It is important to understand that the primary goal of day treatment reporting programs is to provide to support to a juvenile offender after an adjudication to ensure that behavior is corrected, and similar issues will not occur in the future. Moreover, it is paramount to note that legal systems have been looking for various ways to use such initiatives because they are viewed as incredibly efficient.
One of the core aspects that should not be disregarded is that such programs may be used as a particular assessment tool that would help to identify needs of a juvenile, and this approach may lead to numerous discussions. The issue is that it may be viewed as a particular form of punishment before a due process. However, the need to review strengths and weaknesses of this approach should not be disregarded. The biggest benefit of such initiatives is that they have access to enormous amounts of resources, and trained professionals would be capable of providing juveniles with services of highest possible quality. Moreover, the assessment would be reasonable and adequate. The problem is that an enormous percentage of young offenders that are forwarded to such centers are mentally ill, and they require a unique treatment. The age of a person is also vital most of the time and affects the decision-making process in such situations. Furthermore, other types of punishment may not be viewed as reasonable.
Another aspect that is worth noting is that this approach would help to ensure that individuals are provided with help much earlier, and prompt treatment may be vital in some cases. It is imperative to understand that the identification of factors related to predisposition is critical most of the time, and would help to ensure that issues that a juvenile has to deal with are addressed. Moreover, a day treatment center may be viewed as a primary sanction against juveniles that are not violent (Siegel & Welsh, 2014). Moreover, it is imperative to understand that many young offenders are punished only with a verbal warning because they are not dangerous, and their offenses are relatively minor. On the other hand, some vital information may be obtained during such assessments, and it can be viewed as a particular contradiction. Also, it is necessary to understand that the difference between juvenile and adult legal systems is significant, and a young individual may not have an understanding of his or her rights. It is imperative to mention that preventive aspect needs to be taken into account, and a group theory that is common in such centers may be incredibly useful in some situations (Shoemaker, 2013). However, the problem that is currently present is that a consensus on particular aspects of risk assessment has not been reached, and it may be viewed as a complication most of the time, and it may be hard to justify the use of day care centers as a measurement tool.
In conclusion, it is important to note that it is not likely that this approach would punish juveniles before the due process because such programs do not have the same power as law institutions. Moreover, it is entirely possible that every case needs to be reviewed individually to ensure that rights of an individual are not broken. Overall, particular modifications to the current systems may be required if it is necessary.
References
Shoemaker, D. J. (2013). Juvenile delinquency. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Siegel, L. J., & Welsh, B. C. (2014). Juvenile delinquency: theory, practice, and law (12th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.