Juveniles in Court

Abstract

Nineteenth-century American reformers were concerned about the influence of immaturity and development in juvenile offenses. They responded to their delinquent youths through the creation of juvenile courts. This early American juvenile justice system sought to treat children as different from adults and to rehabilitate wayward youths through the state's assumption of a parental role. Although these rehabilitative goals were never fully realized, the field of American child psychiatry was spawned from these efforts on behalf of delinquent youths. Early child psychiatrists began by caring for juvenile offenders. The function of a child psychiatrist with juvenile delinquents expanded beyond strictly rehabilitation, however, as juvenile courts evolved to resemble criminal adult courts-due to landmark Supreme Court decisions and also juvenile legislation between 1966 and 1975. In response to dramatically increased juvenile violence and delinquency rates in the 1980s, juvenile justice became more retributional, and society was forced to confront issues such as capital punishment for juveniles, their transfer to adult courts, and their competency to stand trial. In the modern juvenile court, child psychiatrists are often asked to participate in the consideration of such issues because of their expertise in development. In that context we review the role of psychiatrists in assisting juvenile courts.

Young workers and youth offenders

“…These findings demonstrate that receiving placement is not effective at preventing reentry into the juvenile justice system and support the Peer Contagion Theory of allowing youth to stay rooted within the community to deter criminal behavior instead of isolation with other delinquent youth (E. S. Soulier & Scott, 2010). Our findings agree with prior research indicating that justice-based placement often leads to defiant behaviors that result in subsequent contact with the system (Lipsey & Wilson, 1998;Mulvey et al, 2010;Ryan et al, 2014).…”

“…After processing, youth offenders may be assigned to justice-based placement, which involves placement at a detention center, foster home or mental health institution. Theoretical basis supports the effectiveness of informal processing and non-placement sentencing in order to reduce recidivism (Howard, 1963;Soulier & Scott, 2010). However, research identifying effective processing and sentencing on preventing recidivism has conflicting findings or demonstrates low feasibility for practical implementation within the juvenile justice setting (Ariga et al, 2010;Bergseth & Bouffard, 2012;Henggeler, Melton, Brondino, Scherer, & Hanley, 1997;Lipsey & Wilson, 1998;Livingstone, Macdonald, & Carr, 2013;McGrath & Weatherburn, 2012).…”

“…According to the Labeling Theory, youth who are formally processed in the court system can be labeled as a delinquent (Howard, 1963;Tannenbaum) which may have a negative impact on self-perception (Klein, 1986;Patrick & Marsh, 2005). And, during adolescence, self-identity is at its most dynamic stage and is highly influenced by external factors (Elizabeth S Scott & Laurence Steinberg, 2008;Soulier & Scott, 2010). Youth who are deemed delinquent by society will be more likely to behave according to this label, encouraging the display of deviant behaviors and recidivism over time (Patrick & Marsh, 2005;Schur, 1971).…”

“…(National Juvenile Court Data Archive, 2015). Placement is not currently the favored sanction for youth, with rational provided by theories such as the Peer Contagion Theory (E. S. Soulier & Scott, 2010). This theory states that placement encourages criminal education.…”

Adolescent offenders with mental disorders.

“…Economic recessions in the early 1820s led to an increased number of homeless children and the subsequent opening of "houses of refuge" in New York, Boston, and Philadelphia (Steinberg, 2009). The purpose of these houses was to offer support and address delinquent behavior through targeting underlying behavioral, educational, and vocational issues (Soulier & Scott, 2010). An emphasis on the state as a caretaker for delinquent children, imbedded in the notion of parens patriae ("the parent of the country"), began to take hold across the country (Binder, 1988).…”