The forensic psychology sphere can use the competency of juvenile discussion in a number of ways. First, any competency hearing of a juvenile needs to take into account that the offender's mind is still forming and finalizing and it is not the same thing as assessing a person who is, for example forty years old. That being said, younger offenders do typically know right from wrong and it is possible in a clinical sense to determine whether the offender is able to defend himself or herself. The rub is that it has to be done in a specific way and in a way that is tangibly different than with typical adult offenders. After all, though, there is not a huge difference between assessing a 17-year-old and a 18-year-old and one of those two offenders is legally and criminally an adult.
Another dimension that is going to be prevalent in a juvenile hearing, and it is a dimension that forensic psychologists have to take seriously, is the import of the parents, their influence, and their relation (if any)...
This may sound like an odd statement but when 10-year-olds are trying to kill each other over an Xbox, it is clear that there is a major disconnect in their moral development and standards because no rational and lucid person with any sort of instilled morals would do that in most cases but there are children who are technically sane that do ludicrous things like that every day (CBS Sacramento, 2012). Sometimes, it's a matter of lack of values/morals and has nothing to do with sanity and that is a tricky question to answer when assessing the societal and other related contexts.
References
CBS Sacramento. (2012, July 31). Xbox Chat Leads To Violent Attack In Oakley -- CBS Sacramento. CBS Sacramento. Retrieved August 12, 2013, from http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2012/07/31/xbox-chat-leads-to-violent-attack-in-oakley/
Harvey, A. (2011). Juvenile Courts and Competency to Stand Trial. Sociology Compass, 5(6), 439-451. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9020.2011.00377.x
