Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Wei Chin
Per.6
22 May 2008
English 1 H
Moran
Chin 2
Wei Chin
English 1 H
Moran
12 May 2008
In 1899, Illinois passed the Juvenile Court Act, which established the nation’s first
juvenile court. It was founded on three principles: juveniles are not ready to be held
accountable for their actions, are not yet fully developed, and can rehabilitate easier than
adults. Now, in all but three states in the United States, anyone charged with committing a
criminal act before his or her 18th birthday is on average, is considered a juvenile offender.
More than ever, states and countries worldwide have begun to question the reliability of the
juvenile court. The juvenile court system should be abolished, the system of punishment is
not only too unrestricted on the juvenile offenders, but it is also inefficient in responding to
The aim of creating a juvenile court for children was not only for it to differ from that
of the criminal court, but for the way of these differences manifested themselves was to be
unique and individualized. Procedure was to be kept in a way as to prevent the child from
being tried and treated like a criminal. The original court permitted jury trials under no
circumstances, allowed no public trials, and allowed the judge to represent both parties of the
law. The informality of the court allowed individual circumstances surrounding each case to
be identified and considered by judges when ruling. The transformation of the juvenile
jurisdiction began in the late 1960’s with cases by the Supreme Court granting due process
rights to juveniles where, becoming eerily similar to criminal courts, juvenile transfers were
Chin 3
established such that the most serious young offenders could be tried as adults. The American
judicial system and the treatment of juvenile offenders have undergone considerable changes
in the past 30 years. With the rising levels of juvenile crime combined with media discourse,
an increase in public fear and a ‘get tough’ government approach to crime has emerged. The
notion of “adult time for adult crime” has brought significant changes in the juvenile justice
system and its philosophy for dealing with adolescents, ultimately resulting in an increasing
number of juveniles being transferred and sentenced in the adult court system. It is time to
consider whether or not this long process is needed, whether or not the entire juvenile
anything is done to them. It is amazing how ancient, archaic, and broken down the juvenile
justice system is." (Senator Peter Domenici, Butts, Harrell 9). For example, after bashing a
13 year old friend in the head, knocking her unconscious, a 14 year old is in custody at the
conduct and interference with an educational institution (Sanchez 1). Instead of sending her
where she needs to go, they decide to send her to a mere detention. This will do nothing to
The reason that it seems inefficient is because some of the juvies have been in
and out of the system so much that there is no fear. I worked JD for 5 yrs back
and it became almost a "status" thing for some of these kids to get arrested and
put back in. They would walk thru the door and half the kids would cheer and
back slap the kid like he/she was "home". They need to keep them locked in
cells and only let out at certain periods of the day for exercise and meals. Stop
Chin 4
Like the author mentioned, juvenile court is so easy to get through, it wasn’t even considered
a punishment. If this is how the juveniles are being treated, isn’t it the same as house arrest?
titled, No Matter How Loud I Shout: A Year in the Life of Juvenile Court. In this novel, he
introduced us to a 13 year old boy, Richard Perez, who was charged with car theft,
misbehavior in school, truancy, and incorrigibility. Settling his case, Richard busted curfew,
smoked marijuana, and continued running with his gang. When he didn’t show up to school
for at least a month, his parole officer drove to his address, which was discovered to be
fictitious; no one had bothered to check it before he was released. After being brought back
to court a month later, he was again went home with a probation, followed by 3 arrests, all of
which he was released from custody. Richard Perez walked into a restaurant in the Lynwood
area of L.A. County, and approached a 17 year old boy. When asked what gang the boy was
in and getting no answer, Richard pulled out a gun and shot the boy to death. At the hearing
to determine his fitness to be tried as a juvenile or adult, Richard’s lack of remorse and utter
contempt for a system that had never held him accountable was obvious. (Humes 3). Edward
Humes points out the attack by Perez could have been avoided had the court paid close
enough attention to the small cases, instead of only the violent and serious cases. If that is not
enough to prove the insufficiency, in 1995, U.S. juvenile courts handled more than 1.7
million cases involving delinquency charges (Sickmund, 1997). “Nearly half (45%) were
handled without formal court action. In cases involving youth under age 13, 73% of all
delinquency referrals ended with the youth receiving no formal services” (Snyder et al.,
Chin 5
1997). If this is the case, kids may believe that crimes they committed were deemed
court with exclusive jurisdiction over the young offenders. They believe the juveniles are
different from adults, and the due process requirements give the juveniles a wider chance of
intervention. However, the jurisdiction over the young offenders was dubious to start with.
Juvenile court will never provide enough rehabilitative chances as it was envisioned, “57%
of first time juvenile offenders never come back. The other 43% needs to be focused on, but
there is nothing that is done; children are sacrificed” (Humes 41). This is too big of a
number, if the 43% of the juvenile offenders are on the streets; the chances of getting
attacked are just too big a risk. Instead of concentrating on the small, minor crimes, the
officials concentrate on the major cases, such as rape and 1st degree murder. In this matter,
the smaller delinquents can easily turn into hard-time crocks; they won’t be punished until
it’s too late. Furthermore, “The due process is no longer acceptable given its new emphasis
on just deserts” (Butts, Harrell 6). If this is the case, we do not have a need for the juvenile
court system; it’s the same as the adult criminal court sysyem.
Some argue that without juvenile court, the adult court system would hurt the ones
that do not have a fully developed mind. Most of the juvenile offenders have gone through a
rough time growing up, but juvenile court is not required for their benefit. Some states have
created "family courts" to handle all family matters, including abuse and neglect, divorce and
custody disputes. Abolition of the juvenile court would have no impact on the viability of
family courts. They would simply no longer handle criminal law violations by minors.
Preservationists from all over the country would also argue that adult prison is not the ideal
Chin 6
place for someone not yet an adult; after all, prison is a place where many believe to be hell.
Abolition of the juvenile court would not require that all young offenders be sent to adult
prison. Many states already operate separate correctional facilities for young adults (under
age 21, under 23, etc.). There is not enough reason to suggest that juvenile should not belong
to the adult court system; after all, the division is just a waste of money and time on the
state’s part. The use of juvenile courts in Arizona was ended by the “Stop Juvenile Crime
Initiative” and was endorsed by 63% of Arizona voters. According to a NBC New-Wall
Street Journal poll, two thirds of Americans think juveniles under the age of 13 who commit
murder should be tried as adults (Butts, Harrell 2). In a survey conducted by Sam Houston
State University, a majority of the public favored sentencing many young offenders in adult
court rather than in juvenile court. Nearly all of the respondents (87%) favored adult
sentences for juveniles charged with serious violent crimes, and 69% favored adult court
sentences for drug sellers, and 63% for serious property offenders (Maguire 155).
The United States has many rights for juveniles; but the juvenile court should not be
on the list as one of them. States and countries have already begun to abolish this useless
system that only serves to waste time and money. Juveniles are constantly being undermined
by the court, and it is time to change it all. Those that seem silly and inappropriate will be
excused in the adult courts, while crimes that are more acceptable will be charged
accordingly, instead of wastefully. Currently, only the most serious and violent are
transferred to adult court, called a waiver or transfer. We have taken the first steps, it is now
time to complete the process of abolishing this wasteful and inefficient system.
Chin 7
Work Cited
Bakken, Nicholas. "YOU DO THE CRIME, YOU DO THE TIME". University of Delaware. 22
<http://www.urban.org/publications/307452.html>.
<http://www.edwardhumes.com/articles/juv_senate.shtml>.
<http://www.albany.edu/sourcebook>
<http://answers.yahoo.com/question/;_ylc=X3oDMTE1aThkdWZ2BF9TAzIxMTUDA>
Sanchez, Jesse. "Teen beats classmate with chair in taped attack". 12 May 2008.
<http://current.com/items/88906812_teen_beats_classmate_with_chair_in_taped_attack>
<http://www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles/93868.pdf>.