Several concerns have been proposed over the years about the future of juveniles and juvenile justice; some have demonstrated successful turnouts and some have not. As revisions continue to be proposed by members of juvenile justice and by authoritarian figures in society, the future of juveniles lies in the hands of our law makers. Juvenile justice is an important instrument to the criminal justice system, such as important decision- making that will contribute to future outcomes but it is also used to eliminate future deviance. Other than intervention programs and suggested resources that have been recommended by officers or by criminal courts, the future of juveniles should be determined by pro-active programs that are located near rural/low-income areas or in an educational environment. These programs should promote an external motivation, a specific focus that will eliminate the pleasure of committing criminal acts. Some suggest that pain and pleasure are parallel to one another this leads to the ultimate thrive of adapting a criminal characteristic. The division of these two should be alienated, and the focus of pain should be greater than the concept of pleasure. As several suggestions have been analyzed through different perspectives, Edward Mulvey and Anne-Marie Iselin authors of Improving Professional Judgments of Risk and Amenability in Juvenile Justice, propose potential community risks which can be controlled through juvenile justice; “The dual requirement to ensure community safety and promote a youthful offender's positive development permeates policy and frames daily practice in juvenile justice.” And explains that; “Balancing those two demands, explain, requires justice system professionals at all levels to make extremely difficult decisions about the likely risk and amenability to treatment of adolescent offenders” (Mulvey & Iselin , 2088).
Although juvenile crime is not a relaxed discussion neither cannot be easily controlled, the efforts to continue a positive solution to juveniles and reform the juvenile system may eliminate deviance for future crimes. We must be able to comprehend the needs of both members, the community and the offender. Three suggestions have been proposed through the principles of Edward Mulvey and Anne-Marie Iselin. First, there is a need for more reliance on actuarial methods at detention and intake that would promote more efficient and reasonable screening of cases for ensuing courts involvement (Mulvey & Iselin , 2088). Second, the use of structured decision making by probation officers could provide more consistent and valid guidance for the court when formulating dispositions (Mulvey & Iselin , 2088). Finally, implementing structured data systems to chart the progress of adolescents in placement could allow judges to oversee service providers more effectively (Mulvey & Iselin , 2088).
One aspect the juvenile system fails to overlook is the intervention of juveniles and community based programs. Perhaps a suggestion that can be made is, allowing juveniles to feel as though they have a position in society by allowing them to join prevention programs that are located in their communities. Although direct supervision should be implied, at times juveniles feel as though they have little importance to society, and assigning responsibilities can help eliminate free time. This may not guaranteed total justice for the community and the juvenile system, but the ability to keep this suggestion open allows for quicker corrections to be made and future planning. It is difficult to conclude a definite solution to end juvenile violence, we must treat every delinquent as a case-by-case situation, and not every offender will need the same type of resources to completely transform. The making of potential laws promote the intention to reform or improve juvenile justice, some have taken initiative to propose harsher demands in youth courts. They also become a daily discussion for members in the correction and probation/parole system. The New York Times illustrates current juvenile update on what should be done to assist juveniles in our present world, “Structure and personal attention are the priorities. Nearly every moment of the day is filled with counseling, school time, meals or recreation” (Brandi Grissom, 2012). These types of encouragements should continue to be part of the juvenile system, not only to offenders who are at higher risk. Juvenile justice continues to reform its policies and regulations to protect what is known as the ultimate goal, to keep society safe. Essentially, harsher punishments and a lack of resources can allow “unintended consequences” to occur allowing severe outcomes to take place in the future of juvenile crime.
The New York Times . Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/02/us/phoenix-program-
Mulvey, E., & Iselin , A. (2088). Improving professional judgments of
risk and amenability in juvenile justice. The Future of Children , 18(2), 35-57. Retrieved from http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/foc/summary/v018/18.2.mulvey.html