Charging Adolescent as Adults and Strategies to Address the Issue
Introduction
The juvenile justice system is quite vital and essential in any society. Correct strategies should be put in place to address the many uprising cases of crimes and felonies that are being committed by minors, especially the adolescent age bracket. In the following essay, I will discuss the ethical questions concerning the teenage children being charged as adults and strategies to reforming the juvenile justice systems.
Ethical Question Concerning Charging Adolescent Children as Adults
The subject of changing adolescent children as an adult is quite impressive. The big question is how juvenile justice systems will act in such a case. The United States juvenile justice system primarily focuses on the transformation of the accused individuals rather than punishing them. The sentencing may be quite awful, but priority is given to the correctional facilities to transform the convicts into responsible adults in the future rather than criminals (Liefaard, 2015).
The best example a case that involved the sentencing of a minor who had murdered a woman in cold blood. The United States court sentence the individual according to the judicial constitution stipulation of juvenile acts, not the ordinary criminal justices systems acts. The convict got a lenient sentence and sent to a juvenile correctional facility. The action is entirely ethical as the convicts in such institutions are still minors and need guidance and counseling services.
The juvenile correctional facilities act as correctional schools for convicted minors. The United States government policy is for the transformation of juvenile individuals into law-abiding citizens after they are released, not responsible criminals. Hence the strategy of holding the minors who are law-breakers separately is a good idea. This is because in that environment will be favorable for transforming them. The case of holding the same individuals in the typical correctional facilities with the other criminals will be a process of changing the minors into worse criminals than they were initially were.
Statistical Record for Minors Convicted and Released
The statistical records showing minors’ convictions and release follow-ups over the years is quite disturbing. A survey conducted in the United States in the states of Tennessee showed that the majority of the minors convicted at the adolescent age bracket and are later released commits various crimes. These acts are quite saddening to and unfortunate to hear (Pitts, 2015).
The statistical record raises the ethical question of whether the juvenile correctional facilities are indeed working. The stakeholders involved in that particular field stated clearly stated that some of the individuals pretend to have reformed. Still, later on, after being released, they go back to commits crimes due to family-related issues and also stigma from society to some extent.
The Ethical Question of Conviction of a Minor
The ethical point of view of how a minor should be convicted and judged is quite impressive. This brings up the question of the crimes being committed by minors are they lesser acts of breaking the law or they should be treated in the same intensity as an ordinary crime. The United States juvenile justice systems, fortunately, are lenient on the judging of the offenders. They are given almost the same punishment as a typical convict would receive, but they are sent to a juvenile correctional facility.
The act above is entirely ethical and encouraging as it champions for the greater good of the minors in question. The juveniles, in most cases, commit crimes due to environmental factors, especially their homes and schools. Some children end up committing crimes because of evil influence from their relatives of peers. The best example is that of many cases in the United States in the state of Atlanta, where minors are involved in many drugs and gun possession cases. Sadly most of the cases are trodden by the environmental factors of the juveniles (Anne Hobbs et al., and 2015-2020).
Strategies to Reform the Juvenile Justice System
Crime Prevention
The first strategies that juvenile justice systems should employ are the prevention of crime. The government organization should come up with initiatives to visit schools and other institutions of learning to educate children, especially the adolescent age bracket of ways of staying away from crime. This should be done in areas, especially where they are rampant cases of teenage crimes being committed.
The other initiative that can be put in place is the crime prevention agencies organizing community rallies. The said rallies can be held in community gardens or during sports activities events that will be championing for the various ways that the youth can prevent engagement in crime-related acts. The forums guide the youth, especially the adolescents, on implications that come with committing a crime and alternative ways of engaging in productive activities rather than offense.
Delinquency Disposition
The other strategy to reform the juvenile justice system is by application of delinquency disposition. This is simply the act of imparting the right knowledge and wisdom to the convicted minors. Through this strategy, they are guided on what is right and wrong also the ways of becoming a law-abiding citizen in the future. The plan is quite essential as some of the minors may be undergoing mental shortcomings coming from their various diverse family backgrounds (Trinidad et al., .2020).
Majority of the cases of teenage crimes being committed as a result of peer pressures of negative family influence. The minors in the juvenile facilities that are taken through delinquency dispositional forums are come out as changed individuals who became productive and law-abiding to the society in the future.
Fairness Policies Should Be Administer
The other vital strategy that the juvenile justice system should employ is on fairness policy acts. The fairness acts should be administered in juvenile court proceedings and during conviction of the minors. The law will guide the court on how to rule the case on a nondiscriminatory basis bearing in mind the person being convicted is a minor. The United States policy on the juvenile acts states that the solemn idea of having an independent juvenile justice system is for reforming and correcting the children not punishing them.
The fairness policies can even lead to the acquitting of the minors being prosecuted. Statistical research has shown that some accused children are absolved of the crime they have committed or also given a lighter sentence of working in community service programs. This because the findings in their cases are results of evil influence from their home setting and environment. Hence they are acquitted and sent to guidance and counseling sessions with psychologists.
Diminished Culpability
The strategy of diminished culpability should be administered in the juvenile justice system arena. This is simply the administration of sentences according to circumstances that the accused person was found in. The accused may be in a poor mental state or provocation state that caused the person to commit the crime. The accused person is defiantly a minor; hence the court may consider rendering a lighter statement.
The diminishing culpability strategy should be applied during the administration of sentences. The approach will give a clear dispensation of whether the accused person was in the right state of mind before committing the act or whether other factors triggered the action a good example being provocation. The judgment administered will henceforth be fairly delivered according to the findings (O’Neill et al., .2018).
Conclusion
The ethical question of charging a minor as an adult is exciting. The big problem solemnly lies in whether the crime committed by the minor is a lesser crime than the one determined by the adult. But from the legal perspective, both are the same, but mechanisms should be put in place on how to handle both cases. The strategies stated above are good starting points on how to treat individuals caught up in those circumstances.
References
Anne Hobbs, J. D., Lindsey Wylie, J. D., & Fousek, S. Nebraska’s Strategic Plan for Victims and Survivors of Crime 2015-2020.
Liefaard, T. (2015). Juvenile justice from an international children’s rights perspective. Routledge International Handbook of Children’s Rights Studies, 234.
O’Neill, S. C., Cumming, T. M., Strnadová, I., & Grima-Farrell, C. (2018). Transitions from behind the fence to the community: The Australian experience. In Incarcerated Youth Transitioning Back to the Community (pp. 97-113). Springer, Singapore.
Pitts, J. (2015). Youth Crime and Youth Justice. Youth & Policy, 114, 31.
Trinidad, A., Vozmediano, L., Ocáriz, E., & San-Juan, C. (2020). “Taking a Walk on the Wild Side”: Exploring Residence-to-Crime in Juveniles. Crime & Delinquency, 0011128720916141.