Introduction
Juvenile delinquency is not only a public vice but also a significant legislative problem. Issues related to the prosecution of adolescents and the imposition of punishment are often actively discussed in the press and cause a public outcry, thereby forcing the authorities to monitor compliance with all the nuances of such trials closely. Nevertheless, regardless of the publicity of a particular case, bringing to criminal responsibility juvenile offenders is accompanied by a number of moral and ethical challenges since the young age of the accused often becomes an obstacle to logical and reasonable punishment.
Contrary to public opinion, the state does not seek to penalize but searches for ways to correct and rehabilitate them because timely measures may protect juvenile offenders and help them return to normal life. Therefore, the fair and qualified assessment of the degree of misconduct testifies to the competent organization of the judicial system aimed at not only punishment but also correction.
Emphasis on Correction
In accordance with the laws protecting the rights of children and adolescents, criminal responsibility is extreme punishment to which the representatives of the judicial system resort. Despite this fact, the stable dynamics of the increase is observed in the number of adolescents committing offenses of moderate severity and serious crimes. In this regard, it is necessary to consider the relevance of current policies regulating the behavior of adolescents and the timely identification of deviant propensities.
As a potentially effective measure, the involvement of guardianship agencies and departments for working with minors is an essential part of the process of decriminalizing society. The proportion of crimes committed by juvenile offenders implies the need for actions. Therefore, to improve the current situation, the joint actions of different social boards are needed as an effective way of influence.
The focus on a correction should accompany ideological work among the target population. Those adolescents who demonstrate dangerous inclinations and the manifestations of misconduct should be brought in to work with social workers and psychologists. The help of qualified specialists may also be important if a certain teenager commits crimes from time to time, thereby demonstrating a reluctance to rehabilitation.
The employees of relevant boards should strive to find an approach to those juvenile offenders who show a strong belief in their impunity. Such measures can make it possible to achieve a change in the life priorities and values of those adolescents who do not accept a law-abiding life in society.
Finally, encouragement may serve as a successful technique for helping young offenders to adapt to normal living conditions. Reduced adolescent crime rates can and should be accompanied by appropriate incentives. For instance, if a teenager demonstrates the rejection of the manifestations of deviant and antisocial behavior, special services should encourage such a step and stimulate further socialization.
Assistance in the provision of education and further employment is the practice that can help to not only eliminate crime recurrences but also maintain control over the most complex cases. Therefore, the emphasis on correction is no less important than punishment.
Conclusion
Correction as part of the juvenile delinquency program of the judiciary can be a valuable mechanism aimed at stimulating teenagers’ changes of interest. Engaging professional specialists to help adolescents with antisocial inclinations is the measure that may contribute to strengthening control over difficult cases and help delinquents to adapt to a normal life. Encouragement should be promoted as one of the mechanisms of contacting troubled teenagers.