Aspects of Juvenile Sentencing Efficiency

Introduction

Most nations throughout the world are seeing an increase in juvenile criminality. When children are involved in crime, it has a detrimental influence on their education, health, financial restrictions, and an increase in the legal system’s budget. According to Anderberg et al. (2022), young people misuse drugs and alcohol, and follow-up into adulthood shows that anti-social behaviors in juveniles enhance the probability of future crime. Juvenile sentencing efficiency is the capacity of the justice system to provide an appropriate sentence to juvenile offenders. Several developments have been made in juvenile delinquent rehabilitation programs and strategies over the past several years to help the juvenile justice system reverse the rising concern. The term “juvenile justice system” refers to all procedures for handling children who have broken the law. The current juvenile sentencing system is ineffective and leads to high recidivism rates; thus, alternative methods emphasizing rehabilitation and restorative justice are needed.

The children’s justice system investigates the pertinent standards, legislation, procedures, institutions, and organizations to ascertain that children’s rights and legal protections are adequately acknowledged and safeguarded. This system seeks to increase public safety by holding juveniles accountable for their behavior and providing opportunities to grow and develop into productive, law-abiding citizens. According to Forsberg and Douglas (2022), rehabilitation is intended to punish criminal offenders with therapeutic rather than punitive goals. Previously, rehabilitative principles and methods in American jails focused on instructive programs, anger management, and psychological examination. The definitive purpose of justice for children is to guarantee that the criminal justice system serves and protects children. Globally, the judicial system strives to ensure that the rules and regulations for the kid’s rights involved in the legal system are upheld. Global -Prison Trends (2018) states that one million children were arrested and brought into contact with the justice system. Globally, the system has experienced several challenges in rehabilitating juvenile criminals. Consequently, children in these institutions routinely face high levels of violence, leading to poor results.

Research Objectives

Main Objective

Evaluate the effectiveness of rehabilitation programs and techniques used in correctional facilities in addressing adolescent delinquency.

Specific Objective

1. Evaluate the effectiveness of preventative and intervention programs in reducing juvenile delinquency.
2. Identify strategies to mitigate the impact of childhood trauma, parental imprisonment, drug misuse, neglect, or abuse on a child’s predisposition for delinquency.
3. Investigate the reasons for disparities in how different groups perceive the juvenile justice system regarding fairness, stigma, and equality.
4. Evaluate the effectiveness of community-based programs and services in preventing juvenile delinquency.

Research Question

Main Research Question

How effective are rehabilitation programs and techniques used inside correctional facilities regarding adolescent delinquency?

Specific Research Questions

1. To what extent may preventative and intervention programs work to reduce juvenile delinquency, and what risk factors contribute to this problem?
2. What can be done to lessen the effects of childhood trauma, parental imprisonment, drug misuse, and neglect or abuse on a child’s predisposition for delinquency?
3. What factors contribute to the disparities in how various groups see the juvenile justice system regarding fairness, stigma, and equality?
4. To what extent can community-based programs and services help prevent juvenile delinquency and facilitate effective reintegration for young people associated with the juvenile justice system?

Literature Review

Being a significant influence on a child’s likelihood of engaging in anti-social behavior, families play a pivotal role in shaping the lives of their young charges. Children must understand the principles their parents instill in them and make those values a regular part of their lives if they become responsible, contributing adults (Mwangangi, 2019). They need their parents’ direction to achieve their full potential. Sociologists debate whether anti-social conduct is a natural development element or indicative of institutionalized criminality. Emotional, cognitive, social, and physical growth are all components of a child’s development, with the family unit providing the essential context for all of these. Children must always feel safe to fully develop their intellectual capacity, creativity, athletic prowess, and emotional maturity. Building trust between family members and children is another important function of safety. Children develop a greater sense of ease and contentment when they can trust the people around them. A child’s growth is greatly influenced by the stability, values, and opportunities their family unit provides.

Marriage consistently improves children’s lives by enhancing their happiness, health, and stability, giving them the best possible start. Children with married parents are less likely to experience childhood and adolescence difficulties (Mwangangi, 2019). Those raised by a single parent are more likely to have school challenges and behavioral issues and thus get involved in criminal conduct. Divorce is a significant parent-related potential risk for violent behavior in childhood and adolescence, resulting in increased criminal records and anti-social conduct in children and adolescents. Post-divorce matters may have negative consequences, including financial difficulty and disruption to the family structure (Mwangangi, 2019). When children are subjected to authoritarian parenting, they are not allowed to express themselves, which may lead to rebellion, abandonment, and a life of crime. Children’s emotional and social vulnerability may be exacerbated by their parents’ negative attitudes, such as concealing information or ignoring queries. This feeling of uncertainty may lead to various adverse outcomes, including mental health problems and criminal actions.

Some factors increase the likelihood of delinquency among children in society. Extreme poverty, a lack of recreational opportunities, substandard housing, and overcrowding are commonly linked to high juvenile delinquency rates in urban slums (Agarwal, 2018). Lack of educational opportunities is a factor in the rise of juvenile criminality. A lack of access to education may leave children feeling hopeless and bored, which might increase their involvement in criminal behavior. Substance addiction has a devastating effect on children and is a critical factor in juvenile criminality. Delinquency can be a genetic disorder as some children are born with anti-social personality disorder, manifesting in strange and damaging ways of thinking, seeing the world, and interacting with others.

Problems emerge when young persons acquire deviant tendencies and get involved in legal troubles. Age is highly connected with crime as it peaks in adolescence and declines with time (Agarwal, 2018). Drug addiction renders adolescents more vulnerable to crime. Broken families are closely related to greater rates of delinquency. Youngsters who get little parental supervision or live in unstable or underprivileged households are more prone to participate in delinquent conduct. Occasionally, when main groups fail to give appropriate self-discipline and social control, children may acquire delinquent inclinations. The disintegration of social institutions has been connected to deviant conduct and delinquency. Additionally, a strong correlation may exist between a youth’s psychological state and their potential to acquire criminal tendencies.

Despite mounting data suggesting they may encourage rather than prevent anti-social conduct, juvenile awareness programs continue to be used. This research aimed to determine these programs’ good and bad aspects contributing to their ineffectiveness in reducing delinquency (Van der Put et al., 2020). According to the results, participation in such programs significantly improves participants’ views of crime and punishment (Van der Put et al., 2020). The risk variables for delinquency, having deviant classmates, and being antagonistic, may improve awareness, although this trend was not statistically significant. The research hints that these programs’ greater impacts on attitudes may be because attitude changes often come before any corresponding shifts in behavior (Van der Put et al., 2020). Regrettably, the study did not explain why adolescent awareness programs are unsuccessful and how they may be improved since no individual components were substantially connected to program efficacy (Van der Put et al., 2020). But still, the findings do present a more favorable picture of program efficacy than earlier research, given the changes in anti-social attitudes and the beneficial moderating impact of follow-up programs.

Even though evidence-based initiatives for juvenile justice have not yet had the expected effect, they are being adopted and expanded at a pace comparable to other disciplines’ preventative treatments. It is difficult to substantially change existing institutional procedures when assessing program assessment and execution in many social policy domains, including education, health, and justice. (Elliott et al., 2020) As a result, it is unusual for policies or programs that call for substantial shifts to the status quo to get widespread support and implementation. Expecting the juvenile justice system to adopt a new creative program immediately is unreasonable. It must take some time so that the relevant stakeholders can fully embrace it.

Strategies for the detention and rehabilitation of juvenile offenders should strike a balance between the competing goals of penalty and community safety. Juveniles develop many pro-social traits via role-playing, making it crucial to regulate their activities. It has been shown, as Hwang (2020) points out, that a number of interventions have failed to effectively reduce juvenile delinquency. As a result, it is crucial to assess the state of the art in rehabilitation methods so as to identify the most effective tactics yielding the greatest results for children. Krasny-Pacini and Evans’s (2018) study on the topic of reducing recidivism and strengthening community ties among British criminals found that special needs programs and intervening activities should have the greatest impact on the way a juvenile case is resolved. The author also noted the usefulness of family therapy and other support programs in the recovery process. It was concluded that jail sentences do not prevent criminal behavior, and that rehabilitation rather than punishment should be the primary goal of prisons.

Many juveniles are locked up, leading to overcrowding in prisons. Congestion has further been escalated by the rising number of ex-convicts who are coming back to prison. Regression rates in South Africa (SA) are predicted to be between 55% and 95% by Murhula et al. (2019), suggesting that former offenders are not receiving enough rehabilitation. Around the globe, the number of juveniles who have broken the law is on the rise. Most incarceration centers have been criticized for their lackluster effort to inmate rehabilitation. George et al. (2022) investigated the efficiency of rehabilitation programs in African prisons and found that, despite attempts, recidivism remained high. This is supported further by the findings of Resch et al. (2018), who discovered that the kind of rehabilitation provided had no beneficial effect on teenagers. The study made clear that the emphasis in rehabilitation has been on the process rather than the result.

Methods

In this research, I will collect data from juvenile offenders and adults who have ever been convicted as a juvenile or have children convicted. The study sample will be from the Crossroads Juvenile Facility in Brownsville and will consist of ten children aged 13 to 15. The other participants will be ten adults from New York. This cohort will be chosen to their unique experiences with juvenile sentencing, which I thought may give valuable insights into the efficacy of the juvenile justice system. I will choose questionnaires over interviews for data collection. This strategy will be selected because it will make data collecting more efficient and avoids interviewer bias. The data-collecting period will last from February 28 to March 10, 2023. This qualitative study’s approach will be appropriate for its intended objective, which is to assess the efficacy of correctional facility rehabilitation programs and strategies in dealing with juvenile delinquency.

The sample will be restricted to individuals who have undergone juvenile sentencing or have children who have undergone juvenile sentencing. The age range for the young participants will be 13 to 15 years, while adult participants have no age restrictions but must live in New York. The sample will not be limited to any specific gender or race. The data will mainly be gathered through self-administered questionnaires sent to the chosen individuals. The participants will be informed of the purpose of the study, and their consent will be obtained before administering the questionnaires. For the participants whose legal age of consent has not been attained, the information will be collected from their parents or the administration of the juvenile facility. The questionnaires will cover various topics, such as the effectiveness of juvenile sentencing, the impact of juvenile sentencing on the offenders and their families, and the participants’ attitudes toward the juvenile justice system. The questionnaire will consist of closed-ended questions to obtain information on participants’ experiences with the juvenile justice system. The questionnaire used for data collection consists of closed-ended questions rated on a 5-point Likert scale to assess participants’ perceptions.

Results

Table 1: Demographic Characteristics of Participants

The study population’s demographics are summarized in Table 1. Males and females comprised an equal share of the children’s sample, but men were more among the adults. Adult participants represented a greater variety of racial backgrounds than their younger participants.

Table 2: Reasons for Sentencing

The study’s participants’ sentencing determinants are shown in Table 2. About 35% of the time, drug-related crimes were the reason. Theft (25%) and assault and other causes (20%) tied for second and third place as the leading causes of detention.

Table 3: Perceptions of the Juvenile Justice System

The median and mean ratings of the participants about the juvenile justice system are shown in Table 3. With a median score of 2.5 and a mean score of 2, the findings suggest that the participants rated the system as less fair and just than initially. On the other hand, the participants thought the system treated people of different races fairly, giving it an average and median score of 2.

Table 4: Community-Based Programs and Services for Juvenile Delinquency Prevention

Table 4 shows the participation percentages of various community-based programs and services. After-school and mentoring programs had the highest participation rates, followed by family counseling and substance abuse treatment with lower rates.

Table 5: Demographics of Adults with Juvenile Sentencing Experience

Table 5 presents the demographics of adults with juvenile sentencing experience. The results show that most participants were males, and black was the most common racial group. The age distribution of the participants was relatively even across the age groups.

Table 6: Comparison of Childhood Experiences of Juvenile Offenders and Non-Offenders

Table 6 presents a comparison of childhood experiences between juvenile offenders and non-offenders. The results show that more young offenders experienced childhood trauma, neglect or abuse, parental incarceration, and substance abuse than non-offenders.

Table 7: Proposed Reforms to the Juvenile Justice System

Table 7 outlines the proposed reforms in the criminal justice system, with the percentage of participants who support them. More community-based programs and services received the highest percentage of support, reduced emphasis on punishment, better support for families or caregivers, and increased focus on rehabilitation with the lowest support.

References

Agarwal, D. (2018). Juvenile delinquency in India- Latest trends and entailing amendments in juvenile justice act. PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences, 3(3), 1365–1383. Web.

Anderberg, M., Dahlberg, M., & Wennberg, P. (2022). Criminality among young people with substance use problems in Sweden: A one-year follow-up study. Journal of Drug Issues, 52(3), 406-420. Web.

Elliott, D. S., Buckley, P. R., Gottfredson, D. C., Hawkins, J. D., & Tolan, P. H. (2020). Evidence‐based juvenile justice programs and practices: A critical review. Criminology & Public Policy, 19(4), 1305–1326. Web.

Forsberg, L., & Douglas, T. (2022). What is criminal rehabilitation? Criminal Law and Philosophy, 16(1), 103-126. Web.

George, K., Sibanyoni, E., & Mofokeng, J. (2022). Fetching water with a leaking container: Female offenders’ rehabilitation program limitation, South Africa. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), 11(2), 433-446. Web.

Global prison trends 2018. Penal Reform International. Web.

Hwang, A. (2020). Restorative Justice: A Better Alternative for Reducing Recidivism? The Sociological Imagination: Undergraduate Journal, 6(1). Web.

Krasny-Pacini, A., & Evans, J. (2018). Single-case experimental designs to assess intervention effectiveness in rehabilitation: A practical guide. Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 61(3), 164-179. Web.

Murhula, P. B. B., Singh, S. B., & Nunlall, R. (2019). A critical analysis on offenders rehabilitation approach in South Africa: A review of the literature. African Journal of Criminology and Justice Studies: AJCJS, 12(1), 21-43. Web.

Mwangangi, R. K. (2019). The role of family in dealing with juvenile delinquency. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 7(3), 52–63. Web.

Resch, C., Rosema, S., Hurks, P., de Kloet, A., & van Heugten, C. (2018). Searching for effective components of cognitive rehabilitation for children and adolescents with acquired brain injury: A systematic review. Brain Injury, 32(6), 679-692. Web.

Van der Put, C. E., Boekhout van Solinge, N. F., Stams, G. J., Hoeve, M., & Assink, M. (2020). Effects of awareness programs on juvenile delinquency: A three-level meta-analysis. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 65(1), 0306624X2090923. Web.