Juvenile Courts in the United States When the Juvenile Justice System was created, it was geared towards treating poverty stricken juvenile offenders as adults while allowing the wealthier offenders to essentially go free. Decades later, a reform movement saw a need to delineate juvenile offender from adults through their own court system. A shift in how these offenders were treated throughout the juvenile system process began to take shape. There was a push to reduce the risk of a youth offender becoming an adult offender. This push is far different from how the initial juvenile offenders were treated.
In the Beginning Over 100 years ago, the juvenile court system was created. With the growth in juvenile offenders there was a need
…show more content…
In juvenile court cases, a judge is considered a fact finder. The decisions are left up to the judge in juvenile court case because there are no juries. Although, in the 1960’s, the societal movement for civil rights raised the legal standards of protection. The standards and procedures used in court proceeding around this time were limited by the amount of judicial discretion allowed. That movement brought us closer to today’s structure of the juvenile court system.
Essentially, the In re Gault ruling guaranteed juveniles many of the same essentials of due process, with the exception of affording them the right to a trial by jury, but there are many other differences between these two systems. The juvenile court system allows for informal proceedings unlike in adult court. The emphasis of the court is to help the juvenile based on civil laws instead of criminal laws. Frequently on the news, you will hear they are not showing the suspects face because he/she is a juvenile which leads me to secret proceedings. Unlike with adult court cases, juvenile cases are not typically open to the public and it is illegal to share the juvenile offender’s personal information. In the recent years, some states have begun opening delinquency hearing in certain cases to the public (Neubauer & Fradella, 2011).
The Court ruled for the juvenile, stating that his rights to due process were indeed violated according to the Fourteenth Amendment. “The proceedings of the Juvenile Court failed to comply with the Constitution. The Court held that the proceedings for juveniles had to comply with the requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment” (Oyez, n.d.). The Court analyzed the juvenile court's method of handling cases, verifying that, while there are good reasons behind handling juveniles in a different way from adults, adolescents seeking to settling delinquency and detainment cases are qualified for certain procedural safeguards under the Due Process Act of the Fourteenth
The adult system’s shifts leaked into the juvenile system, causing an increase in incarcerations even when delinquency rates were declining at the time. Juvenile reform legislations prompted more compulsory sentencing and more determinate sentences for juveniles, lowering of the upper age of juvenile jurisdiction, considerable ease in obtaining waivers to adult court for juvenile prosecution, and made it easier to gain access to juvenile records as well. Furthermore, it led to greater preoccupation with chronic, violent offenders, which in turn led to a redirection of resources for their confinement. Thereby, the absence of reliable criteria for identifying such offenders tends to stereotype all delinquents and is more likely to raise the level of precautionary confinements. These three major shifts in juvenile justice policy demonstrate the power and depth of traditional beliefs about the causes and cures of crimes in U.S. society. It also shows how the system can bend for a time in the direction of new approaches to prevention and control. Today, we are presently in a time of conservative responses where the prevailing views about crime express beliefs about prevention, retribution, and incapacitation that are profoundly rooted in our
One of the fasting growing juvenile treatment and interventions programs are known as teen courts. Teen courts serve as an alternative juvenile justice, to young offenders. Non-violent, and mostly first time offenders are sentenced by their peers’ in teen courts. Teen courts also serve as juvenile justice diversion programs. Teen courts vary from state to state, and sometimes within the same state. With this program, all parties of the judicial setting are juveniles with the exception of the judge. Each teen court, is designed specifically to meet the needs of the community it serves. Teen courts were created to re-educate offenders throughout the judicial process, create a program with sanctions that will allow the youth not to have a juvenile record, and to also instil a sense of responsibility.
This an extremely well written and powerful book written by Edward Humes. Humes shared his thoughts, observations, and criticisms about the juvenile justice system after a “riveting ride” through the Los Angeles Juvenile Court within his book, “No Matter How Loud I Shout.” The manner in which the book is written makes it fairly easy to read, demanding your attention while allowing for a simple follow along. I feel as if the book has given me much more insight and broader knowledge of the juvenile justice system, particularly the juvenile court system of Los Angeles.
Jenson, Jeffrey and Howard, Matthew. "Youth Crime, Public Policy, and Practice in the Juvenile Justice System: Recent Trends and Needed Reforms." Social Work 43 (1998): 324-32
Juvenile Justice Reforms in the United States. (n.d.). Retrieved September 20, 2011, from Juvenile Transfer to Criminal Courts: http://www.ojjdp.gov
The Progressive Era ignited one’s greater desire for family unity however, teenager delinquency was increasing. Judge Benjamin Barr Lindsey is noted for one’s contribution to the American family with the creative plan of Juvenile Court Systems which was formed in 1901(Campbell, 1978). Judge Lindsey wanted to insure that minors would not be punished through adult judicial systems. The Juvenile Court Systems currently offers more services than originally planned. Juvenile Court provides services which protects neglected and abused minors and also is responsible for collecting child support payments.
This paper will analyze the different theoretical issues pertaining to the modern juvenile court, determine their origin, and suggest a course of action for resolving these issues to the best extent possible. It is important to note, however, that the juvenile justice system alone cannot ever prevent all juvenile crime, respond perfectly to every situation or treat every suspect fairly. Furthermore, an effective antidote to modern juvenile crime would necessitate far broader action, addressing underlying social structure inequalities that breed poverty and social disorganization.
...ing beckoned in with the 21st century. While U.S.’s JLWOP laws are inconsistent with many human rights treatises and with international law, it is more important for our policies to be based on a thorough understanding of the issue- the most essential being a separation of the processes for juvenile and adult criminal offenders. With an emphasis on rehabilitation for juvenile offenders, and the goal of encouraging maturity and personal development after wayward actions, the futures of many teens in the criminal justice system can become much more hopeful.
With increased media coverage of violent juvenile behavior, legislators began to pass laws to toughen up on juvenile crime. Many laws made it easier to waive juveniles into adult courts, or even exclude juveniles who had committed serious crimes from juvenile court jurisdiction. Furthermore, the sentences to be handed out for offenders were lengthened and made much more severe. As a result, the juvenile courts began to resemble the adult courts. Yet, this movement’s influence began to fade, and by the turn of the century, another shift had occurred. In the current juvenile courts, a balanced approach is emphasized. While the court deals with chronic and dangerous offenders with a heavy hand, needy youth who need help to get back on track are still assisted under the parens patriae philosophy. Restorative justice has come to be the preferred method of today’s juvenile courts. In an overall sense, the modern juvenile court has taken on a paternalistic view similar to parens patriae towards youths who are in need of guidance, while punitively punishing offenders who do not respond to the helping hand extended to
This paper will discuss the history of the juvenile justice system and how it has come to be what it is today. When a juvenile offender commits a crime and is sentenced to jail or reform school, the offender goes to a separate jail or reforming place than an adult. It hasn’t always been this way. Until the early 1800’s juveniles were tried just like everyone else. Today, that is not the case. This paper will explain the reforms that have taken place within the criminal justice system that developed the juvenile justice system.
The book “No Matter How Loud I Shout” written by Edward Humes, looks at numerous major conflicts within the juvenile court system. There is a need for the juvenile system to rehabilitate the children away from their lives of crime, but it also needs to protect the public from the most violent and dangerous of its juveniles, causing one primary conflict. Further conflict arises with how the court is able to administer proper treatment or punishment and the rights of the child too due process. The final key issue is between those that call for a complete overhaul of the system, and the others who think it should just be taken apart. On both sides there is strong reasoning that supports each of their views, causing a lot of debate about the juvenile court system.
In today’s society it is not who or whom it is what. Juvenile offenders are now facing a two court system, not only can they be tried in juvenile court for a crime committed. They are now being charged as adults in adult court. Charging a juvenile as an adult has stirred up ...
This paper describes the various legislations and movements that were established in 19th century to address the issue of juvenile justice system. It outlines the challenges faced by the legislation and movements and their implications in addressing the issues of the juvenile justice system.
The juvenile system was first established in the United States around 1899 when Illinois had their first court appearance including a juvenile. This then led to the Nation’s first juvenile system being created, which was for youth under the age of eighteen who have been convicted of crimes. Up until then, most youth were tried as an adult until the system was put into place. The system has different sections in which they youth is taken in such as: intake, adjudication, disposition, and post adjudicatory.