Psy/270 Week 2 Case Study Of Rehabilitation

In Last Chance in Texas, The author researches the treatment of juveniles that are in the Capital punishment program at the Giddings State School. Giddings is a facility in Texas that is ran aggressively and has one of the most successful, treatment programs in America for young offenders (Hubner, 2008). The juveniles in this program have committed violent crimes and were sentenced to this school for rehabilitation and the ability to reintegration back into society. Throughout the book, Hubner studied three sets of nine students of Giddings for nine months. Hubner discovered that the treatment programs worked by making the juveniles understand their past and how their actions affected other people was the key to a successful rehabilitation

There are indication that most criminals have a juvenile records in the US, indicating that crime manifests from a tender age. Therefore, to reverse the incidence of crime, it follows that the best strategy is to reduce the criminal orientation in the juvenile offenders as opposed to hardening them and preparing them for criminal careers. The case of the Crossroads Juvenile Center demonstrates the willingness of the juvenile justice systems to make these changes on the children. References Day, S. (2014). Runaway Man: A Journey Back to Hope.

The federal government’s “War on Crime” by the Johnson administration in the 60s made way for tougher law enforcement and surveillance (Hinton, 2015). However, with this came the separation of children and adults in the criminal justice system; then the separation of juvenile delinquents from status offenders. As mentioned, status offenders are different from juvenile delinquents because they had broken rules which apply to only children. Meanwhile, juvenile delinquents are youths under the age of 18, who committed offenses that would be punishable to adults as well. By the late 1960s, there became a growing concern that juveniles involved in the court-based status-offense system, were not getting their best interests met (Shubik & Kendall, 2007).

Rehabilitation methods should be the primary action taken for any non-violent crime but especially for juveniles

Not only does Berstein call for an overall reform of this nation’s juvenile prisons, she goes as far as saying the practice of locking up youth is in need of a “more profound than incremental and partial reform” (13). The fact that Bernstein outlines the numerous failed strategies and goals of this practice with her compelling use of studies and statistics is enough to promote an audience to reject the practice of locking up youth. The statistic she shares that “four out of five juvenile parolees [will be] back behind bars within three years of release” as well as the studies she conducted on numerous instances when a guards abuse of power lead to the death of a child work to further prove her point: being that “institution[s] as intrinsically destructive as the juvenile prison” have no place in a modern society (13, 83). Bernstein refutes this false sense effectiveness further by sharing her own ideas on what she believes works as a much more humane solution to rehabilitating

Annotated bibliography Childress, S. (2016, June 2). More States Consider Raising the Age for Juvenile Crime. Retrieved from PBS: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/more-states-consider-raising-the-age-for-juvenile-crime/ More states are considering to raising the age for juvenile crimes before being tried as adult because young offender's mental capacity. The idea is to cut the cost of incarcerate young offender in adult prison and ensure offenders to receive proper education and specialized care to change their behavior. Putting children in adult prison does not deter crime.

Imagine being a child imprisoned for committing a crime for which you did not understand the consequences. Alone and afraid, with only hardened criminals and psychopaths as adult role models, you live in fear. Through a vicious combination of physical, sexual, emotional, and mental abuse, there is no option but to turn back to crime as an adult, and continue the cycle. This is a daily reality for thousands of American juveniles. Yet, we continue to call it the juvenile justice system.

In the article “Remember the Victims of Juvenile Offenders” Jennifer Bishop-Jenkins explains how the killer of her 26 year-old pregnant sister got away not only with that crime but others as well (Bishop-Jenkins 1). Bishop-Jenkins agrees how some teens need long term evaluation before they are able to rejoin the public, as a result should be tried as adults. If these criminals are shown there are no serious consequences for crimes then they will continue their antics. Teens should be tried as adults for felonies if they are unfit for juvenile detention centers for which they can not rehabilitate. Not only will it put criminals behind bars but will allow the victims to experience some

A Bureau of Justice Statistics conducted a study in 40 of the nation’s largest urban communities. “It was found that an estimated 7,100 juvenile defendants were charged with felonies in adult criminal court in 1998. Of these 40 county criminal courts, juveniles were 64% more likely than adults to be charged with a violent felony. These juvenile defendants were generally treated as serious offenders, as 52% did not receive pretrial release, 63% were convicted of a felony, and 43% of those convicted received a prison sentence. States have expanded the mechanisms by which juveniles can be charged in criminal courts.

There are differences between a juvenile court and criminal court in the United States. The focus of the juvenile justice system is on rehabilitation, in hope of deterring the minor away from a life of crime so they will not commit a crime again as an adult. In contrast, the criminal justice system focuses on the punishment and often bases the sentencing outcome on the criminal history of the youth. In a study conducted, Butler (2011) showed that the participants’ experience with adult jails and prisons show that those facilities may instill fear but are otherwise emotionally—and often physically—dangerous for youth. Many of the adult prisoners, who were minors when they enter the adult institution, felt they were forced to “grow

The same malleability that makes them vulnerable to peer pressure also makes them promising candidates for rehabilitation. ”(8) This makes the reader believe that, despite the heinous crimes the juveniles committed, they are still able to change. Gail Garinger’s claim of minors not receiving life sentences for the fact that they have the ability to change by using emotional responses in the reader makes her article the least credible.

It is debated that juveniles are committing more serious and violent crimes because the youth think they can get off easy and take advantage of the system put in place. Those in favor of youth offenders being tried as adults believe that as juveniles are punished to the full extent of the law, future youth offender will think twice before committing a criminal act. In support of this, seventy-five percent of the transferred juveniles interviewed by Redding and Fuller (2004) felt that their experiences in the adult criminal justice system had taught them the serious consequences of committing crimes. As one juvenile explained, “[Being tried as an adult] showed me it’s not a game anymore. Before, I thought that since I’m a juvenile I could do just about anything and just get 6 months if I got

Within the urban communities, negative perceptions are magnified. Adolescents are more prone to be a product of their environment, especially those whose parents are incarcerated. Because of this trend adolescents are being incarcerated at an alarming rate and sentenced to adult facilities. Lambie & Randall (2013) states, the United States have imposed harsher penalties on serious young offenders, and have consequently increased rates of incarcerated youth and made it easier for youth to be treated and incarcerated as adults within the justice

Jessie Townsend May 3rd, 2016 Prof. Allen Wong ASOC283 Why Kids Get Life The documentary “When Kids Get Life” delves into four cases involving juveniles who are serving life without parole in Colorado prisons. All of these juveniles are serving this time due to first degree murder among other charges they have received. The ages of these juveniles at the time of their crimes range from fifteen to seventeen and all of them still currently remain incarcerated. By applying different delinquency theories to each case, there is a chance that one could explain or even rationalize why these juveniles committed the crimes that they did.

(1994). JUVENILE OFFENDERS: WHAT WORKS? A Summary of Research