Abuse and neglect of children have increased during the past ten years. This reality is not without its difficulties. The juvenile justice system is now dealing with certain particular problems that, if not properly resolved, might cause a crisis in the system. The juvenile justice system is the formal, responsive arrangement by the government to process and deal with a child in conflict with the law in line with the established set of rules while taking into account the kid’s rights and best interests. Hence, while the juvenile justice system helps maintain public safety, foster skill development, habilitation, rehabilitation, and meet treatment requirements, the paper herein compares the apparent differences between the Juvenile Justice system of the past and present.
The juvenile justice system has expanded and seen a significant transformation. Initially, an attorney did not represent the defendant, and the court proceedings were casual, sometimes involving a dialogue between the kid and the judge (Goshe, 2019). Little was known about how the juvenile court functioned or what happened to the youngsters who came before it in the community or outside closed-door proceedings. On the other hand, to provide juveniles with supervision, direction, and instruction, the present juvenile courts have established a probation system and separate rehabilitation and treatment facilities rather than locking up children and teenagers in jails with adults.
After this change to secure due process in juvenile court hearings, legislators adopted “tough on crime” measures in the late 1980s and early 1990s in response to a rise in juvenile crime rates, depriving some children of the safeguards of the juvenile justice system (Dragomir & Tadros, 2020). However, in the current Juvenile Justice system, states have implemented new systems to transfer juvenile offenders to adult criminal courts for prosecution and punishment. Children occasionally receive the worst punishments under these new laws—death and life in prison without the possibility of release. Like before the first juvenile court was established more than a century ago, many new state legislation likewise exposed children to the risks and possible abuses associated with being detained alongside adult offenders.
Finally, today’s juvenile justice system prioritizes rehabilitation and sets itself apart significantly from the criminal justice system. With few exceptions, the majority of jurisdictions define delinquency as the commission of a crime by a child who was under the age of 18 at the time; most states also permit minors to stay under the supervision of the juvenile court until they become 21 (Dragomir & Tadros, 2020). Juvenile court judges used a variety of legal choices, including alternatives to jail, to fulfill the demands of the youth’s treatment and the public’s need for safety in the past juvenile justice system. Even though present juvenile detention facilities frequently resemble adult prisons and jails and those children may be detained there, they have consistently enforced uncommon penal procedures like solitary confinement, strip searches, and the use of chemical or mechanical that were present in the past juvenile justice system (Goshe, 2019).
In conclusion, the juvenile justice system has evolved over the past years in treating offenders. Shorter, juvenile policing has been implemented due to legal reforms and policy adjustments made under the get-tough umbrella, making it simpler (or in some circumstances required) to treat a child who has committed specific offenses as an adult. In addition, the paper herein has also examined the apparent differences in the legal system in the two eras.
References
Goshe, S. (2019). How contemporary rehabilitation fails youth and sabotages the American juvenile justice system: A critique and call for change. Critical criminology, 27(4), 559–573.
Dragomir, R. R., & Tadros, E. (2020). Exploring the impacts of racial disparity within the American juvenile justice system. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 71(2), 61-73.
write