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-
gives-texas-juveniles-intensive-counseling.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&
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