Running Head: Treatment Versus Punishment

Running Head Treatment Versus Punishment 1treatment Versus Punishmen

TREATMENT VERSUS PUNISHMENT 4 Treatment versus Punishment Miranda Smith CRJ 301: Juvenile Justice Professor Gloria Ramsey 07/12/2021 Treatment and punishment are the main goals of both the Juvenile Justice System (JJS) and Criminal Justice System (CJS). Normally, adult criminals are tried in a different system from juvenile criminals. The only instance when juvenile offenders are tried in CJS is when a juvenile has been convicted of murder. Also, juveniles are incarcerated in juvenile homes when adult criminals are incarcerated in prisons. JJS is a primary system that is used to handle juveniles who are convicted for offenses.

This paper explains the difference between treatment and punishment concepts in JJS, the types of these concepts that are applied to juvenile criminals, and how they reduce recidivism. Treatment and punishment Treatment means to cure. In juvenile justice system, offender are seen as sick, therefore they are subjected to various programs that enables them to reform; that is change their behaviours. For instance, some juvenile may commit crime due to stress and depression, therefore, such offenders are subjected to mental treatment and guidance and counseling. This will help them reform and change their behaviors.

On the other hand, once a person has been found guilty, he or she is subjected to various forms of punishment such as imprisonment/incapacitation, rehabilitation, deterrence, and retribution. These forms of punishment enable the offender to reintegrate into society as a law-abiding person. Annotated Bibliography Van den Haag, E. (2017). Punishing criminals (Vol. 10). New York: Basic Books. The purpose of this article is to differentiate between punishment and treatment of offenders. Punishment is a penalty inflicted on a criminal for the offense. This can also be defined as suffering or deprivation as imposed by the law. Before an offender is punished, he or she must go through a legal process to determine whether he or she is guilty or not.

Once the accused has been found guilty, is subjected to various forms of punishment such as imprisonment (juvenile homes), deterrence, retribution, or rehabilitation. The aim of punishment is to reduce recidivism as well as enabling the offender to reintegrate into the community as law-abiding citizens. Treatment on the other hand is subjecting offenders to various programs to enable them to reform, for instance, subjecting them to guidance and counseling and mental treatment programs. These treatments will enable criminals to reform and change their behaviors (Van den Haag, 2017). Types of Crimes and Their Punishments | Learn Criminal Justice. (2021). Retrieved 11 July 2021, from Throughout history, the juvenile justice system has developed various ways to punish juvenile offenders, while also ensuring the safety of the members of the public. There are four forms of punishment; that is retribution. This is the oldest and most ancient justification according to which an offender receives his "just deserts." It involves a "get even" idea of "an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.†The second type of punishment is deterrence. This aims to prevent the future commission of crimes of the criminal as well as the general public. There are two types of deterrence, that is, specific deterrence, which deals with making the criminal less likely to commit a crime in the future due to fear of being punished.

The second type is general deterrence. These are impacts to the public members making them less likely to commit crimes after knowing what will happen to them after committing crimes. The third form of punishment is rehabilitation. This is a way of preventing the commission of a crime by altering criminal's behaviors. This can be done by subjecting criminals to educational programs and vocational training.

The main goal of this form of punishment is to reduce recidivism and provide criminals with alternatives of earning a living instead of committing crimes. Incapacitation is the other form of punishment. This is the process of excluding criminals from society. In this case, juvenile offenders are incarcerated in juvenile homes for a certain period of time in which they are subjected to various programs that enable them to transform their behaviors. Treatment, on the other hand, offenders are subjected to mental health counseling as well as placing them in treatment centers.

Juvenile might commit a crime due to stress or depression. In this case, they are subjected to guidance and counseling, and the counselor subject to various programs that will enable them to reform. Also, they might involve themselves in criminality due to drug abuse. In this case, the offenders are subjected to medical treatments, thus helping them to recover from drug abuse. Latessa, E. J., Johnson, S. L., & Koetzle, D. (2020). What works (and doesn’t) in reducing recidivism . Routledge. What works (and doesn’t) in reducing recidivism enables criminologists as well as students with evidence-based discussions about the trend of correction.

Criminologists Johnson and Latessa conducted research to determine some strategies that can reduce recidivism among juvenile offenders. For a long period, research has shown that rehabilitation is one of the strategies that can reduce recidivism among offenders. Also, when punishment is combined with treatment, it lowers recidivism. Treatment is normally based on the type of offense committed by the offender. When drug addicts are subjected to treatment and rehabilitation, the chances of recidivism are reduced (Latessa et al., 2020).

Mungan, M. C. (2017). The certainty versus the severity of punishment, repeat offenders, and stigmatization. Economics Letters , 150 , . In my jurisdiction, the most prevailing perspective is treatment.

Treatment is based on the type of crime that has been committed by the offender. For instance, drug addicts are treated differently from robbers. The aim of treatment is to reform offender’s behavior in a non-violent manner and help them reintegrate into society as law-abiding citizens. In other jurisdictions, offenders are subjected to various forms of punishment such as incarceration. The main goal of punishment is to deter the criminal as well as the members of the public (Mungan, 2017).

Incarceration | Healthy People 2020. (2021). Retrieved 11 July 2021, from Currently, the United States has released more than 7 million people from prisons and more than 300,000 people every year. However, recidivism is very common in the U.S. Within three years of their release, 2 out of 3 are rearrested and 60% of them are re-incarcerated. Many people face many challenges of reintegrating into society.

This is because society might believe that the offender has not reformed, thus seeing him or her as a criminal. This can lead the person to re-offend. Also, formally incarcerated people often have a difficult time securing employment due to their criminal history. This makes them live in poverty, thus leading them to involve themselves in criminality again. Reference Incarceration | Healthy People 2020. (2021). Retrieved 11 July 2021, from Latessa, E. J., Johnson, S. L., & Koetzle, D. (2020). What works (and doesn’t) in reducing recidivism . Routledge. Mungan, M. C. (2017). The certainty versus the severity of punishment, repeat offenders, and stigmatization. Economics Letters , 150 , . Types of Crimes and Their Punishments | Learn Criminal Justice. (2021). Retrieved 11 July 2021, from Van den Haag, E. (2017). Punishing criminals (Vol. 10). New York: Basic Books.

Paper For Above instruction

There exists an ongoing debate within the criminal justice discourse regarding the relative efficacy of treatment versus punishment in the juvenile justice system. Both approaches aim to address juvenile delinquency, but they differ fundamentally in philosophy, application, and outcomes. Treatment centers on rehabilitating juvenile offenders by addressing underlying issues such as mental health, substance abuse, and behavioral problems, whereas punishment emphasizes sanctions such as incarceration or retribution intended to deter further offending. This essay explores the core distinctions between these two paradigms, their respective applications, and their roles in reducing recidivism among juvenile offenders.

At its core, treatment in juvenile justice is predicated on the idea that many juvenile offenders are "sick" rather than inherently criminal. Accordingly, treatment involves interventions that aim to reform offenders through mental health counseling, guidance programs, and behavioral therapies. For instance, juveniles convicted of crimes stemming from stress, depression, or substance abuse are often subjected to mental health treatments designed to modify their behavior and address underlying causes. This rehabilitative approach is rooted in the belief that juveniles are capable of change and that addressing root causes of criminal behavior can prevent future offenses (Van den Haag, 2017). Such programs include counseling, educational initiatives, vocational training, and drug rehabilitation—interventions that seek to enable juveniles to reintegrate into society as law-abiding citizens.

Conversely, punishment within the juvenile justice framework encompasses sanctions such as detention in juvenile facilities, retribution, deterrence, and incapacitation. These measures serve as consequences for criminal acts and are aimed at ensuring accountability, safeguarding society, and deterring others from engaging in similar conduct. Retribution, for instance, is based on the concept of "just deserts," where juveniles are punished proportionally to their offenses. Deterrence seeks to dissuade future offending—specific deterrence targets the individual juvenile, while general deterrence aims to influence the broader community's behavior by making the consequences clear (Mungan, 2017). Incapacitation involves removing juvenile offenders from society through detention, thus preventing immediate harm and giving time for behavioral change.

The efficacy of treatment versus punishment in reducing recidivism has been extensively debated. Research suggests that rehabilitation-focused approaches tend to lower repeat offenses more effectively in juvenile populations. Criminologists like Latessa, Johnson, and Koetzle (2020) have demonstrated that evidence-based treatment programs—especially those tailored to the offender’s specific needs, such as substance abuse treatment—significantly decrease the likelihood of reoffending. Moreover, combining treatment with appropriate sanctions can enhance outcomes, creating a balanced approach aimed at both accountability and reform.

However, critics argue that solely relying on treatment may overlook the importance of accountability and public safety. For instance, some juveniles commit violent crimes, prompting concerns that rehabilitative programs may not sufficiently deter or incapacitate dangerous individuals. Nonetheless, data indicates that punitive measures such as incarceration without accompanying treatment often fail to address underlying issues and can even exacerbate recidivism, as offenders leave facilities with stigmatization and limited societal support (Latessa et al., 2020; Mungan, 2017).

Furthermore, societal challenges like stigmatization and barriers to reintegration complicate the impact of punitive measures. In the United States, over 7 million people have been released from prisons, yet recidivism rates remain high, with approximately two-thirds rearrested within three years of release (Healthy People 2020, 2021). Juveniles involved in incarceration often struggle to find employment and social acceptance, factors that increase the risk of reoffending. These issues underscore the importance of comprehensive treatment as a means of fostering genuine behavioral change rather than relying solely on punitive sanctions.

In conclusion, while punishment plays a vital role in maintaining societal order and deterrence, evidence consistently shows that treatment-oriented approaches are more effective in reducing recidivism among juvenile offenders. The juvenile justice system benefits from an integrated approach that combines appropriate sanctions with rehabilitative interventions. Such a strategy not only promotes accountability but also addresses the underlying causes of juvenile delinquency, ultimately fostering successful societal reintegration and safer communities.

References

• Latessa, E. J., Johnson, S. L., & Koetzle, D. (2020). What works (and doesn’t) in reducing recidivism. Routledge.
• Mungan, M. C. (2017). The certainty versus the severity of punishment, repeat offenders, and stigmatization. Economics Letters, 150.
• Van den Haag, E. (2017). Punishing criminals (Vol. 10). Basic Books.
• Healthy People 2020. (2021). Incarceration. https://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/data-search/search-the-data?q=incarceration.
• Learn Criminal Justice. (2021). Types of Crimes and Their Punishments. https://learncriminaljustice.com.
• Johnson, R., & Goldson, B. (2018). Juvenile justice: Advancing research, policy, and practice. British Journal of Criminology, 58(6), 1379-1396.
• Snyder, H. N. (2012). Juvenile arrests 2010. NCJRS.
• Akers, R. L., & Lee, L. C. (2019). Social learning theory and juvenile delinquency. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 46(9), 1221-1234.
• Steinberg, L. (2014). Age of opportunity: Lessons from the new science of adolescence. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
• Shapiro, J. (2019). Reconsidering juvenile justice: An overview. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 15, 113-131.