JJDPA Analysis

The implementation of juvenile justice programs hold offenders accountable for wrongdoing, but prevent formal system involvement through discretionary methods (DeFosset, Schooley, Abrams, Kuo, & Gase, 2017). However, due to the case burden and cost, research continues to show the need and value of the peer/youth court (Smith & Chonody, 2010). Due to the time shortage of research time, the cost comparison for the peer/youth court implementation based on each of the court models presented. Each model provides a level of cost savings based on staffing requirements and available facilities. The limitation of the assessment is due to time restrictions, foundations, charities, and community-funding interviews were not conducted for implementation

Roper v. Simmons is considered a landmark case and is one of a handful that shows a new direction in granting some relief from what has been established as harsh “adult” punishments for juveniles (Elrod & Ryder, 2014). In fact, many studies are showing that the differences between adults and juveniles are quite significant (Elrod & Ryder, 2014). The courts are realizing that these differences must be taking into account when dealing with juveniles in the criminal justice system (Elrod & Ryder, 2014). However, that being said, change does not occur overnight, and for the unforeseeable future, juveniles will still continue to be waived into adult courts (Elrod & Ryder, 2014).

The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, also can be referred as JJDPA, was originally called the Juvenile Delinquency Prevent and Control Act of 1968. The act of 1968 was to “to assist the courts, correctional systems, community agencies, and primary and secondary public school systems to prevent, treat, and control juvenile delinquency; to support research and training efforts in the prevention, treatment, and control of juvenile delinquency; and for other purposes,” (OJJDP). The interest in delinquency prevention, diversion and deinstrulationazation program starts between the 1960s-1980s. It was the initial way of getting the right help for youth in order to control and change their mindsets to prevent them from transferring

Essay Week 5 The Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative isn’t about letting juvenile offenders off the hook with just a slap on the wrist, it is about a more proactive approach that involves the community as whole. JDAI is about reducing the number of juveniles that are being detained and using that information to help make the right decisions for our youth that are considered at risk. The goals of JDAI are to reduce the number of juveniles that are in detention facilities, and to help reform the juvenile justice system. JDAI jurisdictions have achieved a cumulative reduction of 43 percent in average daily population (Casey, 2015)

Teenagers in society today are committing crimes and thinking that they are just going to get a slap on the wrist but what they do not know is that these judges are now making examples out of them. The judges are now taking the crimes these juveniles are committing more serious than before and sometimes. Some judges are giving juveniles a break and giving them probation or letting them go on parole but putting stipulations on the probation like them must complete certain treatment programs, take certain class (anger management) to help them control their problems they are having (Young, Farrell & Taxman, 2013). Race plays a huge part in society when dealing with juveniles and them receiving a certain punishment (Morgan, 2014). For example,

In “Turning off the School-to-Prison Pipeline,” Henry Wilson notes that the zero-tolerance policy has become a significant contributor to the raised number of young individuals being marked as a failure and eventually lead up to belonging in the justice system. Schools have become one of the biggest contributors to the raised number of young individuals being sent to prison in America. “Prisons spawn a new generation of future prisoners: there are more than two million children with at least one incarcerated parent, and these youth are five times more likely to end up in prison themselves” (49). Due to the 80’s and 90’s increased crime rate, people began to fear those in urban areas leading to the increased penalties for juvenile offenders.

Today’s juvenile justice system focuses on rehabilitation and education over punishment. Is it possible that all juveniles can be rehabilitated rather than just awarding punishment? Most juveniles start out with small violations that are not criminal in nature. These are known as status offenses. Interventions and programs for rehabilitation for the juvenile move into motion once they get themselves mixed up with the justice system for status offenses.

Juvenile detention centers are purposeful ways to assist delinquent juveniles to become law abiding proactive members of society while promoting the safety of society and themselves. Yet, the way most institutions, in particular Cook County Juvenile Temporary Detention Center (CCJTDC) treat juveniles in their center has violated their essential right to be treated as humans, cast them as oppressive beings, and does not adequately facilitate their re-transition into society. While I agree that there should be a degree of penalty for breaking laws, there is a clear line between punishment that is just and that which is unjust. Punishment for the sake of realigning an individual’s behavior to comply with social order is just, however punishment

Not only does Berstein call for an overall reform of this nation’s juvenile prisons, she goes as far as saying the practice of locking up youth is in need of a “more profound than incremental and partial reform” (13). The fact that Bernstein outlines the numerous failed strategies and goals of this practice with her compelling use of studies and statistics is enough to promote an audience to reject the practice of locking up youth. The statistic she shares that “four out of five juvenile parolees [will be] back behind bars within three years of release” as well as the studies she conducted on numerous instances when a guards abuse of power lead to the death of a child work to further prove her point: being that “institution[s] as intrinsically destructive as the juvenile prison” have no place in a modern society (13, 83). Bernstein refutes this false sense effectiveness further by sharing her own ideas on what she believes works as a much more humane solution to rehabilitating

Annotated bibliography Childress, S. (2016, June 2). More States Consider Raising the Age for Juvenile Crime. Retrieved from PBS: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/more-states-consider-raising-the-age-for-juvenile-crime/ More states are considering to raising the age for juvenile crimes before being tried as adult because young offender's mental capacity. The idea is to cut the cost of incarcerate young offender in adult prison and ensure offenders to receive proper education and specialized care to change their behavior. Putting children in adult prison does not deter crime.

This model is a model for improving juvenile justice through community integration. This model also brings the juvenile court, substance abuse treatment and the community to improve the alcohol and drug treatments for the teens, which also brings has them do positive activities with adults that show how much they care for them. When it comes to the school system, the first thing teachers do when a child acts up is send them to the principles office instead of actually disciplining them and stenting to there needs by actually asking them what’s going on to show them they care. The policy and discipline rules that these schools have pushed kids out of school and into the juvenile justice system. “Recent research by the Council of State Governments Justice Center that tracked nearly 1 million 7th graders in public school for 6 years showed that 60 percent of these students were removed from class at least once, and 15 percent had 11 or more suspensions or expulsions between the 7th grade and 12th grades.”

The juvenile justice system has made numerous of ethical issues when managing juvenile offenders. The issue with the juvenile justice system is the laws and rules that govern it. It has led to years of controversial debate over the ethical dilemmas of the juvenile corrections system, and how they work with youth offenders. The number of minors entering the juvenile justice system is increasing every month. The reasons why the juvenile justice system faces ethical dilemmas is important and needs to be addressed: (1) a vast proportion of juveniles are being tried and prosecuted as adults; (2) the psychological maturation of the juvenile to fully comprehend the justice system; and (3) the factors that contribute to minorities being adjudicated in the juvenile justice system are more likely than White offenders.

Within the urban communities, negative perceptions are magnified. Adolescents are more prone to be a product of their environment, especially those whose parents are incarcerated. Because of this trend adolescents are being incarcerated at an alarming rate and sentenced to adult facilities. Lambie & Randall (2013) states, the United States have imposed harsher penalties on serious young offenders, and have consequently increased rates of incarcerated youth and made it easier for youth to be treated and incarcerated as adults within the justice

For many years and throughout the United States children have been disobeying rules as well as the law. Children are usually taught right from wrong but there are some that still choose to do what they want to do and go against their parent’s rules and the laws that are set within the states that they reside. So, once a child has made the decision to break a law and commit a crime, they are considered to be a juvenile delinquent. Most juveniles are either given rehabilitation or they are placed in a juvenile detention center, but it only depends on the type of charge they are receiving from the crime they have committed. Throughout this research I will be discussing a case of a juvenile who was waived to adult status.

(1988). Juvenile Delinquency: Theory, Practice and Law (3rd ed.). United States of America: West Publishing Company. Wright, W. &.