During colonial times, children were complete property of their parents; thus, the parents could request help from the state regarding the punishment needed to discipline their children (Hinton, Sims, & Adam, 2007, p. 466-468). People believed that the youth needed to be transformed into productive members of society through rehabilitative treatments (Bilchik, 1998). It was not until 1899, however, that the first official juvenile court was established in Cook County, Illinois to help troubled juveniles by providing them with free counseling and rehabilitative services instead of incarceration (Platt, 1969). In 1905, in Commonwealth v. Fisher, the Supreme Court concluded that it is acceptable and legal to have a Juvenile Justice System that …show more content…
concentrates on rehabilitation instead of punishment (“Commonwealth v Fisher,” 1905). Conversely, during the 1970’s, people’s perspectives changed from therapeutic interventions to retribution, leading to the 1980’s “get-tough-on-crime” era. Even so, when considering the issues of maturity, juveniles were punished less severely than adults (Massey, 2006, p. 1083). Based on current data, in today’s society, rehabilitation is not enough to deter juveniles from reoffending. Furthermore, although it is important to learn about the different programs that are implemented to help the troubled youth, it is equally important to remember that support for at-risk juveniles is not always feasible (Cox, Allen, Hanser, & Conrad, 2014). The objective of this literature review is to analyze the findings related to the following hypothesis: if the number of juvenile delinquents increases, then the effectiveness of the juvenile based rehabilitation programs decreases. Despite the overall conflicts in theory, evidence, and conclusions, the literature review findings will allow people to become aware and better understand the impact that rehabilitation has on juvenile offenders regardless of specific age, race, and gender. Independent Variable need 1more page Age To understand the Juvenile Justice System and the programs that are set to assist juvenile offenders, the related statistics must be presented. Typically, statistics enable the justice department to justify what they need and why those particular resources are needed. Per the Bureau of Justice and Statistics, in 2015, the jail population of prisoners under the age of 17 years was 993 nationwide. More specifically, there were 48 prisoners under the age of 17 years in the Texas prison systems (Carson & Mulako-Wangota, 2015). Unfortunately to the justice system, these statistics are nothing other than numbers needing to be reduced. On the other hand, these statistics are not just a number to the family members, instead they reflect future reintegration problems. Regardless of the exact age, however, the crime involvement of juveniles continues to be examined in other studies. Race and Gender Race has always been a controversial subject in the justice system and will continue to be an uncomfortable topic for many. Often people mistakenly believe that others of the same race are the main population in the prison system. This misconception can be attributed to the various media sources which tend to broadcast the negative racial influence of police arrest; therefore, causing an uproar of racism. The research that was gathered, reviewed, and analyzed, demonstrated that although juvenile delinquency has gradually declined in the past years, the perspective that society once had has drastically changed to a more punitive one regardless of the juvenile’s race or gender. Never once was race mentioned as one of the determining factors for crime prediction. The results demonstrate that the option for rehabilitation programs is frequently offered to those who commit minor offenses, regardless of the juvenile’s race (Snyder, 2003). In 2015, per the Harris County Juvenile Probation Department, most of the incarcerated juveniles were African American males with a total of 2,092 and 1,282 Hispanic males. Furthermore, the statistics between male juvenile offenders and female juvenile offenders in the Harris County Juvenile System was a drastic difference. There were 404 African American females and 252 Hispanic females (Glover & Trojan, 2015). The studies demonstrated that the majority of the involvement in delinquent behavior was attributed by males. Family Stability and Dynamics As stated in an article written by T.
Earl Sullenger (1934), if families have stability, then the communities have stability. There are several reasons that will cause a juvenile to be placed in a juvenile correctional facility and at times, the cause is attributed to the family. In Omaha, Nebraska, there was a study compiled of 125 cases which established the results of family involvement in crimes. Concerning those cases, in 20 the father had been involved in the Criminal Justice System due to some sort of misdemeanor. Accordingly, out of the 125 cases, 8 cases showed that the mother had been arrested for some sort of offense. Furthermore, out of the remaining cases, 22 confirmed that other children in the family had been involved in the Juvenile Justice System. Consequently, it was concluded that family stability at home will either positively or negatively influence a juvenile’s contribution to society. Moreover, the complied study in Omaha explains that the delinquent behavior was displayed more often in the absence of the father figure. In essence, the behavior was not strongly affected in either the boys or the girls, when they experienced the absence of the mother (Sullenger, …show more content…
1934). In an article published on the Texas Department of Criminal Justice website, it states that the children who grow up with parents who are incarcerated are more likely to commit crimes; when compared to children who grow up with both of their parents, the statistics rise to five times more likely to be involved in criminal activities (Mosely, 2008). If there is a history of alcohol and drug abuse, there is a possibility that the likelihood of crime involvement will also increase. Other studies confirm that juveniles that come from a divorced family will constantly lash out, seeking attention that is not provided at home.
Households that suffer from the loss of one or both parents greatly increase the probability of juvenile delinquency. Delinquency becomes a revolving door; therefore, the community along with the Juvenile Justice System need to work together on the implementation of rehabilitation programs. Based on the findings in the study, there is an indication that the lack of family stability hinders juveniles from being law-abiding citizens. Nonetheless, the other studies did not mention the juvenile’s family stability or lack of. Theories Glasser’s Choice Theory expresses in meticulous detail the ten steps that should be used to discipline juveniles in schools. However, it appears that these steps will only be successful if consistently used in the way in which they are described. Additionally, it is imperative that professional assistance is used accordingly so that the juvenile understands his or her choices. Also, Glasser believes that a person’s behavior consists of acting, thinking, feeling, and the belief that a person can choose a path towards happiness (Zeeman, 2006). Dependent Variable need 1.5 more
pages Recidivism Throughout the years, studies have been debated and academic researchers have discussed and defended multiple findings. For instance, some researchers have reasoned and concluded that juvenile offenders who are sentenced to correctional facilities, in comparison to those who are given an alternative option, are much more likely to experience different types of physiological abuse which may lead them to commit suicide (Young & Gainsborough, 2000, p. 6). There are several considerable differences between the criminal courts and the juvenile courts. For instance, in the juvenile court, treatment and rehabilitation is a requirement that is to be provided to reduce juvenile delinquency; conversely, the criminal court may not offer any rehabilitation services to the offender (“Overview of the Juvenile Justice System in Texas,” 2017). Ultimately, juvenile courts only deal with juveniles who commit status or delinquent offenses. Through meaningful interventions which adequately meet the rehabilitation needs of each juvenile, deterrence is possible (Bilchik, 1998). The thought is that deterrence for delinquency will result if juveniles are given the opportunity to participate in a rehabilitation program; yet, this may not be accurate today. The objective of these programs, nonetheless, is to aid juvenile offenders who lack the concept of maturity and demonstrate troubled tendencies (Scott, 2000, p.292). Ultimately, the main purpose of rehabilitative programs is to provide juveniles with the opportunity to learn from their criminal behavior without hindering the possibility of a better future (Scott, 2000). Programs During the research, there were several rehabilitation programs set for juveniles in each county, state, and municipality. Some of the programs may include, but are not limited to community service hours, mentoring programs, and facilitating the establishment of positive behavior. For purposes of this literature review, the focus will be on Harris County, located in the State of Texas. JumpStart is on the programs that is part of the Change Happens program that Harris County has adopted. It is set up to work with the juvenile offender and the workforce to help them develop skills to become a lawful contributor to society. JumpStart helps youth who live in areas where there is a significant increase in crimes. Statistics showed that in one year, the program benefitted numerous juvenile offenders. Furthermore, 100 juveniles under the age of 17, were helped in obtaining employment during the entire summer (Change Happens, 2014). Like this particular program, there are other rehabilitative programs which enable a positive future. Another program funded by Harris County and the Juvenile Justice System is The Youth Partners CAN (Create A New Beginning), which provides mentoring services that assist youth in transitioning from offenders to productive members of their communities. Research revealed that from September 2013 to August 2014 there were 236 mentor applications submitted. During that period, the program paired 200 of those mentors with juveniles. As well, 70% of the matches were held for at least one year, and 90% of the juveniles did not reoffend. As well, there are numerous faith based organizations that help rehabilitate juveniles through the faith and believe of God. For example, The Teen Turnaround program, explicitly focuses on mentoring juveniles, helping them with job placement, and enabling a positive education experience. Today, Oak Cliff works with approximately 80 juvenile offenders. The Nehemiah Faith Based Academy in Orange County, Florida continues to provide basic, yet necessary skills, such as literacy, to enable high-risk youth to escape poverty and crime (Beary, 2002). While research will always vary, statistics will remain similar in nature, even if the numbers are not identical. Nevertheless, research has assessed that nearly two-thirds of juvenile offenders are given an alternative option to incarceration through various rehabilitation programs (Community Corrections, 2014). Per Harland (1996), unfortunately, even with the most outstanding rehabilitation programs, deterrence is not always achieved; then again, if the rehabilitation programs adequately establish their goals to help the community, then the number of juvenile delinquents will decrease. Clearly, every program experiences flaws, but if properly implemented, the procedures will benefit society as a whole.
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. Edward Humes follows the cases of seven teenagers in juvenile court, and those surrounding them.
Hinton, W., Sheperis, C., & Sims, P. (2000). Family based approaches to juvenile delinquency. The Family Journal, 11(2), 167-173.
The Juvenile Justice system, since its conception over a century ago, has been one at conflict with itself. Originally conceived as a fatherly entity intervening into the lives of the troubled urban youths, it has since been transformed into a rigid and adversarial arena restrained by the demands of personal liberty and due process. The nature of a juvenile's experience within the juvenile justice system has come almost full circle from being treated as an adult, then as an unaccountable child, now almost as an adult once more.
What is important to understand in terms at the difference between the juvenile and adult system is that there is a level of dependency that is created tween the two and the juvenile system focuses on how to help rather than in prison individuals at such a young age. However, it usually depends on the type of crimes that have been committed and what those crimes me for the families and how they impact of the greater society. The adult system distinguishes between dependence and delinquency mainly because there was a psychological transition that occurs with juveniles that is not always a predictor of a cyclical life of crime. However, if an adult is committed to the justice system there can be a dependency of delinquency and a cycle of crime that is more likely to be sustained at that age and level of cognitive ability then in comparison to a juvenile. The reasoning behind this is important is that is focused on maintaining a level of attention to the needs and capacity abilities of individuals living and working in different types of societies (Zinn et al.,
The challenges of children who grow up with parents whom were incarcerated at some point in their childhood can have a major effect on their life. The incarceration of parents can at times begin to affect the child even at birth. Now with prison nurseries the impregnated mother can keep her baby during her time in jail. With the loss of their parent the child can begin to develop behavioral problems with being obedient, temper tantrums, and the loss of simple social skills. Never learning to live in a society they are deprived of a normal social life. “The enormous increase incarceration led to a parallel, but far less documented, increase in the proportion of children who grew up with a parent incarcerated during their childhood” (Johnson 2007). This means the consequences of the children of the incarcerated parents receive no attention from the media, or academic research. The academic research done in this paper is to strengthen the research already worked by many other people. The impact of the parent’s incarceration on these children can at times be both positive and negative. The incarceration of a parent can be the upshot to the change of child’s everyday life, behavioral problems, and depriving them a normal social life.
Since the establishment of the first juvenile court in Chicago Illinois for over 100 years (Grisso, 199,813) ago, psychologists have continued to show a strong presence in juvenile proceedings and assist the juvenile justice system, as well as young people involved in it. a special court and the justice system for minors, partly in response to the recognition that adolescents, while clearly shows greater cognitive, emotional and behavioral capacities were established than their younger counterparts, do not have many of the skills that adults and relevant to the legal decision making and criminal responsibility (Otto and Borum, 2004) demonstrators. As a result, the juvenile court was to consider the criminal behavior of minors in context of development, with a greater emphasis on rehabilitation and decreased attention on the punishment (Zimring, 2000). Since the juvenile court was to focus on rehabilitation rather than punishment, the dramatic changes in the landscape of juvenile justice in 1966 and 1967, changing forever the denial of constitutional guarantees for minors. In its decisions in Kent v. United States (1966) and In re Gault (1967), the Supreme Court of the United States asked if the ideal rehabilitation of the
The opposition believes that holding court cases where juveniles remain tried as adults undoubtedly violates the rights of the juvenile. Initially, the age of a person when the alleged crime occurred decides whether or not he or she will be tried as a juvenile. “Definitions of who is a juvenile vary for different purposes within individual states as well as among different states” (Rosenheim 36). Children, ages seven to seventeen, who are suspected of crime, must be treated as children in need of guidance and encouragement, and not as vicious criminals (Emerson 6). Also, the opposition feels that the juvenile cannot accept full responsibility for his or her actions. Some people insist that each minor who committed a crime was influenced in some way or another (Emerson 8). Not only does the opposition believe that the minor was influenced, but they also believe that the juvenile was not able to control his or herself (Emerson 8). In addition, juveniles have not yet reached the necessary maturity level to share a prison amongst other adults. Minors, isolated for punishment, do not deserve this radical treatment (Staff Report C13). Numerous lawsuits are filed annually to fight the improper incarceration of juveniles who were tried as adults (Staff Report C13). Most importantly, courts must not rely on prosecutors to prove that a child knew whether or not that the crime committed was right or wrong. “The court is exhorted to treat children brought before it with the same kind of care, custody, and discipline that they would receive ...
Families serve as one of the strongest socializing forces in a person's life. They help teach children to control unacceptable behavior, to delay gratification, and to respect the rights of others. Conversely, families can also teach children aggressive, antisocial, and violent behavior. In adults' lives, family responsibilities may provide an important stabilizing force. Given these possibilities, family life may directly contribute to the development of delinquent and criminal tendencies. Parental conflict and child abuse correlate with delinquency. Though not all children who grow up in conflictive or violent homes become delinquent, however, being exposed to conflict and violence appears to increase the risk of delinquency. At this point, researchers have not pin pointed what factors exactly push some at-risk youth into delinquency. A child with criminal parents faces a greater likelihood of becoming a delinquent than children with law-abiding parents. However, the influence appears not to be directly related to criminality but possibly to poor supervision.
There are three classes (trauma theories, life course theories, and selection theories) in which help explain the relationship between families and delinquency. Many seem to believe that juvenile delinquency is a reflection of a weak family structure. In todays society many minors that are committing crimes come from broken families/households. By saying that I would consider broken households to include single parent homes, minors being raised by other family members or even minors having to find survival means for themselves. The blame cannot always be placed on the juvenile’s family but the family structure is a large contributor to one’s behavior.
“The history of the juvenile justice in the United States began during the colonial period” (Bartollas & Miller, 2008, p.5). “During this time span the family was the main origin of social control” (Bartollas & Miller, 2008, p.5). However, the Juvenile Justice system was developed by states because of the demographics in cities. In the 1800s, the state seeing the developing cites and the effect it was having on the young population, they had to develop a system control the youths.
The family role within the juvenile justice system is vital to both rehabilitation as well as reducing recidivism. The process of rehabilitation of a juvenile should involve the family more. The resources available to juvenile offenders can provide the assistance in the world to change the behavior of the child, consequently, if the family of the juvenile is not on the same page the juvenile will return to the same lifestyle bringing them into the system. A requirement for family involvement in the treatment of a juvenile offender should be mandatory.
Juvenile delinquents, or youth that have been convicted of a crime, seem to be the norm these days. Citizens, families, and policy makers want new programs and policies within the juvenile justice system. Researchers have found that the family structure can be a precursor to delinquent behavior, and families do not have the control or balance that they once did. As such, new measures need to be implemented to help these families in crisis. Rehabilitation of the family unit is the answer, say many, not punishment.
The understanding of the behavior from delinquents is built upon the explanations that have been offered and the findings that have, in research, been revealed. Juvenile delinquency is defined as a behavior of a young individual that has been characterized by antisocial behavior. This kind of behavior is normally more than what the parents can control. When this happens, the juvenile is subject to legal action. These “juveniles” are typically between the ages of 10 and 18 and they have usually committed some violation of the law. Instead of being referred to as crimes, the acts are considered delinquent acts. There are also numerous ways that juvenile proceedings differ from regular adult proceedings. There are many influences that contribute
“I think we attribute it [juvenile crime] to parents who need to pay more attention to their children,” Columbia County Juvenile Judge Doug Flanagan stated, “The problem almost always starts at home” (Mirshak 1). Simply not meeting a child’s emotional, mental, or physical needs can fall under the umbrella of “lack of parenting”; neglectful or abusive parenting is a definite example of a lack of parenting that can cause juvenile crime. Juvenile delinquency or crime usually refers to the violation of a law by a juvenile or minor (Gibbons 1). Parenting styles and crime rates are especially related when considering the criminal and antisocial behaviors of children and teens. The tight bond
Juvenile delinquency is one of the major social issues in the United States today. Juvenile delinquency, also known as juvenile offending, is when “a violation of the law committed by a juvenile and not punishable by death or life imprisonment” (Merriam-webster.com). Although we have one justice system in America, the juvenile system differs from the adult juvenile system. Most juvenile delinquents range from as low as the age of seven to the age of seventeen. Once the delinquent or anyone turns the age of eighteen, they are considered an adult. Therefore, they are tried as an adult, in the justice system. There are many different reasons why a child would commit crime, such as mental and physical factors, home conditions, neighborhood environment and school conditions. In addition, there are a variety of effects that juvenile justice systems can either bad effects or good effects. Finally there are many different solutions that can reduce juvenile delinquency. As a result, juvenile delinquency is a major issue and the likeliness of it can be reduced. In order to reduce juvenile delinquency there has to be an understanding of the causes and the effects.