Dissertation final study chapters 4 and 5

v

When addressing juvenile delinquent treatment and punishment, there are two major principles to consider when considering the link between social justice and juvenile justice. Over the years, these two ideas have fueled a cycle of change in the juvenile justice system. While some claim that because juveniles are so young, they should receive therapy rather than punishment for their crime, punishment for juveniles who commit murder is preferable to treatment because some contend that they understood fully what they were doing. The purpose of this study paper is to explore the distinctions between juvenile rehabilitation and prison punishment for African American criminals. Juvenile rehabilitation and imprisonment among African Americans are not equal or up to societal norms and guidelines. The study concentrates on identifying the problem in terms of rehabilitation and incarceration and, as a result, changing and improving the way society views African Americans. The study attempts to follow the research in a variety of ways that include a knowledge of criminal justice and how African Americans fare throughout jail and rehabilitation. The research paper focuses on a societal issue; thus, it is critical to include and utilize, which is a significant benefit to the way they collect information.

Background of the Study

Youths from the marginalized communities face the stress and disproportionate juvenile systems differently ac compared to youths from other communities. Even though there have been strides in the juvenile’s system due to improvements in rehabilitation and other policies, the length other stay of the African American male youths in confinement and the level of punishments when incarcerated exceeds what is stipulated on the policies. Therefore, this implies that African American male youths face tough incarceration punishments including having longer stays within the correction or punitive justice systems.

Violent offenders should be treated equally, and governments are always pragmatic towards the control of crimes; however, policies and individuals argue that tough punishments should be given to violent offenders as compared to nonviolent offenders. Many people argue that nonviolent offenders should be rehabilitated while violent offenders should face incarceration punishments. Such policies are more likely to affect African American male youths because, they are often associated with violent crimes. Therefore, they will face harsh punishments when incarcerated as compared to white male youths. This source will help in supporting my dissertation topic because it highlights the different perceptions towards offenders and varying degrees.

Many people hold that male black youths face tough punitive measures in incarceration facilities as compared to other races. More so, when they are taken into rehabilitation, chances of recidivism are higher. This is a vital source to develop my dissertation argument that juvenile rehabilitation and incarceration punishments for male Black youths are tough and harsher as compared to other races.

Treatment is where juveniles receive assistance. As an example, consider counseling. The author of the textbook Introduction to Juvenile Justice defines treatment as "a collection of acts or services aimed to rehabilitate or alter an individual" (Listwan, 2013, Ch. 10.2). "Juvenile offender treatment might involve a variety of activities such as group therapy, individual sessions, school-based interventions, and/or community mentorship programs" (Listwan, 2013, Ch. 10.2). Treatment can take place almost anyplace. It can happen in schools, households, prisons, or various community institutions (Listwan, 2013). Treatment is intended to aid in the rehabilitation of juveniles. Parole, life sentences, the death penalty, or a lengthy term are all options for punishment. Consider a sentence of over 25 years. Punishment would be more appropriate in this instance. As previously indicated, punishment can take the form of parole, life sentences, the death penalty, or a lengthy prison sentence. Some claim that because of their age, juveniles should not be treated as adults and should instead be treated as children.

Problem Statement

African American Male Juvenile Rehabilitation vs. Incarceration Punishment is a contentious issue that several researchers are attempting to investigate. When juvenile offenders are put into the criminal justice system, the issue is whether they should be sent to serve their penalty automatically or whether there should be rehabilitative approaches that may be used to assist protect them from reoffending. When adolescent offenders are exposed to the criminal justice system or have their first encounter with law enforcement, this is when they leave their mark. Law enforcement authorities have now decided how they will react to and engage with them from now on. Unfortunately, not all youth have favorable contacts with law enforcement, which is why the study was conducted.

Purpose of the Study

The initiative focuses on identifying the problem in terms of rehabilitation and incarceration and, as a result, changing and improving the way society views African Americans. The article will attempt to follow the study in a variety of ways that include a knowledge of criminal justice and how African Americans fare during jail and rehabilitation. The research paper focuses on a societal issue; thus, it is critical to include and utilize, which is a significant benefit to the way they collect information. The paper utilizes the qualitative research methodology which will help in providing social evidence and research into the issue which is beneficial to the way that they do connect and thus it is important to increase their interactions.

2. What are the problems in terms of rehabilitation and incarceration useful for creating justifying strategies of the social issue of African American juveniles?

3. Why are African American male juveniles not offered other means of rehabilitative punishments?

4. What effects does existing jail and punishment system have on this population?"

Theoretical Foundation

According to the punishment theories, offenders are taken through the incarceration process to discourage them from getting involved in criminal activities. Incarceration exists to punish the offenders because they deserve the punishment (Donaldson, 2020). When considering the impacts of punishment, it does not reflect its purpose in offenders' lives but introducing rehabilitative programs proves to be more beneficial. Punishment is described as suffering, loss, pain, or any other consequence inflicted on a person by the relevant authorities for the offence. What individuals feel is acceptable in terms of criminal consequences is mainly governed by the ideology of punishment to which they subscribe. That is, individuals tend to agree with the punishment theory that is most likely to produce the outcome they feel is proper (Enns & Ramirez, 2018). This belief system concerning the goals of punishment frequently spills over into the political arena. Politics and incarceration policy are inextricably linked. Many of the changes in correctional policy experienced in the United States during this period reflected the political context of the moment.

Legislation should be used to improve society happiness, according to utilitarian philosophy. Because crime and punishment are incompatible with enjoyment, they should be maintained to a minimum. Utilitarians realize that there is no such thing as a crime-free society, but they try to inflict just the amount of punishment required to discourage future crimes (Enns & Ramirez, 2018). According to utilitarian philosophy, laws that define a penalty for illegal action should be intended to deter future criminal behavior. Deterrence is effective on both a small and large scale. The phrase "general deterrence" refers to the power of a penalty to dissuade others from doing criminal acts (Garland, 2018). The punishment serves as an example for the rest of society and a message to others that criminal behavior will be punished. Rehabilitation is another utilitarian argument for punishment. The goal of rehabilitation is to allow offenders to succeed within the confines of the law so that they do not commit crimes again (Garland, 2018). In most cases, rehabilitative interventions for criminal offenders involve treatment for mental illness, substance abuse, and recurring violent behavior. The use of educational programs to give offenders with the information and skills they need to engage in the labor market is also part of rehabilitation.

The research mainly utilizes the descriptive research design that mainly focuses on helping to find and answer the how, what, where and when the issue takes place. The research is focusing to identify such questions before moving on to try and find out the why at the end. The descriptive research design is appropriate because it help make a right judgment that establishes a plan that make sure that they do interact and make sure that they do come up with the proper plans. It is important to use the descriptive research design because it focuses on trying to understand the reasons between the juvenile rehabilitation and incarceration punishment among the African American offenders. The design helps in building a proper plan that helps in getting the right answers that will help make sure that there is a direction of the research helping make sure that there are interactions and variances in the society which is vital for the research. The research focuses on the differences between the juvenile rehabilitation and incarceration whereby there is a major difference but there is something that is creating some inconsistencies in the society leading to major issues in the society.

Significance of the Study

The topic ‘African American Male Juvenile Rehabilitation versus Incarceration Punishment’ is worth studying because there are juvenile offenders who were offered rehabilitative methods after their detention center time and ended up in a better situation afterwards than those who only had direct punishment and were released to the streets to no resources. Juvenile Justice is a direct part of the criminal justice system and law enforcement. Studying rehabilitative programs and the different therapeutic methods which helps assist juvenile with re-entering society.

Historically, US politicians have sought to discover solutions to assist prevent incarceration and minimize recidivism difficulties, but their efforts have typically focused solely on young offenders' mass incarceration rates, failing to lower their recidivism rates (Sawyer & Wagner, 2020). The goal of the literature review part is to look at how African American juvenile ex-offenders' life experiences have influenced their views on rehabilitation vs incarceration. For example, for years, various reform laws and policies have been in place to keep African American youth under control when it comes to criminal acts. However, considering that the 013 Huvenile Justice Reform Act's major focus was on rehabilitation, there is still cause for concern (Baglivio, Wolff, DeLisi, Vaughn, & Piquero, 2016; Boggs & Worthy, 2016). Despite the fact that the government has invested billions to help address high recidivism rates, more than half of individuals who enroll in rehabilitation programs reoffend within three years after serving their sentences (Sawyer & Wagner, 2020). Because African American males confront several hurdles when they return to their communities after incarceration, it is critical to comprehend the factors that contribute to their high recidivism rates. Existing laws, regulations, rehabilitation, and skill-building programs that fail to properly execute corrective treatment and good recidivism outcomes are among the causes of recidivism.

The present literature on African American male juveniles, existing programs, recidivism, and the effects, if any, of the Juvenile Justice Reform Act on African American male juveniles is introduced in this chapter. The theoretical underpinning for this study, Sutherland's (1939, 1947) differential association theory, is outlined in the next section. It also covers the history of the juvenile justice system in the United States, the high recidivism rates of African American male adolescents, and other pertinent material. There is also a reason for the need for this study based on the literature and the association it has with good societal change in terms of rehabilitation and incarceration in this chapter.

Literature Search Strategy

Journal of Criminal Justice, Journal of Juvenile Justice, and Journal of Correctional Education. Keywords like African American male, rehabilitation, incarceration, recidivism, recidivate, juvenile, reoffending, social learning theory, labeling theory, former juvenile convicts, juvenile reentry, black male, juvenile offenders, status offense, juvenile laws, juvenile acts, sentencing, and United States Juvenile Justice were used as the primary strategy for this search.

Theoretical Foundation

As previously stated, punishment theories suggest that criminals are subjected to jail in order to deter them from engaging in illegal activity. Incarceration is intended to punish offenders because they deserve it for their unlawful acts. According to the punishment hypothesis, rules exist and are utilized to enhance society's satisfaction. Crime and punishment should be limited to a bare minimum since they are incompatible with pleasure. However, while there is no such thing as a crime-free society, there is an effort to impose only as much punishment as is necessary to deter individuals from committing crimes. Punishment, as a result, has ramifications for both the offender and society, and is associated with the creation of overall good conduct in a person. Because the severity of punishment is not restricted, regulations that specify the sort of punishment for illegal behavior are intended to prevent future criminal behavior.

A utilitarian justification for punishment is rehabilitation. The purpose of rehabilitation is to keep criminals from committing crimes again by providing them the tools they need to prosper within the constraints of the law. Treatment for ailments including mental illness, substance dependency, and recurrent aggressive conduct are common rehabilitative approaches for criminal offenders. Educational programs are frequently used in rehabilitation to provide offenders with the information and skills they need to succeed in the employment market. The retributive theory of punishment is the polar opposite of the utilitarian theory of punishment. Offenders are punished for illegal action because they deserve it, according to this view. Criminal activity disrupts society's peaceful equilibrium, and punishment helps to restore it.

The retributive philosophy emphasizes the offense as the basis for enforcing punishment. The utilitarian view looks forward and bases punishment on societal advantages, whereas the retributive approach looks backward and bases punishment on the transgression. Human beings have independent will and are capable of making reasonable judgments, according to retributivists. Insane or otherwise inept offenders should not be punished. An individual who deliberately chooses to disturb society's equilibrium, on the other hand, should be penalized. Incarceration as a kind of punishment can be considered as a type of retribution, since wrongdoers must suffer because they cause others to suffer. As a result, incarceration might be justified as a means of protecting both society and the offender's lawful rights. Punishment demonstrates society's respect for the wrongdoer's free choice by allowing the criminal to repay the debt to society and then return after jail, ideally free of guilt and disgrace.

Sutherland's (1939, 1947) differential association theory provided the theoretical foundation that I employed to drive my research. The differential association hypothesis explains that when a person engages in illegal activity, the frequency with which such action occurs varies based on the person's direct personal relationships (Mowen & Boman, 2018). This theory gives a lens through which to understand the elements that contribute to juvenile recidivism, as well as the significant impact that reoffending has on African American males. The differential association hypothesis has been considered as the most complete theory of delinquency and youth criminal activity. Gray, Durkin, Call, and Evans (2015) analyzed teenage marijuana usage and discovered that Sutherland's hypothesis could explain 40% of the behavior. Behavior, values, and standards are taught through interpersonal contacts with classmates and extended family, according to Gary et al. (2015). When people have a personal connection to those who engage in illegal or deviant activity, the consequences on their mental attitude and value definition might enhance the risk of repeating the same undesirable behavior through imitation and reinforcement.

The idea explains the delinquent conduct of many African American males as a result of their living situation, which may include a lack of a positive male role model in the household. African American male minors may have seen or known a guy of their own race who got a small sentence for a criminal offense (e.g., selling drugs or stealing) and was freed after serving a short stint in prison. Young African American boys who see these minimal repercussions for undesirable behavior may wonder what would happen to them if they committed illegal offenses based on their views and observations of those who have done so. This theory offers a lens through which to understand some of the elements that contribute to juvenile recidivism, as well as the significant impact on young African American males who socialize with reoffending peers.

According to Nuo and Katz (2018), deviant conduct is influenced by the history of communal features. Poverty, a large proportion of ethnic minority populations, and a diminishing population overall, as seen in Chicago and Georgia, were recognized as three perceived criteria for towns with high rates of adolescent delinquency (Mowen & Boman, 2018). Perpetrators who were affiliated with persons who committed the same crime were more likely to reoffend, according to Damm and Gorinas (2016) and Ouss (2011). Similarly, a juvenile who hangs out with people who have done or are going to commit a crime gets a kick out of the bad conduct that leads to peer pressure to commit or reoffend.

Sutherland (as referenced in Kassem, 2017) proposed nine distinct association arguments, the first of which implies that criminal conduct is not dictated by DNA. Second, interpersonal communication is a type of communication. Third, small intimate groups are the key gathering where the majority of learning occurs. Fourth, the directing of urges, rationalization, and perspective are all tactics for committing a crime. Fifth, the direction in which the urges and motivations proceed demonstrates awareness of whether or not they correspond with the terms of the law. Sixth, being delinquent demonstrates that you have broken the law. Seventh, deviance will alter the frequency with which something occurs, the duration with which it occurs, the preference with which it is preferred, and the strength with which it is effective. Eighth, processes and noncriminal conduct present a possibility for an individual to benefit by studying and practicing the behavior in the same way that criminal behavior is studied and shown. The differential association manifestation of criminal conduct is the last statement. Although wants and values may not explain why criminal conduct exists, both criminal and noncriminal behavior reflects an individual's needs and values (as cited in Kassem, 2017).

To sum up, differential association theory can be used to explain aspects of a person's procriminal behavior through interaction with a close associate whose conduct is deviant, making it useful for explaining the type of punishment the justice system imposes, such as rehabilitation or incarceration. It describes how criminal tendencies are taught and justifies procriminal conduct (Hanson, Harris, Letourneau, Helmus, & Thornton, 2018). Knowledge about deviant practices picked up from others may have a big impact on how people act and how motivated they are to conduct crimes.

Literature Review

The criminal justice system is expected by society to either rehabilitate or punish offenders or criminals. Punishment, rehabilitation, deterrence, and incapacitation are all recognized goals of the criminal justice systems in the United States. When dealing with criminals in the United States, however, punishment has remained the primary goal. Theorists have debated the effectiveness of combating crime throughout history, looking at both sides of punishment and rehabilitation. Everyone in human society wants justice to be served not only to the victims but also to the perpetrators. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the efficacy of punishment and rehabilitation in reducing crime in society. The study discusses the effectiveness of both punishment and rehabilitation in deterring crime, as well as the effects on the individual/offender, the victim and their families, the social and fiscal effects on society, and the management of those who have already been convicted and are under community supervision.

The involvement in reoffending behaviors by adolescents is one of the key factors to the rise in juvenile crime, prompting the debate over rehabilitation vs incarceration for African-American juveniles. Recidivism is defined as "the conviction for delinquent activities once a juvenile is discharged into the society while under DJJ supervision or following DJJ supervision," according to a report from the Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ, 2022). The high rates of juvenile recidivism are concerning because they have an impact on people' and communities' quality of life (Mauer, 2011). According to Sanei & Mir- Khalili (2015), the social context, such as the consequences of poverty, may play a role in recidivism. Ejection or school dropout, a lack of educational possibilities, difficulties of living status (low-income housing regions), and high unemployment rates are all factors that contribute to juvenile recidivism (Upadhyayula, Ramaswamy, Chalise, Daniels, & Freudenberg, 2015).

It is often assumed that this tendency is driven by widespread public concern about the issue of young criminality, and that the public supports legislative efforts to expand punitive measures. However, it is unclear if this assessment of public opinion on the proper reaction to juvenile criminality is true. On the one hand, a number of public opinion polls have showed widespread support for toughening up on juvenile criminality and punishing minors as severely as their adult counterparts. At the same hand, a closer look at the sources of public opinion data indicates that the public's support for adult sentencing of juveniles is mostly dependent on either response to highly publicized events like school shootings or mass opinion surveys that generally ask a few simple questions. It's also possible that public perceptions of juvenile criminality, and the right reaction to it, fluctuate dramatically depending on when and how public opinion is polled. In our own research, we've shown that even little changes in the phrasing of survey questions may produce drastically different impressions of public opinion on juvenile justice policy.

The deterrent of crime has been a hot topic in the debate. According to Morris and Rothman (1995), the most common method of reducing crime or misbehavior in the criminal justice system has been to penalize those who have been convicted. Self-driven deviation and ignorance of the underlying or related laws are said to be the root of most crimes or wrongdoing in society. As a result, society views punishing the criminal as the most efficient means of ensuring that the victim receives equal justice. Even the fear of harsh penalty for an offender will not dissuade a criminal who believes or has the attitude that they will get away with it after all.

The Juvenile Justice Reform Act of 2013 addressed several issues that concerned stakeholders in the US. The expense, the rate of recidivism, and the diversion of young offenders from jail to more focused-based therapy for small or misdemeanor offenses were the most urgent problems (Okonofua et.al, 2021). Those focused-based programs became recognized as community-based programs, and their principal goal was to minimize adolescent criminal activity via rehabilitation. Community-based programs were created to address the underlying issues that contribute to delinquent conduct in the context of the juvenile's community. These issues originate from a range of life concerns, such as work, educational learning, mentorship, and housing, to name a few (Okonofua et.al, 2021). Georgia, for example, provides resources to help children transition from jail to their home communities (Tan & Zapryanova, 2020).

Furthermore, the penalty would be ineffective in deterring crime from those who have been described as being overwhelmed by emotions or having a sort of disordered thinking when it comes to caring about the repercussions of their actions. People question the efficiency of accepting punishment in society as a result of this logical argument. The main goal of executing punishment in prison systems, according to Sutherland, Cressey, and Luckenbill (1992), is to hold not just the criminal but also the community accountable for their misdeeds. Punishment is seen as a means of teaching society, particularly those preparing to commit crimes, about the repercussions of their actions. People, according to Gilligan (2012), learn through example. As a result, the harsh sentence meted out to a criminal acts as a lesson to society's members, preventing them from committing crimes.

Another point of contention has been how to assess the success of punishment and rehabilitation in reducing the negative consequences for victims and their families. From this perspective, rehabilitation has shown to be the most successful, since it is said to provide victims and their families with stability and protection following the release of their offender. Rehabilitation increases the many changes by rebuilding a feeling of self-worth so that they may return to the society and be useful and respected. Individuals who participate in rehabilitation programs improve their communication skills, which they will use once they are freed ("BOP: Community Ties," n.d.). Some victims' family see these changes in their ex-offender, who expresses regret for their actions. Learning such abilities also aids offenders in managing with negative influences and learning how to deal with the victims they have wronged, preventing recidivism. Putting the criminal in rehabilitation instills terror in the victims and their family, who are concerned that the offender will still come after them when he or she is released. However, with good rehabilitation therapy, criminals modify their ways and feel guilt for their wrongdoing. As a result, they require a second opportunity in the community to reclaim their dignity and self-confidence in themselves and their employers. Consequently, they are able to manage and deal with their employees in order to earn a livelihood and meet social and personal duties such as housing. This boosts the country's economy as well as public faith in people who have been wronged ("Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)," n.d.).

The impact of a punishment or rehabilitation procedure on society may also be used to assess its success. Despite the argument that some delinquents may change after being punished, unfriendly and brutal treatment, such as incarceration, has been observed to increase tolerance among criminals, hence boosting recidivism rates ("Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)," n.d.). That indicates punishment has flaws since it requires full intensity to be successful; otherwise, the effect would be transient, and tolerance would be required in the long term.

Furthermore, the administration of heavy punishment to delinquents may be viewed as a violation of society's sense of fairness and justice. As a result, compared to rehabilitation, the penalty would be judged to have an impact of increasing recidivism and the frequency of crime in society. Recidivism or re-involvement in misbehavior is common among rehabilitated criminals, according to statistics ("Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)," n.d.). As a result, most criminals may utilize rehabilitation as a ruse to reclaim a chance to reintegrate into society. This makes punishment more attractive since it promotes long-term imprisonment and delinquent correction.

The purpose of rehabilitation, according to reports, is to protect or enhance the victim's long-term security and safety when the delinquent is released back into the society ("Topic: Justice System | NCJRS," 2018). It could be argued that justice is based not only on the importance or effectiveness of providing the victim with equitable justice in punishment as a means of retribution, but also on the creation and instilling in the delinquent a sense of respect for the rights and property of others ("BOP: Resources For Victims," n.d.). Rehabilitation is a more dependable kind of punishment that aims to restore peace and allow people to reintegrate into society. It trains offenders for reintegration into society.

While in imprisonment, the offender considers how they will prove to the society that they have changed, whether they will obtain work or jobs, the parole authorities' directives, where they will live, and whether or not their relatives would accept them back. "National Criminal Justice Reference Service | NCJRS," n.d., states that "rehabilitation programs require finances to provide for medical therapies counseling to minimize anxiety that increases as their release date approaches." The fear of being exposed to society makes offenders fearful, leading them to repeat their crimes. Paying psychologists and caseworkers helps to cover the workload and so reduces the offender's sensations or emotions. As a result, adopting rehabilitation can be perceived as a flaw in crime because of the economic implications and the perception that it merely leads to counseling and other medical therapies rather than the severe and sometimes brutal punishment administered by security officials in jail. Furthermore, rehabilitation procedures and processes are seen to be more expensive for both the community and the government.

Officers who are inherently punitive, on the other hand, may find it difficult to build rehabilitation programs (Burton Jr et al., 1991). Punishment tries to confine criminals and ensure that they feel the consequences of their actions while incarcerated. Confinement is claimed to be a possible technique of minimizing the likelihood of repeating the same offenses once freed. It is clear from an examination and study of the effectiveness of both punishment and rehabilitation that, based on the two justice methods, rehabilitation of the criminal is better since it eliminates inhumane treatment. As a result, the likelihood of recognizing physiological modeling of the delinquent's regular conduct increases.

When deciding whether punishment or rehabilitation is successful, both the social and financial effects of the society should be addressed. Charges against recidivists in California are based on three main strike rules, according to Adler et al. (2009). For strike two, the offenders would be accused with twice the at-hand offense term with barely any release time before serving an 80 percent of the term, and for strike three, they would be sentenced to 25 years to life without the possibility of parole before serving an 80 percent of that 25-year sentence. If all states applied or implemented such laws, the society would feel safer. This would minimize a variety of misbehaviors in society, such as drug misuse, gun violence, and any other type of crime.

As a result, rehabilitation will save money because it does not necessitate the construction or installation of prisons. However, in the United States, more monies have been allocated to the construction of prisons than to the establishment of rehabilitation programs ("National Criminal Justice Reference Service | NCJRS," n.d.). In addition, as they prepare for their release, rehabilitation programs aid delinquents in finding work, finding a place to live, and reducing anxiety. Government money is required for rehabilitation programs. It fosters good self-esteem and obtaining work via the learned job aids in demonstrating to the victims, their families, and the society that they have shown regret and improved themselves.

There is a need to recognize and appreciate the value of long-term security in terms of the consequences on victims and their families, the effect on the offender, social implications, and budgetary effects on the community. Most proponents of punishment have argued that punishing criminals is the best option, claiming that it gives equitable justice for misconduct or wrongdoings committed against other members of the society. Punishment has also been demonstrated to have little effect on reducing crime in society since criminals may grow tolerant, increasing recidivism. Offenders, on the other hand, may utilize rehabilitation as a ruse as they prepare to be freed. Victims and their family fear rehabilitation because of the possibility that their abusers would be freed and come after them. Offenders, on the other hand, require a feeling of self-worth and trust that can only be gained via rehabilitation. Funding rehabilitation programs and establishing prisons are some of the linked social and economic expenses. Proponents to argue for rehabilitation, claiming that it strives to make criminals more trustworthy in terms of respecting other people’s human rights, have used this argument. Due to the related expenses, everyone in society should embrace and maintain harmony.

Youth who were considered boisterous, uncontrollable, or disobedient were either given a tolerated flogging or transported to adult jails until the 1800s. These facilities were rat-infested, dangerous, and in dreadful shape (Springer & Roberts, 2011). During this period, children as young as seven years old were deemed old enough to face charges such as stealing, aggression, graffiti, parental abuse, and neglect (Bilchik, 1999; Juvenile Crime, Juvenile Justice, 2001).

There were no distinct juvenile justice systems for minor offenders prior to the Progressive Era. Delinquent minors were either dealt with by the adult criminal court system or placed in shelters (Amdur, Davidson, Mitchell, & Redner, 2013). As an alternative to prisons, homes of refuge were patterned like impoverished dwellings. Youth were placed in a residential facility with the goal of removing them from the harmful settings that lead to their bad behavior in the first place (Amdur et al., 2013). They operated on a rigid educational, hard labor, and disciplined paradigm. The idea was that these harsh standards, rather than love and care, would lead to recovery. By the 1840s, there were about 25 homes of refuge scattered across the nation (Springer & Roberts, 2011). Each refuge home housed between 200 and 1,000 young people (Springer & Roberts, 2011). Houses of shelter became a detention center for marginalized adolescents, with limited success in rehabilitating them. Furthermore, the residences were plagued with overpopulation, staff abuse, and hazardous circumstances, rendering them outdated (Springer & Roberts, 2011). Other options for dealing with delinquent kids were sought by reformers (Amdur et al., 2013).

Jane Addams and Julia Linthrop lobbied for legislation that resulted in the first juvenile court in Cook County, Illinois, being established in 1899. (Springer & Roberts, 2011; Thompson & Morris, 2015). Except for Wyoming and Maine, every state had a functioning juvenile court by 1925. (Juvenile Crime, Juvenile Justice, 2001). These courts were more concerned with rehabilitation than with punishment. Early juvenile justice systems concentrated on therapy and rehabilitation rather than punishment because of the youngster's immature moral, social, emotional, and intellectual qualities (Thompson & Morris, 2016).

Even though the federal government began to pay attention to juvenile justice in 1912 (OJJDP, n.d.), Congress did not approve any official statutes connected to juvenile delinquency until 1960. (Olsen-Raymer, 1983). The Juvenile Delinquency and Youth Control Act has been changed, updated, and renamed multiple times since it was first enacted in 1961 (Delcea et.al, 2019). The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA, 1974) gave the juvenile justice system nearly complete power over the treatment of juvenile delinquency (Tan & Zapryanova, 2020). At this period, the criminal justice system served as both a deterrent and a control for delinquency. Status offenses like as truancy or noncriminal misconduct were used to hold youth who were thought to be susceptible to criminality. Because the judicial system had been criticized, revisions to the JJDPA were made, stating that the justice system could only act once a delinquency had occurred, rather than preventatively (Hawkins & Weis, 1985).

The juvenile justice system is starting to take on the characteristics of the adult judicial system (Thompson & Morris, 2016). While emulating the adult judicial system has shown to be advantageous in terms of protecting these young offenders' rights, it has also resulted in a more severe approach to dealing with juvenile lawbreakers. The juvenile justice system has been incarcerating adolescents at an increasing rate since adopting adult-style techniques (Thompson & Morris, 2016). According to Aizer and Doyle (2015), approximately 130,000 juveniles are jailed in the United States each year, with 70,000 children incarcerated on any given day. Juvenile imprisonment is linked to lower school completion rates and higher adult incarceration rates, according to data collected from over 35,000 young offenders (Aizer & Doyle, 2015). A juvenile justice system that emphasizes jail and punishment can be harmful to children (Aizer & Doyle, 2015; Thompson & Morris, 2016).

Researchers have discovered that the adolescent frontal lobe and prefrontal cortex are immature. These areas of the brain influence Planning and self-control in adolescents. In comparison to adults, kids are more inclined to act rashly and neglect long-term effects (Monahan, Steinberg, & Piquero, 2015). These considerations should be taken into account when deciding how to interact with juvenile offenders. Discipline and control-oriented interventions have been proven to be ineffective (MacKenzie & Farrington, 2015). Punishment-based rehabilitation programs that employ a bootcamp mindset and tough discipline have had dismal results (Young, Greer, & Church, 2017). Nisar et al. (2015) investigated the juvenile justice system's growing "get-tough" approach, which leads to more children being transferred to adult courts and prisons rather than getting rehabilitative treatment.

In 2015, there were around 82,940 juvenile offenders aged 12 to 18 who were not living at home (Sickmund, Sladky, Kang, & Puzzanchera, 2017). These children were housed in residential placement institutions such as juvenile detention centers and correctional facilities (Campaign for Youth Justice, 2016). On average, 21% of all juveniles who are brought before the courts for minor infractions are sentenced to jail. Hoy et al. (2016) looked at the link between juveniles being detained and their subsequent involvement with the juvenile justice system and street life. According to Hoy et al., incarceration does nothing to rehabilitate kids and instead increases their likelihood of engaging in activities that lead to subsequent incarceration. Raphel (2014) suggested that incarcerating children for delinquent conduct can have detrimental consequences for their scholastic and production results, leading to further offending.

Retaining juvenile offenders in the community while providing rigorous intervention can improve the odds of success for the youngster's rehabilitation (May, Osmond, & Billick, 2014). When compared to those who were sentenced to in-home probation, those who were sentenced to detention facilities had a 2.12 times higher chance of reoffending (Ryan, Abrams, & Huang, 2012). Interventions focusing on skills training and restorative practices, on the other hand, have been shown to be helpful in the rehabilitation of juvenile delinquent kids (MacKenzie & Farrington, 2015).

Rehabilitation groups educate kids how to manage their hostility, which has been linked to a decrease in violent conduct. Conflict resolution approaches and interpersonal skills training are complimentary therapies used to improve the mental processes and interpersonal behavioral tactics that cause children to participate in deviant conduct (OJJDP, 2016). Anger management strategies, conflict resolution skills, issue identification, and social resistance training are among the abilities targeted by these therapies. These treatments encourage cooperative behavior and can help adolescents build good peer bonds while also helping to reduce negative behaviors (OJJDP, 2016; Trupin, 2007).

Wong, Bouchard, Gravel, Bouchard, and Morselli (2016) investigated whether restorative justice practices were most effective in rehabilitating delinquent juveniles and reducing recidivism. Even though the study found that restorative justice methods that hold the offender accountable for his or her actions are more successful than punitive measures like jail, there were sample size and exclusion criteria limitations. Furthermore, peer-reviewed publications were lacking in the literature. As a result, the suggested research is required as a tool for policy reform.

Juvenile criminality and delinquency are a social problem that has a significant emotional impact on society (Pardini, 2016). Several elements contribute to adolescents being delinquent. The broad literature analysis provided insight into the problem's history, scale, and complexities, with the goal of better understanding the success of African American male rehabilitation vs incarceration.

The emphasis of this study endeavor was on African American male juvenile delinquents. The factors that led to their incarceration, according to Omboto, Ondiek, Odera, and Ayugi (2013), are frequently not adequately treated inside bars. As a result, the study focuses on the role of the criminal justice system in rehabilitating or incarcerating these kids. The subject of African American male juvenile delinquents was explored in this area of the capstone, as well as the study's consequences for the social work community, the juvenile justice system, and this delinquent adolescent population. The key gap identified throughout the literature research is the absence of therapeutic participation for African American male juvenile delinquents with gang connection, since the court system typically employs a punitive strategy when dealing with this demographic. As a result, these children are deprived of the opportunity to learn new skills, create healthy peer connections, and learn how to avoid recidivism in the future.

Chapter 3: Research Method

Qualitative researchers value the input of each participant to the research process (Roller, 2015). According to Brydon-Miller, Greenwood, and Maguire (2003), action research may be utilized to achieve criminal justice goals through empowering people. When a researcher focuses on a specific subject, the participant group might be empowered to fight for the issue on a larger scale. Because the study aimed to look into the use of rehabilitation vs incarceration in the treatment of African-American juvenile issues and how they may aid, feedback from experts who currently work with this demographic was crucial. In addition, the research aims to enable participants to advocate for change at the micro, meso, and macro levels.

Role of the Researcher

After each participant has been instructed on what this research entails and any potential dangers, he or she will be given a signed consent form to sign. Each participant has the right to withdraw from the research at any time and obtain copies of everything that was discussed and signed. When providing information through email, it will be an encrypted email with a unique password that only the participant and I will know. Each participant is given a unique password to correctly examine his or her materials. Other important documents will be kept in a safe box at a secure place. Interviewing someone who is personally known will be avoided as a preventive measure. Finally, all names and other identifying information will be redacted and replaced with code numbers to protect each participant's identity. Before receiving clearance from the research committees and Walden's Institutional Review Board, no preliminary research activities with possible interviewees in this study were conducted (IRB).

Methodology

Data will be gathered from social workers who deal with African American juvenile delinquents or have worked with them in the past. A focus group will be used to obtain information. Focus groups will be recognized as providing larger disclosures that would be valuable to the study in a comparison of alternative data gathering strategies (Guest, Namey, Taylor, Eley, & McKenna, 2017).

The purpose of the questions is to find out what values and abilities African American juvenile delinquents lack the most. Furthermore, the questions aid in the investigation of rehabilitation strategies for African American, gang-affiliated adolescent delinquents as an alternative to punitive measures. Furthermore, the focus group's findings will aid in the development of a framework for the criminal justice system's debate over rehabilitation versus imprisonment. This will include systemic concerns and impediments that obstruct the capacity to achieve the stated goal of instilling values in youngsters in order for them to behave better in social roles. For the project's accuracy, all essential data will be acquired.

Utilizing nonprobability sampling, five licensed social workers who deal with African American male gang-affiliated juvenile delinquents will be chosen to partake in the research. In addition, twenty individuals with prior experience in juvenile imprisonment will be recruited to participate in the study. For qualitative study, Ritchie, Lewis, Elam, Tennant, and Rahim (2013) advocate utilizing nonprobability sampling to choose individuals with characteristics that are relevant to the issue. The goal of the research is to learn how the criminal justice and correctional systems see their responsibilities and capabilities in assisting African American male gang-affiliated adolescent delinquents. When it came to selecting volunteers for the study, homogeneous samples that were meant to offer an in-depth look at a certain topic were chosen.

E-mail will be used to recruit participants. Those that are contacted will be familiar with the people with whom they work in this group. The snowball approach was used to identify the five social professionals that took part in the study. The snowball approach will also be used to identify the remaining twenty people. Male and female volunteers will be included in the sample size. Participants will range in age from 30 to over 60 years old and come from any ethnic background.

Although some of the potential volunteers have already been identified, the research will have no personal or professional ties to any of them. Bias won't be a problem. To avoid bias in action research, Creswell (2013) proposed only asking open-ended questions. The researcher is not restricting the replies based on prejudice by employing open-ended questions. If the researcher asks closed-ended questions, the responder must pick from the options provided rather than the response that he or she believes best answers the question. The researcher's personal sentiments will not impact the participants' replies by asking open-ended questions (Creswell, 2013). Furthermore, by gaining informed permission, participants will be educated about the research procedure and aim.

Participants in this study will mostly come from two Virginia cities: Chesapeake and Virginia Beach. To recruit people, I'll employ a variety of random sampling procedures. First, I will seek data of African American male juvenile ex-offenders who were older than 18 but less than 40 years old, lived in Chesapeake or Virginia Beach, and had a history of recidivist. Then, in both cities, I'll set up meetings with juvenile authorities (judges, counselors, and probation officers) to present myself and my findings. I will not provide any information concerning future interrogation at that time. However, I will send them an email requesting their permission to participate. I'll put up fliers at places where African American males and ladies are known to congregate in Chesapeake and Virginia Beach, such as hair salons, barber shops, nail salons, gaming rooms, racing tracks, and so on. According to Wise and Cantrell (2018), handing out fliers before the interviews is a good way to present the research to participants.

I'll utilize the approach as a guide to obtain detailed information on the people being probed. In addition, I will undertake a thorough screening of all replies to ensure that only those who meet the criterion of being willing to discuss their lived experiences working with African American male adolescents and will be included for their recidivism rates. Those chosen will get an email and a phone call thanking them for their time and inviting them to all meetings and interviews, as well as chances to see and revise transcripts of the interviews, in a public area where they feel at comfortable and safe (e.g., libraries, restaurants, or cafés). Participants will have the opportunity to meet the researcher and learn more about the study at these locations. This one-on-one interaction was crucial in determining whether someone would be willing to participate in the study.

Content analysis is widely used by qualitative researchers to examine data by grouping information into groups depending on interpretation (Elo et al., 2014; Zhang & Wildemuth, 2009). The analysis begins at the beginning of the data collecting process. According to Zhang and Wildemuth, the focus group transcript will be turned into written text (2009). The focus group session will be recorded and transcribed into text for the research. Each participant will be asked to declare their name and a statement of their choice at the start of the focus group session. When transcribing the recording, this aids in recognizing their voices.

Themes will be selected to categorize the material after gathering the data and transcribing the tape. Themes will emerge as you go through the transcript several times. The topics discovered from the focus group transcript will be categorized using hand coding. The tallying will take place in accordance with the topics that the group agreed on as well as the areas where there were differences of opinion. Conclusions will be formed when all the data has been collected, processed, and examined.

It is critical to verify that the data used in study is accurate. The phrases "precise, accurate, exact, scientific, and unerring" are synonymic with "rigor," according to Roget, Roget, and Roget's Thesaurus (1999). The researcher's biases and preconceptions can detract from the project's rigor. Having active participation in the project allows the researcher's preconceptions and prejudices to be addressed by the other participants, ensuring the project's trustworthiness and rigor (Padgett, 2017).

In order to communicate the study data, a written representation of the in-depth fieldwork is completed. The textual depiction gives the background that created this research's overall credibility and reliability. The findings of this study can be used to future studies of a similar nature. Several conclusions can be drawn from this research: (a) learning and practicing the coping strategies described by the participants would benefit African American male juveniles who are incarcerated, and (b) stakeholders would be able to make better decisions when deciding what constitutes a juvenile crime and how the sentencing hearing will be put in place before incurring punishment. Stakeholders may help ensure that laws, regulations, and rehabilitation initiatives are just, meaningful, and consistent, and that the penalty is proportional to the offense. This research might also help Virginia’s Juvenile Court System by implementing intervention measures that could minimize juvenile recidivism. The data gathered in this study can be utilized to help reduce recidivism rates among African American male youths in Virginia. The study adds to the little body of knowledge about the impact of laws, policies, and rehabilitation programs on African American male adolescent recidivism. All standards were followed to guarantee the data collecting, trustworthiness, credibility, and analysis processes were all protected.

Dependability

Using Walden University's outline template as a foundation for my research helps me to collect data from human volunteers in a succinct and accurate manner. To guarantee that the overall study quality was reliable, every method outlined in Walden's standards had to be meticulously followed. Using a strategic skill set allows me to define and carry out the research's overall objectives.

Confirmability

According to Patton (2015), confirmability is proven when others, excluding the researcher’s perspectives, verify the participants’ results. The data gathering shall be straightforward and concise, as indicated. I'll base my conclusions only on the information gathered during the study. The body language and expression of the individual participants as they discussed their impressions of their lived experiences with African American male juvenile ex-offenders were captured through observations in this study. In addition, I will check the results based on the data obtained.

Fowler (2013) emphasized the necessity of morally responsible research. It is a researcher's obligation and responsibility to follow the ethics outlined in the NASW (2017) code of ethics when doing research. Furthermore, if the research is deemed unethical, the findings may be questioned, as well as professional and legal repercussions. There are several protections in place to ensure that ethical research is carried out. The importance of informed consent and ensuring the participants' rights were considered.

Before participating in an action research study, participants must sign a permission form. As a result, each participant in this research received one. A definition of the study, the participant's role, the fact that the study is voluntary and no compensatory, and confidentiality requirements were all mentioned in the permission form. Assigning pseudonyms to everyone might be one approach to maintain secrecy. The participants were referred to by aliases during the focus groups. The master key that identifies each participant's pseudonym, as well as the tape and transcript of the focus group session, are kept in a locked safe. I'm the only one who can get into the safe. The data will be kept for a minimum of 5 years before being destroyed.

The university's IRB must approve and approve the research study before it can be carried out. All procedures will be included while filling out the IRB permission application. All IRB-approved protocols for ensuring ethical and procedural practice in the research project shall be followed.

References

Adler, F., Mueller, G. O., Grekul, J., & Laufer Wiıliam, S. (2009). Criminology, 1st Canadian Edition.  Canada: The McGraw− Hill7Companies.

Aizer, A., & Doyle, J. J. (2015). Juvenile incarceration, human capital, and future crime: Evidence from randomly assigned judges. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 130(2), 759-803. doi:10.1093/qje/qjv003

Amdur, R. L., Davidson, W. S., Mitchell, C. M., & Redner, R. (2013). Alternative treatments for troubled youth: The case of diversion from the justice system. Springer Science & Business Media

Augustyn, M. B. (2015). The (ir)relevance of procedural justice in the pathways to crime. Law and Human Behavior, 39, 388-401. doi:10.1037/lhb0000122