W8_Final
snakeater50
CJ499_RanstadW7Assignment_Final.docxRunning Head: FINAL RESEARCH PAPER INSTRUCTOR REVIEW 1
FINAL RESEARCH PAPER INSTRUCTOR REVIEW 11
Criminal Justice Capstone: FINAL RESEARCH PAPER INSTRUCTOR REVIEW
Nicholas M. Ranstad
Grantham University
Instructor Richard Sayles
June 27, 2020
Abstract
The juvenile justice system did not exist until 1899, when the first juvenile court was established in Illinois. Before then, children who had committed various crimes were charged just as adults because they were being considered as "small adults." Concern was shown that these children who were institutionalized with adult criminals were learning advanced crimes and usually found their way back in jail (FindLaw, 2019). During the revolution in America, many people were displaced and moved to major towns in search of jobs to cater for their basic needs. Children were among this population, and when they were not able to find jobs, many of them became street children and started engaging in different criminal activities.
The number of children committing different crimes escalated, and there was a need for the judicial system to find a solution to manage the situation. A better understanding of the development of children and compassion led to some changes in the way that they were prosecuted in courts. Juvenile institutions were being set up, which dealt with teaching different life and trade skills. They acted like correctional facilities for the children (FindLaw, 2019). House of refuge was set up for reeducation of youths where intermediate sentencing was used to correct the behavior, and also religious teachings were provided, offering the youths a chance to turn their lives around.
New reformatories such as foster homes were also set up in the mid-1800s, where hard labor was stressed to punish these individuals. Separate juvenile for girls were also set up to teach them to be more responsible in the future. All these institutions were brought together to form the first juvenile court in 1899. In 1944, the first juvenile courts operated with the philosophy of parenspratiae, where the State was expected to act as a parent and intervene where necessary if a minor was found committing any crime (CJCJ, 2020).
Since then, changes have been made in this justice system, formalizing it and making more laws to allow the representation of a minor by a lawyer during trials. Stages that occur in the juvenile court include intake screening of the minors, filing of a formal petition, adjudication, and lastly, disposition (The National Academies Press, 2015).
Introduction
In today's world, any person that violates the established laws is subjected to legal consequences. However, the type of punishment or consequence that a person can be subjected to is determined by several factors. Modern-day society is keen on promoting human rights and freedoms based on the specific needs of each individual even when they violate the law. As such, it is only appropriate that the members of society be grouped according to specific characteristics such as age and gender to ensure that each group is treated fairly. The justice system exists to handle all cases involving a person that has violated the law in one way or the other, (Koocher & Kinscherff, 2016). Even so, the juvenile justice system was established to accommodate individual cases that involve persons who cannot be considered as adults by the law. The juvenile justice system's primary role is not to punish but rather to rehabilitate young offenders who are below the age of 18 years. This department was established based on the understanding that punishments meant for adult offenders were barely optimal for youthful offenders.
About a hundred and twenty years have passed since the juvenile justice system was established in the U.S. Since then, much progress has been made to ensure that youthful offenders are rehabilitated appropriately and reintegrated into their respective communities. To better understand whether or not the juvenile justice system has served its purpose, it is necessary to evaluate the department's first philosophy as well as the statistical data about the number of juvenile cases in the country over time. As such, this paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the juvenile justice department. The increasing number of youthful offenders necessitated the need for a juvenile justice department. Over the years, this department has promoted the welfare of youthful offenders but not without some racial disparities.
Ideology
The juvenile justice system was founded on the principle of freedom from oppression and the philosophy of personalized justice. These two aspects are among America's most cherished traditions in the quest to promote social welfare. Most importantly, the principle of Parens patriae has the most influence on the juvenile justice system in America. This principle requires that the State or rather, the federal government should act as a substitute parent to any child or minor who does not have the privilege of being raised by their parents. As such, the State has jurisdiction over neglected, dependent, and delinquent children (Kuperminc, et.al., 2018). This philosophy requires that the State should not discriminate against any child that requires juvenile services based on their race or social status. Also, the first philosophy of the juvenile justice system requires the State to withhold the identity of the youthful persons held in any correctional facilities to prevent stigmatization in the process of reintegrating them into their respective communities (Elkington, et.al., 2020).
Based on the principle philosophy, the juvenile justice system strives to ensure that youthful offenders are treated as a person in need of structured help and behavioral rehabilitation rather than subjecting them to punishment. Although this philosophy is has led to significant achievements within the juvenile justice system, concerns over the legal rights of youthful offenders often arise. For instance, families of children detained in the juvenile justice system have raised concerns over the lack of engagement in the rehabilitation process (Amani, et.al., 2018). This is one of the areas in which the philosophy is lacking. Effective rehabilitation procedures should accommodate all the stakeholders, the youthful offenders incarcerated, juvenile officials such as judges and probation officers, as well as parents and educators, (Hirschfield, 2018).
In most of the states, the youth remain under supervision until they are aged years. In the juvenile court, the judges provide a range of legal options that aims to achieve both safety needs and, at the same time, proper treatment for the youth (Modrowski & Kerig, 2019). Despite the fact that an individual could be confined to a correctional facility which they could resemble adult prisons or jails with routine imposing of correctional facilities such as solitary confinement and strip searches, the juveniles have better environments that foster change in behavior and growth (Elkington, et.al., 2020).
Like all the other youths, they are entitled to educational programming while under detention in the juvenile facilities. The education could be provided to the child in the child's community, or they could be placed out of home in a residential treatment program and ordered to attend school on-grounds (Hirschfield, 2018).
Juvenile court hearings are not often conducted on the public in the same manner as those of the criminal proceedings. Children are still developing, and thus their confidentiality is paramount. The records of court hearings are confidential (Modrowski & Kerig, 2019). The juvenile system is designed to protect the young generation from stigma and collateral consequences in areas where records have been made public. Despite the advocacy for confidentiality, there has been a rise in incidences of juvenile records being available to the public(Hirschfield, 2018). The recent trends have been attributed to improper sealing of jurisdictions and expunging when a young person becomes an adult. This negatively affects teenagers when obtaining employment or enrolling in higher education programs.
The advocates of the juvenile system have advocated for the system to be viewed through a scientific lens of developmental psychology (Fair Sentencing for Youth, 2013). This is based on the youth's developmental immaturity, susceptibility to the negative peer influence, and capacity to change when subjected to the proper system in the juvenile correctional facilities. These arguments have been supported by neuroscience, which has indicated that the key areas of the adolescent brain achieve their maximum growth or development in their mid-twenties. This has changed in the manner in which youth are sentenced and prosecuted in the criminal justice system. The juvenile system also has adopted new rules and standards for law enforcement and interrogation of the youth, confessions, among other things that do not hinder the youth's reputation.
Organizing System
This study adopts a qualitative research methodology to investigate the relevance of the juvenile justice system in a modern-day society based on the principal philosophy and statistical data over the years. A qualitative research design is appropriate because it allows the study to document the opinions and attitudes presented by stakeholders in the juvenile justice department. This approach will promote the evaluation of social welfare versus social control in the juvenile justice system. The information used to develop the argument and draw conclusion has been derived from multiple secondary sources of data. As such, a synthesis of literature material has been conducted to support the main argument.
Juvenile systems remain viable considering that the Juvenile law center continues to ensure that the youth under the juvenile system have strong and meaningful rights, do have access to education, and do develop appropriate treatment and are provided with the right opportunities of the being healthy and productive adults. The system continues to work towards creating a society that is unique and provides the youth in the correction facilities with fair and equitable treatment to ensure successful adulthood. Over the years, the juvenile system in the U.S has continued to change and moving from the punitive approach to a more rehabilitative approach (Fair Sentencing for Youth, 2013).
Calculations
Research indicates that the number of juvenile crimes has significantly dropped in the years after the establishment of the juvenile justice system was established in the U.S. Most importantly; the juvenile justice system has demonstrated its relevance to society through the number of minors and youthful offenders that the department has rehabilitated and reintegrated over the years. On average, "2.1 million youths" are rehabilitated by the juvenile justice system annually (Elkington, et.al., 2020). This means that almost a similar number of crimes are averted annually through rehabilitation programs. However, the department has been criticized for racial disparity. Records at the juvenile justice department indicate that black people account for the largest juvenile population in the U.S. Based on the same records, White persons and Asians are the least likely to be accommodated in various rehabilitation centers. Male offenders are more than female offenders in the juvenile justice system (Evangelist, et.al., 2017). Below are data tables that present the Juvenile department's incarceration records.
1.The declining trend of juvenile cases
2. The age and gender distribution of juvenile offenders
3. Juveniles in residential placement by race.
Conclusion
The increase in cases of crimes committed by children necessitated the implementation of juvenile law in America. The minors who commit crimes are arraigned in juvenile courts with their defense attorneys (CJCJ, 2020). The judicial system has incorporated the laws that govern the conduct of the behavior of minors that have criminal characteristics. Juvenile systems have continued to increase in the world where the victims and their families have had notable differences in their adaptation to life after the event. There are cases where the victims in juvenile cases are unfairly treated by the members of the society who affect their livelihood and means of expression (Modrowski & Kerig, 2019). In America, for instance, the juvenile system is not fair to the black people who are seen by the fact that black schools are likely to suspend the learners while the white schools do not. This indicates the disproportionation of the minority contact with the juvenile system. Data have indicated that the black males are likely to receive an adjunction that is formal than the white male as they are grounded on ethnic inequalities as well as sex.
Some programs have been initiated to help the youth engage in positive behaviors and increase positive social networks with participation and guidance from adults. The programs have proven to be effective in fostering positive behaviors and also in avoiding juvenile systems. Some interventions have been sought by the counselors to assist and take care of children and the juvenile justice systems (Kuperminc et al., 2018). The counselors have decided different techniques that are dependent on the type of needs of the youths. The treatments are aimed at the modification of behaviors, positive peer cultures, and guided group interactions (Koocher & Kinscherff, 2016).
References
Amani, B., Milburn, N. G., Lopez, S., Young-Brinn, A., Castro, L., Lee, A., & Bath, E. (2018). Families and the juvenile justice system: considerations for family-based interventions. Family & community health, 41(1), 55. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5726419/
CJCJ (2020). Juvenile Justice History. Retrieved from http://www.cjcj.org/education1/juvenile-justice-history.html
Elkington, K. S., Lee, J., Brooks, C., Watkins, J., & Wasserman, G. A. (2020). Falling between two systems of care: Engaging families, behavioral health, and the justice systems to increase uptake of substance use treatment in youth on probation. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 112, 49-59. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740547219302995
Evangelist, M., Ryan, J. P., Victor, B. G., Moore, A., & Perron, B. E. (2017). Disparities at adjudication in the juvenile justice system: An examination of race, gender, and age. Social Work Research, 41(4), 199-212. https://academic.oup.com/swr/article-abstract/41/4/199/4600566
Hirschfield, P. J. (2018). The role of schools in sustaining juvenile justice system inequality. The Future of Children, 28(1), 11-36. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26641545?casa_token=4wSy-iwYHE0AAAAA:ib5N_JBTudKQ_3JWXBrjSI1nlicKHHRre6eE-Nzg9Dxl-R0eA48f5fL9ALfVH2Soj6P6ul-tET7Odv8RXQDtxUYkmu0ZFf8pPjenVdM2ns7IaRqHAtkqSQ
Koocher, G. P., & Kinscherff, R. T. (2016). Ethical issues in psychology and juvenile justice. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2014-56681-031
Kuperminc, G. P., Chan, W. Y., Hale, K. E., Georgia State University, & United States of America. (2018). Group Mentoring for Resilience: Increasing Positive Development and Reducing Involvement in the Juvenile Justice System. https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=274354
Modrowski, C. A., & Kerig, P. K. (2019). Investigating the association between posttraumatic risky behavior and offending in adolescents involved in the juvenile justice system. Journal of youth and adolescence, 48(10), 1952-1966 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10964-019-01120-0
Fair Sentencing for Youth (2013). SB 260 (Hancock) [Fact sheet]. Retrieved from http://www.fairsentencingforyouth.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/SB-260-fact-sheet.pdf
