Approaches to Juvenile Justice
The juvenile justice system has some major differences from the adult system. Juveniles, for instance, do not commit crimes, they commit delinquent acts. Juveniles do not have a right to a public trial by jury, rather a judge decides on the evidence at an adjudication hearing. The hearings and restrictions on use of evidence are sometimes less formal and more flexible than in adult court. The reason for the differences comes from the idea that juvenile offenders have different issues and levels of responsibility than their adult counterparts.
Other People Are Reading
-
Culpability
-
A reason the juvenile system takes a different approach to handling delinquents comes from a belief that children bear less responsibility for their actions than adults. Anyone who has been around young children understands they don't fully understand the consequences of their actions. As children grow older they process information more like adults, but in January of 2004, the American Bar Association published an article that examined how even the adolescent brain functions at a less sophisticated level than an adult brain. As the authors noted, the distinction is not to allow juveniles to get by with something, but rather to identify the best way to handle youthful offenders.
Rehabilitation
-
By the 1960s the courts handled most juvenile cases separately from adult cases. Having a separate system allowed the juvenile courts to focus on rehabilitation rather than punishment. The system took on the role of "parent" for the child and attempted to teach the juvenile more socially acceptable behavior. During the late 1980s and early 1990s many states moved away from the rehabilitative approach. Missouri, one of the states that continued with rehabilitation as the focus now boasts an 8 percent repeat offender rate as opposed to the estimated 50 percent in some states that moved away from rehabilitation as the primary goal.
-
Punishment
-
With juvenile crime increasing, many states adopted a get tough on crime approach to juvenile justice during the 1980s and 1990s. The National Juvenile Justice Network (NJJN) noted in its 2007 to 2008 report that the United States has one of the most punitive approaches to juvenile justice of any country in the world. Most nations follow the international Convention of the Rights of the Child to guide their systems in helping juvenile offenders. According to the NJJN as of 2008, only the United States and Somalia had refused to ratify the treaty.
Isolation
-
In some situations the courts determine that juveniles should face adult court rather than staying in the juvenile system. Usually the courts try a juvenile as an adult only if the child has a history of delinquent acts and has committed a serious offense. In these cases the rules that limit how long a juvenile stays in custody do not apply. The approach in these circumstances involves an attempt to isolate a person who presents an ongoing danger to the community regardless of the person's age. The U.S. incarcerates more children than any other country and remains the only country allowing life-sentences for children under the age of 18.
-
References
- Legal Match; How Does the Juvenile Criminal System Differ from the Adult Criminal System? Ken LeMance; December 2010
- American Bar Association; Adolescence, Brain Development and Legal Culpability, Juvenile Justice Center; January 2004
- Newsweek; Children Are Not Too Old to Change; Ellis Cose; January 2010
- jjustice.org; Advances in Juvenile Justice Reform; National Juvenile Justice Network; 2007 to 2008
- Yale.edu; Rehabilitation and Control of Juvenile Delinquency Offenders; Afolabi James Adebayo; 2000
- LawyerShop; History of America's Juvenile Justice System; 2008
- Photo Credit Jupiterimages/liquidlibrary/Getty Images
