Introduction
Juvenile delinquency and the victimization of children are issues that have a direct impact on the welfare of society. In many communities around the country and mostly in regions and cities, juveniles who break the law and children who suffer from abuse and neglect have become a great concern for society as a whole (Martin, 2005, p. 3). Many people will want to assume that these twin issues do not happen in their communities but rather to other communities. The truth is that these problems do persist everywhere; they occur in rural areas, cosmopolitan cities, and wealthy suburbs, and also in the provincial small towns (Martin, 2005, p. 4). It is therefore important, in regard to these issues as a matter of national necessity, that the concept of juvenile justice permeates society at every level. Basically, juvenile justice can be defined as the fair handling and treatment of youths under the law. Furthermore, it is a philosophy that recognizes the right of young people to due process protections when they are in trouble and personal protections when they are in need (Martin, 2005, pp 4). The juvenile justice process on the other hand may refer to distinct procedures established to assure the fair administration of youths under the law. Moreover, these particular procedures are carried out in accordance with institutions designed for the administration of justice in general and particularly juvenile justice (Martin, 2005, pp 4).
The juvenile justice system is composed of institutions that have been organized to manage established procedures as a way to achieve justice for all juveniles. These institutions may include; the police, juvenile courts, juvenile corrections, and community-based agencies and programs. Recently, juvenile justice has frequently come to the forefront of social and political affairs. This has been motivated by the deep cultural discernment and three fundamental obligations that society has toward young people which include; protect the general public from juvenile offenders, protecting individual juveniles from victimization, and lastly, providing treatment for both offenders and victims (Martin, 2005, p. 4). In the past, these obligations were undertaken within the context of rehabilitation. However, during the late 20th century, this approach has been combined with a new philosophy of punishment for violent and criminal juveniles.
Types of Juvenile Correction Alternatives
The advancement of juvenile corrections in the USA has been a manifestation of existing cultural attitudes toward incarceration in general and youthful offenders in particular. Generally, the progression of the juvenile justice process has advanced through several stages in American history. All these stages addressed the remediation of wayward youths within the context of society’s prevailing views on child-rearing and when the social mores changed, so too did accept practices on dealing with juvenile offenders (Martin, 2005, p. 232-233). It has to be understood that, the juvenile correction has been the main philosophy of the juvenile justice process. Throughout the eras of the juvenile justice process, correctional programs have been undergoing refining and development. The programmatic profiles adopted mostly reflect the prevailing degree of enlightenment toward defining and dealing with juvenile offenders.
During the colonial period, the adopted programs mostly were for corporal discipline and instilling fear of authority. In the refuge period, the main philosophy was corporal discipline and paternalism. During the child savers period, the aim was for paternalism, corporal discipline, and emotional-based persuasion. However, in the modern era, the emphasis has shifted to therapeutic intervention with the aim to rehabilitate (Martin, 2005, p. 236). When youth are adjudicated, a number of dispositional options may be exercised by juvenile courts. Generally, the options fall into three categories which are; on-formal processing, which includes the dismissal of the case, referral to a community diversion program, and placement on non-formal probation. The two formal processing options are; placement in a community-based correctional program and placement in an institutional correctional program (Elrod and Ryder, 2009, p. 285).
Community-Based Corrections
They refer to diverse types of supervision, treatment, reintegration, control, and support programs for the youth involved in the juvenile justice process. The belief here is that the most effective way to encourage law-abiding behavior among the youth is to help them assume legitimate roles within the community. The objectives of these programs include controlling and sanctioning youths, allowing youths to maintain existing ties with the community, reintegration, and reducing the likelihood of recidivism (Elrod and Ryder, 2009, p. 286). Examples include; probation, foster care, group home placement, and parole.
- Probation: This is the most used correctional response to youths who are adjudicated in juvenile courts. It is the conditional release of an adjudicated youth into the community under the supervision of the court. Typical rules of probation require that the probationer obey all laws, follow home rules, be home each day by a certain time, meet with the probation officer when requested, and if in school, attend school each day and obey rules of the school. The purpose of probation is to enable the juvenile offender to reshape in the framework of normal living conditions while preserving family life and other normal social relationships.
- Parole: this refers to early release from the residential correctional facility where the offender’s sentence begins in confinement and ends in the community under the supervision of the parole agency.
- Foster homes: Foster care is popular for dealing with children whose parents abuse them or have failed to care for them, also for children who come from chaotic families and the children who exhibit behavioral problems (Elrod and Ryder, 2009, pp 298). Main activities in a foster home may include; counseling, nurturing discipline, and behavior reshaping.
Institutional Corrections Programs
Institutional placement is the most restrictive type of placement used by juvenile courts. In most cases, they restrict youths’ access to the community to a greater degree. These programs include; juvenile detention, forestry camps, ranches, boot camps, diagnostic and receptive centers, and state training institutions. Most of these facilities house offenders who have committed a variety of offenses but others do house specialized offenders such as sex offenders and the youth with mental health and substance abuse problems (Elrod and Ryder, 2009, pp 318).
- Training schools: These institutions often serve as the last resort to the youth who are regarded as repeat offenders. Most of them have a closed environment in that they are physically secure and they have various security devices such as; high walls and fences, razor wire, motion detectors, and locked cell blocks and always they are self-sufficient. They sometimes do have solitary confinement or isolation rooms for those who consistently misbehave. Training schools usually consist of academic education, vocational education, recreation, basic counseling, and behavior management. Other programs that might exist in some specialized institutions include; family counseling, health and nutrition counseling, substance abuse counseling’s offender treatment, and also religious counseling (Elrod and Ryder, 2009, pp 333). In many institutions, treatment and behavior management or modification are emphasized.
- Diagnostic and reception centers: The main goal for these centers is to assess youths committed and determine the best treatment plans and placement for them. Assessment normally takes five weeks and the youth is placed in another correctional facility to complete the period of commitment. A treatment needs assessment may include; psychological evaluations, educational assessment, social history, and behavioral observations.
- Ranches and Forestry camps: These are long-term programs for persons who do not require secure custody. Here the youth have access to the community than in other types of institutions. Today, these programs focus on teaching the youth responsibility and self-sufficiency and building their self-esteem. They operate on the belief that by placing the youth in a different environment, old attitudes may be altered, and new acceptable behaviors patterns may be created (Elrod and Ryder, 2009, pp 337).
- Boot camps: The philosophy of adoption of boot camps is that the serious youth offenders could be influenced in a positive way by exposing them to rigorous military-style training, military disciplining, group cohesion, and strictly enforced obedience are believed to be able to rebuild an undisciplined offender into a productive member of the community (Benda and Pallone, 2005, p. 181). Training techniques of the armed forces are used with the intention to shock the youth into socially productive conformity over a period of 30 to 120 days. Due to their nature of execution and mostly the emotional and physical torture employed, these camps can only be suitable to males (Borque, 1996, p. 3) and not females who are not able to withstand the force that is employed.
Effectiveness of These Alternatives
Despite the history of juvenile correctional institutions and their increasing popularity, little seems to have been done on their effectiveness. However, a few studies done show that some institutional programs for juveniles appear to be effective but the bulk of them, evidence indicates that they have little impact on recidivism. In many cases, these institutions lack good treatment programs. Many programs have no genuine caring and concern for youths while others are poorly designed and implemented (Elrod and Ryder, 2009, p. 341).
Also, the reality in the modern world is that the rate of youth delinquencies and crimes is escalating and therefore the punishment will continue to be an important option in dealing with serious offenders.
Also to note is that some offenses committed by the youth may prevent the authorities from placing them into alternative institutions, such offenses may involve; attempted or forcible rape by the juvenile, murder, and aggravated assault committed by the youth. Also, youth with mental disorders may be placed in specialized units instead of being taken to alternative institutions.
Conclusion
Any juvenile correctional interventional program should promote and support practices that are effective in reducing juvenile offenses. An effective program has to address the following; it should concentrate on changing behavior and improving positive social skills, it should focus on problem-solving with both the juveniles and their families. It should also have multiple interventions and lastly, it should be highly structured and intensive. Also, the program can on a large scale incorporate the following; it should provide guidance and training in family problem solving, should provide a variety of structured programs that include education, vocational training, and skill development, and lastly, promote healthy bonds with respect for persons in a juvenile’s life who are positive role models.
References
Benda, B. B. and Pallone, N. J. (2005). Rehabilitation Issues, Problems, and Prospects in Boot Camp. NY, Routledge.
Borque, B. (1996). Boot Camps for Juvenile Offenders: An Implementation Evaluation of Three Demonstration Programs. PA, DIANE Publishing.
Elrod, P. and Ryder, R. S. (2009). Juvenile Justice: A Social, Historical and Legal Perspective. MA, Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Martin, G. (2005). Juvenile Justice: Process and Systems. CA, SAGE.