Juvenile Competency Analysis

There are four Correctional modules in the juvenile justice system: The treatment model, the justice model, the crime control model, and the balanced and restorative justice model. The Parens patriae, or treatment model, is a more informal and flexible procedure. In this model a juvenile judge would probe the root causes of the child’s difficulties. The justice model is the concept of just deserts, in that violators are responsible and should be punished. The punishment received by juveniles however, must be proportionate to the seriousness of the crime.

The role of Attorney for a juvenile is complex. Is the attorney held to the same moral standards when defending juveniles as he/ she is when defending an adult? Juveniles are not mentally and educationally mature to understand the law, the extension of what their offense is, or how it impacts those around them. Often attorneys have the dilemma of having to decide to override their clients wants and decisions because they know they genuinely have their clients best interest.

In America, most of the crime is committed by juveniles. In fact, the justice department estimates that about 10% of all homicides are committed by people under the age of 18 (Clarke, 2015). Once minors commit a crime, they are tried in a court system that is either the juvenile justice system or the adult justice system. Both of these court systems have similarities as well as differences. The similarities show how the much the juvenile and adult courts have in common and how they are not too different from one another.

Some juvenile cases can be transferred to adult court through a process called "waiver”. Usually juvenile cases that are subject to waiver involve more serious crimes and incidents.. Although being tried as an adult has its pros and cons. A juvenile being tried as an adult has more constitutional protections then a juvenile case. However there is more potential for a more severe sentence and the possibility of serving time in an adult correctional facility.

Typically, when a judge decides to waive the protective rights the juvenile court has on a youthful offender it is for more serious crimes. This can also be applied to minors who have been in and out of the juvenile justice system. Fagan (2008) states that in some instances, transfer decisions made by juvenile courts to try juveniles in adult criminal court was primarily based on the severity of the offense. Some juvenile cases depending upon the severity or nature of the offense are transferred to adult criminal court through a process called a “wavier”.

There are several challenges facing the juvenile justice system. In the past years prior to the 21st century there are difficult cases and justifying situations that truly can’t be ignored when it comes to deciding the fate of a juvenile. The stress that juveniles are presented with in today’s society are unbelievable and the it gets to the point to where a lot of factors can affect the lives of our children such as an unstable environment, more pressure into substance abuse, and no reliable sources of community help. While juveniles are having a harder time today they are involving their self in actions at even a younger age. An ordinary result of these hardships along with the daily life is frustrating at their age.

4 – Question #11: (Ch 9) Juveniles may be represented by several different types of individuals in court, this includes: court-appointed and private lawyers, public defenders, special advocates, and guardian ad litem – who represents the juvenile often depends on the case its self. To begin, a court appointed lawyer may either be an attorney or a public defender – both of which represent defendants who do not have the financial income or money to obtain a private lawyer. An attorney is typically drawn from a roster of practicing attorneys in the jurisdiction of the case. On the other hand, a public defender is a full-time salaried employee.

Youth crime in Canada has decreased overall but that does not mean crime has disappeared as there are cases where youths. Studies have shown that the “typical” method of justice, through incarceration has not made a huge impact on juvenile offenders ( S.M. Tarolla et al. 127). Which makes this topic so important because if young offenders are not given the right help and treatment they could continue onto the adult criminal justice system. Furthermore, if there is a way to identify recidivism, and provide help for young offenders then we would be adhering to the goals of the criminal justice system which is to rehabilitate and put people back into society as productive peoples.

Juvenile offenders often have an unstable or dysfunctional living situation or display psychological problems. For this reason, psychological evaluations are an essential part of juvenile court. A study done by Baglivio (2009) suggested that psychologists, and psychiatrists regularly use psychological evaluations of juvenile offenders to determine the recidivism of the individual. To reduce the risk of recidivism, juvenile court provides the offender with the necessary treatments needed, as determined through the psychological evaluation conducted by the health care expert. Juvenile court is geared toward rehabilitation of the offender, so courts often request psychological evaluations to assist in legal decisions (Viljoen, McLachlan, & Vincent, 2010).

The adversary system is characterized by party control of the investigation and presentation of evidence and argument, and by a passive decisionmaker who merely listens to both sides and renders a decision based on what she has heard. An ideology has developed that seeks to justify the adversary system, but the adherents have had some difficulty settling on the most appropriate justification. The current ideology extols the adversary system primarily as the best system for protecting individual dignity and autonomy, but some theorists continue to profess the original ideology, which says that adversarial presentation and argument are the best way to arrive at the truth. (Sward, 1989) The most cited assumptions of the proponents of the early