1
Policy Issue and Solution Paper: Juvenile Justice Reform
LeeAnn Martina
Liberty University
CJUS 601: Criminal Justice Program Evaluation
Dr. Jarrod Sadulski
September 21, 2025
Abstract
The juvenile justice system in the United States continue to struggle with balancing
punishment and rehabilitation for youth. Originally the system was created to separate youths
from adults, however the system has, and continues to, fail to address developmental needs.
This leads to high incarceration rates, untreated mental health disorder, disrupted education
and racial and societal disparities. These issues cause an increase in recidivism and a lack of
community trust. This paper looks at the problem through four critical areas, overreliance of
incarceration, unmet mental health issues, educational barriers and inequality. Three potential
policy solutions are considered which are maintaining the current system, adapting incremental
reform and fully implementing reform. A comparative and comprehensive analysis shows that
while incremental reform offers partial improvements, full implementation provides the best
approach in order to create a system that prioritizes accountability and long-term results for
youth and the community.
2
Introduction
The juvenile justice system in the United States has long struggled to balance
punishment and rehabilitation. Initially, the juvenile system was created in order to differentiate
youthful offenders from adult criminals however the system has increasingly failed to address
the unique developmental needs of youth due to the reflected punitive models. Decades of
research and advocacy has emphasized the importance of rehabilitation though the United
States continues to incarcerate youth at a high, disproportionate rate compared to various other
nations. This approach has raised concerns among the community and even some policymakers.
The argument is that punitive measures often do not address the root causes of delinquency
and only continue the cycle of recidivism. It is shown that over time, recidivism is likely to rise
over longer periods. Withing 6 months the rate was 22%, within 12 months was 34.1% and
within 24 months it was 51/2%, (Roberston et.al, 2020). Juvenile justice reform has emerged as
a critical policy issue, demanding restorative justice practices that prioritize rehabilitation,
community safety and longterm successful outcomes for all youth.
The need to reform the juvenile justice system has been supported by developmental
science in which youth differ from adults in regard to brain development, impulse control and
susceptibility to peer influence. Compared to adults, youth are more likely to struggle with
selfmanagement, and these factors influence youth to engage in riskier behavior without fully
thinking through the consequences of their decisions and actions, (OJJDP, 2024). These
differences imply that juveniles have greater ability to change, making rehabilitative approaches
more appropriate and effective rather than punitive ones. Research has consistently shown that
youth incarceration produces limited benefit in terms of deterrence and public safety, all while
imposing financial and societal costs on families, the communities, and taxpayers, (Ackerman,
3
Magram, & Kennedy, 2024). The issues regarding racial and ethnic disparities in juvenile justice
outcomes further underscores the need for reform. Youth of color are disproportionately
represented at every stage of the system, from arrest all the way to sentencing. Addressing
these inequalities required the acknowledgement, but also structural changes to reflect
principles of fairness and justice.
The persistence of punitive practices within the juvenile justice system highlights a clear
disconnect between what is known about adolescent development and how the system
operates. Despite the widespread acknowledgement that most young people naturally are
deterred from criminal behavior as they mature, policies continue to focus upon incarceration
rather that rehabilitation. This contradiction undermines public safety by failing to address the
underlying causes of delinquency such as poverty, lack of education, trauma and mental health
issues. It also places a heavy burden, financially, on taxpayers as juvenile detention, or a secure
placement, is far more expensive than community and evidence-based alternatives. Recent
years have also obtained growing attention to the long-term consequences of incarceration of
youths. Secure placement during adolescent years disrupts education while also weaking family
and community connections all while increasing the likelihood of recidivism. There has been a
connection of being involved within the juvenile justice system at a young age and also not
having the same opportunities regarding social, education, and employment options. This only
in turn creates an unstoppable cycle well into adult hood. Many states have begun to adopt
reformative efforts to emphasize rehabilitation and diversion opportunities for youth. There
have been many initiatives like the “raise the age” legislation, that has expanded community-
based treatment programs to ensure that response to youth offending reflect developmental
science. Such developments support the urgency of adopting policies that focus on
4
rehabilitation rather than punitive traditions. A justice system that reflects the needs of youth
has the potential to reduce recidivism while also ensuring a safe community while promoting
healthier pathways into adult hood. As proverbs reminds us, “start children off on the way they
should go and even when they are old they will not turn from it,” (Proverbs 22:6, New
Inetnational Version, 2011). Framing juvenile justice reformation is both a practical necessity
while also hosting a moral responsibility to lay the foundation to examine the issues with the
current system. With a bit of guidance, rehabilitation, and accountability there is hope for the
youth involved in the juvenile justice system.
The Problem
The juvenile justice system within the United States faces deep, internal challenges that
reveal the issues of shortcomings regarding punitive models thus pushing the need for reform
even further. The original purpose of the juvenile system was to differentiate youth from adult
offenders; however, the current system fails to meet the developmental, rehabilitative and
social needs that youth offenders face differently from adult offenders. This failure showcases
itself in four critical areas: overreliance and incarceration issues, unmet mental health and
trauma need, educational barriers and inequality disparities.
Overreliance and Incarceration Issues
A central problem related to juvenile justice is the systems over reliant use of incarceration as
the default response to delinquency. Despite decades of evidence demonstrating that
incarceration typically has negative, adverse effects on youth, this still is a commonly utilized
choice. Even though juvenile arrest and criminal rates have declined in many portions of the
United States, many still confine youth at some of the world’s highest rates. In 2020, there were
5
about 424,300 juveniles’ arrests, (OJJDP, 2022). Secure placement is often deemed necessary for
deterrence and community safety; however, research has shown that there is not many long-
term benefit to this. In 2022, there were about 27, 587 youth that were detained in a placement
facility, which was a 10% increase from 2020, (OJJDP, 2023). Instead, secure confinement or
placement, exposes youth to environments where negative behavior or even antisocial
behaviors may be reinforced while removing them from any access to support services such as
parents, family, community programs and ties or even education. These conditions within many
juvenile facilities further emphasize the problem. Many states have documented the issue of
juvenile facility overcrowding, inadequate staffing, violence and lack of access to necessary
programming regarding mental health, social or health services for integration. Overcrowded
facilities only create unsafe conditions that cannot be controlled adequately. Not just youth, but
staff and administration face security and safety issues at many correctional facilities. These
environments fail to provide the needed rehabilitation services and treatments that are crucial
to reducing recidivism and reform. Incarceration often exemplified the issue that it seeks to
resolve, perpetuating a cycle of recidivism and community detriment.
Mental Health and Trauma Needs
Another issue that lies within the juvenile justice system is the predominance of
untreated and undiagnosed mental health conditions and trauma among youth. Studies have
shown that about one half to three quarters of juveniles within a secure detention facility meet
the criteria for at least one mental health disorder, (Teplin, et.al., 2021). This also includes many
co-occurring conditions as well like substance abuse or post-traumatic stress disorder. A large
portion of these youth have also endured adverse childhood experience which include abuse,
neglect and exposure to crime and violence. Despite the high need of access to quality care
6
within juvenile facilities, this issue remains inconsistent. Many facilities often function as stand
in mental health providers, yet they are poorly equipped to deliver evidence-based treatment
that the youth need. The lack of proper therapeutic support means that many youths are
constantly in and out of juvenile custody without receiving proper intervention methods that is
necessary to address underlying causes of delinquent behavior. This not only increases the odds
of reoffending but also produces a cycle of trauma and instability. Addressing mental health and
trauma effectively requires shifting further away from punitive methods and more towards
rehabilitative, evidence and community-based services that ensure recovery.
Educational Barriers
Education is one of the most important, if not the most, in shaping and determining a
youth’s future. However, many youths involved in legal matters seem to encounter barriers
regarding their education. When youth are confined within the juvenile justice system this often
can cause youth to fall behind academically. Even with instruction and classes provided within
the facilities often time it does not align with their community home based school curriculum.
Youth that return back into the community after commitment may face additional barriers such
as schools refusing to re-enroll due to safety concerns or lack of credit transfer due to state
policies that exclude those with felony charges from attending traditional schools, (National
Center for Learning Disabilities, 2023). These educational disruptions contribute to lower
graduation rates and less employment opportunities while also increasing the risk of continued
adult system involvement. The long-term impact of educational barriers not only harms the
youth but also the community by encouraging unemployment and poverty. Ensuring consistent
education for all youth within the justice system is a rehabilitative and community necessity.
7
Inequality and Disparities
The most widespread problem within the juvenile justice system is the persistence of
inequality and disparities across racial, ethnic and socioeconomic lines. Research has shown for
decades that youth (and even adults) of color are consistently disproportionately represented at
every stage of the system, (van den Brink, Lanskey, 2025). Similarity, class disparities tend to
shape juvenile justice outcomes as youth from low-income families are less likely to access
quality legal representation or even the connections needed to curtail the legal system, (Kelley,
2020). Lower class families also struggle with resources which fuels disadvantaged youth further
into the system at higher rates in comparison to their more privileged peers. These disparities
not only tarnish the legitimacy of the justice system but also urge cycles of disadvantages that
extend far into adult hood. Communities of economically disadvantaged neighborhoods bear
the consequences of punitive justice practices which only further strains the trust that families
have in the institutions and agencies intended to serve them. Without efforts to address these
inequalities, the justice system will continue to reinforce injustice rather than promote
rehabilitation and fairness.
Significance
The challenges engrained within the juvenile justice system are not isolated concerns,
but they carry broad implications for youth, families and even society as a whole. While the
problem areas may reveal the shortcomings of punitive practices, the issue lies in the long-term
effects for public safety, community trust, economic stability and future opportunities to
succeed into adulthood. Understanding these problems is critical in order to have effect
reformation and rehabilitation in order to evaluate solutions that work deeper rather than
strictly punitive.
8
One of the most substantial concerns regarding the juvenile justice system is the issue of
public safety. The assumption of incarceration is that youth should be deterred to further
engage in delinquency after experiencing confinement. However, research has shown that
incarceration actually has little to no effect on deterring youth. The disruptive nature of
confinement often times increases the chances of the youth reoffending which creates a cycle
of delinquency rather than breaking it. Youth who are incarcerated are more likely to become
antisocial, associate with other delinquent youths and have a weakened bond with their family
and community. The combination of those factors ensure that reentry becomes more difficult
and increases the risk of system involvement that bleeds into adulthood. Failing to promote and
provide effective rehabilitation for delinquent youth in turn undermines community safety.
When youth return back to the community without adequate integration and support, they are
less prepared and more likely to fall back into delinquent behavior and patterns. The system not
only fails the youth at this point but also compromises the safety of the communities.
Another portion of significance is the financial burden that is associated with juvenile
incarceration. Secure placements are one of the most expensive intervention methods in the
justice system. These costs are high when compared to community-based alternatives, which
are less expensive and more effective in promoting rehabilitation while reducing recidivism. The
impact economically is not just regarding government spending. Youth who have been
incarcerated may struggle with obtaining their education which leads to employment issues.
Reduced ability to obtain financial security also translates into increased reliance on public
assistance programs which further strains economic systems. By not investing in preventative
and rehabilitative programs, the system is promoting a costly cycle which falls upon the
taxpayers without delivering any justifiable results.
9
When communities perceive that the justice system unfairly targets and punishes a
certain demographic, trust in legal institutions disintegrates. The erosion of legitimacy can
reduce cooperation with law enforcement, weaken familial relationships and educational
partners and bring alienation to a group of already vulnerable populations. Communities that
bear the brunt of disparities are left with fewer resources that are able to support and help their
youth which further supports the disadvantaged cycle. The perception that the justice system is
unjust is not just because of public perception, tangible barriers are created to reform efforts
and reduce the chance of successful reintegration of youth. With a lack of trust, no matter how
adequately designed an intervention may be, it may fail to gain community support needed for
effective implementation.
The long-term significance of juvenile justice practices extends further beyond
incarceration periods. Youth who are detained face issues regarding re-enrolling into school,
having credits transferred, completing their education and thus not finding stable employment.
Educational disruptions only lead to higher dropout rates, lack of hope for the future, which
increases the likelihood of adult involvement in the justice system and chronic unemployment.
These outcomes create effects that permeate into the community. For youth, even carrying the
label offender as a juvenile is a harsh reality for many to face during a critical time of
development. This can taint self-perception which only hinders positive identity formation not
just for the youth but the public perception as well. The stigma perpetuates the cycle of
delinquency and disadvantage that the system should be working to disrupt.
Solutions
Addressing the issues that are attached to the juvenile justice system requires careful,
thoughtful, and intentional evaluation of potential policy options. Three primary solutions are
10
available which are, to maintain current policy, pursing incremental reform or fully
implementing comprehensive reform. As Micah reminds us, “He has shown you, O mortal, what
is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and love mercy and to walk
humbly with your God,” (Micah 6:8, New International Version, 2011). This guidance
underscores the importance of choosing policies that reflect justice, mercy and humility when
determining how to best service vulnerable youth.
Maintain Current Policy
For juvenile justice agencies, sticking to the status quo provides short term stability as there
would be no new requirements for training, staffing or organizational restructuring that would
be required. However, this means that persistent problems such as safety issues, overcrowding
and burnout of staff would remain unaddressed. Departments would continue to manage their
highrisk youth with the limited rehabilitative resources available which perpetuates
inefficiencies and undermines staff morale. For external community members such as families,
schools, and court systems, not acting perpetuates a cycle of harm. Families would have no true
meaningful rehabilitative support, and schools would even face barriers of reintegrating all
juvenile youth back into the community-based setting. Communities as a whole would see little
to no improvement in public safety with no change. Racial, ethnic and socioeconomic disparities
would continue further corrupting trust of the system. Financially doing nothing requires no
new investments, yet it is the most expensive option for the long run. States spend hundreds of
thousands of dollars for each incarcerated youth. It is estimated that states spend at least
$100,000 and up to $500,000 a year on each confined youth, (Justice Policy Institute, 2020).
Continue to prioritize secure placement without daunting transformative results over
evidencebased community services just continues wasteful spending.
11
Incremental Reform
The second option is to gradually expand the juvenile justice system while maintaining
the general structure of the current system. For agencies, incremental reform requires staff
training in evidence-based practice. This approach does produce little to no resistance by
introducing reforms gradually rather than overhauling the entire system at one time. However,
the risk at hand is that there could be uneven implementation with jurisdictional resource
availability concerns. Families and communities can benefit when youth maintain their
connection to the community through various support services. Incremental reform can begin
to rebuild trust by addressing some inequalities, however access to programs may remain
inconsistent demographically. The outcome would be partial relief without full resolution of
systematic issues that need addressing. There are mind financial implications with incremental
reform. Whenever pilot programs are utilized, the main investment is staff training which is still
less costly than incarceration. Diversion and restorative justice as a whole are significantly less
expensive than incarceration is while actually showing promising results and a reduction is
recidivism.
Full Implementation
The third, and final, solution is the adoption of full rehabilitative and restorative justice
through community and evidence-based practices. The shift from punishment to rehabilitation
is entirely adopted through this implementation in order to address systematic inequalities
through policy reform. Staff that are directly involved with juvenile justice will require an
extensive amount of training regarding restorative practices and trauma informed care that
would increase their case management skills. Facilities and institutions would need to be
repurposed, or last resort option, due to the favor of community-based programs for restorative
12
justice. While initially this implementation may be disruptive of the system, this approach will
create a better system long term by aligning with developmental science to achieve
rehabilitative goals. The community would benefit more from full implementation by ensuring
youth are connected to their schools, friends, family and support systems. The community gains
accountability, healing, reconciliation and trust which restores many systematic inequalities of
the system. Financially, there is a significant amount of costs that would be needed in order to
scale such a long-term investment of the community. Staff training, new developmental
programs, and expansion of resources within the communities are just a few of the areas that
would need hefty funding.
However, over time the upfront costs will be offset by reduced incarceration savings.
Comparative Analysis
In order to truly evaluate and determine the best course of action through the three
policy solutions, this requires weighing out the benefits, limitation and long-term implications.
Each solution is a distinct approach in order to address the challenges that the juvenile justice
system faces. The do-nothing option offers a short-term fix which new costs and major
legislative changes are seemingly avoided. However, this is the least desirable long-term
method. By utilizing this method, it increases overcrowding and unsafe facility conditions while
also continuing inequalities while offering little benefit to public safety. Financially, it is the most
up cost beneficial however, most long term expensive due to high-cost incarceration with
minimal recidivism reductions. From a policy and moral standpoint, doing nothing fails both our
youth and society as a whole. Incremental reform is a middle grade solution that offers
improvements gradually. Agencies are able to expand community programing without
exhilarating budgets or overworking staff. By taking this approach, resistance to change is
13
reduced. The main limitation is uneven implementation due to access to reform programs are
dependent upon geography and funding availability. This leaves some youth without
opportunities for rehabilitation. Though it can be a meaningful process, incremental reform
does have the risk of falling short regrading systematic inequalities. Fully implementing
comprehensive reformation is the most comprehensive response by addressing all structural
flaws of the juvenile justice system. Although there is an exceedingly expensive upfront
investment in development and training, the long-term cost savings are the most significant
reductions in regard to recidivism. This option also aligns the closest with developmental
science as well as biblical principles of justice. The challenge does lie in overcoming resistance
and securing the proper amount of funding.
However, the long-term potential benefits outweigh these barriers. When comparing side by
side all three solutions, the evidence shows that full implementation of reformation in the
community is the most effective solution. While partial reform offers a great stepping-stone, it
does not offer the complete necessities to reach the root causes of delinquency to ensure
sustainable change.
Conclusion
The juvenile justice system within the United States faces a major issue between punitive
traditions and rehabilitative reform. The system was originally designed to separate youth from
adults within the system, there has been many flaws regarding the developmental needs of
youth. Overreliance of incarceration, lack of mental health services, educational barriers, and
systemic inequalities have undermined the goals of rehabilitation which continues to contribute
to the cycles of recidivism. These problems are not solely policy challenges, but also moral
concerns that demand extensive, intentional action. The significance of addressing systematic
14
challenges is critical. Current practices compromise public safety, put a heavy financial burden
on taxpayers and diminish trust between communities and institutions as well as jeopardize
long term future of youth. The policy options that were evaluated highlight the stakes that are
involved in juvenile justice reformation. Maintaining the system as it requires no immediate
chance however it does waste resources on costly incarceration while continuing systematic
harm. Incremental reform offers progress through programs and gradual improvements
however it risks uneven implementation and limited impact. Full on implementation is the most
challenging however it is the most resource intensive and provides the most effective
sustainable long-term solutions. By prioritizing rehabilitation and community-based
alternatives, the root causes of delinquency are addressed and in turn promotes long term
systematic changes and public safety. From both a policy and biblical perspective, reformation
is compelling. Scripture constantly calls for justice that protects the vulnerable and restores the
broken, which in this case are the youth. Proverbs inform humanity to “start children off on the
way they should go, and even when they are old they will not turn from it,” (New International
Version, Proverbs 22:6, 2011). The responsibility to guide youth with compassion, accountability
and wisdom falls upon all adults either in the community or within the juvenile justice system.
Ensuring that young people are not defined entirely by their mistakes but given a chance to
grow are the future generation of society. The path forward required commitment and intention
by the community. Though reformation costs may be high, inaction is even higher. A juvenile
justice system that is centered on rehabilitation and restoration is not only possibly, but
essential. Investing in evidence-based practices and fostering environments that support youth
development, society can build a system that truly reflects both policy and moral responsibilities
for the next generation.
15
References
Ackerman, E., Magram, J., Kennedy, T.D. (2024). Systematic Review: Impact of Juvenile
Incarceration. Child Protection and Practice, 3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chipro.2024.100083
Biblica. (2011). The Holy Bible, New International Version.
Justice Policy Institute. (2020). The Cost of Youth Incarceration.
https://justicepolicy.org/wp content/uploads/2022/02/Sticker_Shock_2020.pdf
National Center for Learning Disabilities. (2023). Youth with Learning Disabilities & The
Juvenile Justice System. https://ncld.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/NCLD-Unlocking-
Futures-Final-7th-Dec-Updated-.pdf
Kelley, J. (2020). A Childs Right to Counsel: Juvenile Public Defenders. R Street Shorts, 95.
https://www.rstreet.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Short-No-95-final-Juvenile-Defenders-
1.pdf
OJJDP. (2022). OJJDP Statistical Briefing Book.
https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/statistical-briefing-book/crime/faqs/qa05101#0-0
OJJDP. (2023). Highlights from the 2022 Juvenile Residential Facility Census. Highlights from the
2022 Juvenile Residential Facility Census
OJJDP. (2024). Age Boundaries of the Juvenile Justice System.
https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/model programs-guide/literature-reviews/age-boundaries-of-the-juvenile-
justice-system#2-0
Robertson, A. A., Fang, Z., Weiland, D., Joe, G., Gardner, S., Dembo, R., McReynolds, L., Dickson,
M., Pankow, J., Dennis, M., & Elkington, K. (2020). Recidivism Among JusticeInvolved Youth:
Findings From JJ-TRIALS. Criminal justice and behavior, 47(9), 1059–1078.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854820922891
16
Teplin, L., Potthoff, L., Aaby, D., Welty, L, Dulcan, M., Abram, K. (2021). Prevalence,
Comorbidity, and Continuity of Psychiatric Disorders in a 15-Year Longitudinal Study of Youths
Involved in the Juvenile Justice System. JAMA Pediatrics, 175(7).
ttps://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.5807
Van den Brink, Y., & Lanskey, C. (2025). Inequality, cumulative disadvantage and youth justice:
Towards an analytical framework for understanding and addressing inequalities in youth justice
decision-making. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 80.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlcj.2025.100725
