assignment on juvenile delinquency

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
BJPsych Bull
v.41(1); 2017 Feb

Juvenile delinquency, welfare, justice and therapeutic interventions: a global perspective

Susan young.

1 Imperial College London, London, UK

2 Broadmoor Hospital, Crowthorne, UK

Richard Church

3 South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK

This review considers juvenile delinquency and justice from an international perspective. Youth crime is a growing concern. Many young offenders are also victims with complex needs, leading to a public health approach that requires a balance of welfare and justice models. However, around the world there are variable and inadequate legal frameworks and a lack of a specialist workforce. The UK and other high-income countries worldwide have established forensic child and adolescent psychiatry, a multifaceted discipline incorporating legal, psychiatric and developmental fields. Its adoption of an evidence-based therapeutic intervention philosophy has been associated with greater reductions in recidivism compared with punitive approaches prevalent in some countries worldwide, and it is therefore a superior approach to dealing with the problem of juvenile delinquency.

Recent years have seen sustained public and academic interest in criminality and mental health, with attention often focused on antisocial behaviour by children and adolescents. The scale of the problem of juvenile delinquency has provoked mixed responses from governments and the media across the world, with calls for improved rehabilitation and support for juvenile offenders competing with voices advocating more punitive approaches. 1 Meanwhile, decades of rigorous academic scrutiny have shed light on the complex and diverse needs of children who come into conflict with the law. 2 – 5 Much of the growing body of literature on juvenile offenders shows considerable overlap between criminological, social and biomedical research, with a consensus emerging around the significance of a developmental understanding of the emergence of juvenile delinquency.

Importantly, juvenile offenders have consistently been identified as a population that suffers from a markedly elevated prevalence and severity of mental disorder compared with the general juvenile population. 6 , 7 Meeting the needs of these young offenders presents practical and ethical challenges concerning treatment and management, including liaison with other agencies.

What is juvenile delinquency?

Who counts as juvenile.

Juvenile delinquency is a term commonly used in academic literature for referring to a young person who has committed a criminal offence, although its precise definition can vary according to the local jurisdiction. The specific reasons underlying these differences are unclear, but they may arise from the lack of an agreed international standard. 8

A ‘juvenile’ in this context refers to an individual who is legally able to commit a criminal offence owing to being over the minimum age of criminal responsibility, but who is under the age of criminal majority, when a person is legally considered an adult. The minimum age of criminal responsibility varies internationally between 6 and 18 years, but the age of criminal majority is usually 18 years.

In some cases individuals older than 18 years may be heard in a juvenile court, and therefore will still be considered juveniles; indeed, the United Nations (UN) defines ‘youth’ as between 15 and 24 years of age. The term ‘child delinquents’ has been used in reference to children below the age of 13 who have committed a delinquent act, 9 although elsewhere ‘children’ are often defined as being under 18 years of age. The term ‘young offenders’ is broad, and can refer to offenders aged under 18 years or include young adults up to their mid-20s.

What is a crime?

A ‘delinquent’ is an individual who has committed a criminal offence. Delinquency therefore encompasses an enormous range of behaviours which are subject to legislation differing from one jurisdiction to another, and are subject to changes in law over time. Whereas acts of theft and serious interpersonal violence are commonly considered to constitute criminal offences, other acts including alcohol consumption and sexual behaviour in young people are tolerated to very differing degrees across the world. Sometimes these differences arise as a consequence of historical or cultural factors, and they may be underpinned by traditional religious laws, such as in some Middle Eastern countries. Some offences may be shared between jurisdictions but be enforced to differing standards – for instance, ‘unlawful assembly’, often used to prevent riots, is applied in Singapore to young people meeting in public in groups of five or more as part of police efforts to tackle youth gangs. Furthermore, ‘status offences’ – acts that would be permissible in adults but criminalised in children, such as consumption of alcohol or truancy – not only vary between jurisdictions, but contribute to discontinuity when comparing juvenile delinquency with adult populations in the same jurisdiction.

Lack of clarity can also arise in jurisdictions where a young offender is processed via a welfare system rather than a youth justice process. Countries with a high minimum age of criminal responsibility may not technically criminalise young people for behaviour that would normally be prosecuted and therefore classed as ‘delinquent’ elsewhere.

Not all incarcerated juveniles are ‘delinquent’, since some may be detained pre-trial and may not be convicted of an offence. Even if convicted, it would be wrong to assume that every ‘juvenile delinquent’ meets criteria for a diagnosis of conduct disorder; offences vary considerably and may not be associated with a broad repertoire of offending behaviour. Also, most ‘juvenile delinquents’ do not pose an immediate risk of violence to others, and the vast majority of convicted juveniles serve their sentences in the community.

To meet the diagnostic criteria of conduct disorder requires evidence of a persistent pattern of dissocial or aggressive conduct, such that it defies age-appropriate social expectations. Behaviours may include cruelty to people or animals, truancy, frequent and severe temper tantrums, excessive fighting or bullying and fire-setting; diagnosis of conduct disorder can be made in the marked presence of one of these behaviours. 10

Overall, the term ‘juvenile delinquent’ is used extensively in academic literature, but requires some care. It can be a potentially problematic term, and in some contexts can strike a pejorative tone with misleading negative assumptions. For several years the UN has used the phrase ‘children in conflict with the law’ to describe the breadth of the heterogeneous group of individuals under the age of 18 who have broken the law or are at risk of doing so.

General principles of juvenile justice

Welfare v. justice models.

The sentencing of an individual convicted of a criminal offence is largely driven by three key considerations: retribution (punishment), deterrence and rehabilitation. In the case of juvenile offenders the principle of rehabilitation is often assigned the greatest weight. 11

Special consideration for juveniles within the criminal justice system is not a new concept. In Roman law, the principle of doli incapax protected young children from prosecution owing to the presumption of a lack of capacity and understanding required to be guilty of a criminal offence. Most countries have some provision for special treatment of children who come into conflict with the law, however, the degree to which this is provided varies across the world. 1 , 12 In some countries a ‘welfare’ model prevails, which focuses on the needs of the child, diagnosis, treatment and more informal procedures, whereas other countries favour a ‘justice’ model, which emphasises accountability, punishment and procedural formality.

Belgium is frequently cited as an example of a country with a strong welfare process, supported by a high minimum age of criminal responsibility of 18 years. Similarly, France built a strong welfare reputation by placing education and rehabilitation at the centre of youth justice reforms in the 1940s. New Zealand in 1989 established the widely praised system of Family Group Conferencing as an integral part of youth justice, with a focus on restoration of relationships and reduction of incarceration that would be considered part of a welfare approach. In contrast, the UK and the USA have traditionally been associated with a justice model and low age of criminal responsibility – 10 years in England and Wales, and as low as 6 years in several US states.

Within welfare or justice models, a young person may at some point be ‘deprived of liberty’ – defined as any form of detention under official authorities in a public or private location which the child is not permitted to leave. Locations in which children may be deprived of liberty include police stations, detention centres, juvenile or adult prisons, secure remand homes, work or boot camps, penitentiary colonies, locked specialised schools, educational or rehabilitation establishments, military camps and prisons, immigration detention centres, secure youth hostels and hospitals. 13

Between the less and more punitive systems

The UN supports the development of specialised systems for managing children in conflict with the law. When the first children's courts were set up in the USA in the 1930s, they were widely praised as a progressive system for serving the best interests of the child. Although informality was championed as a particular benefit, in the 1960s substantial concerns arose about due process and the protection of the legal rights of minors. The subsequent development of formal juvenile courts occurred in the context of a continuing ethos of rehabilitation of young people, with a move away from incarceration of juveniles in the 1970s, especially in Massachusetts and California. However, following a marked peak in juvenile offending statistics during the 1980s and 1990s, public and political opinion swung firmly in a more punitive direction. This was accompanied by legal reforms that increased the severity of penalties available to juvenile courts and lowered the age threshold for juveniles to be tried in adult criminal courts.

When the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child entered into force in 1990, the USA was not a signatory owing to 22 states permitting capital punishment of individuals who had committed their crimes as juveniles. It is reported that 19 juvenile offenders were executed in the USA between 1990 and 2005. Although this number may represent a small percentage of the total who faced the death penalty in the USA during that period, the practice was widely criticised by international bodies and organisations. 14 A landmark ruling in the US Supreme Court 15 outlawed the execution of juvenile offenders in the USA, but to date a small number of countries worldwide still implement this practice, sometimes as a result of religious laws.

However, it would be wrong to assume that welfare systems are automatically preferable to a juvenile justice approach, since welfare arrangements can be equally coercive in terms of deprivation of liberty of juveniles. They may lack due process, safeguards for obtaining reliable evidence from young people, processes for testing evidence, and procedures for scrutiny or appeal following disposal.

Trends in youth crime

The USA witnessed a dramatic increase in arrest rates of young people for homicide and other violent crimes in the 1980s and 1990s, sometimes referred to as the ‘violence epidemic’. 16 The ensuing moral panic led to harsh and punitive policy changes in juvenile justice and, although official statistics document a subsequent fall of 20% in court case-loads between 1997 and 2009, victimisation surveys have indicated a degree of continuity in high levels of offending, consistent with a reported increase in juvenile offending between 2000 and 2006. 17

In common with the USA and several other high-income countries, the UK also experienced a rise in juvenile offending in the 1980s and 1990s, but figures from the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales appear to indicate a general improvement in recent years. Between 2009/2010 and 2014/2015 a 67% reduction has been observed in the number of young people entering the juvenile justice system for the first time, a 65% reduction in the number of young people receiving a caution or court disposal and a 57% reduction in the number of young people in custody. 18 These figures support an overall decrease in juvenile offending noted since the early 1990s. 19

Youth crime figures from Australia have documented a 4% reduction in the overall number of young offenders in 2013/2014, 20 although the number of violent offences committed by young people in the urbanised and densely populated region of Victoria has increased by 75% between 2000 and 2010. 21

The Nordic countries have witnessed an increase in the number of law-abiding youths from 1994 and 2008. 22 In Sweden, both objective levels of juvenile crime 23 and self-reported involvement in juvenile crime 24 have fallen between 1995 and 2005. Similarly in Finland, where, despite fluctuating trends in juvenile drug use, juvenile property and violent crime is reported to have decreased between 1992 and 2013. 25

To summarise, whereas regional and annual trends in juvenile offending are observed and expected, a global trend characterised by decreased juvenile offending appears to have emerged in recent years. Indeed, UN data from a sample of 40 countries lend support to this conclusion, indicating a decrease in the proportion of juveniles suspected (10.9% to 9.2%) and convicted (7.5% to 6%) of crime between 2004 and 2012, respectively. 26

Juvenile gang membership

Influence on crime involvement.

One of the features of urbanisation across the world has been the rise of youth gangs, groups of young people often defined by geographical area, ethnic identity or ideology; recent reports indicate a rise in groups with extremist views. Explanatory models for the rise in youth gangs include factors such as economic migration, loss of extended family networks, reduced supervision of children, globalisation and exposure to inaccessible lifestyle ‘ideals’ portrayed in modern media.

Authorities in Japan attributed a surge in serious youth crime in the 1990s primarily to juvenile bike gangs known as ‘bosozoku’, who were deemed responsible for over 80% of serious offences perpetrated by juveniles, putatively bolstered by a crackdown on yakuza organised crime syndicates. 27 Although difficult to quantify, gang involvement appears to feature in a large proportion of juvenile offences, and there is evidence that gang membership has a facilitating effect on perpetration of the most serious violence including homicide. 28

Mental health

Compared with general and juvenile offender populations, juvenile gang members exhibit significantly higher rates of mental health problems such as conduct disorder/antisocial personality disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety disorders and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). 29 Gang members, compared with non-violent men who do not belong to a gang, are far more likely to utilise mental health services and display significantly higher levels of psychiatric morbidity, most notably antisocial personality disorder, psychosis and anxiety disorders. 30 Gang membership has also been positively correlated with an increased incidence of depressed mood and suicidal ideation among younger gang members. 31 Prevalence of ADHD is significantly greater in incarcerated youth populations (30.1%) than in general youth population estimates (3–7%), 32 therefore it may be reasonable to expect a similarly increased prevalence in juvenile gang members. ADHD has also been associated with a significantly increased risk of comorbid mood/affective disorder. 33

Forensic child and adolescent psychiatric services

Increased awareness of constitutional and environmental factors that contribute to juvenile offending has strengthened a public health perspective towards the problem, and in the UK entry into the youth justice system has been adopted as an indicator of general public health. 34

Dictionaries frequently define ‘forensic’ as meaning ‘legal’, implying a relationship with any court of law. Indeed, many forensic psychiatrists, particularly in child and adolescent services, undertake roles that encompass multiple legal domains relevant to mental health, including criminal law, family and child custody proceedings, special educational tribunals, and immigration or extradition matters.

Specialist forensic psychiatric services vary considerably between countries, 35 but usually forensic psychiatrists assess and treat individuals in secure psychiatric hospitals, prisons, law courts, police stations and in the community under various levels of security, supervision and support. In some countries there has been a trend towards forensic psychiatrists working almost exclusively with courts of law, providing independent specialist opinion to assist the court.

In the UK, forensic child and adolescent psychiatry has emerged as a clinical subspecialty. Some services are based in specialist secure hospitals for young people and cater for the relatively small number of high-risk young offenders with the most severe mental disorders. In the absence of such specialist resources, young people may be managed in suboptimal environments such as juvenile prisons, secure residential placements or secure mental health wards for adults, or even fail to receive treatment at all.

In light of growing evidence-based interventions for juvenile offenders within a public health framework, 36 the role of child and family mental health services may increase over time. Aside from direct clinical roles, practitioners in forensic child and adolescent psychiatry are also well placed to work with a wide range of partner agencies on the planning and delivery of broader interventions for the primary and secondary prevention of juvenile delinquency.

Prevalence of mental health problems among juvenile offenders

Rates of mental health problems among juvenile offenders are significantly higher than in their non-offender peers, with two-thirds of male juvenile offenders in the USA suggested as meeting criteria for at least one psychiatric disorder. 37 One in five juvenile offenders is estimated to suffer severe functional impairment as a result of their mental health problems. 38 Paradoxically, these needs are often unmet, 39 , 40 despite evidence of increased contact with mental health services, particularly among first-time juvenile offenders. 41 , 42 Of additional concern are the reported associations between mental health problems and mortality in incarcerated juveniles, 43 including an elevated suicide rate for males. 44 Mental health problems must be a target in interventions for juvenile offenders; however, treatments which focus solely on clinical problems are unlikely to result in benefit for criminogenic outcomes. 45 There is therefore a clear need for effective interventions which address both the clinical and criminogenic needs of these individuals.

Evidence-based treatments for mental health problems

Treatment of ptsd.

Estimates regarding the prevalence of PTSD among juvenile offenders suggest that 20 to 23% meet the clinical criteria, 46 , 47 with prevalence rates significantly higher among females than males (40% v . 17%). 46 Moreover, with 62% experiencing trauma within the first 5 years of life 47 and up to 93% experiencing at least one traumatic event during childhood or adolescence, 48 this should be a target for intervention.

Cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) is regarded as the most effective intervention for adults with PTSD 49 and also has demonstrated efficacy for juvenile non-offenders. 50 , 51 There is limited evidence suggesting a significant reduction in self-reported symptoms of PTSD following group-based CBT in male juvenile offenders, 52 and of an adapted version of CBT, cognitive processing therapy, 53 also resulting in a significant reduction in self-reported symptoms of PTSD and depression compared with waitlist controls. 54

A trauma-focused emotion regulation intervention (TARGET) has received preliminary empirical support for use in this population. TARGET resulted in nearly twice as much reduction in PTSD symptom severity as treatment as usual (TAU), 55 in addition to significant reductions in depression, behavioural disturbances and increased optimism. 56

Mood/anxiety disorders and self-harm

Juvenile offenders in the UK present with a high prevalence of mood and anxiety disorders (67% of females, 41% of males), self-harm (11% of females, 7% of males) and history of suicide attempts (33% of females, 20% of males). 57 Similarly high prevalence has also been observed cross-culturally, namely in the USA, 37 , 58 Switzerland 59 and Finland. 60

Despite such high prevalence, there appears to be a paucity of high-quality evaluations regarding the effectiveness of interventions for juvenile offenders with mood and/or anxiety disorders, or problems with self-harm. However, the limited evidence that is available suggests that group-based CBT may aid symptom reduction. 61 Recovery rates for major depressive disorder following group-based CBT are over double those for a life skills tutoring intervention (39% v . 19%, respectively), although no significant difference was noted at 6- or 12-month follow-up. CBT also resulted in significantly greater improvements in self- and observer-reported symptoms of depression and social functioning. 62

However, group-based CBT is not reported to be significantly different from TAU in reduction of self-harm, 63 whereas individual CBT is not significantly different from TAU in outcomes for depression, anxiety, conduct disorder or PTSD. 64 Yet recruitment to and retention in intervention seems good, suggesting that CBT is feasible to implement in juvenile offender populations. 64

Evaluations of alternative interventions have posited muscle relaxation as effective in improving juvenile offenders' tolerance of frustration. 65 Dialectical behaviour therapy (DBT) has also been reported to significantly reduce incidences of physical aggression in a juvenile offender population 66 and among juvenile non-offenders expressing suicidal ideation. 67 It significantly reduced serious behavioural problems and staff punitive actions among juvenile offenders within a mental health unit, although no similar significant reductions were observed for those without mental health problems. 68

Evidence-based treatments for conduct disorder: family approaches

Relationships with family and peers are recognised as key factors in the criminogenic profile of juvenile offenders. 69 Multisystemic therapy (MST) is a family-focused intervention targeting characteristics related to antisocial behaviour, including family relationships and peer associations, 70 with evidence from US and UK studies suggesting MST is a beneficial intervention for juvenile offenders. When compared with conventional services offered by juvenile offending services, MST was associated with a significant reduction in the likelihood of reoffending, 71 maintained 2 and 4 years post-treatment. 72 , 73 Offenders engaging in MST are reported to be significantly less likely to become involved in serious and violent offending. 73 , 74 Significant improvements have also been observed in both self- and parent-reported delinquency, 74 family relations and interactions, 73 and home, school, community and emotional functioning. 71 A cost offset analysis of MST among UK juvenile offenders suggested that combining MST and conventional services provides greater cost savings than conventional services alone, as a result of its positive effects on recidivism. 75 Qualitative impressions of MST from juvenile offenders and their parents indicate that key components of a successful delivery of MST include the quality of the therapeutic relationship and ability to re-engage the offender with educational systems. 76

Some evidence also exists regarding the efficacy of MST when delivered to non-offender antisocial juvenile populations outside the USA and the UK. Compared with TAU, MST resulted in a significantly greater increase in social competence and caregiver satisfaction, and a significant reduction in referrals for out-of-home placements, in Norwegian juveniles exhibiting serious behavioural problems. 77 However, no significant difference between MST and TAU was reported in outcomes for antisocial behaviour and psychiatric symptoms in Swedish juvenile offenders. 78 MST was also found to have no significant benefit over TAU in outcomes including recidivism in a sample of Canadian juvenile offenders. 79 These differing outcomes have been posited as the result of barriers in transferring MST from US and UK populations owing to differing approaches to juvenile justice between countries (i.e. a welfare v . justice approach). 78 The heterogeneous nature of studies concerning MST in juvenile offender populations prevent a firm conclusion being drawn as to its superiority over alternative interventions, although this does not diminish the positive outcomes which have been observed. 80

Substance misuse

Motivational interviewing represents a promising approach for juvenile offenders, particularly as a treatment for substance misuse. 81 Group-based motivational interviewing has received positive feedback from participants when implemented with first-time juvenile alcohol or drug offenders, 82 and compared with TAU, juvenile offenders in receipt of motivational interviewing have greater satisfaction and display lower, though not statistically significant, rates of recidivism at 12-months post-motivational interviewing. 83 There is therefore preliminary evidence for the acceptability and feasibility of motivational interviewing for substance-misusing juvenile offenders, but future research regarding long-term outcomes is warranted. To date, motivational interviewing for difficulties faced by juvenile offenders beyond that of substance misuse does not appear to have received much research attention. Juvenile offenders are known for their difficulty to engage in rehabilitative services, therefore further investigation of the effectiveness of motivational interviewing in encouraging engagement is warranted.

Preliminary investigations have also developed a conceptual framework for the delivery of mindfulness-based interventions (MBI) to incarcerated substance-misusing juveniles, with qualitative impressions suggesting this is a potentially feasible and efficacious intervention. 84 Although literature regarding the effectiveness of MBI in juvenile offenders is scarce, qualitative feedback has indicated positive reception of this style of intervention, with particular improvements in subjective well-being reported by juvenile participants. 85

Employment and education

Engaging juvenile offenders with education and skills-based training is an important component of successful rehabilitation, with positive engagement in meaningful activities associated with improvements in areas such as self-belief 86 and protection against future participation in criminal activities. 87 It is concerning therefore that an evaluation of the use of leisure time over a 1-week period by probationary juvenile offenders in Australia indicated only 10% of this time was spent engaging in productive activities, such as employment or education, with 57% used for passive leisure activities, a level 30% higher than that of their non-offender peers. 88

Efforts to engage juvenile offenders in vocational and/or occupational activities have shown benefits in a number of areas. A specialised vocational and employment training programme (CRAFT) emphasising practical skills was evaluated against conventional education provision to juvenile offenders in the USA. Over a 30-month follow-up period, those engaged in CRAFT were significantly more likely to be in employment, to have attended an educational diploma programme and to have attended for a significantly longer period of time. 89 Benefits have also been reported with regard to risk of reoffending, with an after-school programme in the USA incorporating practical community projects, educational sessions and family therapy resulting in a significant reduction in recidivism at 1-year follow-up. 90

Qualitative investigations of US juvenile offenders suggest there is not a lack of interest in pursuing education among this population, but rather a disconnection with educational systems when education providers are perceived not to care about students' progress. 91 Ensuring education providers are perceived as proactive and caring in this regard may therefore be an important consideration for efforts to engage juvenile offenders with educational systems. Significant barriers to engagement include difficulties in obtaining accurate information regarding the offender's educational history, in addition to identifying community-based education providers willing to accept previously incarcerated juveniles on their release. 92

Language and communication

Difficulties with language and communication skills appear to be prevalent among juvenile offenders, with estimates of those falling into the poor or very poor categories ranging from 46 to 67%; overall, up to 90% of juvenile offenders demonstrated language skills below average. 93 Specifically, high rates of illiteracy are reported in this population, 94 with evidence to suggest that an awareness of such problems among juvenile offenders themselves is associated with dissatisfaction and poor self-esteem. 95 These difficulties may act as barriers to engagement in therapeutic interventions, particularly those delivered in group settings, as well as re-engagement with educational systems. Awareness of the challenges these young people face with regard to confidence and ability to communicate is important, and potential involvement of a speech and language therapist could be considered. Preventing deficits in language and communication through effective schooling and appropriate support in the early years of life may serve as an aid to effective engagement in rehabilitative interventions, and may also mitigate the risk of engagement in criminal activities in the first instance.

Delivery of therapeutic services

Common challenges to a therapeutic youth justice pathway.

There are common obstacles to smooth care pathways between different parts of systems, such as in transitions between secure settings and the community, between prisons and secure psychiatric settings, and between child and adult services. In some jurisdictions individuals can only be treated pharmacologically against their will in a hospital setting, a safeguard which limits the extent to which individuals can be treated in prison, but there is still great scope for intervention by prison mental health teams in juvenile prisons.

Factors associated with good outcomes

A meta-analysis has revealed three primary factors associated with effective interventions for juvenile offenders: a ‘therapeutic’ intervention philosophy, serving high-risk offenders, and quality of implementation. 96 These findings are consistent with factors posited as correlating with good outcome in residential centres for troubled adolescents and juvenile offenders: good staff-adolescent relations, perception of staff as pro-social role models, positive peer pressure, an individualised therapeutic programme approach, developmentally appropriate programmes and activities, clear expectations and boundaries, and placement locations which allow for continued family contact. 97 , 98

In the community, coercive styles of engagement have been found to be less successful at achieving adherence among juvenile offenders than a client-centred approach. 99

Factors associated with poor outcomes

‘Scared Straight’ programmes expose juveniles who have begun to commit offences to inmates of high-security prisons, yet these approaches have been discredited due to evidence that risk of recidivism may in fact increase following such exposure. 100 Similarly poor outcomes have been observed in programmes modelled on military boot camps, in which harsh discipline is considered to be of therapeutic benefit, 101 and initiatives such as curfew, probation and hearing juvenile cases in adult court were also shown to be ineffective in reducing recidivism. 13

Over recent years it has been repeatedly demonstrated that exposure to juvenile court itself appears to have a detrimental effect on juvenile offending. 102 – 104 This may be partially explained by effects of labelling, stigma and negative self-image associated with a criminal conviction, but also the practical consequences of sentences, including assortment of delinquent peers in community or prison sentences. Incarceration presents several additional harms, including disturbance of care and pro-social relationships, discontinuity in education, association with delinquent peers, and exposure to violence. Half of detained young offenders in the UK reported victimisation during their current prison term, 57 while 12% of incarcerated youth in the USA reported sexual victimisation in the previous year. 105 International agreements state that deprivation of liberty (such as juvenile prison) should be used as a last resort and for the shortest time necessary, so should be reserved for the highest-risk offenders. The cost of juvenile antisocial behaviour is known to be high, and to fall on many agencies. 106 The current climate of austerity in public services demands that any interventions should be not only effective, but also cost-effective, raising a clear challenge – and opportunity – for the implementation of interventions for this population of vulnerable young people. For example, parenting programmes have demonstrated sustained benefits for this population, 107 , 108 with economic analysis indicating gross savings of £9288 per child over a 25 year period. 109 Considered together with wider costs of crime, these gross savings exceed the average cost of parenting programmes (£1177) by a factor of approximately 8 to 1.

Conclusions

Many argue that we have a long way to go before arriving at ‘child friendly’ juvenile justice. 110 Around the world there are variable and inadequate legal frameworks that are not age-appropriate, there is a lack of age-appropriate services and establishments, and a lack of a specialist workforce, leading to challenges around training and supervision to work with this vulnerable population. In the UK and other high-income countries worldwide, forensic child and adolescent psychiatry is a multifaceted discipline incorporating legal, psychiatric and developmental fields. This approach has navigated clinical and ethical challenges and made an important contribution to welfare and justice needs by its adoption of an evidence-based therapeutic intervention philosophy.

Declaration of interests S.Y. has received honoraria for consultancy, travel, educational talks and/or research from Janssen, Eli Lilly, Shire, Novartis, HB Pharma and Flynn Pharma.

COURSE INFORMATION:

SOCI 3302-01 (PSYC 3302-01, CRJS 3302-01) Fall, 2004 TTH 11 AM Class: LC 318

COURSE DESCRIPTION:

A study of deviant behavior by legal minors in contemporary society; factors and conditions contributing to delinquency; control and treatment of offenders and programs for prevention.

COURSE OBJECTIVES and OUTCOMES:

Upon completion of this course, students will acquire these competencies (skills/abilities):

Comparison and analysis of the theoretical explanations of the causes, dynamics, and consequences of juvenile delinquency
Examination of the environmental influences on delinquency, as well as prevention of juvenile delinquency
Have an increased understanding of the issues of law enforcement related to juvenile delinquency
Examine the juvenile court system and its handling of cases, as well as other methods of treatment of children and adolescents
Evaluate the issues of juvenile delinquency in the context of a Christian worldview in order to become more effective servant leaders

REQUIRED TEXTBOOKS:

Juvenile Delinquency: The Core, second edition by Siegel http://cj.wadsworth.com Book Companion Site

SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS:

What Can We Do about Violence? (video) Kids in the Crossfire video Criminal Justice Resource Center Bookmarks MLA Style

COURSE OUTLINE:

1. Childhood and Delinquency. 2. The Nature and Extent of Delinquency. 3. Individual Views of Delinquency. 4. Sociological Views of Delinquency. 5. Developmental Views of Delinquency. 6. Gender and Delinquency. 7. The Family and Delinquency. 8. Peers and Delinquency: Juvenile Gangs and Groups. 9. Schools and Delinquency. 10. Drug Use and Delinquency. 11. The History and Development of Juvenile Justice. 12. Police Work with Juveniles. 13. The Juvenile Court Process: Pretrial, Trial, and Sentencing. 14. Juvenile Corrections: Community Treatment and Secure Institutions

COURSE REQUIREMENTS and METHODS FOR ASSESSING OUTCOMES:

Textbook Assignments:

Assigned chapters in the textbooks are to be read by the date indicated in the class schedule. After reading the chapter you should complete the study material from the online website. This will prepare the student for class discussion and help them to be able to synthesize the material presented in class. In other words, you are more likely to stay awake! And yes, this is not for a "grade" but for your "learning pleasure." The textbook website The Core includes for each chapter: • Chapter Objectives • Chapter Outline • Chapter Summary • Glossary • Concentration • Concept Builders • Crossword Puzzle • Flashcards • Tutorial Quiz • Final Exam Completing these learning opportunities will help the student prepare for tests, but will not be graded.

Written Assignment

The students will bring one current event from a newspaper, magazine, professional journal, etc. related to each of the following topics of discussion. The student is to have a brief written synopsis of the article (less than one page) and bibliographic references. Ten articles will be submitted in a folder (the flimsy, cheap paper kind), with each individual synopsis, bibliographical reference, and the copy of the article. References must include at least two online sources and two professional printed journals. These will enhance both Writing and Technology Across the Curriculum. And yes, these printed journals must be from those dusty library shelves, and not from your computer.

These topics include:

Mass Media Family Gangs Schools Drugs Female Delinquency Youth Violence Juvenile Policing Juvenile Law or Court Juvenile Corrections

The student should also be prepared to present these to the class, during pertinent discussions. Students will be graded on their creativity, ability to follow instructions and include the required information, the variety of entries, and their class participation. These may be kept by the instructor, so the student should make a copy of this before turning it in if so desired. They are due on the date given at the beginning of class. After that ten points will be deducted per calendar day.

Use the following guidelines for this assignment, as appropriate. Most of these should be less than one page in length.

Cover sheet for first page These articles should be attached to or copied onto an 8 1/2 X 11 paper Margins (one to one-and-a half inches on all sides) Double-spacing (quotations longer than five lines will be indented one inch from the left margin) Paragraph indention (one-half to one inch) Left justification Use 12-point fonts Avoid "widows," which are single lines separated by a page break Basic grammar for formal writing Spelling and punctuation Do not use contractions or first person pronouns Use APA or MLA form and procedure Further help with writing may be found in the writing lab (Yes, I know this isn't an English class!)

Three exams will be given on the dates indicated in the class schedule. All exams will cover only the material presented or assigned since the last previous exam. The questions will be taken from the lectures, class discussions and textbook. These may include material from the videos. The exam will be primarily objective. All exams taken in class will require a Scantron form 882-ES. No make-up exams will be given after the class has taken an exam. After the first student leaves, no one will be permitted to begin the exam. Don't be late! No beepers, cellular telephones, programmable calculators, or electronic dictionaries may be used during a test. Remember the Honor Code!

Attendance :

Absences for any reason must be kept to a minimum. If you are absent, you are expected to complete the assignments found on the course schedule. Two tardies will equal one absence and it is your responsibility to check after class and make sure you were counted present. So that you do not steal time from your classmates, do not come to class more than 15 minutes late. (Don't assume you can find a nice close parking spot!!) If you miss more than 25 percent of the total classes (or more than seven classes), you will receive an F.

Final Exam:

A comprehensive final exam will be given as scheduled. This grade may be used to replace your lowest major exam grade. If you are absent when an exam is given, that zero will be dropped and replaced by the final exam grade. If you are in class to take all scheduled exams, and if you are satisfied with your class average, you are not required to take the final.

Extra Credit:

If all work is completed and turned in on time, there is an extra credit assignment, worth up to 3 points on the final grade. Read and complete a 3-5 page book review of Superpredators: The Demonization of Our Children by the Law by Peter T. Elikann. You may find this book in your library, bookstore, or from amazon.com .

This class will be graded on a percentage basis, as shown below.

Assignment Percentage Written Assignment 25% Exam #1 25% Exam #2 25% Exam #3 25% Total 100%

Grading System

A 94-100% C 74-77% A- 90-93% C- 70-73% B+ 88-89% D+ 68-69% B 84-87% D 64-67% B- 80-83% D- 60-63% C+ 78-79% F <60%

GPA Grading System

A/A+ 4.00 C 2.00 A- 3.67 C- 1.67 B+ 3.33 D+ 1.33 B 3.00 D 1.00 B- 2.67 D- 0.67 C+ 2.33 F 0.00

METHOD OF INSTRUCTION

The class will be primarily lecture, group presentations, and group discussion. There may be some guest speakers and videos. There will also be a field trip to the Dallas County Juvenile Justice Center.

TENTATIVE SCHEDULE OF ASSIGNMENT

See attached.

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Printed Journals:

Miscellaneous student information.

PROVERBS 1:33

But whoever listens to me will live in safety and be at ease, without fear of harm.

ISAIAH 1:17

Learn to do right! Seek justice, encourage the oppressed. Defend the cause of the fatherless, plead the case of the widow.

ISAIAH 55:7

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

We're Hiring!
Help Center

Assignment on " Juvenile delinquency " A case study of my own village

Related Papers

International Journal of Law, Humanities & Social Science

IJLHSS Journal

Juvenile delinquency, also known as juvenile offending, or youth crime, is participation in illegal behaviour by minors or juveniles (individuals younger than the statutory age of majority). A juvenile delinquent is a person who is typically under the age of 18 and commits in the act that otherwise would have been charged as a crime if they were an adult. This research paper discusses the scope and limitation of the study, the objectives of the study, the research methodology and the review, provides the conceptual issues relating to Juvenile delinquency. It also discusses the causes of it. The research provides the establishment of the juvenile court, trial procedure of this court and administration of juvenile justice system in Bangladesh, shows the relevant statutory laws with Juvenile delinquency. Last of all, some findings and recommendations have been extracted out of this study. Current efforts to fight juvenile delinquency are characterized by the lack of systematic action and the absence of task-oriented and effective social work with both offenders and victim such as seminar, workshop, fieldwork whether real or potential. Analysis is further complicated by a lack of international comparative data.

Journal of South Asian Studies

Kudrat-E Khuda

Md. Hasnath Kabir Fahim

In today's global village juvenile delinquency is treated as one of the most ominous and touchy offences mischievous for the social order of a country. The trend of juvenile crimes is sharply rising in Bangladesh like many other countries of the world. Due to socioeconomic circumstances like absence of proper guidance from family, poverty, situation of residential area, non-accomplishment of basic needs, misuse of social media and internet, both male and female teenagers are getting involved in various types of antisocial activities like ragging, carrying illegal arms and drugs, killing, sex offences, engaging in gangs, smuggling, criminalized politics and many other delinquent actions. These issues are of serious anxiety for the entire nation and immediate solution must be sought out to save youths of the country. This paper, however, tries to trace out the causes of offences committed by juveniles and challenges to eradicate them in the perspective of Bangladesh. To this end this article seeks to analyse the existing national juvenile justice system and their limitations regarding the treatment of juvenile offenders. Finally this study suggests to expand the reactive approach of treatment with special attention for the protection of the interest of the juveniles and to ensure youth-friendly environment in every stage of respective institutions.

Camellia Khan

Children have been described as our future, our greatest resource, and our hope for a better tomorrow. In our society many people infuse fear in the mind of children. They represent violence, a segment of society lacking in self-control and devoid of ethics and morals. Their families fail to instill in them traditional values. They hardly have respect for others. Fear of crime, especially random violence perpetrated by young Bangladeshis, has become the greatest concern of the nation; we have been motivating a good number of people to change their lifestyle. Moreover, fear of crime has influenced politicians and laypersons to adopt the position of a conservative justice system, present system of dispensation of justice seeks to punish and deter. It aims at curtailing juvenile justice. Some social scientists think that the juveniles should be kept away from the courts where adults are put under trial. At present we are thinking of curtailing juvenile crime in various ways. There are ...

Kamrul Hassan Nazmul

Sociological Inquiry

Dr S M R I T I K A N A GHOSH

Yanu Wardana

isara solutions

International Research Journal Commerce arts science

Children are the future of our country and it is the responsibility of everyone to ensure that they have a safe environment to live in and develop in a healthy manner. But since last decade there is a huge increase in the rate of Juvenile crime in a developing country like India. Today, Juvenile crime is like a disease in our society. This paper starts with describing the concept of Juvenile Delinquency; evolution of Juvenile Justice Legislation, before and after 1986. Inspite of the presence of that welfare law for such children, there is a rise in the number of Juvenile offenders across the country. The paper also tries to find out the causes of Juvenile Crimes in our society. Preventive measures of Juvenile Crimes are also provided so that children should not convert into a hardened criminal.

Olubunmi Olawoyin

Siniša Franjić

The term delinquency covers more difficult forms of associal, antisocial, socio-pathological and criminal behavior such as theft, deliberately causing damage and fire, misdemeanor, deviant behavior, hooliganism, robbery, carrying out criminal acts etc. The term delinquency is used when it comes to juvenile perpetrators of criminal offenses. It is an inconsistent form of behavior, a dangerous and complex social-pathological phenomenon, a very delicate criminological, legal, economic and sociological, and serious family, pedagogical, medical and difficult general-social problem. The implications for juvenile justice and the factor underlying the juvenile delinquency have not clearly understood. In this review, we reported in details the potential investigations of juvenile delinquency and the legal system."

Delinquent: Read all the stories from Week 4; Cuyahoga’s juvenile court has programs to rehabilitate youth offenders, some are transformative

C LEVELAND, Ohio – Standing in juvenile court awaiting arraignment last year, 15-year-old Demetrius was unphased. He’d done this routine five times in four years for low-level offenses, and court was starting to feel like a revolving door.

But when the judge listed attempted murder among the eight counts against him, confusion set in. Murder? Of who?

Demetrius didn’t know yet that his best friend had been shot in what the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office is calling a botched robbery but Demetrius claims was an unprovoked ambush. Now, not only was Demetrius learning that his friend had been seriously injured, but Demetrius was the one accused of trying to kill him. The hard exterior he’d been trying to maintain fell away and his nearly 6-foot, 200-pound frame collapsed into sobs.

Five days later, the friend died, and Demetrius’ charge escalated to murder. The prosecutor’s office asked a judge to transfer Demetrius to adult court, a process called bindover.

In discretionary bindover cases, juveniles 14 and older can be sent to the adult docket for any felony allegation. To guide that decision, the judge holds a special hearing to determine whether the youth is “amenable” to care and rehabilitation within the juvenile system – which runs until an offender’s 21st birthday – or whether adult sanctions are necessary to protect public safety.

“I’m not saying I’m an angel; I did a lot of f---ed up s--- I regret, lock me up for that,” Demetrius says nine months later from the Cuyahoga Juvenile Detention Center, where he was awaiting the amenability hearing that would decide his fate. “But this, I didn’t do this.”

Demetrius is one of more than 50 juvenile offenders – referred to by middle name or pseudonym – who spoke to The Plain Dealer/ cleveland.com about their recent experiences within the Cuyahoga County juvenile justice system, which puts more children behind bars than any other county in Ohio. Their stories, told over six weeks, illustrate influences that led them to crime, escalations from petty misdemeanors to violent acts and barriers that delayed or blocked their way out, sometimes despite interventions. This is week 4.

SEE ALL STORIES FOR DELINQUENT: OUR SYSTEM, OUR KIDS

The juvenile justice system was created to treat youths differently from adults by focusing on rehabilitation, rather than just punishment. In the spirit of second chances, Cuyahoga County’s Juvenile Court supports numerous programs to address the underlying causes of juvenile crime and to help youths leave the system with a lower chance of reoffending.

Demetrius tried many of those interventions over the years, following low-level offenses, but his criminal behavior continued. The shooting, however, was the first time he’d been accused of serious violence. The outcome of that case brought any progress he was finally making to a dead stop.

Demetrius’ criminal record began when he was 11. His parents were in prison for drug trafficking and gun possession, so he was living with an aunt, who, he says, was physically and emotionally abusive. They fought often.

“I used to be on punishment so long I’d forget why I was punished,” he says. “So, I just started doing whatever I want.”

Once, when she refused to let him inside the house, he shoved open the door, grabbed his belongings and tried to run away. She called police, who wanted to send Demetrius to a program for unruly youth. But his aunt declined, having him charged with disorderly conduct instead, records show.

In another fight eight months later, Demetrius hit her over the head with a clock and was charged with assault. This time the court offered to put him through Multi-Systemic Therapy, or MST, one of its most intensive services that works with the entire family to improve relationships and behaviors — but again, the aunt refused. The court tried mentorship and community service instead.

Things didn’t improve until later that year when Demetrius’ mother was released early from prison, and he moved back under her care. He didn’t touch the court again for three years.

But he grew bored and restless during the pandemic. He stopped going to school and started getting into trouble with friends. Once, in 2022, he was caught throwing shopping carts off a roof. Another time he was involved in a disturbance at MetroHealth hospital and refused to leave when asked. In both cases, he was the only one caught and charged.

With each delinquency, the court escalated sanctions, ordering him to stay in detention and two different residential facilities, before sending him to probation. His case was also referred to a specialized docket catering to youth whose behavior might be driven by a mental health condition. Demetrius is diagnosed with ADHD, trauma-stressor disorder and Oppositional Defiant Disorder.

The judge on the mental health docket asked the family to again consider MST. Demetrius’ aunt had opposed the therapy program, but his mother was open to it. It was supposed to help correct his behaviors and support her in developing better management strategies. It also works with parents to address their own mental health conditions and traumas.

His mom had many. She lost her father at age 2 and her mother by 14, thrusting her into foster care. At 17, she got pregnant and dropped out of high school. By 22, she found herself alone with three young children. The next year, she says she got married to keep a roof over their heads. Not long after came three more children, including Demetrius. Then her husband was arrested, and she feels she was unfairly sentenced to prison with him.

In that time, her older children stayed with relatives on her side of the family. They went on to graduate high school and are now working or in college. The younger siblings stayed with the dad’s side of the family and have each since faced criminal charges.

“I’ve got two sets of kids,” the mom says. “One set is doing good, and the other is constantly in trouble.”

She hoped MST would get them all on track, especially Demetrius, who by then had three delinquencies and a reputation for impulsive and risk-taking behaviors. It was a rocky start.

Demetrius was skipping school – he had over 351 unexcused absence hours – and failing every class, his probation officer reported. He was also using marijuana. Then he was caught trying to break into a car with his younger brother. He told police he intended to sell it for $75.

Demetrius was always looking for ways to make quick cash. Sometimes he says he would resell bottles of water on the street corner, rake yards or help demo houses. But when business was slow, he’d sell weed and boost cars.

One summer, he saved up $7,000, but says it didn’t last long. Part of it he used to buy a bed, TV and dresser, things he’d never had but felt “should be in a room.” Then he bought new clothes to replace the “raggedy” ones that he says led him to skip school to avoid embarrassment. The rest of the money he gave to his mother so they could avoid eviction.

“That’s why it’s always good to have it,” Demetrius justifies. “Because if I didn’t, we wouldn’t have a house.”

His drive to make money at any cost hindered his progress with MST. He skipped community service and court hearings to pursue work opportunities. His mom was just as problematic, a probation officer said, describing her as inconsistent and difficult to reach. She met program expectations three weeks out of nine.

But by the end, the court was starting to see some progress.

Demetrius applied for a job at McDonald’s. He joined the school’s chess team, earning second place at his first competition, so the court referred him to a chess-focused mentoring program. He was passing his drug screenings and more regularly attending school, his probation officer said.

“The youth reports he thinks he could change and do better for himself,” his probation officer said in an assessment at the time.

Four days later, Demetrius was accused of murder. All services stopped.

Demetrius didn’t fire the gun that killed his friend. He’s not accused of firing at anyone, but he’s still responsible for his friend’s murder, the prosecutor’s office says. They accuse Demetrius and his friend of plotting a robbery that led to the fatal violence that day.

The pair had discussed robbing the target with other teens on social media. But when those teens backed out, the prosecutor says Demetrius and his friend decided to go through with the plot on their own. Days later, the pair rode a bus to the alleged target’s house in the Brooklyn Centre neighborhood. The man was hosting a cookout and Demetrius, who says he was only going to play videogames, called ahead to say they were on their way.

When they arrived, there was a confrontation at the door.

Demetrius says several people inside the home shoved guns in their faces and ordered them to the ground in retaliation for ever considering the robbery. Evidence presented in court shows one of the other guests had texted a 15-year-old guest the night before telling him to bring a gun and “be ready.”

The alleged target, however, accused Demetrius and his friend of drawing weapons first.

Seconds later, Demetrius’ friend, who had a gun, and the 15-year-old guest simultaneously exchanged fire. The friend was shot in the head; the other teen was hit in the stomach.

Amid the chaos, Demetrius ran and called 911, seeking shelter at a nearby restaurant while directing officers back to the shooting scene. By the time police arrived, one of the witnesses had stashed the 15-year-old’s gun, which was never recovered. The target also later admitted to throwing away a bullet casing.

Demetrius, alone, was charged.

“If I was robbing, I wouldn’t have called 911,” Demetrius defends.

Despite being accused of murder, Demetrius didn’t qualify for mandatory bindover, which would have sent him straight into the adult system, because he wasn’t yet 16 – the minimum age requirement – and had never served time in juvenile prison. But prosecutors requested discretionary transfer, asking a judge to try him as an adult.

That decision hinged on a special hearing, where a judge would weigh the likelihood that Demetrius had planned the robbery that resulted in murder, as well as his potential for rehabilitation in the juvenile system.

The court offers over 100 intervention services to facilitate that rehabilitation through community service, counseling, mentorship, and behavioral therapy. Many of them work to deter future crime by addressing the underlying causes, such as mental health, sexual abuse, physical abuse, drug use, childhood trauma, absentee parenting, educational barriers and extreme poverty.

Those programs have proven successful in diverting more youth away from the system earlier, data provided by the court shows, which has resulted in fewer kids facing some of the harsher sanctions, like residential lockup, jail or juvenile prison. However, about 25% of youth who participate in such services still reoffend and return to court within a year, data show, raising questions about why programs aren’t working in those cases and whether more could have been done.

Demetrius is one of the unsuccessful ones who continued to cycle through the system despite interventions. He can’t answer why, though he argues that nothing could have prevented him from being falsely accused of a murder. However, he suspects poverty might have contributed to his other crimes. It put pressure on him to survive, by any means.

“If I had a job, I wouldn’t be in trouble, I would be making money. I love money,” he says. “I can change. All I need is a job, and I’ll never catch a case again.”

The same might be said of his younger brother, DeAndre, who now faces the same struggle. He served as Demetrius’ lookout in the attempted car theft, which thrust him into the justice system for the first time.

Problems compounded when Demetrius was jailed for murder and could no longer supplement the family’s income. Their mother was struggling to find work and they again faced eviction.

DeAndre started shoplifting clothes, some to wear and others to sell for profit, he says. Then his mother says she found stolen computers in his room and turned him in to police, adding more charges to his record. “She keeps it real,” he says now, without resentment.

The court sent him to an 11-week program meant to reframe his thinking about right and wrong. It worked, staff say. He met all the conditions and was successfully graduating. But on his last day, when staff tried to drop him off back at home, they learned his family had been evicted.

Staff couldn’t reach his mother, so they took him to the Jane Edna Hunter Social Services office. He walked out within the hour, eventually reuniting with his mother. But months later the family was still homeless, couch-surfing in separate houses.

DeAndre went to stay with family friends in Mount Pleasant, but he worried his welcome was wearing out. “One more mouth to feed,” he says. He asked his mother for $20 to contribute toward groceries, in hopes the family would let him stay longer.

“I’ll be alright,” he assures.

Not amenable

Earlier that day, DeAndre had walked an hour and a half through a drizzling February rain to attend his brother’s amenability hearing, where a judge would determine whether Demetrius would be tried as an adult. He thought the outcome would be favorable.

Demetrius had the support of his alleged victim’s family, who not only were advocating against his bindover but were calling for all charges to be dropped. They felt the 15-year-old who fired the fatal shot should be held accountable, not Demetrius, and accused police of ignoring evidence in the case.

Court assessments also gave Demetrius a high chance of rehabilitation in the juvenile system.

His psychological evaluation said he was more amenable to reform than 79% of other justice-involved youth in the county. And while his probation officer still noted that Demetrius “needs structure” to be successful, they felt it “would be very beneficial” for him to get a job, participate in a positive activity and meet regularly with a therapist.

“(Demetrius) has been through a lot in his life,” the probation officer wrote, listing off traumas, including his turbulent home life and his best friend dying in front of him.

Demetrius’ assigned public defender, Michael Hustick, stressed those points when urging Judge Kristin Sweeney to deny bindover. It didn’t help that during a recent attempt at home detention Demetrius had been charged with domestic violence following a fight with his sister over cleaning the bathroom. But at 16, there was still five years to work with Demetrius in the juvenile system, Hustick argued, and he was already proving himself capable of reform.

Demetrius had recently received his diploma and enrolled in chef training. His good behavior in detention also earned him “star mentor” status, which allowed him to live in the least-restrictive housing unit, his attorney said.

That had apparently changed by the time of the hearing. Sweeney said her notes showed him recently being moved to a slightly higher security level, though she did not say what caused the move. Even so, Hustick implored, he had shown good behavior deserving of a second chance.

“We should reserve adult sanctions for youth who are the most dangerous and least treatable, and that is not (Demetrius),” Hustick appealed to the judge. “If the goal is to rehabilitate, then the court should deny the motion.”

Sweeney wasn’t persuaded. She granted the bindover, citing Demetrius’ failed attempts at reform in his prior cases and the fact that his hands tested positive for gunshot residue. (Hustick argued that his proximity to the gunfire explained the residue and pointed out that neither city cameras nor home security footage ever showed Demetrius with a gun.)

Sweeney also noted that murder charges, in adult court, carry a 15-year prison sentence, time Demetrius couldn’t serve in the juvenile system, if convicted.

Following the ruling, Demetrius’ mother stormed out of the courtroom in protest. The victim’s family followed – “This justice system sucks, and it’s getting worse every day,” the grandmother remarked.

Demetrius, who maintains his innocence, hopes to beat the charges in adult court. Then, he says, he wants to move away from Cleveland. There’s nothing left for him in the city but memories of the hardships he’s faced and the friends he’s lost to gun violence – 10 total, including his best friend.

If he can get out, he says, maybe then he’d have a chance.

“I know I’m a kid, but I don’t feel like it,” Demetrius says. “Kids don’t see this s---. Kids don’t have their friends die.”

Mariah: Diversion helps youth avoid juvenile record

As a Bible school volunteer and statewide representative for her church, Mariah, 17, preaches peace, respect and kindness.

But when a girl jumped her at school in a fight over a boy, Mariah reverted to her mother’s teaching to defend herself, and punched back. The other girl started seizing.

Both were suspended for two days. The other girl also changed schools. Mariah thought the one-off fight was over.

Four months later, she was charged with assault.

Mariah was terrified. It was the first time she – or any of her four siblings – had been in trouble with the law. She worried whether she could be jailed or how a criminal record could impact her aspirations to become a nurse. Mostly, though, she hated what the charge said about her.

“It would have a negative impact on my character,” Mariah says. “I’ve never been known to be mean, so people would look at me different.”

Mariah’s case, however, took a different path.

The Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office, which decides whether to allow youth diversion following charges, referred her to the Early Intervention and Diversion Center, or EIDC. The program is for kids accused of low-level, non-violent offenses and little to no court history. The idea is to stop crime at the first sign of misbehavior. If youth successfully complete programming, they’re never charged and the case is sealed, leaving their record clear.

The prosecutor’s office and juvenile court started the voluntary program in 2019 and have referred more than 6,500 youths through 2023. Most faced low-level charges for unruly behavior or misdemeanor crimes, but a third were accused of non-violent felonies, court data shows.

Youths previously had to wait to be adjudicated to start services – a process that could take six months or more. But the EIDC program allows the court to implement them immediately. Each youth is screened for potential behavioral health issues, along with trauma symptoms, substance abuse, depression, or anxiety. Appropriate services are then assigned.

Some youth might be sent to therapy or one of the court’s specialized dockets, where they receive services specific to their needs. Others are sent to traditional diversion programs through the youth’s home community or the city where their offense occurred. The individual programs decide the consequence, typically involving apology letters to victims, community service or counseling.

Bridget Gibbons, juvenile court’s deputy administrator, believes those earlier interventions are already reducing recidivism and will eventually result in lower juvenile crime rates. “We’re trying to catch those kids today, right now,” she says.

So far, the program seems to be having a positive effect. A recent Case Western Reserve study of outcomes between January 2019 and 2021 found that of the roughly 5,100 youth referred to the program by that time, just 7% were charged with a new offense within one year.

In 2023, Mariah was sent to Cleveland’s youth diversion program, one of the county’s most active. She wrote an essay on her dream to become a nurse, volunteered with her church and attended a youth empowerment summit on conflict resolution and self-esteem building. She completed diversion in November and her case was sealed.

“We’re not worried about her,” Charisse Dawson, a licensed social worker and administrative manager for the program, says. “She won’t come back.”

Most of Cleveland’s participants don’t retouch the system.

The program does not track recidivism directly, Dawson says, but her manual review of 2023 participants who were charged with new offenses while going through diversion fell below 3%. Most of those charges were misdemeanors, she says. Only two youths had committed high-level felonies.

More often than not, Dawson says, if a youth does not complete diversion – about 24% of their referrals in 2023 – it’s because the program could not reach a parent to approve participation or because the parent declined. Not because a youth reoffended.

Because of that high success rate, Angela Shute-Woodson, Cleveland’s director of community relations, overseeing diversion, wishes it could accept more kids.

A recent study out of the University of California at Irvine found that youth who go through the formal court process have worse outcomes than those who are diverted. They’re more likely to reoffend, become incarcerated and drop out of high school. Increased use of diversion, Shute-Woodson says, helps kids avoid that fate.

“This is still a youth,” she stresses. With the structure diversion offers, “maybe we will prevent them from going down a path they can’t return from.”

Granting that wish, however, requires more funding. Cleveland’s program has just three employees and a budget of $44,700, limiting options. Therapy, for example, is vital to most youth’s rehabilitation, program managers agree, but they can only afford to give youth a session or two, not the ongoing services most need.

“It’s not enough money,” Dawson says.

The city is working with the court to explore options for expanding funding for the program, a spokesman for the mayor’s office says, but nothing has been finalized.

Mariah considers herself lucky. She has a great home life, excels in school and now, thanks to diversion, has a clean juvenile record again. But she can’t help but think about how someone like her touched the system to begin with, and where her life may have gone had her case ended in a delinquency.

She understands, now, how easily poor judgment in a split-second decision can change a life.

If given a do-over, Mariah says she wouldn’t hit back. She warns her friends to “not let things bother you that easily,” too. They may not get a second chance, like she did.

“It wasn’t that serious,” she says now of the altercation that sparked the fistfight. “You can walk away.”

Daniel: MST services could help more youth, but seriously understaffed

Daniel’s first time touching the juvenile justice system stemmed from an incident so minor he almost didn’t qualify for one of the court’s most intensive programs, designed to pull youth back from the brink of deeper crime.

But his behaviors had been stacking into a pattern of violence that officials worried could lead to serious charges. So, the court referred him to Multisystemic Therapy, or MST, to head off problems at the suspected source: his home.

The program sends a case worker into the youth’s house and works with the entire family on stabilizing basic needs, setting boundaries, implementing appropriate punishments and restoring relationships. Workers spend a minimum of three hours with families each week and are on call 24/7 to address problems.

When Daniel started the voluntary program in August, the 13-year-old was rebellious and uncontrollable. He was getting into weekly fistfights at school, skipping class, failing subjects, destroying property at home, berating his mother and disappearing for days, program records show. (Daniel and his family declined interviews but agreed to share their MST report.)

Following one fight with his mom, Daniel was charged with disorderly conduct and placed on the court’s mental health docket, which referred him to MST. He had no contact with his father, and his mother was struggling with her own mental health issues that sometimes prevented her from helping her son.

MST could help them both.

When he first started acting out, Daniel’s mother tried various punishments, including grounding him from PlayStation or seeing friends. But his size allowed him to overpower her to get his way.

The caseworker suggested a different approach, using rewards and sanctions the mother could control. If he did his homework, he could play videogames. If he didn’t, she could remove the gaming system while he was away. If he went fight-free at school, he earned cellphone time. If he didn’t, she could suspend service.

To stop him from stealing, Daniel’s mom started awarding him points for each day he behaved. Eventually, he could apply them toward new clothes or shoes.

“Remember, things can get worse before they get better,” their MST caseworker encouraged in records. “…When we change things up and start sticking to our limits, teens tend to challenge them to see if you’ll give in. Stay consistent. Once a teen knows what to expect, it’s easier to comply.”

Juvenile court considers MST one of its most successful programs.

Among the youth who have participated in the last two years, an average 89% successfully completed treatment and 91% avoided being removed from the home, exceeding national program targets, data shows. However, only 81% of youth remained in school at the end of treatment, and 26% faced new charges, which didn’t meet targets.

There was improvement between the two years, though. Where more than half of participants reoffended the first half of 2022, only one did by the end of 2023.

Cuyahoga County, though, has an unusually small pool of participants.

“There’s no shortage of referrals that the court could make for kids who would benefit from MST, but the slots are so limited,” MST Manager Elizabeth Cipollone says.

There are currently two MST therapists who together can serve a maximum of 20 youths a year. But the court has the budget to support up to eight therapists, who could serve 80 kids.

In March, the court increased the starting salary to $63,000 to attract more applicants, but officials worry the long hours and difficult work may still turn people off.

Daniel’s charge came at a time when MST had an opening. After four months of services, he was consistently attending school and turning in homework. His grades were improving. He was taking his medicine. He was behaving at home.

There was a blip near the end of his time in the program where he was involved in a fight and suspended from school for three days, but MST staff said his mother did “a great job of handling it.” She enforced his punishment – no phone during the suspension – and talked through nonviolent ways he could have responded.

That proved the family’s growth, says Pam Mitterling, an MST expert with Case Western University’s Center for Innovative Practices, who ensures the program adheres to the national model. She reviews each case and, during a phone conversation with Daniel’s therapist in December, didn’t consider his school fight cause for concern.

“It’s not so much that the kids are going to be perfect,” she tells his therapist, “It’s that the parents know how to handle it.”

Daniel hasn’t reoffended since.

Bryson: CBIC transformative intervention, but not always enough

Bryson can’t name a single positive male role model in his life.

He’s not in contact with his father and his older brother is serving 10 years in prison for drug trafficking, making Bryson the man of the house at 17.

His mother, a single parent, provides for his basic needs, he says, but little more. To fill in the gaps, he started selling drugs. In the past, his brother could make $1,000 in just a couple of hours, he recalls. But after his brother was arrested, Bryson got spooked and switched to stealing cars.

In 11 months, he was charged six times with receiving stolen property, a felony, related to the car thefts.

“I hear more people saying they get money off the street rather than a job. So, I want to get the same money they’re getting,” Bryson admits. “I adapted to that.”

The juvenile justice system is designed to promote rehabilitation and give wayward youth a fighting shot at avoiding an adult criminal record. One of the last stops for a kid before juvenile prison or a transfer to the adult system is often the Community Based Intervention Center, an intensive education- and therapy-based program. It boasts remarkable youth transformations that staff say prove rehabilitation is possible.

The program isn’t always enough to overcome a child’s troubled home life and circumstances. But for Bryson, it was exactly the intervention he needed.

Bryson’s search for financial security is common among justice-involved youth.

One of his peers, Aaron, says he also “fell in love with that fast money.” He didn’t have any at home.

Aaron grew up idolizing his father, but rarely saw him. When he was 13, he falsely accused his mother of abuse, thinking the court would send him to live with his dad, permanently. He “expressed jealousy and some resentment” that his half-siblings got to visit their father, a probation officer wrote.

Three weeks later, while staying with his father, Aaron says he watched federal authorities kick in the front door and arrest his dad for gun and drug trafficking. His dad is now serving 10 years in prison.

Things were rocky back at home with his mom. Aaron started running away, stealing cars for “transportation and a place to sleep,” his probation officer reported. Then he turned to older males on the block, who, he now says, promised a “glamorous” lifestyle of weed, money and women.

Last year, the 17-year-old was caught boosting dozens of cars off a rental lot. A police report said he did it under threat from an older man.

Aaron understands what he did was wrong but says it was what he was taught. All youth see in his eastside Cleveland community is crime, he criticizes, yet society “gets mad when we do it.”

Following charges and stays in jail, Aaron and Bryson were sent to the Community Based Intervention Center, a rehabilitation program for males 14 and older considered high risk for reoffending.

During the 3-month program, kids are picked up at home and shuttled to the Metzenbaum Center in Cleveland’s Central neighborhood for 10 hours. Half that time they receive individualized education, catching them up in school. The other half is spent in group therapy, where they learn social and problem-solving skills meant to alter the impulsive thoughts and risky behaviors that led them to crime.

When Bryson started the program last September, he paced with nervous energy, unable to sit or focus. He often had to be separated to avoid disrupting others and wasn’t completing assignments. Fast forward two months, he was relaxing in his seat, working silently and sharing during group therapy.

“He’s come so far,” program manager Patricia Grace remarks. “He’s like a different kid.”

Aaron, too, improved over the same period. He’d recently surprised himself by restraining and calming two brawling teens and helping an injured staff member. Before CBIC, he says he would have let them fight. Staff rewarded him with McDonald’s and a $30 gift card.

“It’s one thing to tell us what they think we want to hear, but another to break up a fight of your peers and demonstrate the skills we’ve been learning,” staffer Sean Lavelle says.

The transformations are proof programs like CBIC can work to rehabilitate and divert troublesome youth, Grace says, even as they’ve had to cut hours amid understaffing.

‘I still got hope’

There were 260 youths who attended CBIC between 2019 and 2023. Most of them completed the program and are considered a success.

The court does not track recidivism in the traditional sense, because it’s expected to take time for the philosophies to sink in and sometimes charges are added late as evidence evolves. Instead, the court bases success on whether participants were sent to residential facilities or state lockups after completing services, indicating they were not yet fully rehabilitated. Over the four years, though, 80% of participants did not cycle deeper, data show. (It’s too early to factor in 2023 participant outcomes.)

“Intervention decisions can’t be based on just one thing: the crime,” Grace defends. “If you’re not addressing the right thing and just locking them up, it’s not going to be beneficial.”

At CBIC, facilitators roleplay scenarios to help youth think through consequences of risky behaviors and possible alternatives. In November, one of the hypothetical scenarios was actually a lived reality for most of the group: what to do if they are kicked out of the house.

Seated in front of a whiteboard, Bryson, Aaron and a few others wrote out their options. They could steal a car or find an abandoned house to sleep in. They might also go to a homeless shelter or crash at a friend’s place. One suggested they might call police for help.

Some of those options would be criminal, but it’s OK for such thoughts to pop into mind, staff tell the kids, as long as they don’t act on them. Following discussion, the teens decide staying with a friend or family member is best. They repeated the exercise several times.

“It’s too repetitive,” one kid complains. “It’s repetitive, so we don’t forget it,” Aaron replies.

Just before Aaron left the program, that training was put to the test.

Freed from his ankle bracelet, he celebrated with friends and came home high. His mother kicked him out and withheld clothes and belongings. He went to the county men’s shelter, which provides housing for homeless youth, but he regressed – acting out, leaving without permission. After a few weeks, he went to live with his grandmother but was soon back at the shelter.

Grace says the situation exemplifies the challenges many youths face on their rehabilitation journeys. Rarely is the path straight or easy, and even kids who do well in court services can struggle again once they return home.

Another kid from the November class fought with his caretaker, cut his ankle monitor and has been missing since. A third was kicked out of the house after he suffered a dog bite that went untreated and the family was reported to social services. He is living in a hotel.

“The challenges of their environment play a huge role” in rehabilitation, Grace says. “We’re trying to give them the skills here to overcome some of them, but their living situations are out of their control.”

Bryson is one of the few kids from the November class who hasn’t regressed.

His mom moved the family across town for a better-paying job and put Bryson in boxing lessons to introduce him to positive role models. He’s looking for part-time work while he finishes school, then he plans to drive a truck.

As of May, he was doing well and hadn’t reoffended.

Months earlier, he predicted he’d still be on the streets, “doing the same things,” if he hadn’t been sent to CBIC. It was his wake-up call. Stealing cars and making money “any type of way” didn’t give him the life he wanted, he says. He had to change.

“I used to always have the urge to do something, but now I think I don’t want to go back to jail,” Bryson says. “I still got hope.”

Carter: Alternatives to traditional juvenile lockup seeing success

Four years ago, Carter was on a fast track to prison or death.

He was failing in school and missing curfew. He stole money from siblings. He’d sneak out for days, running with the Heartless Felons gang.

At 15, he served as an armed guard outside an apartment door, while his crew dumped a man from his wheelchair and stole the TVs from the apartment. Before fleeing, Carter fired his gun, lodging a bullet in the front door. He later turned himself in, telling police the others made him do it. He was charged with 10 felonies, including aggravated robbery.

Then, at 16, Carter led police on a high-speed chase reaching 110 mph in a stolen car. He and two passengers were arrested; police confiscated three loaded firearms. Police later found his fingerprints in a different stolen vehicle – “All I knew was wake up, steal a car and go,” he admits.

“I was just living wild. I didn’t care,” Carter says. “When you go outside, all you see is violence. All you see is people smoking and hear about shootings, and that’s what (kids) go and do.”

Sometimes kids cycle through the system, despite interventions, reoffend and are labeled unredeemable. They get sent on to the adult system to face adult consequences, including adult prison. But some kids defy the odds and the expectations of prosecutors.

Carter was one of those kids. Rather than serving time in a traditional cell, he was transferred to a therapy-focused alternative, where he excelled. His story shows us that some interventions are worth the public’s investment; some kids are worth a second chance.

After the police chase, Carter spent 15 days in jail and two months on house arrest while the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor pursued bindover – transfer to adult court. Carter’s charges didn’t qualify for mandatory bindover, but prosecutors felt he should be tried as an adult, and they requested discretionary transfer.

Discretionary bindovers can be requested anytime a juvenile is 14 or older and accused of a felony. But it’s up to a judge to decide whether transfer is appropriate, following an investigation into the child’s social history, education and family situation, as well as a mental health examination by the court’s diagnostic clinic. Judges hold a special hearing to determine if a child is “amenable” to care and rehabilitation within the juvenile system – which runs until an offender’s 21st birthday.

Carter’s judge found him amenable, noting that he didn’t have a long criminal history and hadn’t yet received services. The judge sentenced him to juvenile prison for a minimum of four years, or up until he turned 21.

Carter’s mother initially resented the sentence, fearing it might spark a vicious cycle of incarceration. His father had been in and out of jail most of his life. Yet, a part of her was also relieved. For the first time in so long, she knew where her son was sleeping at night.

“Before then, I didn’t know where (he) was or if I’d get a phone call telling me he died,” she says. “I went from worrying every night about if my son would get in trouble and would no longer be here, to, ‘Ok, I know where he is, and now that I know where he is, can I get him some help?’”

Unlike many youths who touch the criminal justice system, Carter had a relatively stable upbringing. His mother had a master’s degree and a good-paying job. He also had model siblings and a supportive extended family.

But he still seemed to lack a sense of belonging, after his parents divorced when he was 3. He lost touch with his father over time, and the absence seemed to bother him more than it did his older siblings, his mom says.

Carter started gravitating to older men from their Euclid neighborhood. Bad behavior followed. But his eventual arrest and incarceration “changed the trajectory of his life,” his mother now praises.

Cuyahoga’s six juvenile judges have drastically reduced the number of youths they send to Ohio Department of Youth Services facilities. In 2009, they ordered 293 kids to youth prison, data show, but commitments fell to a record low – 54 – amid the pandemic, in 2020, the same year Carter was sent there. (Commitments have since increased into the 70s, where they remain steady.)

Typically, juveniles sentenced to the ODYS serve time at one of the state’s three primary prisons –Cuyahoga Hills, Indian River or Circleville Juvenile Correctional Facility – all of which have come under greater scrutiny in the past year for riots and problems that many say traumatize youth.

“Indian River is not treatment, it’s just fighting,” Carter recalls of his brief time there.

Not long into his sentence, though, Carter’s judge allowed him to transfer to one of ODYS’ three community-based alternatives, which put greater focus on treatment rather than incarceration. Collectively, about 15% of youth committed to ODYS reside at one of the alternative facilities.

Carter went to Lighthouse Youth Center at Paint Creek, a residential treatment facility near Chillicothe.

The minimum nine-month program works to break through traumas to help youth develop coping and self-regulation skills. It also mandates therapy and education. Older youth are exposed to job training.

It’s meant to be a supportive environment. There are no locked doors, and youth have their own rooms. They also wear regular clothes, rather than uniforms.

“It’s not about compliance, it’s about teaching,” Director Renee Hagan says during a recent visit. “It can’t just be punishment.”

Originally, Lighthouse offered correctional-style discipline for males ages 14 to 20. But in 2021, it switched its focus to “Trust Based Relational Intervention,” using relationship-building and therapy to encourage reform. Since then, it has had greater success rehabilitating youth, Hagan says.

Fights also plummeted. Where Lighthouse used to report about 100 altercations a year, in 2022, it had just 16, Hagan says. Staff were able to convert what used to be “seclusion rooms” into recreational spaces. Recidivism also cut in half, she said; in 2022, just 10% of participants reoffended within a year of exiting the program.

Recidivism in general has been falling across all ODYS facilities since at least 2017, data kept by the state shows. But rates still aren’t as low as at Lighthouse. A recent study provided by the state found that roughly 14% of juveniles released from ODYS in fiscal year 2019 committed new crimes within one year, which was still the lowest percentage since at least 2011. After two years, the rate jumps to 22%. Three-year post-release data was not available for the 2019 group, but rates in prior years have been as high as 49%. For those released in fiscal year 2018, however, the rate had fallen to 35%.

Lighthouse is “not a magic wand,” Hagan cautions. They only accept the best-behaved youth, which may account for their greater success. Still, the program proves “you can do good things with kids without incarceration,” she says.

Carter witnessed the shift in philosophies. It helped him thrive.

At first, he was disobedient and argumentative. Staff say he gravitated to other disruptive youth and resisted therapy. Hagan nicknamed him “Mr. Sassy.”

Back then, Carter says he felt hopeless and trapped. Nothing is going to change; these people can’t help you, he thought. Staff made him go to therapy anyway. It saved his life, he says.

He stopped fighting, called home more and connected with staff. When former gang friends arrived, he avoided them. “That’s when I knew I started to change,” he says. “Once I started changing, then everything changed.”

He graduated high school at the facility, started college courses and got a job at a local sawmill. He was the first youth to ever be permitted to work offsite, affording him greater job experience and an income to grow his bank account in preparation for release. He went from rebel to role model, staff say.

Carter’s progress earned him release a year early. He’s among 22% of Cuyahoga youth whose sentences were cut short – ranging from a week to a year – between 2019 and 2022, state data show.

Today, Carter is 20 years old and back at home with his mom. She now describes him as respectful and hardworking.

“When we were in the courts three years ago, prosecutors talked about him like he was the scum of the earth. That really upset me because look at him now,” his mom says. “He’s living proof that rehabilitation does work.”

Carter has since started a job with Amazon, earning $19 an hour. He’s getting his driver’s license and looking into trade school. He repaid his siblings the money he’d stolen, exhibiting Lighthouse’s motto, “you gotta make it right.”

He’s crime free.

Carter gives credit to Lighthouse. Had he served time in traditional lockup, or had he been subject to bindover and sent to adult prison, he surmises, his life might look very different. He’s not wasting his second chance.

“The charges I had, they expected me to come back, but I didn’t,” Carter says, four months post-release. “That proves people can change if they want to.”

(Coming next week: The reasons Cuyahoga County youth touch – and sometimes cycle through – the juvenile justice system are nuanced and often reflect underlying and untreated causes related to poverty, trauma, mental illness and hopelessness. But that doesn’t excuse their crimes or minimize the harm they caused their victims. Justice is a balancing act between public safety and rehabilitating youth – and victims don’t always think it weighs in their favor.)

Thank you for reading Delinquent: Our System, Our Kids. Please consider supporting journalism like this by joining our community of subscribers. With a paid subscription, you gain access to everything published by a team of journalists committed to providing accurate information on news, entertainment and sports in Northeast Ohio. Please subscribe here. — Chris Quinn, Editor

Staff walk youth through an exercise on reframing risky thoughts and behaviors at the Community Based Intervention Center.

IMAGES

Juvenile Delinquency1
JUVENILE DELINQUENCY
Juvenile Delinquency Essay
Assingment ppc
Juvenile Delinquency (Assignment) by Princess Sarah Abas
Assignment On Juvenile Delinquency

VIDEO

JUVENILE DELINQUENCY AND JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM PART 5
JUVENILE DELINQUENCY: CORRECTIONS
JUVENILE DELINQUENCY: FAMILIES AND DELINQUENCY
Juvenile Delinquency Speech
Juvenile Delinquency
JUVENILE DELINQUENCY: AN OVERVIEW OF JUVENILE JUSTICE IN AMERICA

COMMENTS

Crj180 week 6 assignment
Combating Juvenile Delinquency CRJ 180 Kristen Camero 11/16/ Combating Juvenile Delinquency The Durham Teen Center at Lyon Park is a center for free program ran by Durham County for teens age 13-18 years old and is ran all year round. It provided activities for teens across the city.
Juvenile's Delinquent Behavior, Risk Factors, and Quantitative
Juvenile delinquency is a habit of committing criminal offenses by an adolescent or young person who has not attained 18 years of age and can be held liable for his/her criminal acts. Clinically, it is described as persistent manners of antisocial behavior or conduct by a child/adolescent repeatedly denies following social rules and commits ...
PDF Understanding Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
4 Part I • Understanding Juvenile Justice and Delinquency INTRODUCTION In 2022, Philadelphia police arrested a 12-year-old boy and charged him with murder in the carjacking of 70-year-old Chung Yan Chin. The boy, along with two teenagers, knocked Chin to the ground and repeatedly kicked him in the face and head. Chin suffered serious injuries and
PDF JUVENILE JUSTICE
of crime and disadvantage by balancing punishment and rehabilitation. Yet many decades later, ... • Major correlates and theories of juvenile delinquency • The roles of police, attorneys, judges, and other actors in the juvenile justice system ... assignment, needing to work late, being unable to get to a computer, and having an
PDF Juvenile Delinquency Guidelines: Improving Court Practice in Juvenile
2. Juvenile delinquency systems must have adequate staff, facilities, and program resources. 3. Juvenile delinquency courts and juvenile abuse and neglect courts should have integrated one family-one judge case assignments. 4. Juvenile delinquency court judges should have the same status as the highest level of trial
Risk and Protective Factors and Interventions for Reducing Juvenile
Juvenile delinquency is a pressing problem in the United States; the literature emphasizes the importance of early interventions and the role of the family in preventing juvenile delinquency. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework, PudMed, and Scopus, we included 28 peer-reviewed articles in English between January 2012 and October 2022.
PDF Youth and the Juvenile Justice System: 2022 National Report
Preface. Youth and the Juvenile Justice System: 2022 National Report is the fifth edi-tion of a comprehensive report on youth victimization, offending by youth, and the juvenile justice system. With this release, the report series has adopted a new name (the series was previously known as "Juvenile Offend-ers and Victims"), but the focus of ...
PDF Juvenile Delinquency: The Core, 6 edition
Juvenile Delinquency: The Core, 6th edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing. Course Prerequisites: CRMJ 1001, CRMJ 2210, and CRMJ/SOC 2400. 1. Course Description: Within the criminal justice system, we often focus on adult offenders. However, there is an entirely different criminal justice system that deals with juvenile offenders.
PDF Literature Review
However, those youth who do achieve higher levels of education while in the juvenile justice system are more likely to experience positive outcomes in the community once released (Blomberg et al., 2011; Cavendish, 2014). This literature review will discuss the intersection of the educational and the juvenile justice systems.
Juvenile delinquency, welfare, justice and therapeutic interventions: a
Abstract. This review considers juvenile delinquency and justice from an international perspective. Youth crime is a growing concern. Many young offenders are also victims with complex needs, leading to a public health approach that requires a balance of welfare and justice models. However, around the world there are variable and inadequate ...
PDF SOCIOLOGY OF JUVENILE DELINQUENCY University of Nebraska-Lincoln Course
You are responsible for completing a course project regarding an aspect of juvenile delinquency or juvenile justice. This assignment is an opportunity to dig deeper into an issue of interest to you. During the final week of class, you will create and present a visual project based on your written project. Your written work is to be
PDF CJ 532 (01.W): Juvenile Delinquency
See the Summaries Assignment Handout on D2L for details. Hit each bullet point on the summaries guidelines to earn a good grade. 2. Presentation & Writeup: To get you thinking critically about juvenile crime and delinquency, or issues in the juvenile justice system's processing of delinquent youth by police, courts, corrections,
Interrelatedness of Family and Parenting Risk Factors for Juvenile
The association between family functioning and juvenile delinquency has indeed been well documented in empirical literature (Assink et al., 2015; Datesman & Scarpitti, 1975; Glueck & Glueck, 1950; Howell & Hawkins, 1998: Manion & Wilson, 1995) with a stronger focus on the impact of family and parental risk factors than protective factors ...
PDF CJ 326.71E- Juvenile Delinquency
Textbook(s) Required: Juvenile Delinquency: A Sociological Approach (10th Edition) by William E. Thompson and Jack E. Bynum. 2017 ISBN: ISBN-9781442265004 Rowman & Littlefield Software Required: None ... assignments, class notes and discussion questions. Please know that a short essay is not 1-3 sentences. It is a well thought out answer in 2-3 ...
Assignment on Juvenile Delinquency.docx
Assignment on Juvenile Delinquency Collected by Kamrul Hassan (Nazmul) Mobile : 01739-809078 LL.B (Hons) (UU) MSS in Victimology & Restorative Justice University Of Dhaka The problem of juvenile delinquency is becoming more complicated and universal, and crime prevention programmes are either unequipped to deal with the present realities or do ...
Criminal Justice 305
For this assignment, you will be researching a constitutional law case related to juvenile delinquency or criminal proceedings decided by the United States Supreme Court.
Juvenile Delinquency Syllabus
Evaluate the issues of juvenile delinquency in the context of a Christian worldview in order to become more effective servant leaders; REQUIRED TEXTBOOKS: Juvenile Delinquency: The Core, second edition by Siegel ... Written Assignment. The students will bring one current event from a newspaper, magazine, professional journal, etc. related to ...
(PDF) Factors Affecting Juvenile Delinquency
Abstract and Figures. The occurrence of juvenile delinquency has become a major societal concern caused by various factors both at the micro and macro levels. This study aims to assess the ...
Assignment on " Juvenile delinquency
Assignment on "Juvenile delinquency" A case study of my own village Prepared for: Faculty: Prof. Dr. M A Mottalib College of Arts and Sciences Introduction to Sociology (SOC-106) Prepared by: Md. Shamim ID# 14202299 Program: BBA Section: A Date of submission: 09/07/2015 Introduction Juvenile delinquency is a type of abnormal or anti-social ...
Delinquent: Read all the stories from Week 4; Cuyahoga's juvenile court
Juvenile courts were created in the early 1900s to give youths second chances after crime to be rehabilitated. Courts support numerous programs to foster that reform.
Indian teen allegedly kills two while drunk driving. As ...
This is a heinous crime," he told reporters Tuesday, pointing to the 2015 changes to India's juvenile laws, which allow children above 16 to be tried as adults if they allegedly commit a ...