Now that you understand the historical background of the juvenile justice system, consider issues facing the juvenile court system today, and appraise the efficacy of juvenile justice policy in our modern society. What are the major differences? Do you feel policies in the past were more effective than current policy? Support your answer with examples.
Don't you think your text materials are the best source of this information?
the text went over the past untel the present but does not cover current problems.
IN order to answer this question correctly you need your text materials. It will give you the past policies and then you will be able to answer your question.
It has to talk about current ones or else it wouldn't ask you to compare the two.
The text does not ask me to compare the two the teacher does
You'll find a lot of information in these sites.
http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS362&q=juvenile+court+system
Thank you Ms. Sue that helped a lot, all I needed was some direction.
You're very welcome, Jessie.
To appraise the efficacy of the juvenile justice policy in our modern society and compare it to policies in the past, we need to consider the major differences and evaluate their effectiveness. Here are the key aspects to explore:
1. Rehabilitation vs. Punishment: Historically, the focus of the juvenile justice system was primarily on rehabilitation rather than punishment. The idea was to address the underlying issues that led to delinquency and provide appropriate guidance and support. However, in recent years, there has been a shift towards a more punitive approach, with an emphasis on holding juveniles accountable through harsher sentences and punitive measures.
To evaluate effectiveness, we need to consider the impact of these different approaches. Some argue that the rehabilitation-focused policies of the past were more effective in reducing recidivism and reintegrating juveniles into society. By providing treatment, counseling, education, and skill-building opportunities, many young offenders were given a chance to turn their lives around. On the other hand, proponents of more punitive policies argue that stricter consequences serve as a deterrent and protect public safety.
Example: A study conducted by the Washington State Institute for Public Policy in 2016 found that juvenile rehabilitation programs had a net positive effect by reducing recidivism rates and resulting in cost savings compared to incarcerating youth.
2. Sentencing and Transfer to Adult Court: Another significant difference is the use of sentencing and the transfer of juveniles to adult court. Historically, the juvenile justice system aimed to keep young offenders within its jurisdiction, considering their age, developmental stage, and potential for reform. Yet, due to changes in legislation and public opinion, more juveniles are now being tried and sentenced as adults.
The effectiveness of these approaches is a matter of debate. Advocates argue that trying juveniles as adults is necessary to hold them accountable for serious offenses and protect society. However, critics contend that placing youth in the adult system increases their likelihood of recidivism, exposes them to more experienced and hardened criminals, and hampers their chances of successful reintegration.
Example: Research conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicates that transferring juveniles to adult court can lead to higher recidivism rates and long-term negative outcomes, both for individuals and society.
3. Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities: A persistent issue in the juvenile justice system, both historically and today, is the presence of racial and socioeconomic disparities. Research consistently shows that youth from minority backgrounds and lower socioeconomic status are disproportionately represented within the justice system.
To evaluate effectiveness, it is crucial to consider the impact of these disparities. Critics argue that discriminatory practices not only undermine the fairness and legitimacy of the system but also hinder the positive outcomes and rehabilitation potential for marginalized youth.
Example: A report from the U.S. Department of Justice in 2020 highlighted the overrepresentation of African American youth in the juvenile justice system, which can be attributed to biases and structural inequalities.
In conclusion, evaluating the efficacy of juvenile justice policy in our modern society compared to policies in the past requires a careful examination of different factors. While some rehabilitation-focused policies may have shown positive results, debates persist regarding the appropriate balance between punishment and treatment. Acknowledging racial and socioeconomic disparities is crucial for developing more effective and equitable juvenile justice policies moving forward.