Children represent the future of the current civilization, a reality humanity has recognized since the dawn of time. This concept is also present in our contemporary era. Given this, our society has always worked to ensure that kids and young people have the best chance to succeed. Nevertheless, despite all of society’s efforts, many children and young people still find themselves in trouble with the law. Precautions have been established to give disturbed young ones who are charged with crimes a chance to make amends and turn into respectable citizens through rehabilitation programs.
These precautions have been accomplished through the adoption of juvenile justice systems, which are distinguished by their focus on rehabilitation rather than punishment. Despite the country having a functioning juvenile justice system, crime rates among children and teens have significantly increased. Policymakers have advocated for juvenile waiver, which is defined the process of transferring juvenile offenders to criminal courts for adult prosecution as a result of the rising rates of crime among young people (Williams, 2022). Juvenile waiver allows an underage offender to be tried as an adult and the process often denies the individuals protection that they would otherwise receive when undergoing juvenile proceedings. Some people applaud this action as the best way to lower adolescent crimes and so preserve society’s harmony.
The fundamental tenet of sending adolescents into the criminal justice system is that harsher penalties, even if they come at the expense of rehabilitation, will lower crime rates and so improve public safety. The main justification offered by those who favor automatic judicial waiver of juvenile court jurisdiction is the rise in youth crime and violence (Williams, 2022). Another argument in favor of waiver contends that the way young offenders are handled prevents them from feeling responsible for their acts, which results in a lack of culpability. The adult system, in contrast, holds people accountable for their offenses and makes them pay for them to the fullest extent permitted by the law.
The purpose of sending juvenile offenders to adult criminal courts, according to supporters of the waiver to prosecute the youth in the criminal justice system, is to discourage them from engaging in illegal activity in the future (Williams, 2022). Furthermore, as Kent v. United States showed, children are capable of heinous crimes. Morris A. Kent, a 16-year-old boy, was accused of breaking into a woman’s apartment, robbing and raping her (Williams, 2022). Proponents of the waiver argue that given that it does not include life imprisonment or even the death sentence in its sentencing, it is clear that the juvenile court system is ill-equipped to handle these kinds of serious offenses. Therefore, the waiver system offers a means of preventing these delinquents from reentering society and protecting societal harmony. Without waivers, crimes like those perpetrated by Kent would only get meager punishment and the culprit would be released from prison after just a few years.
Opponents of these waivers contend that doing so lessens the likelihood that young offenders will receive rehabilitation. Additionally, the psychoanalytic theory of Sigmund Freud which explains why people commit crimes may serve as a justification against waiving. According to Freud’s view, all people harbor hidden urges (Shibutani, 2017). Therefore, the only way to suppress these cravings is through socializing (Shibutani, 2017). An individual with inadequate social skills consequently develops a personality disorder, which forces him or her to display antisocial inclinations. Criminals are those who bring out these traits. Therefore, this notion supports the idea that criminals are social outcasts attempting to make up for their deficiencies.
Those against the waiver also use the interactionist theory to assert their opinion. According to the interactionist theory of crime, interacting with criminals might psychologically encourage a person to commit crime (Shibutani, 2017). According to the notion, there is a very high likelihood that someone will commit a crime as a result of peer pressure (Shibutani, 2017). In addition, a minor offender can turn into a serious criminal by hanging out with other offenders. It is presumable that these interactions teach people how to behave, think, and respond in ways that are characteristic of criminals. As a result, locking up juvenile criminals may always render them worse off than they were before entering the system.
Unless they commit atrocious offenses like murder, I think juveniles shouldn’t be waived to adult courts. They ought to be charged under the juvenile justice system instead. This claim is supported by the fact that juvenile courts are inclined to consider the best interests of the children or youths involved and to provide some sort of rehabilitation and defense for the juvenile delinquents. Therefore, the criminal justice system will have failed to achieve its primary objective by arbitrarily releasing juvenile offenders onto the adult court system.
Just like the United States, many other countries such as New Zealand, England, and Australia have legislations that support judicial waiver (Bahmani et al., 2021). The violent and frequent nature of criminal acts that juveniles perpetrate in these countries has forced them to establish waivers. Ironically, these countries support the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) that requires them to “establish a minimum age of criminal responsibility” (Bahmani et al., 2021). More intervention-based methods should be developed to make sure that young offenders do not enter the criminal justice system until they commit egregious offenses, given the possibility that waivers could turn juvenile offenders into hardened criminals.
References
Bahmani, I., Busby, P., Sekar, N., Sharma, N., & Singh, A. (2021). Juveniles on Trial: A Cross-Country Analysis of Judicial Waivers. Research Report, LAWS5078: PACE Clinics and Project.
Shibutani, T. (2017). Society and personality: Interactionist approach to social psychology. Routledge.
Williams, E. J. (2022). “Is the criminal justice system failing our youth”: An analysis of juvenile jurisdiction transfer laws for youth charged with serious crimes and effective alternatives.
write