Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Punishment and rehabilitation of youth offenders essay
Rehabilitation for the youth offender
Treatment of juvenile offenders
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Youth detention is designed to house Juvenile crime offenders rather than placing juveniles most commonly aged 10-17 in prison they are sent to Juvenile Detention centres. These Juveniles commit more property crime then violent crimes, and generally will commit less serious crimes like graffiti, shoplifting, vandalism, motor vehicle theft, fare evasion, road traffic offences and unlawful entry. However in early years in Australia children as young as six years old were once incarcerated for these crimes. However in today’s society the approach to young offenders is quite different. Prison is now seen as last resort solution for most juveniles. Juvenile Detention centres are managed by Youth Justices Services, they follow the belief that young …show more content…
people should only go into detention as a last resort or when the offence they have committed is highly serious. Youths held in detention and their parents can often be very upsetting for them. Youth justice services help people and their families in understanding what causes them to offend and also help find out what they can do to support the young person to change their behaviour. The main objective of Juvenile custodial facilities are to provide a humane, safe and secure environment, this assists young people to address their offending behaviour and it also helps to make positive choices about their lives, both in custody and upon their offending behaviour and to make positive choices about their lives, both in custody and upon their return to the community. The quality of these services that are provided is fundamental to the achievement of this objective. The main ability that is focused on in the current detention system is to rehabilitate young offenders however a number of submissions into this has acknowledged its limitations. As detention seems to criminalise young people further. The Law Society of NSW referred to the anecdotal evidence that states detainees learn to ‘play the game’ so they can make themselves eligible for early realise then then they go out and re-offend. However the importance of rehabilitation in these systems is recognised to a high extent on legislation within most states and territories. Although, a number of these legislative provisions convey the importance of re-integrating young detainees into the community, without making rehabilitation the explicit, primary aim of detention. With most governments attempting to bring the rehabilitative focus more into the spotlight of their detention centres.
As rehabilitation is emphasised as a goal of detention in a number of different detention policies documents and procedure manuals. In New South Wales juvenile justice is commonly used to refer to a state’s criminal justice response to children who have committed an offence or allegedly committed an offence. In NSW the age criminal responsibility is at 10 year. And under criminal law, a child under the age of 18 years. In some jurisdictions, the function of juvenile justice resides within human services agencies and is not viewed purely within a criminal justice context. In New South Wales, the Department of Juvenile Justice is considered both a justice and human services agency.
The police state the detection and investigation of crime is the responsibility of New South Wales police. For eligible and entitled young offenders, the police may use the alternatives to court of warnings, cautions or referrals to youth justice conferences that are set out in the Young Offenders Act 1997. In court proceedings, the majority of juvenile charges brought by the police are dealt with by the Children’s Court under the provisions of the Young Offenders Act 1997 and the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act
1987. Another piece of legislation relating to youth detention is the Youth Justice Act 1992 which commenced operation on 1 September 1993 (as the Juvenile Justice Act 1992) with major amendments occurring in 1996, 2002 and 2010. The Youth Justice Act 1992 provides laws for young people aged 10-16 years old who commit, or who are alleged to have committed, offences. The Youth Justice Act 1992 provides a code for dealing with young people who come in contact with the youth justice system including procedures for police to respond to young people, providing diversionary options such as cautioning and youth justice conferencing, providing a range of sentencing option, outlining how courts deal with young people, the operation of youth detention centres, recognising the importance of families and communities in the rehabilitation and reintegration of young people, in particular Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and establishing the Youth Justice Principles. Also The Community Services Act 2007 has relevance to the youth justice system. This Act governs the administration of funding to organisations in receipt of government funding where a declaration is made for it to apply. Youth justice funding was recently declared to apply to a range of programs and services to young offenders and their families. There are issues surrounding youth’s abilities to participate in the legal processes that affect all children because almost every youth will have some involvement with legal processes in the formal education system and in transactions as consumers of goods and services. Although, participation is a certain issue for select youths who have extensive contact with legal and administrative systems, they depend on these systems to protect and provide them with assistance in dealing with legal processors. This group of youths may include the ones involved with care and protection systems, they may be excluded from school or in some recept of income support or housing assistance or in the juvenile justice system. Some limitations included with youth detention include youths becoming vulnerable and find issues with family breakdowns, socio-economic and educational disadvantages, system abuse and disabilities. Youth involvement in these process may be extent and they don’t always have the support of their families. These factors can lead to their disadvantage and certain limitations amongst youth detention. Contact with legal processes may affect these children's lives in many ways. For many of these children the contact produces a satisfactory result. For example, a child may receive income support that allows him or her to complete school or a child may enter foster care and receive the support his or her parents were not able to provide. (Children in the legal process. 2010) (-------------------------------------crhis cunnenn textbook info---------------------------------------) Based on this evidence the Youth Detention intervention amongst society is a rapid growing intervention that is successful in many ways but has its limitations.
The quagmire of placing juveniles in adult facilities is the risk factors juveniles may experience while incarcerated. Being that juveniles are young and smaller to the adult offenders, they may be seen as a prey or easy target for rape, assault, mental issues which eventually leads to suicide. We must keep in mind that juveniles are youth meaning they are still a child, not an adult and should not be exposed to adult incarceration environment. Although it is cost saving to place juveniles and adults under one facility, it is unethical because they are not built and yet mentally ready and prepared to experience adult facilities. Alternative strategies are available to assist juvenile detainees such as healthcare, education, recreation, and work experience. The Juvenile Court Act of 1899 gave leniency to youth under the age of 16. Placing youth detainees with adult offenders will result in the reduction of rehabilitation services for youth, while increasing the rate of being a victim as a potential prey o...
Youth crime is a growing epidemic that affects most teenagers at one point in their life. There is no question in society to whether or not youths are committing crimes. It has been shown that since 1986 to 1998 violent crime committed by youth jumped approximately 120% (CITE). The most controversial debate in Canadian history would have to be about the Young Offenders Act (YOA). In 1982, Parliament passed the Young Offenders Act (YOA). Effective since 1984, the Young Offenders Act replaced the most recent version of the Juvenile Delinquents Act (JDA). The Young Offenders Act’s purpose was to shift from a social welfare approach to making youth take responsibility for their actions. It also addressed concerns that the paternalistic treatment of children under the JDA did not conform to Canadian human rights legislation (Mapleleaf). It remained a heated debate until the new legislation passed the Youth Criminal Justice Act. Some thought a complete overhaul was needed, others thought minor changes would suffice, and still others felt that the Young Offenders Act was best left alone.
Allerton, M, Butler, T, Champion, U & Kenny, D 2003, 2003 NSW Young People in Custody Health Survey: A Summary of Some Key Findings. Australian Institute of Criminology, [Online]. Available at: http://aic.gov.au/events/aic%20upcoming%20events/2003/~/media/conferences/2003-juvenile/kenny.ashx, [Accessed 14 April 2011].
The Youth Criminal Justice Act, often called by the name of YCJA, is specifically made for youths ages varying from 12 to 17 that disobey the law. In April 1, 2003, the YCJA replaced the previous justice act called Young Offenders Act due to several negative concerns. “These concerns included the overuse of the courts and incarceration in less serious cases, disparity and unfairness in sentencing, a lack of effective reintegration of young people released from custody, and the need to better take into account the interests of victims.” The main purpose of the YCJA aims to have a fairer and more equitable system. Although the YCJA is an effective law within the justice system, a main aspect/characteristic that needs to remain, is keeping the
Most young offenders get into trouble with the law only once. But the younger children are when they first break the law, the more likely they are to break the law again (Statistics Canada study, 2005). The Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) attempts to acknowledge that different youth need different sentences within the justice system, while ensuring that it is fair and equitable for them. Many people, both in Canada, and around the world, believe that youth are not reprimanded harshly enough for the crimes they commit and that they are, in general, are able to squeeze through the justice system without punishment. Others, believe that the justice system does not treat youth fairly and punishes them without acknowledging that rehabilitation
For children and young offenders, there are other programs that offer alternatives to court to achieving justice. The Young Offenders Act 1997 (NSW) is a scheme that provides alternatives to court proceedings for children who have committed particular offences. The act outlines the use of youth justice conferences, cautions and warnings. The act was introduced to provide young offenders
Punishment occurs to individuals who break the law. It is also used to maintain the level of crime and to protect community members in Australia. To determine that society is content with maintaining the crime rate, this essay will discuss punishment types given to offenders and how society justifies the use punishment. Additionally, providing a brief overview of the community correction and prions rates to show that communities prefer to incarcerate lawbreakers. Highlighting that crime rates are being maintained by looking at the personal crime rate for assault before concluding that Australian society feel safe enough to allow the criminal justice system to sustain the crime rate.
Opinions such as those found in the Smith Family Youth Unemployment Report (2003) which hypothesize that juvenile crime is directly connected to the high rates of youth unemployment in Australia cannot be neither accepted nor critiqued until there is a clear understanding of what the terms “Youth Unemployment” and “Juvenile Crime” mean in the context of this essay. In this essay youth unemployment is generally taken to include the entire 15-24 age cohort – not just 15-19 year old teenagers – who are no longer at school or university and who are without a job. I have chosen to include 20-24 year olds under the banner of “Youth”, as it gives a fairer picture of the performance of all young people in the labor market and takes into account the pattern of employment both during and after leaving school or university.
The adjustment from incarceration to society causes a series of problems, making rehabilitation difficult. When the juvenile’s leave home to be detained, all ties with society, the support systems they had, the gangs they associated with, school they attending are no longer in close proximity, which is essential for successful rehabilitation (James, Stams, Asscher, Katrien De Roo & van der Laan 2012). Another problem association with the reintegration is that juveniles are in a particularly fragile state in that they are not only transitioning from society to detention, but from adolescence to adulthood, both of which are overwhelming adjustments. Research has shown, however, that if youths stay out of trouble within the first few months
Vandergoot determines that the reasoning capacity of an adolescent, the ability to make legal decisions, and filter unnecessary information is unclear to a juvenile in the justice system; the vagueness of youth stepping into the courts prevents them from fully participating in the justice system. ( Vandergoot, 2006). As a result of this impreciseness youth encounter Vandergoot concludes a separate justice system allocated for youth to adhere to adolescent needs. Vandergoot discusses the Youth Criminal Justice Act a justice system devised to adhere to youth needs. She summarizes the system that benefits young offenders in contrast to adult offenders. Vandergoot concludes “the goals of the youth legislation…its major objectives are reducing the use of incarceration for young offenders…the YCJA emphasizes restraint, accountability, proportionality, and discretion… it encourages use of extra judicial measures” ( Vandergoot, 2006, p30). Vandergoot determines that the objectives of the Youth Criminal Justice Act is in the interest of youth, however, she accounts for the long term effect on adolescence as well. Vandergoot concludes the emotional and social consequences as youth interact with the system. Vandergoot claims the system leaves juveniles “debased”, suffering an “assault on their self-image”, that “block or snares in the adolescent psyche”, ultimately lowering their motivation and self-esteem which advances youth to have the “they think I’m bad I’ll show them I’m bad” mentality(Vandergoot, 2006). The mentality that derives from direct encounters with the youth justice system, often damages the adolescence completely disregarding the purpose of a youth justice system. Mary Vandergoot’s Justice for Young Offenders Their Needs, Our Responses clearly emphasizes the need
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.
Youth and juvenile crime is a common and serious issue in current society, and people, especially parents and educators, are pretty worried about the trend of this problem. According to Bala and Roberts, around 17% of criminals were youths, compared to 8% of the Canadian population ranging from 12 to 18 years of age between 2003 and 2004 (2006, p37). As a big federal country, Canada has taken a series of actions since 1908. So far, there are three justice acts in the history of the Canadian juvenile justice system, the 1908 Juvenile Delinquents Act, the 1982 Young Offenders Act, and the 2003 Youth Criminal Justice Act. In Canada, the judicial system and the principles of these laws have been debated for a long time.
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.
In England, conforming to the Civitas’s Crime report Youth Crime in England and Wales (2010) the youngest age that someone can be prosecuted is as young as ten years old. It is also mentioned that trailing, patrolling and applying penalties on young offenders costs almost four billion pounds annually. The numbers of first time offences committed by a young person has decrease over the years; according to the Youth Justice Statistics (2014) youth crime is down by 63% since 2002. In regards to the offences themselves, nearly every offence category has decreased in reoccurrence with exception to drug offences declares Civitas’s Youth Crime in England and Wales (2010). The same report states that theft and handling remains the highest volume category taking up 21% of all youth crime. It is shortly followed by violence against a person, 19.5%, and criminal damage, 11.9%. It can be concluded from both aforementioned reports that crime in the UK is decreasing. Contrariwise to this, youth reoffending rates are soaring concludes Civitas’s Youth Crime in England and Wales (2010).
1. Introduction The purpose of this report is to shed light on juvenile delinquency and the issues and factors surrounding the penology as it pertains to Canadian law. The report encompasses the current state of juvenile delinquency, the factors of delinquency, the judicial process and juvenile court, detention centers and correctional facilities where youth offenders are held, alternate rehabilitation, and young offenders’ societal reintegration after serving time. Recommendations will be made at the end of the report to improve the state of juvenile delinquency in Canada.