Free Essay Example: Juvenile Sentencing Policy

Juveniles represent a sector of the population that has not yet attained the age of majority, age of majority is the legal age defined at which a person is regarded as an adult. Juveniles are usually protected by the law as they are regarded as irresponsible and illiterate of the law and thus rarely considered in the event of legal action. When a crime is investigated, juveniles are usually the last lot of individuals that can be regarded as suspects. However, cases of juvenile crime have been on the rise in recent times. Countries such as the US have found it necessary to introduce Juvenile Policing as a legal framework that will oversee the control and arrest of juveniles upon the commitment of a crime (Shteynberg & Redlich, 2015). This law is still in its early execution and has received several concerns from stakeholders. This paper will investigate the effect of juvenile policing to stakeholders, the role that courts have in enforcing the law, and avail recommendations to changes that can be made to juvenile sentencing policing.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Effect of Juvenile Sentencing Policing on Stakeholders

A stakeholder is a person or an institution with an interest to an opinion, legal proceeding or any other concern. Juvenile policing has focused interest among several stakeholders, the main ones being the police, courts, parents and support groups. The questions that arise among these stakeholder groups ascend from the added roles of stakeholder groups. Parents have the role to shape their children in moral ways that follow the law. Police as well have the mandate to determine how to handle a juvenile lest they fall in the hands of judicial prosecution (Sim & Lamb, 2018). The court's system is in a dilemma on the rationale of determining the guiltiness of the juvenile. Support groups from the community as well have the mandate of determining the best programs that will provide a remedy to juvenile crimination.

In juvenile policing, the police become the first stakeholders to come in contact with the juvenile. The police have a tough role in juvenile policing since a mistake in apprehending the wrong juvenile calls for judicial trial. Juvenile policing thus requires the police to ensure that the juvenile, as well as they, are protected in the event of a suspected crime (Cohen & Casey, 2014). The police are required to apprehend the juvenile following the juvenile law as well as dictate the services that the juvenile will require upon arrest. The police are expected to have good intention and relation with the youth. When a police officer apprehends a juvenile, he or she can put him in a detention centre, give him to a probation officer or reprimand and release him.

Parents and family represent the immediate stakeholders that experience the effect of juvenile policing. Parents have the mandate to ensure that their juvenile children abide by the rules of public policy. The effect of juvenile policing to parents comes in as parents have an added role of parenting their juvenile children. Juvenile policing has forced parents to impart social as well as legal perspectives to their juvenile children. The goal of this added role is to ensure that children grow up as noble citizens not only around the home but also in the general society. Parents have to work closely with police officers if a juvenile is under arrest for a crime.

Support groups, as well, have the role to provide programs that will benefit juveniles after they are apprehended for a crime. Support groups have a critical role in ensuring that the kind of service offered to the juveniles offers support and growth on the part of the juvenile (Siegel & Welsh, 2016). Support groups also have the role of ensuring that juveniles presented to them have a way of determining their mistakes as well as find a way to regard positivity as a way out to social integration in the general public.

Role of Courts in Creating or Enforcing the Policy

Courts have the role of enforcing the juvenile policy. However, juveniles represent a special sect of the population that needs to be protected from its complexity. The courts thus have an intricate role in dealing with juvenile proceedings as opposed to when dealing with adults. In some countries, the judicial system recognizes the formation of juvenile courts that deal with the hearing and judging of juvenile proceedings (Decker & Marteache, 2017). Juvenile courts are usually informal in several aspects and the judges here determine the rationale that can incriminate a juvenile to a certain crime. The courts as well have to refer the juvenile to a specific program so that the juvenile can access required therapeutic services.

The judge is supposed to determine whether facts presented in the court regarding the conduct of a juvenile are true. In this regard, the judge must decide the rationale under which such conduct was undertaken, regarding whether the juvenile was acting in his or her capacity or contained. It is usually difficult for the court to determine whether or not a juvenile should be separated from the home for a different social setting. This is because parents and support groups press charges on the relevance of such justifications. Parents and support groups usually facet the court system with influences, claiming that they have the power to undertake the therapeutic process for their kids (Guarino-Ghezzi, 2017). The courts find difficulty in passing such judgments as kids are intended to attend to certain processes such as school and sports as they grow. The ruling of juvenile courts is thus difficult as the decision is controlled from multiple points of view dictating the welfare of juveniles. Courts, however, provide a succession on the rationale and trend of juvenile crime which then helps in shaping juvenile sentencing policing.

Recommendations

There are many restrictions when it comes to apprehending a minor for a suspected crime. Police, as well as court systems, find difficulties in passing judgment to a juvenile. Focusing on the family and support group should be the next idea towards juvenile policing. Family is the immediate social unit that interacts with the minor. If families and support groups are linked, it will be easy to impart positive skills to minors which then will reduce the rate of juvenile crimes. Juveniles will also be protected from the law. Minors who are seen to surpass the intervention of family and support group programs will then be judged in courts of law as per the juvenile policy. Police officers should also be given powers to apprehend minors the same way they will do to adults. This is to ensure that juvenile crimination is not tolerated because of legislations limiting juvenile arrest.

References

Cohen, A. O., & Casey, B. J. (2014). Rewiring juvenile justice: The intersection of developmental neuroscience and legal policy. Trends in cognitive sciences, 18(2), 63-65.

Decker, S. H., & Marteache, N. (Eds.). (2017). International handbook of juvenile justice. Springer.

Guarino-Ghezzi, S. (2017). Balancing juvenile justice. Routledge.

Shteynberg, R. V., & Redlich, A. D. (2015). Policing Juvenile Delinquency. The Handbook of Juvenile Delinquency and Juvenile Justice, 2, 405.Siegel, L. J., & Welsh, B. C. (2016). Juvenile delinquency: The core. Nelson Education.

Sim, M. P. Y., & Lamb, M. E. (2018). An analysis of how the police 'caution is presented to juvenile suspects in England. Psychology, Crime & Law, 24(8), 851-872.