Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Juvenile justice system in canada
Young offenders act canada
Canadian juvenile justice system
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Juvenile justice system in canada
The Young Offenders Act
This essay was written to show the advantages and disadvantages of the Young Offenders Act over the previous Juvenile
Delinquents Act. Also it should give a theoretical underezding of the current Canadian Juvenile-Justice system, the act and it's implications and the effects of the young offenders needs and mental health on the outcome of the trials.
In the interest of society the young offenders act was brought forth on april second 1984. This act was created to ensure the rights and the needs of a young person. Alan W. Leshied says "On one hand the justice and legal objectives of the act are being effectively realized while on the other hand the needs and treatment aspects of it leave much to be desired." The research of the Young offenders act is still ongoing but Leshied says that it is becoming clear that the custody positions have been in dispute since the act came into effect.
The old Juvenile delinquency act states in section 38 "The care and custody and discipline of a juvenile delinquent shall approximate as nearly as maybe that which should be given by his parents, and... as far as practability every juvenile delinquent shall be treated, not as a criminal, but as a misguided and misdirected child . . . needing aid, encouragement, help and assiezce."(Page 72)
If a youth is close to the adult age of 18 years they could be transfered to the adult justice system. This means that they would be given the same sentences as an adult including and up to life in prison. Many people have tried to correct this problem that they see as a weakness. Yet, so far their attempts have failed. Another weakness they find, is that the courts are expensive and unsatisfactory methods of dealing with crime that is not very serious.
Before the fabrication of legal aid most young offenders were not able to obtain legal services. "Subsection 11 (4) provides that, were a young person wishes to obtain counsel but is not able to do so, the youth-court judge shall refer the young person to the provincial legal-aid, or assiezce program. If no such program is available or the young person is unable to obtain counsel through an available program, the youth court judge may, and on the request of the young person shall direct the young person to be represented by counsel.
The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 was established because an American boy was abducted form a Florida shopping mall and was later found murdered. The act was signed into law by George W. Bush on July 27, 2006. This act is established to protect children from sexual exploitation and violent crime to prevent child abuse and child pornography to promote internet safety. This act is also known as the sex offender registration and notification act. It was established with the intention to strengthen laws related to child sexual predators. This law was instructed for each state and/or territory to apply criteria’s for posting offenders data on the internet.
felt by many that the change needed in the area of delinquency within the First
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.
Steven Truscott was a 14 year old boy who was sentenced to life in prison after being accused of the murder of Lynn Harper. It was June 9, 1959 when Lynne Harper, a 12 year old girl, was heading towards a nearby school after having family dinner with her parents Leslie and Shirley. She was heading towards a nearby school playground in Clinton, Ontario where she came across Steven Truscott. She asked for a ride to a nearby highway. Steven Truscott agreed. Lynn clambered onto the handlebars of the 14-year-old boy's bike and they pedaled off. This short ride would trigger a chain of events that will hunt the lives of many for roughly half a decade. This would change the lives of two families, horrify a community, and bring doubts to the justice system protecting everyone’s lives. Lynne’s partially nude body was found nearby a bush in a farmer’s field two days after the bicycle ride with Steven. She had been sexually assaulted and strangled to death with her own blouse. Almost immediately, Steven was assumed to be the likely killer, although there was no physical evidence linking him to the murder. Steven was targeted as a consequence of being the last person to see Lynne alive. Two after the body was found; Steven was charged with the murder and was tried by the court as an adult. The trial lasted 15 days and Steven was sentenced to hang, which was after changed to life in prison. Now when did this misfortune start? It could have been when Steven agreed to give Lynne a ride, or it could have been when there was no physical evidence pointing to Truscott. Even if Steven was a potential suspect, there was no reason of why he should have been treated the way he was.
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
The Youth Criminal Justice Act, enacted in 2003, has had considerable implications for youth offenders, especially in sentencing procedures. However, in 2012 Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his administration made significant punitive amendments that changed the application of the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) to youth sentencing procedures in Canada. This essay will first discuss a brief history of Canadian legislation regarding youth offenders, and the general characteristics and effectiveness of the YCJA within its first decade of existence. Then, it will highlight the changes made by the Harper administration to the YCJA, and the implications of those changes, using evidence of the cycle of juvenile reoffending through imprisonment
The problem of dealing with juvenile justice has plagued are country for years, since the establishment of the first juvenile court in 1899. Prior to that development, delinquent juveniles had to be processed through the adult justic3e system which gave much harsher penalties. By 1945, separate juvenile courts existed in every single state. Similar to the adult system, all through most of the 20th century, the juvenile justice system was based upon a medical/rehabilitative representation. The new challenges of the juvenile court were to examine, analyze, and recommend treatment for offenders, not to deliver judgment fault or fix responsibility. The court ran under the policy of “parens patriae” that intended that the state would step in and act as a parent on behalf of a disobedient juvenile. Actions were informal and a juvenile court judge had a vast sum of discretion in the nature of juvenile cases, much like the discretion afforded judges in adult unlawful settings until the 1970s. In line with the early juvenile court’s attitude of shielding youth, juvenile offenders’ position was often in reformatories or instruction schools that were intended, in speculation, to keep them away from the terrible influences of society and to encourage self-control through accurate structure and very unsympathetic discipline. Opposing to the fundamental theory, all through the first part of the century, the places that housed juveniles were frequently unsafe and unhealthy places where the state warehoused delinquent, deserted, and deserted children for unclear periods. Ordinary tribulations included lack of medical care, therapy programs, and even sometimes food. Some very poor circumstances continue even today.
The new Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act (2003) In Queensland permits prisoners to be kept in prison beyond their release date where a court finds that there is a ‘high degree of probability’ that they represent a ‘serious danger to the community’. Other jurisdictions have enacted similar legislation to restrict the release of prisoners assessed to be dangerous. Do you think that dangerousness legislation of this sort is justified or unjustified?
In today's society juveniles are being tried in adult courts, given the death penalty, and sent to prison. Should fourteen-year olds accused of murder or rape automatically be tried as adults? Should six-teen year olds and seven-teen year olds tried in adult courts be forced to serve time in adult prisons, where they are more likely to be sexually assaulted and to become repeat offenders. How much discretion should a judge have in deciding the fate of a juvenile accused of a crime - serious, violent, or otherwise? The juvenile crime rate that was so alarming a few years ago has begun to fall - juvenile felony arrest rates in California have declined by more than forty percent in the last twenty years. While California's juvenile population rose by a half a million since the middle and late 1970's, juveniles made up less than fifth-teen percent of California's felony arrests in 1998, compared to thirty percent in 1978; according to the Justice Policy Institute. The juvenile arrests have dropped back, even as the population of kids between ages of ten and eight-teen has continued to grow, and the number of kids confined in the California Youth Authority (CYA) has fallen. With all the progress our society has made in cutting back in juvenile crimes there is still a very serious problem. But if locking kids up is the best way to address it, how do we explain a drop in crime when there are more teens in California and fewer in custody? First we must look at the economy around us. With so many job opportunities available more and more teenagers find honest ways to keep busy and make money. Our generation has a brighter future than the generation a decade ago. Next we look at successful crime prevention efforts: after-school programs, mentoring, teen outreach programs, truancy abatement, anti-gang programs, family resource centers. There is evidence that these programs are beginning to pay off. Sending more, and younger teens through the adult court system has been a trend across the country in reaction to crimes, such as school shootings and violent rapes. Yet evidence shows that treating youth as adults does not reduce crime. In Florida, where probability wise more kids are tried as adults then in any other state, studies found that youth sent through the adult court system are twice as likely to commit more crimes when they're release...
As noted by Allen (2016), measures that are implemented outside the courtrooms, especially in a formal procedure, may lead to the provision of accurate as well as timely considerations for youth crime. As such, Canada is keen in the reinforcement of these regulations, as they determine both short and long-term judicial solutions. Most importantly, the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) in Canada plays a major role in the implementation of extrajudicial measures as they may affirm to the occurrence of future issues. According to the Government of Canada (2015a), this calls for an attempt to channel out or divert such offenders from the mainstream justice system to a lesser formal way of dealing with the offenses. This paper attempts to investigate the appropriateness of the extrajudicial measures in Canada, and the reason behind why we established these provisions of the YCJA. It also illustrates an example of a Canadian case, which questions the extrajudicial measures. This discussion canvasses the main argument as for or against the extrajudicial measures in Canada through the adoption of recommendations to the Canadian Government about the proper situations in which such processes should be used.
The overwhelming majority of juveniles are involved in impulsive or risky, even delinquent behaviors during their teenage years. However, the majority go on to become very productive citizens who do not commit crimes. In order for this to continue the government established the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) which gives young offenders a chance to better themselves, and. By doing so, the YCJA helps teach youth that their actions are unacceptable and the punishments imposed are lesser then an adult. Through the analysis of their unacceptable actions, lesser punishments and a better future, it is clear that YCJA is highly effective at giving youth a better chance in society.
“Our youths now love luxury, they have bad manners, they have disrespect for authority, disrespect for older people…” Ancient Greek philosopher Socrates acknowledges the escalation of delinquency among youth in the early age’s .The rise of young offenders furthers the Canadian government to record juvenile offenders, in addition, devise an act to better control the epidemic of young delinquents. The topic of proposal is the effectiveness of the youth justice system in its response to crime. Firstly, in order to determine the effectiveness of the youth justice system, one must grasp the premise that is a delinquency, in particular a young delinquents. Under the Juvenile Delinquents Act, the first act imposed in regards to young offenders,
Introduction: Recidivism or, habitual relapses into crime, has time and time again proven to be an issue among delinquents, which thereby increases the overall juvenile prison population. This issue has become more prevalent than what we realize. Unless a unit for measuring a juvenile’s risk of recidivism is enacted and used to determine a system to promote effective prevention, than the juvenile prison population will continue to increase. Our court system should not only focus on punishing the said juvenile but also enforce a program or policy that will allow for prevention of recidivism. So the question remains, how can recidivism in the juvenile prison population be prevented so that it is no longer the central cause for increased juvenile delinquency? Simply put, we must create a means of measuring juvenile’s level of risk and in turn, form an effective rehabilitation program that will decrease their risk level for future recidivism.
The problem of juvenile violence has become one of the most overwhelming problems of our time for Texas and for the United States. The problem is spread throughout the United States. The serious crimes are usually thought to be problems of the urban city, but this is no longer a problem just for the inner city. The problem has spread through the suburban areas of the city in cases just like the first example. Citizens are spending tons of money trying to fight the problem on their own. They purchase everything they can to combat crime. Women have mace, cars have alarms, houses have burglar bars and alarms, and many schools have metal detectors to try to control the overwhelming effects of violence (Defending 93). However, these efforts are not enough to overcome the effects of violence, such as man pictured below with an automatic weapon in the streets of his neighborhood (Gest p.29). All jail and court information leads to the outcome that there is a wide diversity of criminals in jail. There is no longer a predictable profile for a juvenile criminal. However, most of the criminals still come from the inner city. Due to a 21% estimated rise in the number of 15 to 19 year olds by the year 2005, the problem will get worse without a better plan. The American juvenile justice system is supposed to be the system that prevents juveniles form committing crimes, but the system was designed over 100 years ago to prevent minor crimes from occurring (LaCoya 12/2/94). The current system in Texas and throughout most of the United States allows juveniles to receive a less severe penalty than an adult who is convicted of the same crime. The current Texas system does not allow juveniles to be prosecuted as an adult until they are eighteen unless...