Parens Pariae: The Juvenile Justice System

It is shocking to know that before 1967 youths in the United States did not have the same rights as adults in court. Before the landmark case In Re Gault individuals underage were not promised the freedoms under the fourteenth amendment. The court system did not take juvenile delinquent cases as seriously. It was almost as if they brushed the delinquents under the rug and put them into a detention center the first chance they got. The Supreme Court came to the conclusion that in the case of In Re Gault the requirements for due process were not met. This has turned into a landmark case because it has altered the way the juvenile delinquent court system runs.

Hey Priscilla, you bring up a good point about the separation between juveniles and adults when it comes to the justice system. I agree that parens patriae should not be dispose since the government has to protect minors that can not protect them self. I know most juveniles lack maturity, development, and cognitive thinking skill in comparison to an adult, but it may be in the community they live in. Most juveniles that live in high crime areas are born into the criminal lifestyle and with parens patriae they can live a better life away from all crimes. Like you mention, juvenile offenders should join community based residential facilities to improve their well being, if they are dealing with minor offenses. Of course terms of major crimes,

Essentially, it is obvious St. Louis City juvenile justice has taken great strides in ensuring their clients partake in juvenile justice reform. Certainly, over the years this has been the center piece of the institution in providing a plethora of services, which compassionately meets many of the needs of its youth. However, despite the history and longevity associated with the St. Louis City’s juvenile system, including the uniqueness of the services they provide within the institution today. The need to further develop facility resources, which provides adequate programming and additional tools for its detainees and staff is continual. Clearly, the institution has undoubtedly exceeded many of its own expectations over the years, impressively

justice model, the crime control model, and the balanced and restorative justice model. The Parens

Simply, the basis of the Juvenile court is to protect children. Another founding principle of the court is the idea of rehabilitating delinquent juveniles and providing them with tools to become productive citizens, rather than punishing them (Bartollas and Schmalleger 179). Both these essential principles are demonstrated through actions and operation of the juvenile

The book Burning Down the House: The End of Juvenile Prison, by Nell Bernstein is a compelling expose on the inherent evil of juvenile detention facilities. In her eye-opening account of the danger that lies within locking up this nation’s youth, Bernstein utilizes a plethora of rhetorical strategies to urge her audience to recognize and act on her claim. In writing this account on the heinousness of juvenile detention centers and why the system as a whole must be reformed, Bernstein uses personal cause and effect examples, studies and statistics, as well as concrete refutations to advocate the world for change.

The juvenile justice system has made numerous of ethical issues when managing juvenile offenders. The issue with the juvenile justice system is the laws and rules that govern it. It has led to years of controversial debate over the ethical dilemmas of the juvenile corrections system, and how they work with youth offenders. The number of minors entering the juvenile justice system is increasing every month. The reasons why the juvenile justice system faces ethical dilemmas is important and needs to be addressed: (1) a vast proportion of juveniles are being tried and prosecuted as adults; (2) the psychological maturation of the juvenile to fully comprehend the justice system; and (3) the factors that contribute to minorities being adjudicated in the juvenile justice system are more likely than White offenders. These three ethical issues that are rising in the juvenile justice system will be further examined.

There are many children in the world who are being put behind bars and detained for alleged wrongdoing without protections they are entitled to. Throughout the world, children are charged and sentenced for actions that should not be considered as adult crimes. Here in the United States, the minimum age of criminal responsibility is age 12. Law enforcement officials and those in the juvenile justice system nationwide tend to mistreat underage individuals by trying cases while working through the lens of an adult. Unfair punishments are still handed down domestically, which is in violation of Supreme Court law. The following articles specifically address the idea that juvenile justice is unethical. In the article, “Juvenile Justice & Adolescent

Childress, S. (2016, June 2). More States Consider Raising the Age for Juvenile Crime. Retrieved from PBS: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/more-states-consider-raising-the-age-for-juvenile-crime/

Juvenile courts were initially intended for the trial of minors for small crimes such as theft and trespassing, but within the last 30 years, violent juvenile crime has seen a major influx (Juvenile Arrest). According to Barry Feld, Juvenile justice systems can no longer handle the cases that are being brought to them because they surpass the sentencing of the juvenile system. Thus, his argument is that juvenile systems should be abolished because reforms within the system have allowed for more lenient sentencing and reconciliation of sentences. Doing away with juvenile courts would “assure greater procedural regularity in the determination of guilt” and eliminate the immense amount of subjectivity involved (Feld). Although this may assist in assigning guilt among juvenile offenders in more serious crimes, it may be slightly extreme to try minors in criminal court for petty offences. Feld addresses the apparent problem of subjectivity and trying minors in criminal court would help diminish that bias, yet he only considers the application of more serious crimes that would have mandatory sentences of five years or more, not both the serious crimes and the approach to smaller-scale crimes. Although he remains somewhat blind to part of the overall argument, the information provided is well researched and knowledgeable. Feld himself is also highly

In today’s world there are countless crimes committed every single day. “In 2015, there were 1.42 million total arrests, at a rate of 3,641 arrests per 100,000 residents” (State of California, Department of Justice). Grown adults are not the only people being arrested every year, there are also juveniles, children, being arrested every day. One topic of controversy today is whether or not juveniles who commit these crimes should be tried as adults in criminal court. There are many differences between the justice system for adults and the justice system for juveniles. If a juvenile is defined as a person under the age of eighteen can we justify trying them in as an adult? Is convicting juveniles as adults a better solution?

The matter by which juveniles are processed and handled in the criminal justice system vary on the model and philosophy being used in the proceedings itself. If Parens Patriae, or the Treatment Model was being used, The state would deal with juveniles differently than it would adult offenders, in a much more gentle and caring way, which would be considered informal and flexible. The judge would act in a very calm and caring manner, and would attempt to probe the roots of the child's difficulties. The Treatment Model views child delinquency as some sort of underlying personality problem.

Teen court also known as youth courts is a juvenile justice system program that permits teens to try and sentence their fellow peers for committing minor and status offenses. The main purpose of the teen court is to make young offenders accountable for their wrong doing by paying the price for their offences. However this system keeps first time offenders away from the Juvenile system and gives them a chance to change. In order for a youth to be considered to serve on a teen court, the young individual must be 8th to 12th grade with good academic standing, the teen must be nominated by teacher, parent or him or herself, an application must be filled up and signed with the parent’s approval.

For generations, the argument whether juveniles should be waived to adult courts or not has been a prevalent one in our society. Some agree that waiving the juveniles to adult courts will reduce their recidivism rate, due to the harsh sentences and a lifelong record next to their name. However, in light of the argument these individuals fail to consider that the level of maturity of the juvenile is not the same as an adult. The cognitive development of the juvenile is still in process when they are underage, causing them to act impulsively without thinking about the consequences of their actions. In this paper, I will provide information as to why waiving juveniles to adult courts only causes their recidivism rate to increase rather

According to the text, parens patriae originated in England during the 12th century, meaning “Father of the country”. Parens patriae gave the “King in charge,” authority over juveniles. In the United States juvenile justice system, parens patriae relates to the responsibility of government regarding the idea of rehabilitation of juveniles, that commit a crime or a “status offense.” (pg 10) Most often in the juvenile justice system dispositional options are either nominal or conditional” with the idea of confinement as a “last resort.”