There are many different experiences based on the youth’s background, and 50 separate systems exist because each state is responsible for maintaining its structure. Nevertheless, the five main steps of both the adult and juvenile systems are entered into the system, prosecution and pretrial services, adjudication, sentencing and sanctions, and corrections (Bates & Swan, 2019). Children are referred to the court from two general groups: law enforcement or non–law enforcement entities such as schools, parents, or probation officers (Bates & Swan, 2019). Even at this first stage, there is enough discretion in the system that juveniles can be diverted out to be handled more informally by community agencies or families.
In some instances, a juvenile can be kept in detention before his or her adjudication hearing, known as pre-adjudication detention. The decision to place the kid in custody before his or her hearing is the responsibility of the intake officer. Many factors are weighed, including the severity of the crime, the likelihood of the juvenile to appear for the hearing, and the possibility of the child hurting him- or herself or someone else before the hearing (Bates & Swan, 2019). At this stage, a detention hearing is scheduled, at which the formal process of deciding whether a juvenile should be held in detention and where that custody should occur. This expanded use of imprisonment is called preventive detention.
After the juvenile gets detained, the hearing must be scheduled within 72 hours. Most states also require that the juvenile’s hearing be scheduled within a specific period, if the youth is held in pre-adjudication detention, although the time frame varies by state, between 10 and 180 days (Bates & Swan, 2019). One of the most considerable differences between adult and juvenile detention at this stage is that the latter does not have a constitutional right to bail, while the former does.
If a juvenile and prosecuting attorney agree to a plea bargain, it is more likely to happen in the pre-adjudication stage. As with all processes, the use of the plea bargain varies across states. If a juvenile does not constitute a plea and the case is not dismissed, this hearing is where the decisions about whether the child is adjudicated delinquent or not will be made (Bates & Swan, 2019). A juvenile has the right to an attorney, confront the witness against him or her, and not self-incriminate. However, youth does not have the right to have his or her case heard by a jury of peers because the judge or magistrate of the court hears every case at the adjudication stage.
Several different positions make the basis for the juvenile justice system. The prominent figure in the process is the probation officer, whose work distinguishes children from the criminal justice system. Their tasks include investigating family histories, monitoring, and evaluating minors at different stages of the process (Bates & Swan, 2019). Moreover, in large jurisdictions, there is a role of an intake officer whose task is to determine the juvenile’s initial path through the system. Once that path has been started, the intake officer passes the juvenile’s file to a probation officer assigned to the case for the rest of the stages. As in the criminal justice structure, a defense lawyer, a prosecutor, and a judge or magistrate are involved in the case.
Furthermore, there is the position of a guardian, who can be a lawyer, but most often focuses on minors’ problems and interests. The record-keeping process’s main aspect is the decision of whether the case will be handled by the juvenile court or the criminal (adult) one (Bates & Swan, 2019). Despite regional differences, in general, this can happen in one of three ways: automatic, prosecutorial, and judicial waiver.
The juvenile justice system primarily aims to protect society from minors’ crimes and not at the defendants themselves. For this reason, there is a ramified system of authorities and institutions that regulate the process and focus on justice. Nevertheless, in most cases, juvenile delinquency results from systematic problems in the community in which they grew up: family, friends, environment. Consequently, the juvenile system seems to be quite strict, especially given that prosecutions begin at the age of 14 or earlier in the vast majority of states (Bates & Swan, 2019). Accordingly, children who found themselves in a difficult situation and were forced to choose to break the law to solve the problem find themselves in the same dock as adults. The main disadvantage of the youth justice system is that it differs little from that for adults. Accordingly, the juvenile justice system works to create additional criminal elements in society instead of helping children who need help. The structure’s main task is to decide the guilt of the child and not to figure out the reasons for the acts committed, which is not the most effective method of work. Moreover, inactivity, adolescents are discriminated against by ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation, making the conditions of justice unequal and unfair for different participants.
The consequences for minors caught in the juvenile justice system are negative. Adolescent justice intervention during the teenage years lessened the possibility that youth would graduate from high school. Police labeling during the adolescent years increased the probability of unemployment during early adulthood. Juvenile justice intervention also increased the likelihood of first adult unemployment, but primarily due to its negative effect on youth’s educational progress. A child labeled by the police or juvenile justice actors as delinquents were more likely to engage in crime as young adults than other kids because of lack of education and lack of employment (Bates & Swan, 2019). Young adults who were African-American and came from an economically disadvantaged background (as labeled by police or juvenile justice officials) were more likely to engage in crime than other young adults who had been tagged similarly.
Some programs allow not to send juvenile cases to court: essential counseling services, family intervention programs, drug and alcohol programs, educational services. The problem is that these diversification programs involve people in the juvenile justice system who do not need additional help or support. Furthermore, there is an unfair treatment of minors within the judicial system based on their skin color, religion, culture, sexual orientation. Thus, the structure of support and assistance programs for children helps avoid imprisonment; however, more people are involved in its activities.
The juvenile justice system needs reform since this institution’s activities are more often aimed at punishing minors than helping people who find themselves in difficult life situations. Children’s Defense Fund has identified factors that lead to the cradle-to-prison pipeline. The organization has also identified several key areas and many opportunities to destroy this pipeline. Single individuals should mentor a child, volunteer at school or after-school programs, educate others about the channel (elected officials and neighbors and family), and become involved in the foster care system. The communities can develop faith-based or other organization that links every child to a permanent adult mentor who can keep track of the child, help them if needed, start a support group for parents, and create scholarships for children who need them. Organizations should contribute to prevention and intervention programs, host community fairs that help children get the assistance they might need, and encourage alternatives to incarceration focused on restorative justice and community involvement. Finally, government agencies can promote high-quality television programming, expand second-chance programs for youth, stop the criminalization of children, focus on prevention and intervention instead of suppression techniques.
Reference
Bates, A. K., & Swan, S. R. (2019). Juvenile delinquency in a diverse society. Sage Publications.