Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Solutions to problems of juvenile delinquency
Nature of youth crime essay
Nature of youth crime essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Solutions to problems of juvenile delinquency
Any person can commit a criminal act providing that they were physically capable in doing so. The justice system, however, treats offenders differently if they are under the age of 18 due to the different levels of maturity, self-awareness and personal responsibility involved. The criminal justice system and the extent of its effectiveness when dealing with young offenders is a contentious issue. With rates of youth detentions escalating, it has caused some to question the reliability in the justice system and in the rehabilitation when dealing with young offenders. That being said there is still a reasonable success rate in assimilating young offenders which may be due to the justice systems guidance or the natural maturing of these offenders. …show more content…
The criminal justice system in Australia recognises the Age of Criminal Responsibility. This is where the law treats children and young people differently to adults due to their maturity levels and incapability to comprehend their actions and consequences. The Age of Criminal Responsibility aims to protect children under the age of 18 from being exploited, making uniformed decisions and by being disadvantaged due to their age as recognised in the Children ( Criminal Proceedings)Act 1987. Children can also be less responsible for the actions due to their youth, inexperience and ‘incapability of wrong’, which is also acknowledged in the legal system as ‘Doli Incapax’. This Latin term means that children under a certain age are presumed that they cannot be legally responsible for their actions. This age bracket can be quite controversial due to technology and the normalisation of violence there for …show more content…
Children are often lead astray easily as well as persuaded and can be misinformed due to their young nature; therefore it is necessary to have implications in order so they are protected. As outlined in the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 NSW, there are a number of requirements for police in dealing with young offenders. Police have the same rights to question young people as they do adults, just like young people have the same right to exercise the rights to remain silent. The law adds additional protection for children under the age of 18 as it is assumed that they may not be fully aware of their rights. If a child is questioned by the police there must be a responsible adult over the age of 18 present. Any evidence a child gives to police without the presence of an adult, it will be inadmissible as evidence. The legislation act Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 NSW was an important step for the Criminal Justice System in protecting youth from making uniformed decisions and being coerced into making false
felt by many that the change needed in the area of delinquency within the First
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...
People have, not too long ago, realized that youth and adults are very diverse and should not be treated the same. They gave no time for children to develop the “meins reis”, therefore, they were not given the opportunity to learn. People were not aware that the brain of the youth were not fully developed and were not given the chance of change. They thought that once guilty you shall remain guilty. For that reason they were considered adults, when in reality, adult criminals will only continue to infatuate their mind with evil. The new Youth Criminal Justice Act focuses on change and reintegration with society. We have learned that the youth have not fully developed and do not have the full ability to comprehend such judgements.
The purpose of the criminal law is to balance of rights for individuals in society to achieve justice. The criminal law is continually reforming in an attempt to achieve justice for young offenders, as it is an issue of the criminal law. This essay will examine the effectiveness of the criminal justice system in relation to young offenders therefore looking at various aspects of the juvenile justice system. The criminal justice system does provide some effective and relevant concessions for young offenders. However, due to its focus on incarceration and punishment rather than on preventative measures, the criminal justice system is effective to an extent
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
The analyst analyses the process of development of the attitude and social stigma attached to youth and then makes reverse action for delinking youth with demonization. When youth is demonized in terms of crime they tend to align themselves with one stereotype of social values and move away from other but more necessary social values (Goldson and Muncie, 2009). Moreover, the highlighting of youth in mass media also makes these youth confined to their negative roles as mass media makes these criminals more important and psychologically they tend to attract the immediate attention they receive. The attention may be for the wrong reasons but the criminals interpret it as different and consider it as fame and glory. The policy analyst needs to identify the political motivation behind demonizing youth into criminals and attend to the specific belief to address the rise of such illegitimate magnification. The juvenile system of care and welfare has been taking new forms and gets demanded to be renewed as the old efforts have not been able to curb the recurrence of juvenile and youth crimes (Musto, 2002), but has in fact segregated the rich and poor even terms of equal treatment. These factors of wilful and policy motivated practices of segregation further leads the
Thousands of kid criminals in the United States have been tried as adults and sent to prison (Equal Justice Initiative). The debate whether these kids should be tried as adults is a huge controversy. The decision to try them or to not try them as an adult can change their whole life. “Fourteen states have no minimum age for trying children as adults” (Equal Justice Initiative). Some people feel that children are too immature to fully understand the severity of their actions. People who are for kids to be tried as adults feel that if they are old enough to commit the crime, then they are old enough to understand what they are doing. There are people who feel that children should only be tried as adults depending on the crime.
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.
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
“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.
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?"
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 Canadian population ranging between 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 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 principle of these laws have been debated for a long time. This paper will discuss how these three laws were defined and why one was replaced by another.
To prevent this type crime re-occurring government should look at creating a positive relationship between youths and police. As it aims to prevent from crimes occurring as it creates awareness and is seen as a form of support network that teaches leadership, discipline and respect (Cunneen 2001). These type of programs prevent youths from committing a crime or being in criminal activities as they know the
In the case of R v JTB, a 12-year-old boy was accused of causing or inciting other boys under the age of 13 to engage in sexual activity. It is contrary to s 13(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. The victims were of varying ages and were either the boy’s friends or members of families he knew. The boy admitted the sexual activity in an interview but said that he did not think that what he was doing was wrong. The issue raised by this appeal is whether the effect of s. 34 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 has been to abolish the defence of doli incapax entirely for children aged between 10 and 14, or only to abolish the presumption that the child could rely on that defence; providing an avenue for the ...
In all Australian legal jurisdictions, children under the age of ten are considered to be too young to have criminal intent. That means, that children under this age cannot be held legally responsible for their actions. Australia is the only region in the world to have uniform legal guidelines on the lower age limit of criminal responsibility. (Weijers, Grisso 2009 p.45). Having the presumption that children under the age of ten are unable to know the law completely, therefore not being able to have mens rea, is in my opinion, necessary in our criminal courts. This essay will look at the reasons for the necessary use of the minimum age of criminal responsibility, such as the Beijing rules, the convention