling, and variations, such as

individual, spouse, community, peer, mentoring and combined.

Another productive approach is to destroy construction projects that provide mental,

emotional, social, academic, and career skills and various organized resources. Counseling

approaches have the biggest significant impact on recurrence, lowering it by 13%, accompanied

by various organized services (12%) and opportunities for skill development (12 percent)

(Lipsey, 2019). Group-based, mentoring-oriented, and combined blends of different therapy

forms were the most successful therapeutic approaches.

https://heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/crpp17&section=17

JUVENILE 5

The United States Department of Justice Archives. (2017, March 6). Prison reform: Reducing

recidivism by strengthening the Federal Bureau of Prisons. Retrieved from

https://www.justice.gov/archives/prison-reform

Prevailing perspective (treatment, punishment, or combination of both) in my

jurisdiction

The Federal Bureau of Prisons implements developed standardized, evidence-based

programs to eliminate recidivism and improve public security in my state. These changes cover

nearly every part of the national justice system, from its initial admission of a prisoner to his or

her release to society, by relying on evidence-based recovery methods. The measures are

directed at solving the main behavioral challenges in violence to minimize inmates' risk. The

Houston Federal Bureau of Corrections develops systematic, evidence-based recurrence

prevention services, like cognitive-behavioral treatment classes and other subjects.

Prevailing perspective (treatment, punishment, or combination of both) in your

jurisdiction

Creating an "education department" within the correctional system, another jurisdiction

used in Illinois is corrective education services. Each federal prisoner may be tested upon

detention in the new framework to ascertain their educational level and ascertain the form and

degree of instruction required. During his or her tenure in BOP's care, the "appropriate

educational plan" would accompany the prisoner. The Bureau reported in November 2016; it had

employed Amy Lopez, a professional corrections educator, to function as the BOP academic

county's first supervisor.

Analysis research on recidivism

https://www.justice.gov/archives/prison-reform

JUVENILE 6

The higher recidivism rate approach is the use of a developed standardized evidence-

based programs that are approximately more likely to work because it ncludes curriculum

guidelines for about 50 template programs that are encouraged to be implemented nationally by

Bureau facilities. Moreover, to help track that facilities adopt which model systems, the Bureau

has designed a new automated framework. Conversely, education programs have also been

shown to help reduce recidivism; however, compared with standardized, evidence-based

programs, they have lower recidivism rates.

JUVENILE 7

References: