Transfer To Adult Court Case Study
Jaimie Hutchinson
Ethical Considerations of Juvenile Transfer to Adult Court
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for (CMRJ 500)
March 21, 2011
Abstract
Juveniles in the criminal justice system are a special population. Throughout history juveniles have been looked at as needing to be protected from the harsh realities that face adults daily. The juvenile justice system has primarily operated in a parens patriae capacity and protected the rights of those that were legally incapable of protecting themselves such as minor children and the mentally ill. From 1987-1993 the juvenile homicide rate doubled causing critics and conservatives to questions the approach of the juvenile justice community calling it ‘soft on crime’ Steiner & …show more content…
Many in the criminal justice field view deterrence at the juvenile level, from future criminal ideations, as the answer to much of the crime problem. If this tenet is followed then it makes sense to try to deter the unlawful behavior in juveniles before they turn into the next population of adult convicts. Many say that the answer is to give juvenile offenders harsher penalties including the use of adult sanctioning and more punitive practices. Others advocate for treatment and protection from the adversarial nature of the adult system in the spirit of the, not so long ago history of our juvenile …show more content…
However, when these laws were expanded to make transfers easier, it had a profound impact on the population that was effected. The expansion made transfer possible for youth that were not violent and also extended transfer to youth accused of misdemeanor, and even status offenses in some cases. In other words, children were being transferred for the wrong reasons. In 1999 only 34% of youth transferred were for violent person crimes, 40% involved property offenses such as theft, 16% were drug offenses, and 11% were public order offenses Mole, & White, (2005). Many of these laws were made as statutory exclusions which took away the courts power of discretion and automatically transferred youth even when it may not have been warranted. All in all many of the youth that are transferred are not necessarily violent offenders and in many cases overall they would be better off in the juvenile system where they would receive the treatment that they desperately need to be successfully reintegrated at some point. Studies even show that the treatment that is denied to youth that are transferred is effective in rehabilitating even the violent offender populations so the consequences to youth that are transferred seems to outweigh any possible benefits Redding,
Ethical Considerations of Juvenile Transfer to Adult Court
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for (CMRJ 500)
March 21, 2011
Abstract
Juveniles in the criminal justice system are a special population. Throughout history juveniles have been looked at as needing to be protected from the harsh realities that face adults daily. The juvenile justice system has primarily operated in a parens patriae capacity and protected the rights of those that were legally incapable of protecting themselves such as minor children and the mentally ill. From 1987-1993 the juvenile homicide rate doubled causing critics and conservatives to questions the approach of the juvenile justice community calling it ‘soft on crime’ Steiner & …show more content…
Many in the criminal justice field view deterrence at the juvenile level, from future criminal ideations, as the answer to much of the crime problem. If this tenet is followed then it makes sense to try to deter the unlawful behavior in juveniles before they turn into the next population of adult convicts. Many say that the answer is to give juvenile offenders harsher penalties including the use of adult sanctioning and more punitive practices. Others advocate for treatment and protection from the adversarial nature of the adult system in the spirit of the, not so long ago history of our juvenile …show more content…
However, when these laws were expanded to make transfers easier, it had a profound impact on the population that was effected. The expansion made transfer possible for youth that were not violent and also extended transfer to youth accused of misdemeanor, and even status offenses in some cases. In other words, children were being transferred for the wrong reasons. In 1999 only 34% of youth transferred were for violent person crimes, 40% involved property offenses such as theft, 16% were drug offenses, and 11% were public order offenses Mole, & White, (2005). Many of these laws were made as statutory exclusions which took away the courts power of discretion and automatically transferred youth even when it may not have been warranted. All in all many of the youth that are transferred are not necessarily violent offenders and in many cases overall they would be better off in the juvenile system where they would receive the treatment that they desperately need to be successfully reintegrated at some point. Studies even show that the treatment that is denied to youth that are transferred is effective in rehabilitating even the violent offender populations so the consequences to youth that are transferred seems to outweigh any possible benefits Redding,