Imprisonment of juveniles in the American society has been a critical issue in the American justice system. The study has identified two articles, which are central to this topic whilst elucidating the ideas shared by the authors. Evidently, the issue of paroling juvenile offenders was an issue that stood out in the two articles with calls for the justice system to review jail terms for the offenders.
Sentencing Juvenile Offenders to Life in Prison
Courts are giving juveniles sentences that are more severe than those given to adult offenders are. This is because juveniles have not been able to negotiate so that they can attend the adult criminal court. In the article "Sentencing Juvenile Offenders to Life in Prison" by Jason and Giovani, they have demonstrated that America is the only country where juveniles are sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of Parole Initiative. Eighty percent of juveniles serving life sentences are below 18 years of age: this suggests that these youths will surely die in prison (Welsh & Siegel, 2011). In cities such as Michigan, young people under the age of 14 years have been charged for committing felonies and subject to trial at the adult courts. If they are found guilty, they will be sentenced as adults (Grigorenko, 2012).
The article has gathered reports detailing a wide range of differences how different states are dealing with juvenile cases. In addition, it provides highlights of enormous financial costs involved in juvenile sentencing without parole. Disparities are also evident in juvenile courts. Youth charged with murder are sentenced according to their racial background. A white youth accused of murder is likely to be given parole while a youth from black family is not likely to be given similar treatment. Such similar disparities are evident in a number of states and reports indicate that the trend is on the rise (Researcher, 2011).
On a critical perspective, putting juveniles in the adult court system is just wrong and it has never been supported by the society. Sentencing youth to life imprisonment is some of the injustices arising from reforms done to the court system. The article has compiled data about 1,579 people worldwide who were sentenced to life in prison without parole as juveniles. The data represents 50% of America's juveniles who have been given such sentences (Welsh & Siegel, 2011). The article titled "Sentencing Juvenile Offenders to Life in Prison" has documented high rates of social disparities in juvenile courts, correction policies that are counterproductive and thwart rehabilitation efforts. Juveniles have been encountering disadvantages since the establishment of juvenile courts. Youths who have been sentenced to life imprisonment without parole are being disciplined at an extraordinary rate. In addition, lawyers representing juveniles sentenced to life imprisonment have also been given extraordinary treatment in courts. These attorneys have been publicly disciplined or sanctioned for violating ethical conduct in courts (Steib, 2011).
Juveniles are also rejecting offers of plea at a higher rate compared to adults. Very often, adults are given linear sentences for their crimes. This is because juveniles are not fully equipped and cannot negotiate offers of parole because they are immature, inexperienced and have failed to realize the importance of negotiating for pleas. Many juveniles do not have any knowledge about costs involved and the meaning of parole. When a lawyer who has never been disciplined represents a juvenile, chances of accepting a plea are high. This is because the lawyer is likely to negotiate for a lesser sentence (Grigorenko, 2012).
The current juvenile court system allows youth offenders to be sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. This is like declaring these youths as people who are irredeemable. Evidently, youths have the capability to change. Moreover, a system that allows them to change must be set up by considering their age. Children cannot be compared to adults, thus must be treated in a context that holds young people accountable. In the article, experts are urging lawmakers to review the life without parole sentence given to juveniles such that it should allow public hearings after every four years. In addition, they support parole procedures to be reviewed for youth offenders serving life imprisonment (Sarat, 2009).
It is extremely unusual and cruel to give a mandatory life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, to a juvenile. This decision has followed decisions made by other courts that have reduced punishments given to youth offenders. However, it seems that this case is different. Such punishment had been prohibited by previous cases under any circumstances. It is impossible to have a mandatory sentence. In a case involving a 12-year-old who had been sentenced to a mandatory life imprisonment: the Supreme Court ruled out that the sentence was unconstitutional. Further, other cases had indicated that according to the constitution, children are different form adults concerning sentencing. Youths have great prospects of reforming and accepting to change (Welsh & Siegel, 2011).
You’re 84% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.