This essay will discuss if young people ae all treated the same by the Youth Justice System .It will discuss and explore into some of the issues, themes debates that surround Youth Crime such as the statistics of youth crime, sexuality, race and gender, and mental health, which will then contribute to evaluate the effectiveness of the Youth Justice System.
The Youth Justice Systems are responsible for 10-17 year olds in England and Wales that commit offences. The Youth Justice System works within a multi -dislapinary team, which consists of Youth Offending Teams , Community Safety Partnerships, Youth and Crown Courts, Youth Justice Board to ensure the wellbeing of youths by preventing offending and re offending. They are the first point of
…show more content…
This figure continues to increase from year to year. In England and Wales, delinquent young females are expected to receive their first caution around 13-15 years old whereby they show many different risk factors but normally have had no previous convictions. The most frequent crime committed is theft and handling stolen goods which deems to be quite frequent amongst girls which needs to be addressed more seriously as more young females are entering the youth Justice system .The current Youth justice System have not got enough evidence to conquer how to approach and address the concerns of young girls, however there are surveys have questioned the gender needs .where it is suggested that boys prefer intervention that is stylistically different and girls prefer female one to one relationships where they can be quite vocal . However(Harper and Chitty,(2005) cited in Youth Justice Board(2009) states that work directed at criminogenic needs appears to be of most value with both boys and girls, and this is congruent with research into effective interventions. The method of how gender is defined in crime by the Youth Justice Board(2009) guidelines are clearly gender based and some would argue that it is a bias to boys and their …show more content…
In the earlier years it was not distinguished on gender on how they were punished. Different attitudes and approaches with boys and girls that commit crimes. Walker(1962)cited in Gelsthorpe and Sharpe(2006) states that “girls were clearly seen as ‘less criminally inclined’ than boys, as ‘vulnerable’ and ‘at risk’ of contamination from the more hardened delinquent boys in residential care”. Examination within the Youth Justice System and institutions such as prisons since the beginning of the vulnerable image of girls opposed to delinquent boys , it was seen that girls were more defenceless and required more attention and in fact , there behaviour was seen worse than boys. (Gelsthorpe, (1989) cited in Gelsthorpe and Sharpe(2006) states that “offending girls were generally considered to be breaking not only the law, but also gender role expectations, with girls conforming to the stereotype of femininity most likely to be dealt with by means of the care system as opposed to the ‘criminal justice
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.
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 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.
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...
There is no doubt that youth justice practises have changed throughout the years, these changes have been made to adapt to the new challenges that present themselves today. Crime in general, but particularly youth crime is a consistent problem for society.
A consistent feature of the statistics, not only in England and Wales but across Europe and America, is that far fewer women are convicted of crime than men – a fact which has changed little over the years. Female offenders also show a different pattern of offending being less involved in violent offences and proportionately more involved in theft. In general most now accept that girls and women do commit fewer offences than boys. GENDER AND PATTERNS OF CRIME Writing in 1977 Carol Smart stated: Our knowledge is still in its infancy. In comparison with the massive documentation on all aspects of male delinquency and criminality, the amount of work carried out on the area of women and crime is extremely limited.
When the criminal justice system was established, the main objective was to create neutrality and fairness between the sexes. Even though people might believe that there is no such thing as ‘stereotyping’ in the criminal justice system, it is quite obvious that women are constantly being look down upon because of their sex. In general, women tend to be treated like fragile objects that could break at any moment; the truth is that women can be strong and courageous just like men. Society stereotypes women and the criminal justice system is no different.
The historical development of the juvenile justice system in the United States is one that is focused on forming and separating trying juveniles from adult counterparts. One of the most important aspects is focusing on ensuring that there is a level of fairness and equality with respect to the cognitive abilities and processes of juvenile as it relates to committing crime. Some of the most important case legislation that would strengthen the argument in regard to the development of the juvenile justice system is related to the reform of the justice system during the turn of the 19th century. Many juveniles were unfortunately caught in the crosshairs of being tried as adults and ultimately receiving punishments not in line with their ability
Females are increasingly becoming more active in the juvenile justice system and this is said to be happening at alarming rates. It is important to learn more about why and how girls commit crimes so that we may also attempt intervention in an effective manner to prevent potential offenders and rehabilitate the girls who have already committed offenses. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention has produced a report that includes a review of how these girls are getting into these situations, how states are dealing with this population of offenders, the national efforts that have taken place to attempt to address the needs of the adolescent female offender including training for individuals who work with these females and a female-based continuum of care model that’s use is recommended in the development of any female program development. This population of offenders requires not special treatment but different treatment than the typical juvenile offender which has been up until recently mostly all male.
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
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.
This paper describes the various legislations and movements that were established in 19th century to address the issue of juvenile justice system. It outlines the challenges faced by the legislation and movements and their implications in addressing the issues of the juvenile justice system.
While all feminist theorists share a common focus on gender inequality, there are differing views on the source of the problem and the ultimate solution. Liberal Feminists Freda Adler and Rita argued that sociological factors, not physiology, best explain women’s criminality. There is a strong relationship between women’s emancipation and the increase in female crime rates. As women become more liberated and become more involved in full time jobs, they are more likely to engage in the types of crime that men commit. Thrasher, a leading exponent of the social disorganization perspective, felt that girls and women committed less crime because they were more closely supervised by boys and men. These arguments lacked any factual support.
Akers, Sellers, and Jennings (2013) states that criminology has traditionally been on the most male centered field of criminal justice (p. 262). Majority of research and theories have been based on the study of male criminality and criminal justice system responses to male offenders. Women has been represented in a negative way with a focus on their failure to adhere to traditional model of appropriate female behavior as in paternalistic view of women. Female theorists seek to place gender at the center of the discourse, bringing women’s ways of understanding the world on crime, criminality, and responses to crime.
Stokes, D. 2004. Submission to the Youth Justice Agency. [Online] Available from: www.youthreach.ie [Accessed 7th May 2012]