Juvenile corrections systems and practices

Juvenile Corrections

Juvenile Justice: An overview of the philosophy, system, rehabilitation, institutionalization, and parole of juveniles

Serious crimes committed by juveniles often strike a particular chord in the hearts and minds of the American populace. No one wishes to think that someone who is so young can turn against society and its moral values. However there is equal outrage when juveniles of a fairly advanced age seem to be treated extremely leniently by the justice system. To better understand some of the apparent contradictions of how individuals deemed to be juveniles are viewed and treated by the system of juvenile corrections, at first it is essential to understand the nature of the justice system and the philosophy underlining juvenile justice in America.

The current procedural system of juvenile justice was largely established by the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967). In Gault, the Supreme Court defined formal due process safeguards for juveniles similar to adults, while still upheld the basic mission of the juvenile courts as therapeutic and rehabilitative in their mission rather than purely punitive (Clark 2008). Of course, it could be argued that the adult system is not purely punitive, either, in its structure and intention. However, juvenile justice has always been regarded as attempting to 'teach,' in its mission, individuals often younger than the age where they can be held fully responsible for their actions. These children are thus in need of education as well as punishment.

The difference between juvenile and adult offenders is perhaps most obviously manifest in the fact that juvenile offenders may be convicted of crimes of which adults cannot be found guilty -- running away from home, 'playing' truant from school, and other so-called status offenses. In contrast to adults, the system and the child's parents or other guardians claim a certain responsibility for the juvenile, take an active interest in promoting the child's welfare, and oversee the child's moral development, even if the juvenile offender has committed a crime. Since the Gault decision, the juvenile courts' jurisdiction, purposes, and procedures have adopted specific procedural methods that are similar to but separate from adult criminal courts. "Gault held that juveniles charged with crimes who faced institutional confinement required basic procedural safeguards including advance notice of charges, a fair and impartial hearing, assistance of counsel, an opportunity to confront and cross-examine witnesses, and the privilege against self-incrimination." (Clark 2008).

Beyond these procedural safeguard, however, uncertainty still remains regarding the treatment of juveniles, and what crimes enable a juvenile to be treated as an adult, and if age makes a difference as to the way the offender will be treated. Juvenile courts and laws may vary from state to state. The Gault decision reflected the sociological theory and social developments of its age where aberrant behavior was often seen as a defect of the developmental process, or poor socialization or poor parenting, as well as a moral failing of the individual, but the degree to which the system can attempt to extract some retribution from the juvenile has never been formally established.

Every state has slightly different policies regarding its juvenile justice system and programs. It is useful to look at one state, California, to understand how the system attempts to maintain a delicate balance between rehabilitation and making juvenile offenders accountable for their crimes. In California, there are several ways an offender may fall under the control of the Department of Juvenile Justice. The first is if the offender is committed by a juvenile court. This court system is separate from the adult court system. The offender may even be sent to a juvenile detention facility if they are tried as an adult and committed by a criminal court because of their age. "The DJJ [Department of Juvenile Justice] houses offenders between the ages of 12-25. Offenders that have been committed to CDC [California Department of Corrections] may be transferred to an adult facility on or before their 18th birthday" ("Division of Juvenile Justice: FAQs, 2008, CDCR).

When an offender is paroled, special conditions may be placed by the parole board upon the individual, to ensure that the rehabilitative process began in prison continues. "In addition to establishing the standard rules which include paying restitution, maintaining contact with their parole agent, submitting to searches and not leaving the state without permission" ("Division of Juvenile Justice: FAQs, 2008, CDCR). These special stipulations may include counseling for substance abuse or anger management, substance abuse treatment in a residential facility, drug testing, not associating with certain individuals (like members of the offender's former gang) and even earning a high school diploma or equivalency degree. The system takes an 'interest' in the development of the young offender ("Division of Juvenile Justice: FAQs, 2008, CDCR).

The youthful offender "can earn an early discharge from parole supervision if they perform well on parole for a significant period of time," which the court system calls paying off their restitution in full to society, again reflecting the growing shift to seeing retribution, to some degree, as a critical element even of the once ostensibly rehabilitative system ("Division of Juvenile Justice: FAQs, 2008, CDCR). The offender may be dishonorably discharged from parole if he or she does not meet the conditions of the parole.

Although even adult programs have attempted to embrace a philosophy of rehabilitation or restorative justice before the adult is released into the community, for example, by requiring offenders to engage in community clean-up -- juvenile courts have made even more extensive use of such efforts as community service, sensitivity training, giving back to the community, repairing the offense (like cleaning up graffiti), or 'boot camps' to educate the youths as to how to become more functional members of society. These service and educational activities are meant to teach as well as to repair the harm done by the offender to society.