However, the juvenile court was designed to rehabilitate children rather than punish them for their juvenile’s criminal behaviour. Since late 1970s critics of juvenile courts have sought to abolish this system, arguing that it has failed in its rehabilitation efforts and in not punishing serious criminal behaviour by feral urchins. At the same time defenders of juvenile justice system contend that for the vast majority of the children, the system is a worthwhile means of addressing problems and they argue that a handful of violent juvenile who have committed serious offences should not lead the public to believe that the system does not provide ways changing behaviour.
In fact to that the teenagers may feel stigmatised by a criminal conviction and may believe he or she is isolated and lost, resulting in return to crime. In totalling, it is wrong to label a person so early in life, for an action that may have been hasty or motivated by rake force. On the other tender the huge amount on sentence could be better spent on analysis, education and job training. In adding together to that critics note that social and ethnicity landscapes have changed noticeably since the early 1900s when the juvenile system was recognized. Drugs, gangs and ease of use guns led the young people committing serious crimes including murder. Critics insist that they system is no longer passable to address problems caused by violent and amoral young people. Moreover, critics also claim that it is wrong for juvenile offenders who have committed violent crimes to be released from the juvenile court at early age. Serving a few years in a juvenile correction facility for a crime that if committed by an adult would result in a ten year sentence is unjust. The punishment for a crime, dispute critics should be the same, regardless of the age of the executor.
Free from juvenile justice systems rehabilitative thought and limit on criminal due process rights, juvenile should stand accountable for their criminal action. Once a juvenile is convicted, a trial court can decide the suitable sentence. In difference, defenders dispute that a small minority of violent youths have created misperception that the system is a failure. Though not every child can be rehabilitated, it is unwise to abandon the efforts. In every other globe of society, children are treated differently from adults.
The defenders also keen that violent subculture and early childhood traumas caused by abuse, neglect, and exposure to violence make it more difficult to address individual problems. If the system were effectively funded, probation officers and court support workers could more closely manage children and rehabilitation efforts. If more energy were put into changing the socioeconomic situation of communities, rehabilitation efforts would improve and crime would decrease. As long as there are ways diverting these offenders into the adult system and meet needs of young people this system should maintained.
Many people believe that government’s record on youth crime and tackling the multiple needs of children caught up in the youth justice is less impressive than many would have expected following a wide ranging programme of reform and considerable investment. This raises question about the success of the reforms and youth justice.
In addition to facts that the Home Office and Youth justice Board launched in 2001 new initiatives in increasing sport activities to reduce anti social behaviour, crimes and drugs. This is attempted using sporting programmes which involve coaching and competitions, training and mentoring, linked educational programmes and leadership training.
Former Youth justice Board Professor Rod Morgan argued that if we are dragging into the system kids who can be dealt with outside then we are overloading it and that means it is likely we will not do as good as a job the public expect with higher risk cases. Furthermore Professor Morgan indicated that more schemes dedicated police officers are needed in school to tackle anti social behaviour. There are only 400 schemes in school cross the country, even though they are successful in reducing the number of children excluded from school and therefore reducing the possibility of such children committing offence (The Independent 2006).
Youth inclusion Programme (YIP) was introduced in 2000, the main aim was to reduce crime and anti social behaviour and offer those youth people who are at high risk offending or anti social behaviour new programmes somewhere safe they can learn new skills, take part in activities with others and get help on their education and career guidance.
However, an independent national evaluation of three years of YIP found that arrest rates of the 50 young people considered to be most at risk of crime in each YIP has been reduce by 65% and also those who had offended before joining the programme 73% were arrested for less offences after engaging with a YIP, similarly those who had not offended previously but who were at risk, 74% did not go on to be arrested after engaging with YIP (YIP 2008).
Research by government’s Youth justice Board showed that anti social behaviour orders ASBO are widely seen as badges of honour by offending teenagers. The research also indication that many of those involved in tackling youth crimes, including magistrate, have serious reservation about their effectiveness and question how much they change the behaviour of teenage tearaways (The Guardian 2006).
Moreover, more than 7,300 individual ASBO have been issued they were introduced in 1999 as a flagship part of Tony Blair’s drive against antisocial behaviour and disorder but the new study says that 49% of under 18s had been returned to court for failing to comply with their order, with majority ‘’breaching’’ it on more than one occasion (The Guardian 2006).
The former Home Office Hazel Blears said that the government is doing an assessment of ASBO at the moment and she has surely asked for some examination of hand full of cases that caused difficulties. She insisted that the government does not want orders to be used unsuitable and government wants to have faith and confidence in the police and in their local councils to use the powers that have been given, and properly and appropriately to tackle what is undoubtedly a serious problem in many parts of our country (BBC 20 Nov 2005). The research, which was carried out by the policy research Bureau and Narco, the crime reduction charity, looked in details at 137 cases and found that many young people had no clear understanding of the detailed restriction in their orders and it was not uncommon for the, to openly flout those which placed the greatest curbs on their lifestyle (The Guardian 2006).
Paul Cavadino of Nacro said that in too many areas ASBO were being used as an early option before other approaches were tried and all too often unrealistic conditions were imposed on young people that were bound to be broken. Former YJB Morgan said that ASBO can, and do work incredibly well but they need to be used correctly and that means exhausting every preventative measure in the community first, and ensuring that youth offending teams are not excluded from the process (The Guardian 2006).
Then the government should look at the impact of the young people being jailed while there are more effective ways of tackling youth crime. According to the statistics shows that the number in the custody have increased 8% since March 2003, against a government’s target of 10% fall custody (The Guardian 2008).
The criminal justice and Public Order Act 1994 was passed which created a new security training order that allows young people aged 12 to 14 to be detained in new institutions. This order will be applied to young people who have committed three sentences offence not necessarily on three separated occasions and who breached or offended during a supervision orders.
Tory Leader David Cameron believes that new schemes such as TV chef Jamie Oliver can attract youngsters to be trained as chefs and he said that A new generation of social entrepreneurs like Mr Oliver was needed to restore respect in our community. Tory leader also proposed a national school leaver programme, lasting a few months to teach young people the importance of respecting others. The party plans to speak to a wider range of organisation from the armed force to voluntary groups about those opportunities they could offer. The scheme would give every young person in Britain the chance to develop their self esteem and self respect by participating in community activity at home (Daily Mail 2006).
After all, the government should carefully look at where the tearaways commit offences and put more disproportionate amount to tackle the youth crimes and also look at deeply difference in the custom to modern adult life and the opportunities of young people to be able to grow up safely and successfully. Furthermore the government should make sure in creation a youth club where young people have extra activities such as military art, sports, drama clubs, and scouts and so on. This would help promote personal skills and reduce problem behaviour across teens and adult childhood. It would also provide the opportunity to mix with non abnormal peers to be mentored by adult activity leaders and work towards clean goals. If these measure were taken by the government they would decrease crimes, anti social behaviour, etc and the future of Britain young people would be brighter and more successful.
Travis. (The Guardian 2 Nov 2006)
Brogan (Daily Mail 11 Jan 2006) Respect
Dyer, (The Guardian 21 May 2008)
The Independent (23 April 2006) Special report; The ASBO kids
