9.2. Juvenile Justice Introduction
Alison S. Burke and Kate McLean
The juvenile justice system was founded on the premise that juveniles are different than adults and require special attention and treatment. Two fundamental institutional assumptions are: (1) juveniles are malleable, and thus (1) they can be rehabilitated. For these reasons, the juvenile system believes that public safety is best served by emphasizing the treatment, rather than the incapacitation and punishment of juveniles. [1] Unfortunately, sensationalized media exposure of violent youth led to exaggerated public fear of juvenile crime, get-tough legislation, and a perceived need to “do something” about juvenile crime in the 1990s and 2000s. [2] This punitive position is nothing new. Before the inception of the juvenile justice system in the early 20th century, youth were treated the same as adults. They were considered fully culpable for their actions and housed alongside adult offenders in jails and prisons. Recent research has utilized neuroscience to support the need to treat juveniles differently because they are different. The sections of the brain that govern characteristics associated with moral culpability, behavioral control, and the appreciation of consequences do not stop maturing until the early 20s. Therefore, it is assumed that someone under age 20, such as a juvenile delinquent, has an underdeveloped brain.
When addressing juvenile delinquency in America, the pendulum swings from punitive policies to rehabilitative policies and then back again depending on media, politics, and the current climate. There is no magic bullet approach to preventing juvenile delinquency, but as the court evolves, changes, and utilizes best practices, it gets closer.