More handpicked essays just for you.
The psychosocial effects of trauma on children
An essay on youth development
Effects of emotional trauma on children essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
A average teen that commits a crime need rehabilitation not prison. In Paul Thompson's article “Startling Finds on Teenage Brains” He highlights that the average teen brain is not developed like like a adult brain so knowing that we should not be putting kids under 18 in adult prison. Teens dont know better they dont understand whats right from wrong . They need rehabilitation they don't need to be harassed. So i believe that teen should not be tried a adults in the court of law.
First in Paul Thomson's Article ”Startling finds on Teenage brain”. He explains that teen brains have not developed like we thought they were. He said “they don't know better”. In the teen years they lose the most brain mass Paul says in his article “The biggest surprise in recent teen brain Research is the finding that a massive loss of brain tissue occurs in the teen years.” So in the teen years there is a lot of brain development they don't need jail they need rehabilitation because they will commit another crime again. Therefore teen kinda have a undeveloped brains so why do we convict teens in adult court and in some cases send them in
…show more content…
adult prison. Second some teens commit crimes and have a great chance to be tried as adult in some states. The court of law can try a teen as young as ten years old. In Marjie Lundstrom Article “Kids are kids-Until They Commit Crimes” she highlights that ”Until they commit crimes. And the bigger the crime,the more eager we are called adults.” Teens should not be considered as adults because parents give them too much responsibility and they think they are entitled. Than they start taking advantage and start committing crimes. Also teens that are that trouble should get help before they commit the crime. Teens should not be convicted in a adult no matter the crime. Third there is a lot of cases where the teen killed their parents and in that case there needs to be a different kinda punishment besides adult prison they need therapy and rehabilitation.
In Scott Anderson “Greg Ousley Is Sorry for Killing His Parents. Is That Enough”. Highlights in his article ” In the case of juvenile parricide, there is an added paradox. Because it is among the most target-specific of crimes, criminologists believe that an abused juvenile who killed a parent is likely to be at low risk of future criminality if he gets treatment and has a strong social support system when he is released”. This gives a great example because it gives evidence that most teens that commit crimes the do not relapse and commit the crime again if they get the correct rehabilitation. I believe that there should be a neutral between juvenile and adult
prison. In conclusion in resault of Paul Thomson's article “startling finds on teenage brain” he finds that the teen brain is not as developed as we thought it was. So we should not just send them through adult court we should create a rehabilitation program. In addition i believe if you sent them to adult prison they will commit a similar crime again because of not proper rehabilitation. If you send them to juvie they will receive proper rehabilitation.
Many people say that the systems first priority should be to protect the public from the juvenile criminals that are a danger to others. Once the juveniles enter the system there is however, arguments on what should be done with them. Especially for those deemed too dangerous to be released back to their parents. Some want them locked away for as long as possible without rehabilitation, thinking that it will halt their criminal actions. One way to do this they argue would be to send them into an adult court. This has been a large way to reform the juvenile system, by lowering the age limits. I believe in certain cases this is the best method for unforgiving juveniles convicted of murder, as in the case of Ronald Duncan, who got away with a much lesser sentence due to his age. However another juvenile, Geri Vance, was old enough to be sent into the adult court, which caused him t...
Juveniles don’t deserve life sentences without parole for many reasons but one main reason is becase people don’t know a person’s life at home and sometimes living in a broken home can affect their social life. According to the article “Greg Ousley Is Sorry for Killing His Parents”, the author Scott Anderson states that,“The only way to unlock the mysteries of the psyche is to dissect your childhood, especially the formative influence of your parents” (Anderson 56), proving that juveniles are easily influenced to do terrifying crimes and is not their fault because no one was there to guide them.
In the article On Punishment and Teen Killers by Jenkins, sadly brings to our attention that kids are sometimes responsible for unimaginable crimes, in 1990 in a suburban Chicago neighborhood a teenager murdered a women, her husband, and her unborn child, as she begged for the life of her unborn child he shot her and later reported to a close friend that it was a “thrill kill”, that he just simply wanted to see what it felt like to shoot someone. A major recent issue being debated is whether or not we have the right to sentence Juveniles who commit heinous crimes to life in adult penitentiaries without parole. I strongly believe and agree with the law that states adolescents who commit these heinous crimes should be tried as adults and sentenced as adults, however I don’t believe they should be sentenced to life without parole. I chose this position because I believe that these young adults in no way should be excused for their actions and need to face the severe consequences of their actions. Although on the other hand I believe change is possible and that prison could be rehabilitating and that parole should be offered.
The article titled “ Juvenile Justice from Both Sides of the Bench”, published by PBS, and written by Janet Tobias and Michael Martin informs readers on numerous judges’ opinions on the juveniles being tried as adults. Judge Thomas Edwards believed that juveniles should not be tried as adults because they are still not mature enough to see the consequences of their actions and have a chance to minimize this behavior through rehabilitation programs. Judge LaDoris Cordell argues that although we shouldn’t give up on juveniles and instead help them be a part of society, however, she believes that some sophisticated teens that create horrible crimes should be tried as adults. Bridgett Jones claims that teens think differently than adults and still
It is expected that at a young age, children are taught the difference between what is right and what is wrong in all types of situations. The majority of Supreme Court Justices abolished mandatory life in prison for juveniles that commit heinous crimes, argued this with the consideration of age immaturity, impetuosity, and also negative family and home environments. These violent crimes can be defined as murder, rape, armed robbery, aggravated assault and the like depending on state law. With these monstrous acts in mind the supreme court justices argument could be proven otherwise through capability and accountability, the underdevelopment of the teenage brain and the severity of the crime. Juveniles commit heinous crimes just like adults
Over the years many violent crimes have been committed more by teenagers. The more serious crime the teenager did with psychology recommends that juveniles aren’t full responsible for what happen. In Anna Quindlen’s essay, The C Word in the Hallway, is about psychological autopsy with many peoples examples and how if health insurances provided coverage, then not many teens would have committed crimes. In Charlie Spence’s essay, Sixteen, talked about his locked up experience. There are crimes that aren’t that bad, but if a crime was committed so badly then the perpetrators should be locked away and be trialed as an adult.
For example Paul Thompson an assistant professor of neurology who wrote “Startling finds on teenage brains” says that most teens are experiencing a wildfire of tissue loss in their brains, although it cannot be used to excuse their violent or homicidal behavior it can be used as evidence that teenagers are not yet adults so the legal system shouldn’t treat them as such”. Other people also believe it is wrong to convict a juvenile as an adult just because he/she made one “stupid mistake” for example in startling finds in the teenage brain, Brazill 14 years at the time took a gun to school and shot up the middle school teacher but they say Brazill made one “stupid mistake” and that him and many other teens are far from adulthood and that their minds set are not the same as an
Many people assume that teenagers should not be sentenced as adults, because their brain is not fully developed. On the other hand, people believe if teenagers commit crimes then they need to have consequences for their actions. According to the Campaign for Youth Justices, about 250,000 teenagers are tried, sentenced, or incarcerated as adults every year in the United States (Campaign for Youth Justices 3). Therefore, charging teenagers as adults is fair, because they are human beings just like adults.
There has always been controversies as to whether juvenile criminals should be tried as adults or not. Over the years more and more teenagers have been involved in committing crimes. In some cases the juries have been too rough on the teens. Trying teens as adults can have a both positive and negative views. For example, teens that are detained can provide information about other crimes, can have an impact in social conditions, and serve as experience; however, it can be negative because teens are still not mature enough for that experience, they are exposed to adult criminals; and they will lose out on getting an education.
Age is a factor in why Juveniles should not be sentenced to life in prison. As Paul Thompson states in his article Startling Finds on Teenage Brains from the Sacramento Bee, published on May 25, 2001 “ ...These frontal lobes,which inhibit our violent passions, rash action and regulate our emotions are vastly immature throughout the teenage years.” he also says that “The loss[of brain tissue] was like a wildfire, and you see it in every teenager.”. This loss of brain tissue plays a role in the erratic behavior of teens, they cannot properly assess their emotions and thoughts. During this period of brain tissue loss teens are unpredictable, adults do not know what their teen’s next move will be, teens themselves do not even know what their next move will be. As we grow our brains develop, therefore teen brains are not fully developed, so they cannot be held to the same standards as adults.
Much controversy exists on the question of whether a juvenile criminal should be punished to the same extent as an adult. Those who commit capitol crimes, including adolescents, should be penalized according to the law. Age should not be a factor in the case of serious crimes. Many people claim that the child did not know any better, or that he was brought up with the conception that this behavior is acceptable. Although there is some truth to these allegations, the reality of this social issue is far more complex. Therefore we ask the question, "Should childhood offenders of capitols crimes be treated as adults?"
That’s why we don’t permit 15-year-olds to drink, drive, vote or join the military” (qtd. in Billitteri). There is adolescent-development research according to Hambrick, J. and Ellem, J that has shown “children do not possess the same capacity as adults to think thru the consequences of their behaviors, control their responses or avoid peer pressure” (qtd. in Lyons). There are some very good points made in the argument against sentencing youth as adults but I still have a hard time agreeing with peer pressure or impulse control as a reason to be held in a juvenile center for less than a few years for murder. Ryan, L. uses the example of a report released by the Department of Justice’s Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention on “Juvenile Transfer Laws : An Effective Deterrent to Delinquency?” This report found that prosecuting youths as adults has little or no effect on juvenile crime.” She uses this information and backs it up with the report showing “youths prosecuted as adults are more likely to re-offend than youths handled in the juvenile justice system” (qtd. in Katel). This is definitely a new perspective, but I still stand with my first take on the subject. “We know young people can commit serious crimes, and the consequences are no less tragic” (qtd in
Their brains develop in different stages and they learn skills that they need to learn at certain time. In the article “Juveniles Don’t Deserve Life Sentences”, by Garinger, she argues that juveniles should not be treated as adults if they commit horrible crimes. Garinger states that juveniles should not be sentenced to life in prison without parole. She states that the court is considering life in prison without parole for juveniles who commit capital crimes. Garinger says that juveniles are immature, and still developing, so they can not be held to the same standards as adults. The writer add that as a juvenile court judge, she has seen how that juveniles can change and may become rehabilitated. For example, the court has already struck down death penalty and the life in prison without parole for juveniles or for young offenders convicted of non-homicide. According to the article, “Juveniles Don’t Deserve Life In Prison,” Paul Garinger states that “Brain imaging studies reveal that the regions of the adolescent brain are responsible for controlling thoughts, actions, and emotions are not fully developed. They can not be held to the same standards when they commit terrible crimes.” If this is true, there is no a reason to treat juveniles as
For instance, juveniles do not deserve life sentences because their brain isn’t fully developed yet and lack awareness of their actions. In the article “Startling Finds on Teenage Brains” by Paul Thompson, he explains the development of the brain and how in some situations the brain isn’t ready and it can affect the person. This effect in divergent ways; psychologically and emotionally. Thompson's article introduces the case of Nathaniel Brazill, at age 14, charged with second degree murder, trial as an adult and sentenced to life in prison without parole. After some serious research, it has shown that as many other juveniles who have committed a crime they are “far from adulthood”.
The first article; “Adult Crime; Adult Time.” by Linda J. Collier is about how the juvenile delinquents of the world should be thrown right in with the hardened criminals. She talks about the Jonesboro, Arkansas incident in which 11-year-old Andrew Golden and 13-year-old Mitchell Johnson, slaughtered their classmates as they ran from the school building. They pulled the fire alarm and began their assault with a barrage of bullets. In this particular situation, “they are still regarded by the law as children first and criminals second.”(Pg. 620). This has not been the first time that young children have committed such crimes, but the average of violence committed by children has risen by 60% since 1984. She claims that because of these statistics, we need to update the juvenile justice system. “In recent years many states have enacted changes in their juvenile crime laws and some have lowered the age at which a juvenile can be tried as an adult for certain violent crimes.” (Pg. 620) According to this author, she feels that it is a start in the right direction. She claims that she has represented children as a court appointed guardian and is humbled trying to help children out of their difficulties which often due to circumstances beyond their control. Still, for violent crimes, she feels that “children who knowingly engage in adult conduct and crimes should automatically be subject to adult rules and adult prison time.”