A problem called juvenile recidivism is on the verge of becoming a danger.
Numerous studies have found that the recidivism rate among young individuals is rising. (Carney & Buttell, 2003). Therefore, in an effort to mitigate the problem, policymakers have tried to come up with options to address it.
Concerns about the necessity of trying juvenile offenders in adult courts and subjecting them to adult sentences as a measure to contain the problem have grown.
The efficacy of the actions and its capacity to keep track of the situation have drawn criticism from a variety of angles. Regarding that, we would analyze the viability of the proposals by focusing on the reduction of recidivism among young people versus the consequence of punishment. Also, it would assist in determining and coming up with programs and suitable strategies that best handle the matter through a balanced approach (Abrams, 2006).
Statement on the Results of the Articles
From the analyzed articles, they all seem to point to a similar outcome. They offer qualitative insight on the subject of young offenders getting subjected to adult punishment. Based on available statistics on jurisdictions where the issue is in place, massive failure is a norm. It’s with regards to the consideration and thought put in place that the strategy could offer a remedy to assist young people from going back to wicked ways and activities. However, the approach seems to worsen necessitating policy makers once more to look into the subject thoroughly. It’s towards uncovering underlying root causes of the problem and coming up with appropriate solutions that could be of help. On top of that, proposals have come by on various alternatives and ways such as policy change among other methods that seem to yield results in the long run.
Phenomena which is of Interest to Study
Concerning the topic under study, a significant and interesting aspect of review is on the effectiveness of using adult judicial proceedings on young people so as to contain the high rates of recidivism (Cottle & Heilbrun, 2001). The issue has for an extended period raised concerns about its sustainability, relevance, and impact in handling the ever rising rate of recurrence. Policymakers and other stakeholders involved in judicial and criminal proceedings are in agreement with adult punishment getting subjected to young people. However, when the matter is insightfully analyzed, many disparities arise which leads to its questioning as to whether it’s the most suitable substitute. Even with concern on the number of juvenile offenses getting reported, there is need to come up with appropriate solutions tailored towards young peoples’ needs. Young people are quite different from adults in many aspects. Exposing them to punitive punishment in most cases doesn’t achieve the intended purpose and may not serve as a solution to deter them from engaging in crime.
Summary of Key Findings
From the articles reviewed, a consensus was in place on the detrimental effects of exposing juveniles to adult punishment. A similar stance got maintained on the need to retain juvenile prosecution in their designated court level. Studies undertaken by primary states using the approach indicate interesting facts. Different dimensions regarding the topic such as costs of implementing the proposals and the detrimental impacts that fell on the youth. Prosecuting of young people in adult courts exposed major shortcoming of policies and judicial legislations which flaunted the basic rights of the young people. From directing courts to transfer juveniles to adult courts, there seems to be a shortcoming which goes against their freedom. Besides that, the sentences granted to the young people affect them and make them turn against law enforcers by cultivating negative mindsets. The punishments also impact them psychologically affecting their general well-being besides their overall development. The situation has therefore raised the alarm on a need to reflect on the issue to save young people and rehabilitate them in the best ways possible (Petrosino & Buehler, 2003).
The articles summarized alternative ways to tackle the matter holistically. Some of the proposed methods include through the general incorporation of efforts from various individuals involved in the young adults’ lives. It’s with the objective of positively influencing and guiding them in the right paths to avoid the temptation of engaging in vices. The other is the use of treatment that focuses in concentrating the young adult’s energy and attention to more profitable areas (Przybylski, 2008). The articles propose a systematic approach to remedying and saving young people from the life of crime (Carney & Buttell, 2003). Furthermore, there are suggestions on the best ways to follow through a balanced and insightful review.
The Gap Available in the Study
An apparent gap that would assist in the learning of the topic is uncovering the underlying consequences on the prevalence of the issue. The realization of such important matters would be helpful in coming up with approaches geared towards solving the particular problem. Policies shouldn’t get ratified and imposed quickly without proper background information. In conclusion, the matter on juvenile recidivism is critical and requires consulted and organized effort to tackle it to avoid the emergence of eventualities later and spilling out of control.
References
Abrams, L. S. (2006). Listening to juvenile offenders: Can residential treatment prevent recidivism?. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 23(1), 61-85.
Bradshaw, W., & Roseborough, D. (2005). Restorative justice dialogue: The impact of mediation and conferencing on juvenile recidivism. Fed. Probation, 69, 15.
Carney, M. M., & Buttell, F. (2003). Reducing juvenile recidivism: Evaluating the wraparound services model. Research on social work practice, 13(5), 551-568.
Cottle, C. C., Lee, R. J., & Heilbrun, K. (2001). The prediction of criminal recidivism in juveniles a meta-analysis. Criminal justice and behavior, 28(3), 367-394.
Howell, J. C. (2003). Preventing and reducing juvenile delinquency: A comprehensive framework. Sage.
Petrosino, A., Turpin-Petrosino, C., & Buehler, J. (2002). Scared Straight’and other juvenile awareness programs for preventing juvenile delinquency. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2.
Petrosino, A., Turpin-Petrosino, C., & Buehler, J. (2003). Scared Straight and other juvenile awareness programs for preventing juvenile delinquency: A systematic review of the randomized experimental evidence. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 589(1), 41-62.
Przybylski, R. (2008). What works: Effective recidivism reduction and risk-focused prevention programs. RKC Group, 38.
