Introduction
Within the realms of American laws, the criminal justice system comprises of the law creators (legislative), courts (adjudication), and correctional facilities such as probation, parole, prisons, and jails. American criminal justice system comprises of the jurisdictional, normative, functional, and institutional components. These components work simultaneously in defining the goals of procedural laws and decisions to be taken by the court of law. Factually, these activities take place at different points. This paper analyses the aspect of corrections as part of the criminal justice system. Specifically, the paper concentrates on juvenile correction in the US in terms of the criminal justice acts, execution, effectiveness, and current challenges.
Overview of Juvenile Correction
Juvenile delinquency is one of the public safety concerns that involve individuals referred to as juvenile delinquents, who have not attained the age of the majority. Juvenile delinquency entails the involvement of such individuals in illegal conduct and activities considered criminal that warrants an arrest. The issue of juvenile delinquency has posed a threat to the safety of the public, especially about the measures and programs that have been put in place in a bid to reform and rehabilitate these individuals (Winterdyk, 2002).
Though juvenile crimes are committed by both males and females, most of the individuals involved in juvenile delinquency are male offenders. The difference in gender involvement in delinquent behavior does not only manifest in terms of proportion but also in terms of crimes committed and the type of institution the youthful offender is placed in (Inciardi, 2009). Similarly, the male and females involved in less serious offenses, such as simple assault, are more likely to be held in a private facility as opposed to public facilities for more serious crimes such as robbery and aggravated assault. Additionally, disparities in peak ages of the juveniles are also evident across the genders, with that of female juveniles ranging from 15 to 16 years while that of male juveniles ranging from 16 to 17 years (OJJDP, 2004).
The effectiveness of these programs and the entire juvenile justice system has been questioned. This has emanated from the tendency of the justice system and various juvenile correctional institutions to release the arrested offenders who then end up re-offending, usually committing more serious crimes than they had previously. The increased concerns on the effectiveness of these systems are attributable to the seriousness of the crimes that these juvenile delinquents commit (Winterdyk, 2002). This may range from homicide, tape, physical assault to violent crimes. Therefore, the rationale of the paper is to examine the juvenile correction act and its execution within the correction facilities available for young offenders.
Juvenile Correction Acts and Execution
In the United States, a juvenile delinquent is an individual yet to attain the age of the majority and whose acts have been determined by a court of law as constituting juvenile delinquency. Nevertheless, the determination process of the individual as a juvenile delinquent differs from state to state. The government has put in place measures to ensure that minor offenders are not confined in the same holding facilities as adult offenders. Similarly, it has enacted several acts, such as the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Act, to provide uniform guidelines across states about the treatment and prosecution of minor offenders (Mutchnick, 2009).
The act provides that minors involved in status offenses such as alcohol consumption and tobacco smoking should not be detained or institutionalized. This poses a potential risk to society as the police are prevented from taking a reactive action, which may constitute reunification of such individuals with their parents. There is an increased likelihood for these minors to graduate into the consumption of other hard drugs further predisposing them to engage in illegal tendencies and other juvenile activities (OJJDP, 2004). To prevent the hardening of juvenile delinquents, the juvenile justice act further stipulates that youthful offenders cannot be incarcerated in the same facilities as adults. However, these provisions demand the establishment of expensive juvenile facilities. This makes it hard for the law enforcement authorities to effectively counter juvenile delinquency as holding facilities for minor offenders are inadequate. As result, the arrested offenders may be freed to the society further compromising the safety and security of the public (Winterdyk, 2002).
In the United States, juvenile delinquency issues are handled by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP). This office is responsible for the creation of policies guidelines that offer direction to the juvenile justice system. Additionally, OJJDP is also charged with the role of informing the public on matters about juvenile justice besides scheduling training sessions and programs in juvenile delinquency in the country. Further, this government agency undertakes the role of allocating funds to various state authorities for use in support of diverse juvenile programs across the United States (Inciardi, 2009).
In recognition of the challenge minor offending poses to the country, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention targets various categories of youthful offenders including violent, serious, and chronic juvenile delinquents as well as those who have been affected by the behavior of these juveniles. It, therefore, seeks to ensure the implementation of effective juvenile programs by offering professional assistance to both local communities and states engaged in juvenile rehabilitation endeavors (OJJDP, 2004).
Though parole and probation are community correction strategies functioning on the concept of community supervision, they are different in many aspects. Despite these differences, they were initiated to mitigate the magnitude and severity of the punishment process. Parole was introduced in America in the mid 19th century. Under this arrangement, credit marks are awarded for behavior change and release from detaining heavily relies on the cumulative score per juvenile diligence. After probation, the suspected offender is passed through the criminal justice system, and if found guilty, may be sentenced to a jail term (Mutchnick, 2009). Since these detention camps have parole officers, the delinquents are registered in parole programs and the best behaved released before full jail term. Generally, these processes are designed to promote positive behavior change initiated by the suspect delinquent.
Current Challenges
The formalization of juvenile offenders in the United States has blurred the line between incarceration and rehabilitation further making the system very effective. This is because most of the arrested and prosecuted young offenders are treated as young criminals deserving to serve time in correctional facilities. As such, lesser rehabilitative measures are taken while the individual is under detention after which they are released back into society (Inciardi, 2009). This increases the possibility that the individual will re-offend as they were not accorded proper guidance to avert their criminal tendencies. This has led to an escalation in juvenile crimes involving excessive violence ranging from homicide to rape incidences. Similarly, America has over the years experienced a series of school shootings involving youthful perpetrators usually below the age of the majority. This has contributed to the rise in cases of homicide involving both first and repeat offenders. This trend is an indication of the entrenchment of criminal behavior among the young Americans raising questions on the effectiveness of the juvenile justice and rehabilitation programs that have been put in place (McDermid, 2006).
Embracing violence by young individuals as their way of life has instigated fear among the general public who live in constant danger of falling victims to the juveniles. The increased threat to the safety and security of the public constitutes a necessity to effect significant changes in the juvenile justice system in mitigation to the situation. This may entail the institution of juvenile programs that focus more on rehabilitation rather than punishment to reform both the institutionalized and deinstitutionalized offenders. This would serve to reduce fear among the public as a result of the reduced possibility of re-offending by the released juveniles (Schmalleger, 2010).
Conclusion
Juvenile correction facilities are managed through the OJJDP agency by implementing the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Act. This act has been instrumental in facilitating correction activities within juvenile facilities across the US. The act defines the strategies that are applied in detaining, rehabilitating, and integrating minor offenders to ensure that cases of repeat offenses are minimized. However, despite the efforts by the government to address delinquency through its various mechanisms, juvenile delinquency incidences in society continue to escalate. This trend has been blamed on the inadequacies of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Act that hampers the ability of the justice system to address the issue of delinquency in society.
References
Inciardi, J. (2009). Criminal justice (9th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
McDermid, G. (2006). Shadow line deviance, and crime in the US. New York, NY: McGraw Hill
Mutchnick, R. (2009). Criminal Justice Interactive: Companion text. New York, NY: Prentice Hall.
OJJDP. (2004). About OJJDP. Web.
Schmalleger, F. (2010). Criminal justice today: An introductory text for the 21st century. New York, NY: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Winterdyk, J. (2002). Juvenile justice systems: international perspectives. Toronto: Canadian Scholars’ Press.