As A Nation: The Pros And Cons Of Having Juveniles Being Tri ✓ Solved

As a Nation The Pros And Cons Of Having Juveniles Being Tried

As a nation, the pros and cons of having juveniles being tried as an adult is a subject with which many have been grappling for generations. There are pros and cons to having juveniles within the adult system. Waivers Some juvenile cases get transferred to adult criminal court through a process called a "waiver"—when a judge waives the protections that juvenile court provides. Usually, juvenile cases that are subject to waiver involve more serious crimes, or minors who have been in trouble before. Although being tried in adult court gives a juvenile more constitutional protections, it has distinct disadvantages too—including the potential for a more severe sentence and the possibility of serving time in an adult correctional facility.

There are three ways that transfer proceedings can usually begin—the most common is through the prosecutor's request. But the juvenile court judge can also initiate transfer proceedings. And some state laws require that juveniles be tried as adults in certain types of cases, like homicide. If the prosecutor or judge seeks to transfer the case to adult court, the minor is entitled to a hearing and representation by an attorney. This hearing is called the waiver hearing, fitness hearing, or certification hearing.

Usually, the prosecutor must show probable cause that the juvenile actually committed the charged offense. If the prosecutor has established probable cause, the judge must then decide on the minor's chances at rehabilitation as a juvenile. To make this decision, the judge will often hear evidence on the minor's: • Background • Juvenile court record • Willingness to get treatment in the juvenile system If the judge transfers the juvenile case to adult criminal court, the case starts there at the beginning—typically with the arraignment (formal, in-court notice of charges against the juvenile). Usually, juveniles and their attorneys fight to keep a case in juvenile court. But there are also advantages to being tried in adult criminal court.

Paper For Above Instructions

The issue of whether juveniles should be tried as adults is a contentious one in the American justice system. This debate centers on the balance between accountability and rehabilitation. Advocates for trying juveniles as adults argue that serious offenders should face the same consequences as adults, particularly in cases involving violent crimes. On the other hand, opponents stress that juveniles possess a greater capacity for rehabilitation due to their age and developmental stage.

One of the primary arguments in favor of transferring juveniles to adult court is the notion that it serves as a deterrent against crime. Proponents argue that the consequences faced in adult court are more severe, which may dissuade minors from engaging in criminal conduct. Additionally, it is believed that the adult system may be more effective in handling violent offenders. Research indicates that certain categories of juvenile offenders, particularly repeat offenders or those charged with violent crimes, may not respond positively to juvenile rehabilitation efforts (Mendel, 2011). Thus, the adult system is seen as a more appropriate venue for achieving justice for the victims and society.

However, trying juveniles as adults raises significant concerns regarding their long-term rehabilitation and impacts on their mental health. Juveniles subjected to adult sentencing face substantial risks, including exposure to violence and exploitation in correctional facilities. Such environments can be detrimental to their development, often resulting in increased recidivism (Snyder & Sickmund, 2006). Studies reveal that juveniles are more likely to re-offend once they have been incarcerated in adult facilities compared to those who are rehabilitated within the juvenile justice system (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2017).

Another important aspect to consider is the disparity in sentencing. When juveniles are transferred to adult court, they may face more severe penalties than they would have in juvenile court, where rehabilitation is prioritized over punishment. Sentences can be disproportionately harsher, leading to long-term consequences that can affect the juvenile's future prospects, including education, employment, and social relationships (Holman & Ziedenberg, 2006). This approach can perpetuate cycles of poverty and crime, as youths with criminal records often face barriers in reintegrating into society.

Furthermore, the developmental psychology of adolescents plays a key role in this debate. Research indicates that the adolescent brain is still developing, particularly in areas related to impulse control and decision-making (Steinberg, 2009). Given these characteristics, many experts argue that juveniles lack the judgment and foresight that adults possess, underscoring the importance of treating them with consideration to their capacity for change.

The legal framework surrounding juvenile transfer laws varies significantly from state to state. Many states employ "mandatory transfer" laws that automatically send certain offenses to adult court, limiting judicial discretion (Griffin, 2008). Meanwhile, other jurisdictions employ "discretionary transfer" processes, allowing judges to evaluate the unique circumstances of each case. This disparity further complicates the issue, as it can lead to inconsistent application of justice across the country.

In recent years, there has been a push towards reforming juvenile transfer laws to mitigate some of the harshness of the adult justice system. Advocacy groups argue for the need to examine the individual circumstances of each juvenile case, promoting rehabilitation over punishment. Some states have begun to revise their policies, emphasizing alternative approaches that prioritize reintegration into society (Piquero et al., 2016).

While the debate continues over the merits and drawbacks of trying juveniles as adults, it is essential to consider both the rights of the offenders and the societal need for justice. Balancing these factors is challenging but necessary to protect the interests of all involved. As legislation and public opinion evolve, it is critical to ensure that juvenile justice systems remain focused on rehabilitation and positive outcomes for young offenders.

References

• Griffin, P. (2008). "The Transfer of Juveniles to Criminal Court: A Review of the Literature." Juvenile Justice Bulletin.
• Holman, B., & Ziedenberg, J. (2006). "The Dangers of the ‘Adultification’ of Juvenile Justice." Justice Policy Institute.
• Mendel, R. (2011). "No Place for Kids: The Case for Reducing Juvenile Incarceration." Annie E. Casey Foundation.
• Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. (2017). "Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2016 National Report." OJJDP.
• Piquero, A. R., Jennings, W. G., & Barnes, J. C. (2016). "The Influence of School Discipline on Delinquency: Examining Alternative Approaches." Journal of Criminal Justice.
• Snyder, H. N., & Sickmund, M. (2006). "Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 2006 National Report." OJJDP.
• Steinberg, L. (2009). "Adolescent Development and Juvenile Justice." Aging and Mental Health.
• United States Department of Justice. (2014). "Juvenile Justice: A Guide for Law Enforcement." DOJ.
• American Psychological Association. (2018). "Guidelines for Adolescent Psychological Practices." APA.
• Stahl, M. (2010). "An Evaluation of Juvenile Transfer Laws and their Effects on Youth." Actualité criminology.