Treatment vs. Punishment in Juvenile Justice: The Case for Rehabilitation

Introduction

When it comes to the question of whether treatment or punishment should be used for juvenile offenders, it is important to remember that juveniles are still developing into adults: their minds, bodies, impulses, and cognitive processes are still in formation, and they do not have the kind of self-control one might expect of an adult. Juveniles are children, and if a child is thrown into a cage society is more than likely to label it child abuse. Yet every year children are tried and punished for crimes as though they were adults. While punitive approaches to juvenile justice may sometimes be necessary in order to convey that certain behavior is unacceptable, they should not be applied on the scale reserved for adults. The focus of juvenile justice should be on rehabilitation—not punishment. This paper explains why treatment is the better option when it comes to juvenile justice.

Differences Between Treatment and Punishment

The concept of treatment is grounded in the idea that juveniles who commit a crime—whether it is selling drugs, robbing a house, rape, or murder—are still children who are in serious need of help. The justice system should adopt a more humane approach to juveniles because they are still in a developmental process. As one ages, the phases of development stretch out and last for many more years (Santrock, 2019). According to Erikson's psychosocial theory of development, human beings develop in psychosocial stages and are motivated by a social desire or need to be with other people (Santrock, 2019). For juveniles, the phases of development are intense and confusing; if they are not properly guided by peers, family, groups, and media, they may make very bad decisions and give themselves over to harmful impulses and negative influences. Children need a helping and guiding hand to navigate the conflicts they face in the early stages of development. Treatment is what provides that hand. It can come in the form of therapy, mentoring, a Big Brother program, a new family placement, rehabilitation, restorative justice, and so on.

Punishment is much different. It is what happens when a child misbehaves: the authority figure punishes the child to communicate that such behavior is unacceptable. This is a legitimate and sometimes necessary response, but the problem with the justice system is that punishments are frequently blown far out of proportion (Meli, 2014). Lives are ruined because the justice system wants to send a stern message to offenders and potential offenders that their behavior will not be tolerated. That message, however, must be tempered with empathy, sympathy, and humanity—otherwise patterns of social decay will never reverse and the breakdown of communities will only continue.

Types of Treatment and Punishment

Types of treatment include counseling, prevention programs, cognitive behavioral therapy, education, and psychological therapy (National Institute of Justice, 2019). These approaches tend to promote rehabilitation and assist the juvenile offender in growing into a responsible, accountable adult. Their aim is to foster prosocial attitudes. As Fritz (2015) points out, diverting children away from incarceration is a service both to them and to the community because it promotes a more humane vision of what society should be and demonstrates to the juvenile that the world is not simply out to get them—a feeling that is likely grounded in their experiences and environment, as Agnew (2008) posits when applying Strain Theory to the reasons juveniles engage in crime.

Types of punishment include incarceration, home confinement, electronic monitoring, community service, probation, diversion programs (though these can also fall under the treatment category in some cases), and placement in a foster home. Punishment does not aid in the reduction of recidivism rates the way restorative and rehabilitative forms of justice have been found to do (Wong, Bouchard, Gravel, Bouchard, & Morselli, 2016). Therefore, it should be avoided or, at the very least, used in moderation rather than applied as though it were the only option worth pursuing.

Conclusion

In summation, the concept of treatment best supports the overarching principle of social justice. Social justice is about doing what is right for all stakeholders and helping communities to grow and develop. But communities cannot grow and develop when fathers and sons, mothers and daughters are being incarcerated generation after generation. This creates an endless cycle of recidivism that must be broken so that communities can begin to heal—so that individuals and neighborhoods alike can begin to take responsibility and hold themselves accountable for what happens within them.

The concept of restorative justice is one that should be pursued, even for serious crimes like murder, whenever it is possible to do so. People must begin to reconsider how they view others, even those who have offended them or their communities. Justice does not have to exclude forgiveness. It does not have to be entirely punitive. It can and should combine punitive measures with treatment. In the case of serious crimes, that combination may be exactly what juveniles require. However, they should never be tried as adults. The justice system must remember that these are children: they are still developing, and they need to be treated for the underlying issues that are driving their behavior negatively. Only then can genuine rehabilitation—and genuine justice—be achieved.