Examining The Juvenile Justice Probation System Criminology Essay

Probation is a supervised period of proving where a criminal is allowed an chance to expose proper behavior outside of prison. Juvenile probation is the most normally used sentence in the juvenile justness system. It upholds that a young person will hold a better opportunity of rehabilitation in a place environment than in a gaol installation. Young persons on probation undergo extended monitoring and supervising whilst finishing court-ordered countenances and services ( Broemmel, 2004 ) . For illustration, in add-on to executing community service responsibilities, the young person on probation may be ordered to pay money to the victim if the victim suffered any losingss as a consequence of the offense. They youth wrongdoer may besides be ordered to undergo guidance and in more terrible instances, submit a Deoxyribonucleic acid sample. Probation judicial admissions differ from one wrongdoer to the following, and some young person must stay by curfew limitations ordered by the tribunal, or attend twenty-four hours intervention plans. These plans frequently offer alternate school scenes and supply other resources like choler direction categories or societal skill-building categories.

Despite the common misconception that juvenile probation is a mere smack on the carpus ; the fact is that these young persons must adhere to strict regulations stipulated by the tribunal. If they fail to adhere to any of the given regulations as portion of their probation, they will be removed from their places and placed in an institutionalised scene. There are three types of juvenile probation: unsupervised, standard and intensive. Unsupervised juvenile probation provides the wrongdoer undergoes no supervised inadvertence. Standard juvenile probation requires the wrongdoer to go to regular meetings with a probation officer. Intensive juvenile probation requires intensive monitoring of the wrongdoer. It is a condemning option for extremely at-risk juvenile wrongdoers who have a high demand. Youths on this plan are required to do day-to-day contact with their probation officers ( Broemmel, 2004 ) .

The tribunal procedure for juvenile wrongdoers differs from that of grownup wrongdoers. It works as follows:

First Appearance:

At this point charges are either denied, or a supplication is entered. A justice decides if the young person will be released into the detention of his/her parents, or be placed in a detainment centre during this procedure. Conditionss of the young person being released to the parents may include the undermentioned:

Curfew

House apprehension

Traveling to school

Attending intervention services like reding

Drug proving

Avoiding negative equals and/or victims

Adjudication:

This is the test stage of the tribunal procedure. At this point the justice makes a determination about charges. If the young person is found guilty, the following measure of the procedure is condemning. This may be scheduled for a ulterior day of the month, or may go on during this measure. If the young person is found not-guilty, all charges are dropped and the instance is dismissed.

Disposition / Sentencing:

The justice decides on appropriate sentencing for the offense committed. The young person will either be sentenced to a juvenile correctional installation or be placed on probation. If the latter is chosen, there are conditions involved and conditions applied:

Community service

Payment for amendss incurred as a consequence of the offense

Counseling, like Functional Family Therapy

Appraisal and rating ( www.cyfd.org ) .

The Evolution of Juvenile Justice and Probation

Youth justness and probation are at a critical occasion in their history and grounds of their effectivity has been sought. For many old ages the effectivity of probation played a encouraging function in juvenile justness. The concern was non whether the wrongdoer would perpetrate another offense ; it was more a affair of whether or non proper aid was provided. It was the specific mission of a probation officer the ‘advise, aid and befriend ‘ an wrongdoer. When this method proved uneffective, due to the development of repetition wrongdoers, a method of ‘non-treatment paradigm ‘ was introduced ( Burnett, 2004 ) .

This method restructured probation work to a system of coaction between the worker and the wrongdoer. Its purpose was to supply aid based on jobs presented by the wrongdoer. Before this reform, the chief intent of the young person justness was to be given to the public assistance of young person wrongdoers ( Burnett, 2004 ) .

During the 1970 ‘s a tendency to deinstitutionalize young person started. Young person wrongdoers were moved from secure detainment installations to community based plans. These plans focused on rehabilitating the young persons by communicating alternatively of captivity. In 1972 Massachusetts closed all its province juvenile installations. Two old ages subsequently, California started paying counties to maintain young persons out of province installations. This move led to the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act ( JJDPA ) of 1974. The JJDPA so established a Federal office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention – which had the authorization to carry on research and supply preparation to probation officers. This new Federal jurisprudence mandated that provinces remove position wrongdoers and dependence instances from parturiency. For those young persons who had to stay in unafraid parturiency, it mandated that they be separated from grownup wrongdoers by ‘sight and sound. ‘ Four old ages subsequently the jurisprudence stated that all bush leagues be removed from gaol ( Mucie & A ; Goldson, 2006 ) .

In 1984 the probation service was given an official Statement of National Operations and Purpose ( SNOP ) and affirmed a period of reappraisal where the service was required to supply grounds of effectivity. Military officers had to turn out that their methods really made an impact and produced positive consequences. Additionally, they had to turn out the cost-effectiveness of the service and were challenged to uncover probation attacks to evaluative examination.

By the mid 1990 ‘s the progress in necessitating grounds of effectual pattern showed favourable consequences. By supplying difficult grounds of how money was spent in the probation plans, and how resources were utilised, probation officers experienced a metaphorical ‘rebirth, ‘ ( Burnett, 2004 ) .

The National Crime Survey showed that between 1973 and 1989 serious violent juvenile offenses were comparatively changeless. In 1993 these Numberss jumped by one-third. In a province of terror, more than 40 provinces introduced statute law to toughen punishments on juvenile wrongdoers and to ease the procedure of seeking young person wrongdoers in condemnable tribunals. Suddenly, gaols nationally experienced an inflow of young person inmates. State juvenile tribunals were faced with yet another job. Tougher justness for juvenile wrongdoers and a reform of the juvenile justness system needed to be implemented. New Torahs were put in topographic point and young persons were given harsher penalties for their offenses. Sentences became more terrible and probation conditions became much stricter ( Mucnie & A ; Godson, 2006 ) .

Juvenile Wrongdoers

Young persons today are under all kinds of force per unit area. When these force per unit areas seem excessively monumental to get the better of, offense becomes common pattern. In 2000, a survey was conducted on a group of young person shacking within a 25-mile radius of Gabriel Valley in Southern California ( Wooden, 2000 ) . The intent of the survey was to demo that all teens, non merely urban, low-class young person, were capable to juvenile delinquency. Possibly one of the most starling finds of the survey was that ‘at-risk ‘ childs progressively were shown to be white males from flush middle-class suburban area. It is of import to advert that non all teens turn to offense. In fact, most teens are respectable members of society who obey the jurisprudence and attend school. They attend college and turn up to be well-balanced grownups. This survey focused on the few juveniles who do non suit into that class.

‘At-risk ‘ childs are the 1s who feel isolated from their equals and frequently misunderstood by grownups. In the hunt for credence by any group, they frequently choose delinquency as a method of chumminess. Sadly, the offenses they commit are non guiltless and they quickly become caught up in a series of misdemeanours. This, in bend, lands them in the juvenile justness system which many of them will patronize for the remainder of their adolescent old ages. The survey shows that the lone manner to halt repeat-offenders is for the authorities and households to step in and demo larger involvement. Another dismaying find of the survey showed the increasing ferociousness of contemporary young person wrongdoers. For illustration, a 13-year-old miss is abducted from a slumber party and murdered ; a Christian young person assembly is interrupted when a gunslinger opens fire and starts hiting everyone in sight ; increasing school shots where one or two pupils enter a school and opens fire, killing pupils and instructors likewise. In all the aforesaid illustrations, the culprits were adolescents themselves.

‘At-risk ‘ childs are no longer merely interior metropolis young persons who are pressured into fall ining a pack or merchandising drugs. They are now suburban adolescents who come from stable places and who choose, for whatever ground, to go juvenile delinquents. Once these offenses of slaying and others, such as larceny, are committed, more young persons show up in forepart of a justice. It is at the exclusive discretion of the justice as to how these young persons will be reprimanded. It has become popular pattern for these young person wrongdoers to stop up in the juvenile justness probation system ( Wooden, 2000 ) .

Georgia Juvenile Justice System

The GA Department of Juvenile Justice ‘s ( DJJ ) mission statement is “ to protect and function the Citizens of Georgia by keeping vernal wrongdoers accountable for their actions through the bringing of intervention services and countenances in appropriate scenes and by set uping young person in their communities as productive and observant citizens. ” The DJJ follows specific stairss with juvenile wrongdoers. The intake procedure involves the juvenile tribunal system every bit good as the tribunal service system of the DJJ. The intake procedure may take one of several classs:

A instance may be informally adjusted

A request for adjudicative proceedings may be filed with the juvenile tribunal

The instance may be delivered to services outside the tribunal

The instance may be dismissed

The procedure operates 24 hours a twenty-four hours, 7 yearss a hebdomad. When a young person is taken in by jurisprudence functionaries, the parents or defenders are notified. Release or detainment conditions are based on the young person ‘s hazard to re-offend and hazard of failure to go to tribunal hearings. Based on the old determination, the young person is either released into the detention of his/her parents or defenders, or transported to a Regional Youth Detention Center ( RYDC ) , ( Shuman, 2009 ) .

Most provinces have youth rehabilitation plans in topographic point to assist young persons on probation achieve their highest potency. In all these plans, the young persons work with professional staff on breaking themselves. In Georgia specifically this plan has been successful. A recent survey study released by the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections showed a 25 per centum bead, statewide, in juvenile offenses ( KMTV.com, 2006 ) . Experts attribute those Numberss to “ a really active probation system. ” The effectivity of the probation system prevents the tendency of repetition wrongdoers. New wrongdoers are either placed on rigorous probation conditions or sent to prison. Juvenile Services decision maker Chris Talkington points out that plans which treat young person wrongdoers every bit good as parents of those wrongdoers, play a cardinal function in the success of rehabilitation ( Talkinton, 2006 ) .

Juvenile Crime Statistics

The Numberss recorded by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention ( OJJDP ) do non include all offenses committed by young person wrongdoers, because non all offenses are recorded. For the offenses which have been recorded, the statistics are as follows:

Arrest rates from 1987 – 1994 increased aggressively among youth wrongdoers. Murder rates and aggravated assault Numberss doubled during this period

During this clip, males were the precursors in slaying offenses, and most Acts of the Apostless were committed with pieces

Arrest rates among females were n’t every bit high as their male opposite numbers, but has been steadily increasing since the 1990 ‘s

In 2000, 28 per centum of juvenile apprehensions were apprehensions of females

Since 1994, arrest rates among young persons have seen a steady diminution. Murder rates of and by young persons in 2000 were 74 per centum lower than in 1993

Drug rates, nevertheless, saw an addition during the 1990 ‘s and although it has non increased significantly in recent old ages, it has besides non seen a diminution ( Flores, 2005 )

Young persons are typically arrested for the undermentioned offenses: assault, homicide, colza, robbery, incendiarism, car larceny, burglary, larceny/theft, hooliganism, arms ownership. In add-on to violent offenses, there are besides drug and intoxicant misdemeanors and sexual discourtesies. Probation misdemeanors like curfew misdemeanors, refusal to obey parents, running off, hooky and minor intoxicant ingestion are besides evidences for re-arrest.

More than half of the young person apprehensions made are because of larceny, simple assault, drug maltreatment, disorderly behavior, and curfew misdemeanors. Harmonizing to the OJJDP, larceny has been the greatest cause of young person apprehensions.

In 1999, 2,468,800 juvenile apprehensions were recorded – of these, 380,500 were for larceny

In 2000, 2,369,400 juvenile apprehensions were recorded – of these, 363,5000 were for larceny

Drug maltreatment misdemeanors accounted for 198,400 of the 1999 apprehensions, and 203,900 of the 2000 apprehensions

Violent offense accounted for 103,900 of the 1999 apprehensions and 98,900 of the 2000 apprehensions

Regardless of these high Numberss, juvenile apprehension rates dropped by 5 per centum from 1999 to 2000 ( Flores, 2005 )

Effectiveness of the Juvenile Justice Probation System

Juvenile offense statistics have seen a steady diminution since 1994. An effectual juvenile justness probation system is credited with the positive consequences. Several plans have been put in topographic point to guarantee the effectivity of the system and the bar of future young person offenses ( Flores, 2005 ) . Older schemes like panic tactics and youth boot-camps have been uneffective, and as a consequence newer, more effectual thoughts were implemented.

Education:

Model plans teach parents about raising healthy households, and young persons about the negative impact of drugs and packs. The plans are designed to do young persons cognizant that there are effects to their actions.

Diversion:

Diversion plans provide supervised ‘free clip ‘ to young persons. The Department of Education reported that most youth offenses occur from 2p.m. – 8p.m. , top outing at 3p.m. The consequence of these diversion plans is that young persons interact with grownups and equals and set up healthy relationships, which makes these young persons less likely to perpetrate offenses. Plans are designed to turn to different accomplishments ( sport/art ) , so youths are take parting in a plan making something they are really comfy with and bask making.

Community Involvement:

With community engagement, like church young person groups, male child lookouts and misss lookouts, young persons interact with equals in a safe community environment.

Prenatal and Infancy Home Visits by Nurses:

This plan is designed to turn to low-income, individual parent places. The nurses focus on the wellness of the both the female parent and the kid. They are taught how to set up healthy relationships with their childs. After 15 old ages the nurses follow up with the female parents and the effectivity of their old visits are reeling. The young person of female parents who received antenatal and babyhood visits, had a 56 per centum lower blowout rate, and a 56 per centum lower kid apprehension rate. These household places besides showed a 79 per centum lower maltreatment rate than the places of individual female parents in low-income countries who did non have prenatal and kid visits.

Parent-child Interaction Training Programs:

This 12-week plan Teachs positive rearing accomplishments to parents of kids aged two to seven, who display behavioural jobs. The procedure is guided by a healer.

Strong-arming Prevention Program:

With this elementary- and junior-high school plan, toughs and victims receive independent guidance Sessionss and put up category regulations and group treatments to choke the job.

Prevention Programs within the Juvenile Justice System:

Young person who enter the Juvenile Justice System are sponsored by the province to undergo rehabilitation and go on schooling. Their purpose is to forestall these young person from re-entering the justness system at a ulterior clip.

Functional Family Therapy:

This plan is specifically designed to assist households who have young persons on probation.

The plan is divided into three stages and provides a healer to work separately with each household member to offer positive encouragement to the young person wrongdoer. Phase one: hardship to therapy is broken down and the healer explains the positive consequences of unfastened communicating. Phase two: the healer shows household members how they can alter forms of behaviour to forestall an ‘episode ‘ of delinquency. They are shown different options on how to react to mundane issues. Phase three: household members are encouraged to and shown how use their new rational accomplishments into different societal state of affairss. This low-priced plan has been really effectual in the rehabilitation of young person wrongdoers ( Flores, 2005 ) .

Decision

Countrywide statistics every bit good as statewide statistics have shown that the Juvenile Justice Probation System is effectual. Since its origin, offense rates among youth have dropped and go on to demo a steady diminution. Federal bureaus have made every attempt and accommodation to offer cost-efficient solutions and resources to troubled young persons. Law enforcement functionaries have been affectional in groking young person wrongdoers and puting them in appropriate plans that can lend to their successful rehabilitation. Society as whole is more cognizant of how to near, learn and care for ‘at-risk ‘ young persons. They are reacting favourably to the many resources available to guarantee successful rehabilitation of young person wrongdoers. At this rate, and with the aid of parents, defenders, schools and the Juvenile Justice System, offense rates among juveniles will go on to worsen.