Juvenile Justice System Research Paper

Juvenile Justice System - Contemporary Juvenile Justice System and Juvenile Detention Alternatives" by William W. Patton (2012)

The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution extended the protections afforded by the Bill of Rights to all American citizens, including juveniles. Today, juveniles in the United States, though, are considered special cases that require a different adjudicative approach than that provided adult offenders, but it has not always been this way. In fact, until the end of the 19th century, juveniles in the United States who became involved with the criminal justice system were treated in the much the same fashion as adults. By the fin de siecle, reforms had been made to adjudicate youthful offenders in separate channels from adults. Nevertheless, critics maintain that the American criminal justice system continues to respond to periodic calls from the general public for harsher treatment of repeat juvenile offenders in ways that deny them the due process that these young people need to overcome their behaviors and become contributing citizens. To gain some fresh insights into these issues, this paper provides a summary and review of the essay, "Juvenile Justice System - Contemporary Juvenile Justice System and Juvenile Detention Alternatives" by William W. Patton (2012), followed by a summary of the research and important findings in the conclusion.

Summary and Review

Although the juvenile criminal justice system is taken for granted today, it took 125 years for the United States to recognize the need for a special venue to hear juvenile criminal cases.Prior to the turn of the 20th century, juveniles in America were largely adjudicated in the same fashion as adults, and children as young as 7 years of age were routinely incarcerated with adult offenders. In response to demands from reformers, special courts and procedures were implemented across the country to handle youthful offenders separately from adults in an effort to rehabilitate them rather than punish them. By the mid-20th century, though, it became increasingly clear that the laudable goals of the reformers for youthful offenders had not been achieved. According to Patton, "From the mid-1960s through the mid-1970s the U.S. Supreme Court on several occasions held that the informal structures of the nineteenth century juvenile court denied juveniles due process of law under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution" (para. 3).

During the period from 1980 to 2000, the American public developed the erroneous perception that juvenile crime was on the upswing and there were increasing calls for stronger measures against these youthful offenders. These erroneous perceptions were fueled in large part by media reports that sensationalized isolated cases and these high-profile….....