Juvenile Justice Issues Essay

Most will often wonder if there is actually a future in the juvenile justice system and if so what does it include? Today the juvenile system is known as a weak system that does not actually provide much help for juveniles. Although, this system is effective for a few juveniles, it does not work for them all. The juvenile justice system is the primary system that they use on juveniles who are caught committing crime. The system is put into place in hopes it will deter juveniles away from future crimes to keep their life on track.

about the brain to help them rehabilitate? Put another way: If the brain can grow new neural pathways after an injury … could we help the brain re-grow morality?” This question poses an interesting view on how to properly rehabilitate criminals. However, rehabilitation only has the ability to play a small part in the recovery process. A majority of the recovery is reliant on the criminal and their desire to actually change for the betterment of themselves and the society.

Probation is known as a front-door program that helps participants avoid going to jail or prison; it also serves as a second chance for offenders to get their lives back together. I was wondering, though—does probation really work for youth? Do those who undergo probation receive rehabilitation so they won’t commit future crimes? Also, what is it like to have someone who is a youth in the criminal justice system? What services do they receive?

Shaw believes that a Utilitarian perspective supports the foundations of criminal law because laws help people have a sound mind and a good life. This is because laws protect personal belongings and self. Shaw suggests criminal law should be viewed from a Utilitarian perspective since it helps the overall well-being of society. Some things are breaking the law but are not to be punished as harshly as others. For example, a person speeding over the posted speed limit would not need to be sent to prison like a person who murders someone.

[CITE] Therefore, incarcerating young offenders is an ineffective way in preventing the juvenile rate. Instead, it increases their chance of recidivism. Although there is structure in correctional facilites, there is a lack of positive reinforcement

Furthermore, when information sharing is increased it allows greater access to data on sex offenders. This would help law enforcement to promote justice by having equal access to information. However, at this stage there is not enough research to show to what extent this will impact the justice system’s efficiency. Members of the public can protect themselves Proponents for sex offender registers claim that they provide an effective preventative tool because, if people know where offenders reside, those in the community can protect themselves from the risk that sex offender pose.

Further, diverting juvenile offenders towards community and treatment-based programs have proven to be far more effective at addressing and preventing future delinquency in comparison to placing them in confinement. Additionally, diversion programs allow youths to separate themselves from the stigma of “youth delinquents” and channel their behavior towards a more positive outcome.

Instead of thinking the worse about teens. Have an open mind when a teen is doing something because it could be for the better. Not all teens have the intention to do something bad. Along with that, if you don’t have the full context wait until you make an assumption about the person. According to the article, “ Negative Stereotypes Hurting Teens Job prospects,” Birdwell said, “Teenagers are motivated to make a difference in their community, but the approach they take is radically different to previous generations.”

Those under the age of eighteen do not have the legal rights given to adults; since we do not treat them as adults, it does not make sense to sentence them as such. Biological studies also have found that teenagers make impetuous decisions and cause trouble because their underdeveloped brains lack the ability to look at future repercussions for their actions. Moreover, teenagers are still at an age that they are easily influenced by their environment. They succumb to peer pressure which can push them into doing crimes by the virtue of wanting to be accepted. Furthermore, they should be placed into the juvenile justice system, a safe environment in which allows young criminals to learn from the mistakes they make, rather than into adult jails, a place in which harden criminals could physically and mentally harm them.

What does the age of a criminal have to do with the heinous crime they have committed? While it is understandable to treat a child who has not yet fully grasped the sense of what is ethically right or wrong with a less severe punishment than someone who is matured to a point of being aware of their actions. Teens and even those who are mature enough to see that the crimes they are doing are wrong, but regardless still go through with such an act should not be shown mercy for a crimes that are as serious as intentionally hurting someone or even in the most serious cases murder. The age of a criminal should not be the main or only factor when deciding to let someone who is under the age of 18 off easy on their actions. It should almost always

1. Do children/juvenile have the capacity to understand the consequences of their crimes? Are the children/ juveniles able to be rehabilitated? Answer: Juveniles are between the ages of fifteen years and seventeen years of age. So, no they should not be tried as an adult because they are not eighteen years of age.

There are certain instances of juveniles being tried as adults and sometimes ending up getting a life sentence without a chance of parole. I find that pretty harsh because there have been some cases where the juvenile meant no harm, they were either confused or brought along by gang members and they end up being charged along with the gang members for just being with them when a crime goes down. I believe that juveniles do not deserve to be given a life sentence because for one they are still maturing, they can learn from their mistakes and make amends, we still have to combat crimes like intended murder committed by a juvenile with extreme punishments especially if they are well over the age of 16. In the article published by the New York Times on March 14, 2012 “Juveniles Don’t Deserve Life Sentences”, Garinger discusses that juveniles deserve a second chance since their brains are still developing.

Sentencing juveniles to prison happens to be a very controversial topic today. Many people believe that juveniles should receive the same consequences as an adult criminal and a vast amount of people believe that juveniles should be given a second chance. I personally believe that a child should not be given the same consequences as an adult so the question I would like to pose to my audience is should juvenile offenders be offered the same consequences as adult offenders? Statistics show that across the nation at least 1,200 people are sentenced to life without parole for a crime they committed when they were under the age of 18. Majority of people will argue that this justified because if a child is given a second chance they will continue to commit crimes in the future.

Juvenile Incarceration: Should Juvenile Offenders be Rehabilitated or Incarcerated? Working Thesis: While many believe juvenile offenders should be incarcerated for their crimes since regardless of their age, they are still committing a crime and deserve to be punished, however, juveniles should in fact be rehabilitated rather than incarcerated due to the negative effects prison has on young offenders’ physical and mental wellbeing, the prison system’s failure to deter juveniles from reoffending, and because juveniles are less likely to make rational decisions about things that affect them long term due to their brains not being completely developed. According to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, in 2014, over one