Should Juveniles Be Tried As Adults?

Throughout adolescence many physical, cognitive, and socioemotional changes occur. This time is a transition from childhood to adulthood. Due to these developmental changes, juveniles can participate in risky activities such as crime (Wendy, 2002). Debate on whether juveniles should be tried as adults has been a growing discussion. This debate is largely centered around the cognitive and moral competencies of juveniles. Many people in favor of prosecuting teens as adults believe a crime is a crime and those who participate in criminal activity must do the time. On the other hand, many people believe that teens should not be prosecuted as adults because they have not fully developed yet and do not have the same rights as adults.
Simply declaring
whether or not juveniles should be tried as adults does not address the issue. Many factors add complexity to the problem. These factors include the circumstances of offense, the background of the criminal, and the likelihood of rehabilitation. When a juvenile misbehaves, and commits a crime there should be consequences. These consequences do not however need to be adult methods of punishment such as jail. In serious cases, when a juvenile commits a crime such as rape or murder, the juvenile should be tried as an adult. There must be consistency from state to state and each case needs to be considered on an individual basis.
Cognitive Maturation
During adolescence, teenagers begin to develop the ability to think more complexly, abstractly, and logically.
The capacity to control impulses and determine the consequences of actions also occurs. Many teens start making decisions for themselves and learn how to regulate their emotions (Stanford's Children Health, 2017). As juveniles learn to self-regulate and become adults, they make poor choices and mistakes. Adults however have gone through this stage of development. They have developed the ability to control impulses and think logically (Siegel M.D., 2014). If juveniles were to be treated as adults they would have a disadvantage because they are still learning to calculate risks and self-regulate. This is why juveniles do not have the right to vote, drink, and smoke. They are not fully developed
cognitively.
Purpose of Punishment
The criminal justice system, or adult court, is designed to handle adults who have committed crimes. The juvenile justice system is a separate court designed to deal specifically with juvenile crime (Tobias, 2014). These two court systems are have several differences. First, the objective of adult court is to punish criminals, whereas the juvenile court focuses on rehabilitation and preventative actions to avoid future criminal behavior. Counseling, curfews, and other treatment options are options available to underage people (Michon, 2017). This gives teens in the juvenile courts more options than strictly jail time. In order to determine if a juvenile should be tried as an adult, we must determine the purpose of punishment.
Judicial Transfer Mechanisms
During youth, the prefrontal cortex develops.
This is the region of the brain that allows impulse control, executive functioning, planning, and organizing (Stanford's Children Health, 2017). Excluding serious crimes, juvenile crimes may be more impulsive acts whereas adults may act more on revenge. This could be because of the juvenile’s underdeveloped prefrontal cortex. This is not to say that some juveniles intentionally plan and think out crimes. When a juvenile’s actions are serious and deliberate, there could be just cause for the case to be transferred to adult court. As of 2017, juvenile cases get transferred to the criminal justice system through a process called a waiver. This is when a judge waives the protections that juvenile court provides and assigns it to the adult court. This is the most common type of transfer mechanism (Michon, 2017). Statutory exclusion and concurrent jurisdiction are two other methods to transfer a juvenile to the adult court. In some states, if an offender meets a certain minimum age requirement and commits a particular serious or violent crime that offender automatically gets transferred to the criminal court. This is called statutory exclusion. Concurrent jurisdiction is a mechanism that some states use that involves a juvenile being placed both under the juvenile court and the adult court concurrently. This occurs when juveniles meet certain predetermined stipulations regarding the case (Tobias, 2014). The states’ varying
approaches to judicial transfer mechanisms creates inconsistency. There needs to be uniformity in the mechanisms across the nation.
Individualized Assessment
Individual evaluation of each case by the prosecutor and the judge has been an increasing trend (Tobias, 2014). First, prosecutors must take into consideration the adolescence’s intellectual level and abilities, environment in which he/she was raised in, personal history of criminal activity, and nature of their crime. After these factors have been considered, the judge should make an assessment on whether or not a transfer mechanism needs to be used, or if the juvenile should stay in the juvenile justice system (Michon, 2017). Individual assessment would give a deeper insight into the offender’s history of criminal acts and neglect or abuse in the rearing of the individual. These components would also give foresight on whether the juvenile offender is capable of rehabilitative behavior.
Wired for Violence
Although some young offenders should be tried as adults, not all teenagers are dangerous irredeemable criminals who deserve jailtime. American prison systems are full of grown adults who have done very horrifying crimes. Predators, murders, and dangerous gang members roam the facilities of prisons and prey on the weak. Teenagers are venerable and can be harmed physically and socioemotionally (Wendy, 2002). Furthermore, adult prosecution would not help society because it would turn potentially productive people of society into violent unproductive citizens. The adolescent brain uses a process called synaptic pruning in which the brain increases connectivity among neurons and eliminates the connections not used. This process is how the brain wires itself to play instruments, learn languages, and participate in physical activates such as baseball (Siegel M.D., 2014). When a minor is placed in an environment like a prison, the brain will wire itself for survival and violence. Making a juvenile do jailtime does not help the juvenile learn and grow, but teaches them to become a criminal.
“You don’t have to be an expert in criminal justice policy to understand that a teenager who is brutalized in prison will probably not metamorphose into a productive, law-abiding citizen” (Wendy, 2002, p. 134).
Conclusion
Trying youths as adults is a faulty approach to juvenile crime. All the components of the crime should be taken into consideration when prosecuting juveniles and determining if they go through adult court. These components must include developmental factors, circumstances of the crime, and the willingness of the individual to recondition their behaviors and readapt to healthier nonviolent lifestyles. Juveniles do not have the same rights as adults for a reason, and just like the child, each case is different.