Juvenile Criminal Justice: The Complex Issue of Trying Children as Adults

Title: Juvenile Criminal Justice: The Complex Issue of Trying Children as Adults

Introduction: The question of whether children should be tried as adults for murder and other serious criminal offenses is a complex and contentious topic. The juvenile justice system was established with the belief that children possess less culpability and greater potential for rehabilitation compared to adults. However, some argue that heinous crimes committed by children warrant trying them as adults to ensure public safety and hold them accountable. This essay will explore both sides of the debate, ultimately arguing against trying children as adults for most cases.

I. Arguments for Trying Children as Adults: A. Deterrence and Public Safety:

Trying children as adults for serious crimes sends a strong message to potential offenders, deterring them from engaging in violent acts.
Holding children accountable through adult court may protect society from dangerous individuals who may reoffend if released at a young age.
B. Severity of the Crime:

In cases of heinous crimes such as premeditated murder or rape, the gravity of the offense may warrant treating the child as an adult.
Some argue that children who commit such crimes exhibit a level of maturity and intent that justifies trying them in adult court.
II. Arguments against Trying Children as Adults: A. Developmental Differences:

Scientific research shows that the adolescent brain is not fully developed, particularly in areas related to impulse control and decision-making.
Children lack the same cognitive abilities and understanding of consequences as adults, making them less morally culpable for their actions.
B. Potential for Rehabilitation:

The primary goal of the juvenile justice system is to rehabilitate rather than punish.
Children have a greater capacity for change and reform, offering hope for successful reintegration into society.
C. Risk of Harm in Adult Correctional Facilities:

Placing children in adult prisons exposes them to physical and psychological harm, increasing their likelihood of reoffending upon release.
Adult facilities lack age-appropriate programming and fail to address the unique needs of juvenile offenders.
III. Alternatives to Trying Children as Adults: A. Juvenile Rehabilitation Programs:

Strengthening and expanding community-based programs can provide specialized care, education, and therapy for juvenile offenders.
These programs can address the root causes of criminal behavior, promoting long-term rehabilitation.
B. Individualized Assessments:

Each case should be evaluated individually, considering factors such as the child’s age, maturity level, mental health status, and potential for rehabilitation.
A comprehensive assessment can determine appropriate interventions, ensuring a balance between accountability and rehabilitation.
Conclusion: While the severity of some crimes may tempt us to try children as adults, it is important to consider the developmental differences between children and adults, the potential for rehabilitation, and the risks associated with placing children in adult correctional facilities. Rather than subjecting children to adult court, society should invest in effective juvenile rehabilitation programs and individualized assessments to promote accountability and long-term success for young offenders.

References:

Fagan, J., & Zimring, F. (2018). The changing legal context of juvenile justice. Annual Review of Criminology, 1(1), 47-68.
Scott, E. S., & Steinberg, L. (2008). Adolescent development and the regulation of youth crime. The Future of Children, 18(2), 15-33.
Steinberg, L., & Cauffman, E. (2016). Understanding the legal rights of youth in the justice system: A call for reform. Law and Human Behavior, 40(3), 220-227.
Zimring, F., & Steinberg, L. (2017). Should America’s youth be tried as adults? New York University Press.