Juvenile delinquency has been an ever-evolving issue in the United States. From aims focused on prevention and rehabilitation that resulted in the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974; to a reverse trend beginning in the mid-1970's, the present has brought on a more prevalent tendency to try juveniles as adults. No more have courts taken to giving juveniles delinquents a second chance through rehabilitation (Schmalleger, 2016). In recent years, juveniles have faced life sentences without parole like an adult would. If the trend continues, will the number of juveniles tried as adults grow? Is it the responsibility of the juvenile justice system to prevent crime by enacting harsh penalties on the troubled youth of the country? From a Judeo-Christian perspective, everyone in one way or another, sins. It is up to the government and the community to help sinners see their wrongs and allow them a chance for redemption. One article written by Susan Mody, details the changes of the juvenile justice system. From one that believed in more lenient penalties and rehabilitation to one that tries juveniles as adults, the system no longer aims to help juveniles redeem themselves. What happens then is a creation of a population with high recidivism rates, extensive psychological damage, and limited life chances in relation to education, wages, and family coherence (Mody, 2008). Mody mentions the adolescent brain and the need to understand it to help juvenile delinquents avoid reoffending and enable a better outcome for this troubled population. "In adolescence, the prefrontal cortex, responsible for decision making, planning, and inhibition, is still immature. Most children, given a chance through multi-agency collaborative community-based approaches, will outgrow immature decision-making" (Mody, 2008, p. 2).

Mody states high recidivism rates are directly attributed to courts enacting harsh penalties on juveniles. By allowing the adultification...

This then leads to an attempt to understand why such reasoning is so prominent in the United States.
An article by Sharon Casey and Andrew Day tries to explain the accountability of the juvenile justice system. They explain the United States juvenile justice system often uses recidivism as the only measure of success thus increasing the likelihood of other pertinent changes being ignored. The researchers then decided to investigate and highlight what can be done to obtain the kind of information needed to help understand juvenile delinquents. By creating an assessment protocol, they provided those working in the juvenile justice system, a means of more accurately evaluating the situation of their juvenile justice clients. The article's abstract has the name of the tool provided and what it may offer in terms of data collection and assessment.

The youth justice assessment tool supports case needs identification and analysis as well as screening for mental health concerns, risk of harm to self or others, and risk of reoffending. Initial validation of the case needs component has been undertaken and although further validation is required, preliminary data reported in this article suggest that this type of approach to client assessment does hold some promise (Casey & Day, 2015, p. 1645).

If the juvenile justice system in America only views the recidivism statistic as the main reason for their actions, this may lead to a troubling future. Essentially, the youth justice system has seen increased rates of recidivism in the last few years. They do not understand why this happens outside of the recidivism statistic. All they see is the growing number of juvenile delinquents reoffending and assume the best measure against it is to increase punitive measures like harsher sentencing.

Harsher sentencing is not…