Adolescent Delinquency: Evolution Of The Juvenile Justice System

Adolescent Delinquency
Throughout the course of the progressive era significant legislations helped to control the growing urban society. Austin et al. claim that the establishment of a juvenile justice system is “one of the most progressive developments in the evolution of criminal justice in the United States” (4). Influenced by the children’s welfare, the juvenile law adopted the English doctrine parens patriate which gave states the authority to assume the role of a parent (Soulier & Scott 138). However as the delinquency rate ascended it provoked the modification of certain laws that made it evolved similar to that of an adult system. Such regulations facilitate the transfer of juvenile offenders to be trial as adults, thereon penalized
as so. Despite the distinctive approach towards juvenile violence, many delinquents waived to an adult court are not fully capacitated enough to be held responsible for their actions. Furthermore, their inexperience leaves them vulnerable in prison with the increased possibility of being victimized by adult inmates. Transferring youth to the adult system also denies them the adequate attention that the juvenile court system can provide. Nonetheless, relegating the youth into a criminal system deprives them from the opportunity of becoming a productive member in society.
After the Illinois Juvenile Court Act founded the first juvenile system in 1899, its concept to serve the best interests of children has well been diminished over the century.
Behrman et al. assert that the 1960’s landmark Supreme Court cases, rejected the parens patriate philosophy thus required the practice of basic constitutional measures within juvenile court proceedings (10). Although the rise in delinquency was taking effect in society, many offenders were being influenced either by peer pressure or by the inadequate environments. Unlike adults, juveniles are known to be more susceptible to emotional behavior therefore it is unlikely they would think about the consequences. Laurence Steinberg, expert on adolescent development and juvenile justice, contributed in the research for finding the difference of cognitive immaturity among adolescents and young adults. The MacArthur Juvenile Competence Study consisted of the participation of individuals who at the time were under custody. These findings ultimately correlated with what psychologists had accepted for years. One-third of 11 to 13 year olds as well as one-fifth of 14 to 15 years olds were evidently not competent to stand trial (Juveniles on Trial). Even though young offenders may know the difference between right and wrong, their incapability to make responsible decisions entitles them to have less accountability for their immature
actions.
Many accept the idea to prosecute adolescent delinquents as adults depending on the severity of the crime they commit.
Though the perspective may sound reasonable, the public may not be aware of the particular impacts it can have in an adolescent’s development. Soulier & Scott contend that adult prisons do not offer “developmentally appropriate treatment” for juveniles who are being incarcerated in them (321). Once in the adult system, a juvenile’s potential to rehabilitate may diminish considerably since it lacks many of the resources that can educate them. Michele Deitch et al. discuss a survey of adult jails consisting of educational programs. They concluded that 40% of them had no such services at all, 11% provided special education classes and only 7% offered vocational training (53). Therefore retaining juveniles in the appropriate system may influence a different attitude and perspective towards a better future. Regardless of the crime they may have committed, juveniles are still children who need to be
nurtured.
When parents are incapable of raising their children appropriately, often times crime ends up defining their future. For that reason juvenile courts should play their role, and try to protect them. When confining them with adults, it is obvious that they can be exposed to abuse and even death. The data collected from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) from 2006, shows that 8,500 adolescents are incarcerated in prisons or jails with the general population every day (“National Prison Rape Elimination Commission Report”). Due to many children’s physicality they are often disadvantaged compared to other adults, which leads them to become vulnerable to attacks. According to Professor Jeffrey Fagan’s study, individuals under the age of 18 who were placed in an adult prison were found to be “50% more likely to be physically attacked” by inmates. Additionally one in ten adolescents would report an abuse by staff (qttd. in Deitch et al). Despite these statistics it is probable many other abuses remain unreported, usually because of fear. These events can significantly have emotional impacts on the course of their lives and can consequently lead them to recidivate into crime after all. In exception of certain juveniles who have been considered threats to society, there are many others who have been unjustly incriminated. If precautions are taken before sentencing a juvenile, society can eventually benefit from their contributions.