Question 7

Youthful Offender Population

Name

Institution

1. Juvenile Offender Population and Ideal Treatment.

a. The theoretical approach to juvenile offenses advocates for undertaking early intervention and preventive measures have proven instrumental in the overall treatment of juvenile delinquency (Lipsey, 2009).

b. Prevention is perceived as appropriate because the society serves to benefit positively since such an approach guarantees the neutralization of the threat of crime even before it begins manifesting itself.

2. Assessment Techniques for Juvenile Offenders

a. Tools for evaluating youth at-risk of offending involves referral and screening approaches for juveniles who are highly susceptible to coming into contact with the law. Such individuals are drawn from underprivileged neighborhoods that are characterized by the prevalence of crime, dysfunctional families or they may be victims of child abuse which has been identifying as a contributor towards deviant social behavior in future (Schwalbe, 2008). Hence, screening tools are essential in justifying the fundamentals of diverse preventive measures by converging resources on a particular client.

b. Risk assessment tools are intended to offer an analysis of a young person’s present and historical predicament by earmarking the primary risk and protective factors to gauge the level of risk including developing a customised intervention plan. Such instruments aids in reinforcing the conception of the noteworthy relationships that exist between the past and current risk factors and its influence on the behavioral patterns of juveniles.

3. Unique characteristics of Juvenile Offenders

a. The widely accepted concept is that the young population comprises of individuals who commit crime disproportionately. Researchers indicate that people who are aged between 15 to 19 years are more susceptible to come into contact with the law than any other population

b. Although the rates of arrests according to the Uniform Crime Report (UCR) indicates that the offender rates have been higher amongst the youth, it does not necessarily imply that the juveniles are accountable for a majority of the crime (National Center for Juvenile Justice, 2014). This is because offending is usually at its optimum during adolescence when young people are aged between 18 and 19 years and are no longer considered as juveniles, and instead they are regarded as adults.

4. Current Treatment Approaches

a. The contemporary treatment modality would include the School Transitional Environmental Program (STEP) has been adopted in general educational curriculums especially in institutions where complex interactions are superseded through tutor and peer support (Henggeler & Schoenwald, 2011)

b. The STEP program acts as a bridge which is aimed at streamlining the educational and emotional challenges that may be encountered in conventional learning environments.

5. Specific Treatment for Juvenile Offenders

a. Life Skills Training integrates a class-based approach whereby the youth are informed of the dangers associated with substance use and has illustrated its efficacy by diminishing the partaking of cigarettes and alcohol among school-going children (Schwalbe et al., 2012).

6. Research that Justifies Treatment Approaches

a. The proliferation of preventive measures against youth offending has resulted in diminished rates of recidivism amongst this population (Limbos et al., 2007).

b. Community-based interventions have also proven to be instrumental in the sense that it has contributed to the significant reduction in crime rates.

References

Henggeler, S. W., & Schoenwald, S. K. (2011). Evidence-Based Interventions for Juvenile Offenders and Juvenile Justice Policies that Support Them. Social Policy Report. Volume 25, Number 1. Society for Research in Child Development.

Limbos, M. A., Chan, L. S., Warf, C., Schneir, A., Iverson, E., Shekelle, P., & Kipke, M. D. (2007). Effectiveness of interventions to prevent youth violence: A systematic review. American journal of preventive medicine, 33(1), 65-74.

Lipsey, M. W. (2009). The primary factors that characterize effective interventions with juvenile offenders: A meta-analytic overview. Victims and offenders, 4(2), 124-147.

Schwalbe, C. S. (2008). A meta-analysis of juvenile justice risk assessment instruments: Predictive validity by gender. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35(11), 1367-1381.

Schwalbe, C. S., Gearing, R. E., MacKenzie, M. J., Brewer, K. B., & Ibrahim, R. (2012). A meta-analysis of experimental studies of diversion programs for juvenile offenders. Clinical psychology review, 32(1), 26-33.