USA: +1(669)289-8683 
Sign in
Need at least a 200 min word response with a cited source
I do not know where to begin on this topic. The video, that I just watched is very emotional. It is probably the most powerful three minutes and thirty-nine seconds that I have ever witnessed. My answer or opinion on this topic is simple, the individuals who committed those heinous crimes do not deserve to be released back into society. The members of the parole board who made the conscious decision or lack of a conscious decision to release the teenagers who committed the murder of Shanda, I wonder what was going through their mind when they made their decisions? Did they think of Shanda’s family? Transition to the two year old, James who was murdered by the ten year old’s , Jon Veneables and Robert Thompson. Ten years old or not, they should have not been released back into society. The frightening thing is they have new identities and are they capable of contributing to society? Is it possible they could have a relapse and commit another heinous crime as they did when they were ten years old.
Setting emotion aside, I take the stance of no release for those who have commit cruel, terrorizing, and malicious acts of violence. If prison officials or those who make such decisions are worried about prison overcrowding, then they should focus their attention on the sentences given to those who possess small amounts of controlled substances.
The scales of justice are not balanced in these matters. Where is the justice for the families who have lost a family member to these acts? In my opinion they are being victimized when such decisions are made to release the killers of their family member back into society.
Running head: THE RAMAYANA AND SEI SHONAGON 1
Running Head: JUVENILE SYSTEM 4
Tommy K. Bush Sr.
CJ 3325 Juvenile Justice
Dr. Oliver
November 28, 2013
Abstract
In America, it is noted that the American justice system dealing with juveniles has developed over the past century. This has been due to the distinguishing difference existing from the criminal justice system. As a result, the purpose of this article is to articulate why the juvenile justice system is better than the criminal system of justice. The paper is going to give a brief introduction of the juvenile system of justice and later on, state the importance of the juvenile process. An overview of how the juvenile system is adopted across the American State will be shown. This will give the reader a rough awareness of how the justice system has brought change in the country in terms of crime reduction. Giving statistics of the various criminal activities will expand on this point further, and thus, readers will be able to understand why the juvenile justice system is vital. The essay purposes to elaborate why the juvenile justice system is preferred and thus, will give an in-depth understanding of how the system contributes to the youths’ greater amenability to treatment. The conclusion will be a summary of the main ideas and points argued in the essay and emphasize on the importance of juvenile justice systems.
Introduction
In 1899, in Chicago (Illinois), the first juvenile court was established. Policy makers, citizens, and professionals continue debating on why juvenile offenders should be tried and sentenced differently from adult offenders. To the public, the aspect of trying juveniles as adults is a controversial topic. As such, the principle of establishing these juvenile courts was for individualized justice and their main focus was on rehabilitating, caring, and treating the youthful offenders and not punishing them. The juveniles talked about in this case fall under 18 years of age, nonetheless in some American States there is variance in terms of the legal age. According to recent research conducted, it is evident that the human brain continues to develop throughout adolescence. The pre-frontal cortex (part of the brain responsible for function execution and complex reasoning) is not fully matured until the mid-twenties (Scott & Steinberg, 2008). Therefore, for adolescents, their brain is not fully matured hence; their thought and decision-making processes are different from those of the adult. For instance, for adolescents, it is developmentally normative to take greater risks and show susceptibility to influences from their peers than adults. As such, these normal differences contribute to behaviors that have led many adolescents to their involvement with the juvenile justice system. Some of the risk factors associated with increased numbers of youthful offenders go beyond developmental influences and include: low school involvement; poverty; cognitive deficits; and homeless or runaways.
According to the National Center for Children in Poverty (NCCP), reform efforts place greater efforts and give focus to improving the access of youths to mental health services. These enables institutions to better serve the needs of youths involved in the juvenile justice system, and create effective alternatives that serve traditional cultures and taboos governing their family structures. In order for juvenile systems to be healthy and productive for the youths, it is necessary for them to be accorded proper treatment and rehabilitation services, which culminates to them being productive members of the society. Having juvenile justice systems in the society is beneficial because it gives parents the chance to rehabilitate youth offenders in the family (Scott & Steinberg, 2008). As a result, they save their future by giving treatment and rehabilitation programs to them at an early age, which enables them, better their future because they mend their broken ways.
In another instance, this system has come under examination due to the swelling number of juveniles involved in violent crimes. The most reported cases involve school violence, weapon assaults that result in serious injuries and fatalities, and violence related to gangs. However, with the small proportion of juveniles involved in murder cases reducing each year, media coverage on violent crime committed by juveniles is widespread. As a result, this has solicited response from the political (legislative) and public with regard to juvenile violence and has demanded accountability and punishment, which resembles the criminal justice system. In addition, an influx of immigrants and increased birthrates in America brought a new wave of growth among cities in America (Finkelhor, Turner, Ormrod & Hamby, 2009). The growth came with an increased number of dependent and destitute children that resulted in the formation of juvenile justice systems. This limited the children from being treated as adults and being taken to adult courts for persecution. Majority of the parents were not able to control and discipline their children, and this resulted in the formation of juvenile justice systems that served, as schools to treat and educate the juvenile offenders. These interventions by the government served, as a means to help the children through propelling their behavior in the right direction. Lawyers call juvenile offenders delinquent and the courts are here to change them into productive citizens who give focus to their treatment rather than punishment. Hence, the proceeding of these courts was more of civil and not criminal. The legal process of these courts put the interests of the child ahead, and their hearing was informal. From this, it is evident that at no point can children be treated the same as adults because of the development of their thought process.
Adolescents are mature children who understand the concepts important in the society and the expectations of the public. Nevertheless, during these years, adolescents are trying to deal with societal changes, inner battles, as well as pressures, impulsiveness, their lack of direction and identity. At such times, it becomes unfair to treat them as adults because they have no responsibilities. Furthermore, no maturity is expected of them since they do not conceptualize the consequences of their actions. Juvenile delinquents committing crimes tend to have a repressed memory of those crimes in future, and have a nebulous reminiscence of the events (Granic & Patterson, 2006). For such instances, it becomes the responsibility of the caregivers to impart their children with responsibilities, values, and morals to be upheld in society. Studies conducted show that youths from the black community are given dispositions that are stricter than the youths from the white community; even when the offense committed is the same, and they have similar prior records. As a result, they are transferred to adult courts and give them a reason to re-offend due to the contact they have with the adults. This event magnifies on racial differences experienced throughout the juvenile system.
Logically speaking, age is considered in issues like voting, marriage, jobs, and benefits among others. Therefore, it is wise not to execute harsh forms of punishments to kids as is done to the adults. For example, Virginia’s system of justice is ineffective, unfair, and unsafe because it tries youth delinquents as adults. Inhibitions faced by these young people include working, getting an education, and contributing to the community through volunteering and voting. These obstacles are caused by their adult felony convictions, which undermine successful reentry measures; correctional institutions for adults are not safe places for young people; and local practice variation around the making of certification decisions (Ryan, Herz, Hernandez & Marshall, 2007). The arguments presented above affirm that juveniles are children and have no same thought process as that of adults and hence, act on emotion with no thought on actions involved. As a result, by convicting juveniles as adults undermines and builds life obstacles, which is not the correct way of dealing with juvenile delinquents.
Higher rates of violence and crime exposure are suffered by children than adults, and this exposure is responsible for considerable burden of mental and physical health morbidity. Studies show that a holistic approach to public policy, which concerns victimization of youth and child, is essential (Finkelhor, Turner, Ormrod & Hamby, 2009). Programs need to be implemented and formulated in order to prevent the rise of such cases because they hamper and deter the growth and development of children. The state and federal levels are responsible in fragmenting among child welfare departments, health agencies, and systems of justice. However, many of such institutions and streams of funding adhere to portions restricted to the spectrum of victimization. For example, systems dealing with child protection, which tends to victimization by the system of justice and non-caretakers since conventionally, they are not dealt with by the police. As such, the government has resorted in forming juvenile justice systems that look into rehabilitating, caring, and teaching these individuals in a manner that will help them be productive youths in building the society (Finkelhor, Cross & Cantor, 2005). Health agencies have also campaigned for such policies to be implemented; because they support such justice systems that look into building the delinquent youths into individuals who contribute to change in the society.
In conclusion, it is evident that juvenile systems of justice need to be embraced by all States and countries around the globe. The reasons presented in the discussion above elaborate the importance of having juvenile justice systems in America. Statistics also give an in-depth understanding of how important it is to have such systems. The child needs to develop in a pace that enables him/her undergo through all developmental stages, and as such, policy makers, the public, and parents need to allow the federal arm to take part in rehabilitating, caring, and teaching delinquent youths in society. It is true to summarize that the juvenile system of justice is better than the criminal justice system because, at a younger age, children will conform to societal policies and rules. Therefore, crime reduction and violence will be experienced in the community and society, which means that the criminal justice system will have minimal function. Through rehabilitation programs, individuals will be in a position of giving direction to the youths into adulthood that brings change into their lives. Having youths who conform to rules and regulations of the society enables the State be productive in terms of responsibility and morals.
References
Finkelhor, D., Cross, T.P. & Cantor, E. (2005). The justice system for juvenile victims: a
comprehensive model of case flow. Trauma Violence Abuse, 6(2), 83-102.
Finkelhor, D., Turner, H., Ormrod, R. & Hamby, S.L. (2009). Violence, abuse, and crime
exposure in a national sample of children and youth. Pediatrics, 124(5), 1411-1423.
Granic, I. & Patterson, G.R. (2006). Toward a comprehensive model of antisocial
development: a dynamic systems approach. Psychological Review, 113(1), 101.
Ryan, J.P., Herz, D., Hernandez, P.M. & Marshall, J.M. (2007). Maltreatment and
delinquency: Investigating child welfare bias in juvenile justice processing. Children and Youth Services Review, 29(8), 1035-1050.
Scott, E.S. & Steinberg, L. (2008). Adolescent development and the regulation of youth
crime. Juvenile Justice, 18(2).
