The Efforts and Approaches of the Law Enforcement Agencies in Curbing Juvenile Delinquency - Research Paper Example

The Response of Law Enforcement Agencies and Efforts to Combat Juvenile delinquency and the Effects both have on Society Juvenile delinquency is on the rise in the world today. To law enforcers, policy makers, and practitioners, response to juvenile offending has for a long time remained a unique policy and further proving to be a practice challenge. As such, it has become a controversial issue for decades. Scholars believe that juvenile perpetuates a sizeable fraction of crimes. They thus depict that as most juvenile attain maturity, they will deviate from such crimes and become law-abiding citizens. Despite this belief, crimes rates increase yearly and this involves criminal acts by underage children. Due to the many factors surrounding adolescent and psychological child behavior, dealing with their cases has become complicated. It is time for the law enforcement laid down strategies to curb the increase of juvenile delinquency. There are complains from the public that the approach given to juvenile cases is not sufficiently addressing the problem (Larence 35). The law enforcers need to adopt approaches that leave an impact in the delinquents. Some researchers have identified that the approach adopted by law enforcers in dealing with a delinquent’s first case affects the future behavior of the delinquent. Some approaches will lead the delinquent to commit a chain of crimes in the future while others have a transformational effect bringing the youth back to his or her senses. With that in mind, this paper will seek to establish the efforts and approaches of the law enforcement agencies in curbing juvenile delinquency. In order to determine whether the approaches in place today can sufficiently deal with juvenile delinquency, it is crucial to reexamine the strategies used in the past and their effectiveness. When majority of the juvenile systems started, the main purposed was to help youngsters transform. The process had restorative objectives. The juvenile system sought to make juveniles take the necessary transformation steps. Back then, majority of juveniles underwent successful rehabilitative programs. Research shows that most of them never returned to custody (Holden 5). However, in the 1990’s, things changed. After the predication that a new wave of increased juvenile delinquents that would involve itself in serious crime. This era had many terms that described juveniles. The fear that numbers of juveniles would increase in the years that followed made many of the juvenile systems readjust their objects (DIANE Publishing Company 12). Because of the perception that the future juveniles would prove to be hardened criminals without morals and values, the juvenile systems opted to adopt punitive measures in the juvenile system. In real sense, the predicated new wave of merciless juvenile delinquents never appeared. However, the adolescents who committed offences in this era faced a system that treated them like the adults who were committing crimes. During this period, most of the delinquents facing charges received trial in courts that did not factor out that their age limited their competence in undergoing the trial process (Lipsey, et al 2). The results of the punitive juvenile system were devastating. Many of the delinquents ended up with life sentences without parole. Cries from the public about the treatment of juveniles in the justice system called for a change. In addition, psychologists proved that the maturity of the human brain occurred at 22 years. According to the new revelation, it was obvious that juveniles had deficiency in making sound decisions under immense emotional impulses. The scientific evidence and cries from the public forced the juvenile system to reconsider the rehabilitative purpose (Dood and Cesaroni 101). The implementation of the rehabilitative juvenile system needs to consider approaches that will influence the lives of the juveniles positively (Regoli, et al 70). Many approaches that have been in use have proved ineffective. Several studies investigating the efficiency of the approaches revealed that delinquents required better-integrated methods. Approaches such inducing curfew to delinquents and scaring them with threats to initiate a change in them have failed. The efforts of the drug abuse resistance education program (D.A.R.E) have had minimal positive results in reducing delinquency. Other studies also reveal that the role of police officers is wanting. In the 1980s and 90s, there were no police officers who had the specialty required to handle juveniles. This often resulted to confusion in the reactions of the officers. Because of the lack of expertise who had limited ability to put up with the roughness that police officers dealt with adults, juveniles often suffered. This necessitated the need for juvenile officers. Juvenile officers have not had an easy time. They have the responsibility of judging whether the seriousness of so me juvenile cases. Although this occurs in discretion, most of their decisions do not prove to be the best (Holden 9). The above situations describe the situation of many juvenile systems. Although the juvenile crime rate has not gone too high, there is a need to protect the welfare of the adolescents who find themselves entangled in state offenses of felony cases. Although there are many factors that drive young people to crime, a detailed review of literature is crucial to consider specifically the4 contribution of law enforcement agencies in combating juvenile delinquency (DIANE Publishing Company 25). A Chicago police department report revealed very important approaches that can help agencies in dealing with delinquents. From this report, the authors highlighted that law enforcement agencies were not acting at the right time in prevention of juvenile crime repetition. From their analysis, police officers did not give a juvenile’s first arrest the attention it required. The very first arrest, when handled in the right manner, could make a juvenile rethink on their actions. If a juvenile realizes that being under arrest had serious implications, it would serve as a prompt that he or she needed to readjust his or her life. In most cases however, the officers did not make the juvenile to realize that an arrest for crime was a serious case with its consequences (Dood and Cesaroni 259). The authors of the report have observed that if the first arrest receives considerable attention, the juvenile often reacted positively towards the transformation. On the contrary, if the youngsters did not get the implication that an arrest is a bad sign for their life, they were subject to future arrests. In addition, the report revealed the efforts made by the Chicago police department in changing the approach of addressing juvenile delinquency. The department resulted to a change in approach after a survey that showed that most juvenile delinquents started with minor crimes but advanced to serious crime mostly depending on the experience of the first arrest. The department realized that in addition to research into the underlying causes of increased crime, the agency needed to adopt realistic approaches to juvenile crime. The agency took measures to ensure that juveniles in custody resided in a different center. Moreover, they realized the urgency of dealing with juvenile cases faster. This was after the realization that juveniles staying in custody for a long period before the ruling of their cases reduced the chances of these youngsters to transform to a productive lifestyle. Therefore, the Chicago police department focuses on working in conjunction with social workers in the juvenile center to fasten the handling of juvenile cases. However, the court handles serious juvenile crimes. The center seeks to make the juveniles realize that they are responsible for their crime (Dood and Cesaroni 245). Moreover, the report highlighted the contribution of gang membership to increase of juvenile delinquency. If juveniles had a connection to a gang, they were prone to committing crimes that are more serious. The gang members take advantage of juveniles to reach their objectives. Through this, the mature gang members remain uncovered by police. Usually, it is easier for juveniles to execute crimes than for the mature gang members. Police tend to suspect the activity of gang members easily. Juveniles enrolling with gangs progress fast and start indulging in homicides. This accounts for the current indulgence of juveniles in serious crime. According to this report, prevention of juvenile delinquency will require a dedication of the police to unearth the gangs that motivate juveniles into these crimes. Since these young people will accept to carry out gang assignments for acceptance into the gang, they indulge in crime without reexamining their decisions (Regoli, et al 197). An examination into the Missouri juvenile justice system reveals that the system approaches juvenile delinquency differently. In this system, juveniles need rehabilitation and redirection in order to become responsible citizens. The juveniles go through a jurisdiction process and may be subject to detention. The jurisdiction may be a role played by the juvenile court or the general court depending on the offense committed or the age of the juvenile. The juvenile system commits to its purpose and has many guidelines in place to protect the welfare of juveniles in custody. The system realizes the delicate nature of juvenile offenses and seeks to rehabilitate the juveniles in question in order as an effort to curb the increase of juvenile delinquency. In addition, the juvenile system handles cases of children with uncontrollable behavior that makes them more prone to juvenile offenses (Larence 52). Other authors feel that the strategies that have been in place have failed but strategies that are more realistic are necessary. There is need for programs that target different groups of the youth depending on the risk of indulging in delinquency. These programs should seek to address the needs of youth at large. Programs aimed at strengthening all youths will help them stay focused to their goals. Youth who prove to be at a greater risk of indulging in indulgence require integrated programs that help them resist the temptation of delinquency. Approaches adopted in addressing this group will determine whether juvenile delinquency declines (Dood and Cesaroni 261). These youth require immediate intervention. The group includes youth committing their first crimes. Current delinquents are in need of programs that help them transform. This group requires a multiple of approaches with proven efficiency. Since most of the delinquents are in detention in correctional facilities, the officers in these facilities need to adopt programs with proven efficiency in order to ensure the transformation of the juveniles. In addition, released delinquents require additional programs to help them reintegrate into society. Being in detention affects the attitudes of these juveniles and they require help in trying to rebuild their lives. Release gives those second chances in life and they need help to put things back into place (Lipsey, et al 4). Prevention of juvenile delinquency requires both long-term intervention and short-term objectives that seek to monitor the behavior of the delinquents. The objectives will depend on the level of offenses committed by the juveniles and the risk of repeated crime indulgence. Delinquents who commit felony cases require serious rehabilitation and detention in juvenile facilities. Detention and rehabilitation will help the juveniles to accept crime responsibility. In addition, detention prevents the other youths from the influence of delinquency (DIANE Publishing Company 37). A UNICEF report brings out the importance of law enforcement officers granting juveniles their rights during trials (UNICEF 1). The report highlights the need for juvenile justice systems to adopt international legal standards that concern the treatment of juvenile by law enforcement agencies. UNICEF realizes the need of the law to protect the welfare of children who commit sate offenses and felony cases. From its worldwide studies, children in detention facilities lack access to an education, a chance to undergo individual discovery and medical attention. Denial of such opportunities condemns the juveniles to a meaningless life even after release. The UNICEF rises to ensure that juvenile delinquents receive the right treatment from law enforcers and juvenile facilities. The United Nations unit advises governments to carry out revisions of laws to ensure that juveniles receive a fair treatment (UNICEF 1). A different report by American prosecutors highlights that the juvenile justice system can do more. These prosecutors identify the need to widen approaches of dealing with delinquency from those mentioned by traditional law. In their view, one of the most effective strategies is implementing an integrated community prosecution. This strategy involves the law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, government service agencies, and community members, community institutions such as schools, and faith institutions. The combined effort of all these institutions is necessary in combating crime (Harp 2). Implementing such a system will have a problem-solving objective. Open forums involving all groups will present opportunities of sharing opinions and innovative ideas on how to reduce crime rates. From such forums, each group will become aware of its expected contribution in combating crime. According to prosecutors, this strategy is effective in dealing with delinquency because the juvenile justice system requires the participation of each of the groups mentioned. The report compares community prosecution to previously used reactive strategies. Such reactive strategies only seek to intervene when delinquents are under arrest. On the contrary, community prosecution adopts a preventive nature. The new approach seeks to prevent the development of delinquency. It identifies ways in which the groups mentioned above can help prevent crime among youths. In addition, the community prosecution approach has the potential of establishing programs that can effectively meet the needs of juvenile justice systems. Through negotiations of the institutions involved, there is possibility to formulate guidelines that will help rehabilitation centers to give juveniles the right treatment (Dood and Cesaroni 176). The extensive programs designed through community prosecution provide a re-integration program of offenders back into the society. The report analyzes the real essence of community prosecution as applied in jurisdictions in different centers. The centers include Suffolk County, Multnomah, Middlesex, and Kings Counties. In the entire jurisdiction in the above-mentioned counties, community prosecution involves the community in problem identification and solution finding concerning delinquency. The procedure benefits from the guidance of prosecutors in highlighting the difference of traditional law enforcement set-up and the new way of handling matters dealing with delinquency. In addition, the strategy benefits from partnerships with relevant law enforcement and government agencies. All these partnerships offer an opportunity of examining the matter in different perspectives. The community prosecution strategy proves efficient because it focuses on the needs of an identified region (Regoli, et al 74). The efficiency of community prosecution received backing from several theories that explain the increase of crime in region. One of the theories is the ‘broken windows’ theory that highlights the need of addressing the nuisance little crimes in a society. According to this theory, lack of action concerning minor nuisances such as aimless loitering, prostitution, vandalism, and indulgence in public intoxication often encourages development of serious crime. Since societies do not take any prompt action against these minor offenses, the offenders feel encouraged as they realize that the community can put up with serious crime. The whole issue begins by some people only breaking a window by committing a minor offense. With time, crimes increase representing more broken windows. According to this theory, when a community addresses issues that touch on the quality of life, the action warns potential criminals that such a community cannot tolerate crime (Larence 17). The community prosecution approach seeks to act promptly in addressing minor issues that can lead to potential crime in the future. In trying to do this, prosecutors define a specific area of focus. They work in such an area carrying out assessment and consulting with community institutions to identify nuisances that affect t the quality of the community’s life. By addressing the problem of delinquency and crime from its roots, community prosecution is proving efficient in reducing delinquency in the identified regions (Larence 21). In addition, the approach has community based justice programs in place. These seek to identify youth prone to delinquency and those confessing to have a need to enroll in the juvenile system. On identification of a delinquent, community prosecutors identify the community from which the delinquent comes from and institutes a team to work on addressing the roots of crime in that community. The community based justice carries out additional programs that encourage the delinquent to get back on the right track of life. After the delinquents prove that they have changed, they receive reintegration into the society (Regoli, et al 160). According to this report, the juveniles’ cases receive special attention by specialized officials. The officials seek to establish whether a juvenile qualifies prosecution by the justice system. In addition, the justice unit monitors the activities of delinquents in school and in their community. They work in conjunction with schools and make reports on any misbehavior. In Middlesex County, the partnership with schools has helped reduce delinquency. The juveniles realize that the monitoring centers on the integral lives and opt to change. They become afraid of indulging in crime. In other counties such as Sullfolk, community prosecution has helped juveniles change their irresponsible attitude. In addition, they realize that the importance of acting responsibly in promoting the peace of the community. The community gives suggestions of appropriate projects that the juveniles work on because of their delinquency (Lipsey 3). Other sources emphasize on the role played by police officers in addressing delinquency. As discussed above in the beginning of this paper, the impression a delinquent gets from the police during the first arrest has a lasting effect of the juvenile. Additional reports highlight the factors of police behavior that affects the attitude of delinquents (Larence 46). When delinquents realize that police officers are racially biased or are generally unkind, they develop negative opinion towards the police. This brings in the importance of soft skills to officers dealing with delinquents. Juvenile officers should understand the immaturity of juveniles and the ease with which they develop attitudes. As a result, appropriate training is necessary for juvenile officers and all police officers to develop positive attributes. Such positive attributes will have a positive impression in the juveniles. Since the police officers are the law representatives that juveniles meet, there is need of adopting new cultures of addressing juveniles (Regoli, et al 230). It is evident that juvenile delinquency is a problem in society especially when juveniles indulge in felony cases. Different juvenile systems are using different strategies in combating delinquency (Richards 1). From an examination of the issue, it is clear that there is need for new approaches. Integration of different approaches will offer success. The role of law enforcement officers is critical in addressing juvenile cases. Their attitudes and decisions determine the justice accorded to juveniles. The community has top work in conjunction with law enforcement agencies in combating delinquency. Rehabilitation facilities should present juveniles with opportunities to rebuild their lives and get their focus to the right track. Dealing with delinquents is a delicate matter. It determines whether the juvenile will undergo a worthwhile recollection or indulge in serious crimes. Some law enforcement units have noticed the need of readjustment of their cultures. New approaches such as the community prosecution are proving effective. The law enforcement agencies can still achieve much more in combating delinquency through research and adoption of evidence-based strategies. Work Cited DIANE Publishing Company. Juvenile Justice: Status of Delinquency Prevention Program and Description of Local Projects. Pennsylvania: DIANE Publishing Company, 2004. Print. Dood, N. A. and Cesaroni, C. Responding to Youth Crime in Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2004. Print. Harp, Caren et al. “Juvenile Delinquency and Communication Protection: New Strategies for Old Problems”. American Prosecutors Research Institute, 2004. Web. 26 September 2012. http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/juvenile_delinquency_community_prosecution.pdf Holden, Richard PH.D. Youth Crime Suppression programs. Regional Community Policing Training institute. Web. 26 Sep. 2012. Larence, Eileen. Combating Gangs: Federal agencies have implemented a central American gang strategy, but could strengthen oversight and measurement of efforts. Pennsylvania: DIANE Publishing Company, 2011. Print. Lipsey, et al. “Improving the Effectiveness of Juvenile Justice Programs: a new perspective on evidence-based practice””. Centre for Juvenile Justice Reform, 2010. Web. 26 September 2012. http://cjjr.georgetown.edu/pdfs/ebp/ebppaper.pdf Lipsey, Mark W. et. al. Improving the Effectiveness of Juvenile Justice Programs. Center for Juvenile Justice Reform. Web. 26 Sep. 2012. Regoli Robert, Hewitt John, and DeLisi, Matt. Delinquency in Society. London: Jones & Bartlett Learning, 2009. Print. Richards, Kelly. What makes Juvenile offenders different from adult offenders? Australian Institute of Criminology, Feb 2011. Web 26 Sep. 2012. The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). “Children in conflict with the law”. Child Protection Information Sheet, 2006. Web. 26 September 2012. http://www.unicef.org/chinese/protection/files/Conflict_with_the_Law.pdf United States. Division of the Federal Register, United States. Federal Register Division, United States. Office of the Federal Register. The code of federal regulations of the United States of America. Washington, DC: U.S. G.P.O, 2003. Print. Read More