Skip to main content
Essay Undergraduate 2,122 words

Charging Juveniles as Adults: Harms and Consequences

~11 min read 7 sections Law · Juvenile Justice System
Abstract

This paper examines the negative consequences of trying and sentencing juveniles as adults in the United States criminal justice system. It surveys state-level laws that permit minors to be transferred to adult courts, then argues against this practice on multiple grounds: the declining trend in juvenile crime, the incomplete neurological development of adolescents, the dangers juveniles face in adult prison populations, the availability of specialized juvenile justice systems, and the lack of consistent national standards governing transfer decisions. Drawing on legal scholarship, psychological research, and policy analysis, the paper concludes that adult sentencing for minors increases recidivism, reduces rehabilitation prospects, and ultimately does more harm than good.

Key Takeaways
  • Introduction: The Debate Over Trying Juveniles as Adults: Thesis: adult prosecution of minors causes more harm
  • State Laws and the Growing Trend of Adult Prosecution for Minors: Survey of state transfer laws and rising trends
  • Arguments in Favor of Charging Juveniles as Adults: Supporters cite severity of crimes and accountability
  • Declining Juvenile Crime and Faulty Premises: Data shows juvenile crime is actually declining
  • Developmental Immaturity and the Dangers of Adult Incarceration: Brain development and adult prison harms to youth
  • The Juvenile Justice System as a Better Alternative: Specialized juvenile courts offer better rehabilitation
  • Inconsistent Legislation and the Case Against Adult Sentencing: Inconsistent laws undermine fairness and effectiveness
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾

What makes this paper effective

  • The paper marshals multiple distinct argument types — developmental psychology, criminological data, legal inconsistency, and comparative penology — rather than relying on a single line of reasoning, giving the argument breadth and depth.
  • It acknowledges the opposing viewpoint fairly before systematically rebutting each claim, which strengthens the paper's credibility and meets the standards of academic argumentation.
  • Concrete state-level examples (Tennessee, Minnesota, Colorado, Wisconsin, Kansas, Vermont) ground abstract policy claims in specific, verifiable legal contexts.

Key academic technique demonstrated

The paper demonstrates effective use of the counterargument-and-refutation structure. By presenting the pro-adult-prosecution position before systematically dismantling it with developmental research, recidivism data, and comparative juvenile justice evidence, the author models how to strengthen a persuasive essay by engaging honestly with opposing views rather than ignoring them.

Structure breakdown

The essay opens with a provocative framing statement and a clear thesis, then surveys the legal landscape before addressing opposing arguments. The middle sections each tackle a distinct argument against juvenile transfer (brain development, prison dangers, existing juvenile infrastructure, legislative inconsistency), and the paper closes with a policy-level conclusion that circles back to the opening framing. The structure is cumulative — each section adds a new layer of reasoning rather than repeating the same point.

Essay 2,122 words

Introduction: The Debate Over Trying Juveniles as Adults

"Old enough to do the crime, old enough to do the time" — this is an old yet still very controversial statement when contemplating whether juveniles should be tried as adults in certain circumstances (Maroney 1). Many people believe that anyone who knowingly commits a crime must suffer the same consequences, regardless of age, race, or background. However, treating children as adults in criminal contexts can have incredibly negative impacts on the psychological state and future of any given child. It is clear that charging and sentencing children as adults produces more harm than good, despite opposition calling for harsher punishments within the adult criminal justice system.

State Laws and the Growing Trend of Adult Prosecution for Minors

In today's legal environment, there have been increasing media reports of heinous crimes committed by children, and with them comes a growing demand to treat those children as adults within the punitive system. The United States allows minors to be treated as adults during criminal proceedings depending on the nature of the crime and the age of the child at the time it was committed. When more violent or serious crimes are committed — such as murder — there are avenues for children to be tried as adults (Spohn & Hemmens 180). Many states are making it easier and more accepted to try juveniles as adults, depending on the type of crime committed (Maroney 1).

Tennessee, for example, has no age limit that would prevent the prosecution from moving a juvenile's trial and sentencing to adult court. Theoretically, a five-year-old convicted of murder could be sentenced as an adult. Although that scenario is unlikely to occur, it remains legally permissible in that state. Other states have also begun adopting laws that allow younger and younger children to be treated as adults in trials and sentencing. In 2008, Minnesota passed Emily's Law, under which "persons as young as 14 can be charged as adults" (Collins 1). This legislation followed the gruesome murder and sexual assault of a two-year-old child by a thirteen-year-old adolescent. Kansas and Vermont have laws allowing children as young as ten to be tried as adults, while Colorado sets the minimum age at twelve (Collins 1). Colorado, like several other states, also bases the decision to charge a juvenile as an adult partly on past criminal history (State of Colorado 2).

Many states across the country even have laws that permit sentencing minors to life without the possibility of parole (Cohen 1). Moreover, many of these laws give greater decision-making authority to prosecutors, effectively bypassing judges in determining whether a child should be charged as an adult. Some states, such as Wisconsin, automatically hand over all 17-year-olds who commit any crime — violent or not — to adult courts (Wisconsin Council on Children & Families 1). According to research, prosecutors focus on a child's prior history: "their psychological profile, their home life, their history, any run-ins with the law — all kinds of very important information so that we can decide whether a child should go to adult court" (Stawicki 1). Many of these minors were even held in adult jails during the period their cases were being resolved.

The trend toward escalating punishments for juvenile offenders began in the 1990s and continued into the new millennium. The underlying concept is to remove potential repeat offenders from the streets before they become more hardened criminals. As a result, "each year about 200,000 defendants under 18 are sent directly or transferred to the adult system, known as criminal court," with an average of 7,500 juveniles held in adult jails and prisons on any given day (Cohen 1). Nevertheless, there are many who voice strong opposition, raising questions about the legitimacy of such legislation and court actions.

Arguments in Favor of Charging Juveniles as Adults

Those who support provisions allowing juveniles to be charged and sentenced as adults in certain circumstances believe that the severity of particular crimes warrants correspondingly severe punishment. Supporters argue that any individual willing to commit a heinous crime — such as murder — must face full consequences, regardless of age. Another major concern is the length of juvenile sentences. Many juveniles convicted of serious crimes receive far shorter sentences than adults convicted of comparable offenses (Collins 1). Supporters maintain that criminals must be held accountable for their actions and must serve punishments proportionate to the crimes they have committed.

Declining Juvenile Crime and Faulty Premises

Despite what supporters of adult prosecution might believe, the evidence shows that juvenile crime is actually on a slow yet steady decline. There is therefore little basis for the fear of "juvenile superpredators" to the extreme degree advocated by many in the media or law enforcement, and decisions to try juveniles as adults are often grounded in outdated assumptions about rising juvenile crime rates (Maroney 1). When the trend toward charging children as adults first accelerated in the 1990s, rates of juvenile crime were indeed high (Cohen 1). However, in recent years, a significant shift has occurred. Research clearly documents a decline in juvenile crime, meaning that those juveniles who do still commit offenses should not be treated with prejudice based on trends that are no longer representative of American society.

3 Sections Hidden · 870 words
Developmental Immaturity and the Dangers of Adult Incarceration380 words
There are many arguments against sentencing juveniles as adults based on developmental and physical needs that are unique to younger age groups. Children and teens are nowhere near the developmental or physical maturity…
The Juvenile Justice System as a Better Alternative290 words
Another important reason why juveniles should not be tried as adults is that a supportive punitive system already exists to address the unique needs of young offenders without exposing them to the dangers of adult prison populations. According to research, "the juvenile court is one of the few…
Inconsistent Legislation and the Case Against Adult Sentencing200 words
The lack of strong and cohesive legislation across states makes the practice of charging minors as adults particularly dangerous, as there is no uniform standard governing how the process should proceed. As noted previously, Tennessee has no minimum age limit for when…

References

Cohen, Sharon. "Prosecuting Kids As Adults: Some States Ponder Changes." USA Today. Web. 2007.

Collins, Bob. "Should More Juveniles Be Charged As Adults?" Minnesota Public Radio. Web. 2008.

Maroney, Terry A. "Should Juveniles Be Tried As Adults?" Vanderbilt Law School. Web. 2007.

Roberts, Cynthia H. "Juvenile Delinquency: Cause and Effect." Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute. Web. 2012.

Spohn, Cassia & Hemmens, Craig. Courts: A Text/Reader. Sage Publishing, 2011.

State of Colorado. "When a Child Can Be Tried As An Adult." Office of Legislative Legal Services. Web. 2011.

Stawicki, Elizabeth. "What to Do When Children Commit Adult Crimes." Minnesota Public Radio. Web. 2003.

Wisconsin Council on Children & Families. "Returning 17-Year-olds to Juvenile Court." Wisconsin Counties Association. Web. 2011.

Key Concepts in This Paper
Juvenile Transfer Brain Development Adult Incarceration Recidivism Rehabilitation Juvenile Justice System Transfer Laws Criminal Accountability Adolescent Maturity Punitive Policy
Cite This Paper
PaperDue. (2026). Charging Juveniles as Adults: Harms and Consequences. PaperDue. https://www.paperdue.com/study-guide/charging-juveniles-as-adults-harms-consequences-80898

Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.