There are two opposing views on the contemporary juvenile justice system in the United States. One of the postulates is that it has long ceased to be efficient and should be redesigned completely. The opponents of such radical measured argue that it is functional and that only some details need to be fixed. I support the second viewpoint because I do not think that revolutionary changes within a judicial system can contribute to the well-being of juveniles and the community, in general. I do understand that the modern juvenile justice program has a great number of limitations such as the underprivileged position of these people in the court, retributive punishments, red tape, poor allocation of responsibilities, and lack of support from the government (Whitehead & Lab, 2010; Blomberg et al, 2006). However, these drawbacks do not require dismantling, they can be dealt with separately. One has to remember that restructuring any judicial system is always a very time-consuming and expensive process. Some of these costs that will be entailed by this process can be spent more effectively, for instance, by funding those schools that educate former juvenile offenders. It seems that such an investment would be much more beneficial to the community.
The supporters of radical measures believe that the juvenile justice system should be dismantled but they do not say what we do at the point when the old system is already non-existent, while the new one is still under development. Therefore, one should first understand how to bridge the gap between two systems. This gap can result in overgrown bureaucracy and even arbitrary treatment of juveniles. These are the reasons why I cannot advocate radical views about the juvenile justice system.
Reference List
Blomberg T. Blomberg J. Waldo G. Pesta G. & Bellows J. “Juvenile Justice Education, No Child Left Behind, and the National Collaboration Project” Juvenile Justice News. Web.
Whitehead J. & Lab. S. (2010). Juvenile Justice, Sixth Edition. NY: Anderson.