Juvenile Case

Introduction

Juvenile delinquency is a problem in the United States, it is seen in all regions of the world. This problem is all around the world, the united states has been experiencing increased numbers in juvenile problem behavior, which also includes gang violence, and drug abuse. This research is not saying every nation is the same, however, there are still something's in common. Poverty, broken homes, unemployment, and drug abuse. Standard minimum rules for the administration of juvenile justice were developed in 1985 by the United Nations to encourage all countries to develop a juvenile justice system to improve the administration of the juvenile justice.

Over the past decade many countries have taken measures to get tough on juvenile offenders. What is the future going to look like for juvenile offenders is what this research paper is going to about. Since the "get tough on juvenile offenders" went into affect policymakers' have seen an increase with juveniles in adult courts. Is this really justice being served or is it really just away of saying the system has failed the children who need most of the protection.

Methodology

It has been an ongoing debate whether juvenile offenders should be tried as adults. Some feel that if a juvenile is mature enough to do the crime than they are mature enough to do the time as fit. Others feel that the juvenile is not developed enough to understand what the repercussions are for committing a crime and have no knowledge of the law they are breaking. So the question is, should juvenile offenders be tried as adults? "Because society doesn't expect children to be criminals or to commit crimes, it is faced with the dilemma that most would find difficult to resolve. Should juveniles be placed into the criminal justice system that would preclude a rehabilitative state?" (Steinberg, 2001) The reason for this to be added to this research paper is to take a closer look at the opinions of Lawrence Steinberg and how his suggestions to make a determination as he points out the valid and forms an opinion whether juveniles should be tried as adults.

Lawrence Steinberg is a distinguished Professor of Psychology at Temple University, Philadelphia, Pa., and Director of the John D. & Catherine T MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Adolescent Development and Juvenile Justice. (Steinberg, 2001) On September 2001, Professor Steinberg published an article for USA Today discussing some of the dilemmas that society faces concerning the subject of whether juveniles should be tried as adults for the crimes they commit. This has been an ongoing debate as law-makers feel that age serves no purpose depending on the seriousness of the crime. Professor Steinberg and many others disagrees with some of the policies. Some believe these law-makers and have argues that the development of children plays a major role in whether they understand the law well enough to know the consequences for their offence.

The process of transferring a case from the juvenile courts to an adult criminal court are known as a waiver of jurisdiction. The effects on these transfers denies the youth the protection and treatment afforded by the juvenile process. It is true that state and federal statutes do specify the age as to when the criminal courts can gain jurisdiction over the young offenders. Usually this is the age between 17 and 18.

The issues that affect youth go beyond traditional questions and concerns that have plagued the juvenile court for 100 years. Rodney Hopson and Jennifer Obidah who wrote an article support the arguments that believe problem's of "youth criminality, and discipline for juveniles of color compounded with historical debates and discussions portray that this is a unique around sentencing youth as adults when issues around ideology, hegemony, and race are exposed." (Hopson, & Obidah, 2002).

Hopson and Obidah look at the problem by highlighting and illustrating where getting tough means getting tougher on juveniles of color. The reason this article is being used in this research is to bring attention to the recurring faults of the juvenile courts so criminologist and courts may review the treatment of how much has not really been changed through history as far as how punishment is a racial theory keeping the minority in the correctional system with no chance for a better life and to further their education, Hopson and Obidah illustrate when getting tough means getting tougher on juveniles of minorities that the courts and the community are really failing the children and any hope for a better future.

Enrico Pagnanelli an article which argues that the Supreme Court after considering the decision with Roper v. Simmons case did not live up to the original rehabilitative goals. After Enrico Pagnanelli had finished his study and found that when juvenile offenders of violent crimes are transferred into the system it does increases recidivism among offenders. Pagnanelli finds these results by researching what another author Jeffrey Fagan had found after studying the recidivism rates of a fifteen and sixteen year old who were incarcerated for robbery. Fagan had compared the recidivism rate from New York's automatic transfer statue to those charged in New Jersey's juvenile courts and found an increase in the recidivism of young offenders who had been transferred to adult courts. Pagnanelli had found through his studies similar results giving an example of another study analyzed showing recidivism rates among 2,738 juvenile offenders in Florida were more likely to become victims in the correctional system after being transferred. This article is addressed to the courts and policy makers to bring an awareness that the society is making more victims by not properly making sure that these offenders are being allowed to have their constitutional rights. (Pagnanelli, E. 2007).

According to Daniel C. Murrie, Ph.D. Craig E. Henderson, Ph.D. Gina M. Vincent, Ph.D. Jennifer L. Rockett, Ph.D., and Cynthia Mundt, M.A. their research resulted in finding that juveniles offenders who are transferred to adult courts have substantial mental health problems which are not taken care of before being committed into a prison for adults. ( Murrie, Henderson, Vincent, Rockett, & Mundt, 2009). The authors do conclude that juveniles in adult prisons make up a small portion of prison inmates and a small portion of juvenile offenders, however, this does pose a unique challenges with respect to policy and treatment, because results from their study suggest that "juveniles in adult prison may manifest some of the most substantial mental health treatment needs among all juveniles involved