Juvenile Delinquents vs. Status Offenders

Juvenile Delinquents vs. Status Offenders


Status offender is a term for a juvenile who has committed an act that is an offense only because of the age of the juvenile. If they were an adult there would be no offense. Juvenile offenders are juveniles who commit offenses that are violations of the law at any age (Bartollas, 2008). The status offender and the juvenile delinquent create many separate and distinct problems for the juvenile justice system. The status offender is in the system based on who they are (age), not what they do (Samaha, 2011).
The problem with status offenders is what to do with them. If they are placed with the juvenile delinquents there is a risk of exposing the child to a harder criminal element. This can create adult offenders. Too hard of a hand can send the life of a status offender into a downward spiral ending in criminality, when they did not violate the penal code. Too soft of a hand on the status offender can create future criminals as well. The child becomes labeled with the intake into the juvenile justice system. If possible the least flex of punishment would be an advantageous option. It would be better if they were removed from the juvenile justice system. Status offenders are not accused of violence, theft, abuse, rape, murder, drug dealing or any other such criminal acts found within the criminal court system. Yet, in the juvenile justice system status offenders are treated as such, in some cases, status offenders are treated more harshly that the criminal actors of the same age. The status offender that has less interaction with the juvenile justice system will often “age out” of offending and not receive a lifelong label of delinquent.
Juvenile delinquents pose a problem for the juvenile justice system because of the varying age of the offender and how to punish them. There is a vast difference between the 10 year old offender and the 16 year old delinquent. Placement must be assessed on the age and degree of criminality of the child. Older delinquents are often waived to the adult courts. Do children deserve punishment proportionate to the gravity of the crime, or should the fact that they are children be taken into account? The apparent solution is based on what model the juvenile justice system is using. This is based on public opinion and the current trends in crime. There is no one standard or policy that leads the juvenile justice system. Different states have different guides. Texas falls under a legislative guide that provides recommendations on the protection and care of juveniles (Bartollas, 2008, p. 21).
The “chronic 6 percent” are arrested four or more times. They rarely “age out “of crime. Punishment has little effect on preventing future crimes of the chronic offender, the best solution it to limit opportunity to commit crime. The courts look at multi-pronged solutions to these cases. Research has shown that there are many factors that cause the chronic offenders to continue in the commission of crime. The crime control model is used with chronic delinquents (Bartollas, 2008, p. 25). The crime control model emphasizes punishment. This is not the best solution for chronic delinquents. The “hard line” does very little to influence recidivism rates and the chronic delinquent is not reformed by punishment. If the prison population is composed of 10 percent sociopaths, could the “chronic 6 percent” be the juvenile representation of the adult sociopath population?





Bibliography
Bartollas, C. M. (2008). Juvenile Justice in America (6th ed.). (V. Anthony, Ed.) Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, U.S.A.: Pearson Education Inc.
Samaha, J. (2011). Criminal Law (10th ed.). (C. Meier, Ed.) Belmont, CA, U.S.A.: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

CJ homework: Thomas Geraghty's article "Justice for Children: H...

CJ homework: Thomas Geraghty's article "Justice for Children: H...: Thomas Geraghty's article "Justice for Children: How do we get there?" points suggestions for a more just juvenile system, The three that I ...

CJ homework: Federalist, Anti-federalists papers, Media, Public...

CJ homework: Federalist, Anti-federalists papers, Media, Public...:              In the writing of the Constitution of the United States the framers were aware of the opposition that would fall upon the ratif...

CJ homework: Historical Justice Themes

CJ homework: Historical Justice Themes: There are several historical themes discussed in the text (p. 12-16). Which of these themes do you think are of most importance to today's j...

CJ homework: CJ Homework

CJ homework: CJ Homework: Discuss the pros and cons of the intervention by the U.S. Supreme Court into the juvenile justice system? Overall, do you think it has benef...

CJ homework: Child Maltreatment

CJ homework: Child Maltreatment: What are some of the consequences of child maltreatment?  Other than being illegal and against social mores, what impact does it have on soc...

CJ homework: Thomas Geraghty's article "Justice for Children: H...

CJ homework: Thomas Geraghty's article "Justice for Children: H...: Thomas Geraghty's article "Justice for Children: How do we get there?" points suggestions for a more just juvenile system, The three that I ...

CJ homework: Justice for Juveniles:Abolishing the System

CJ homework: Justice for Juveniles:Abolishing the System:                                                          Justice for Juveniles:Abolishing the System Dana Cowan Abstract This article re...

CJ homework: Serpico: Bad Apples in the Big Apple

CJ homework: Serpico: Bad Apples in the Big Apple: Serpico: Bad Apples in the Big Apple A summarization of the movie “Serpico” leads to the realization that the quote, from John Emeri...

CJ homework: Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003

CJ homework: Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003: Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 Dana Cowan August 29, 2011 Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 The Priso...

Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003

Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003
Dana Cowan
August 29, 2011















Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003

The Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003 legislation arose from the massive amount of sexual assaults that are occurring in prison systems and jails. Sexual assault is present in Federal, State and local facilities this includes juvenile detention centers. A review of the facts that establish a need for such legislation is the preamble to the legislation. The back ground information to the legislation reveals “The total number of inmates who have been sexually assaulted in the past 20 years likely exceeds 1,000,000” (PUBLIC LAW 108-79-SEPT. 4, 2003, 2003). This is an unacceptable failure of the Criminal Justice System that surmounts to a large scale Constitutional violation of the 8th Amendment. It is cruel and unusual punishment to detain a citizen for a crime committed, in a facility where they are brutally sexually assaulted, sometimes to the point of having to be hospitalized.

This legislation defines the weaker population that has a predisposition to become sexually assaulted. The increase in the incarnation of persons with mental illness also increases the victimization (PUBLIC LAW 108-79-SEPT. 4, 2003, 2003). “Young first-time offenders are at increased risk of sexual victimization. Juveniles are 5 times more likely to be sexually assaulted in adult rather than juvenile facilities--often within the first 48 hours of incarceration” (PUBLIC LAW 108-79-SEPT. 4, 2003, 2003). The studies and facts mainly refer to the male incarcerated population and juvenile detainees. The facts presented at the beginning of the legislation cite women’s sexual assault with vagueness. This could be due to the lack of research and empirical data on women’s prison rape cases. This is lack of research is supported and defined in an article from The Prison Journal that states “Although several studies have examined consensual sexual activity in female correctional institutions, there has been little research conducted on in-prison sexual assault among incarcerated females” (Blackburn, 2008)
In the article Powerless in Prison: Sexual Abuse against Incarcerated Women, Nicole Summer points out an issue that pertains solely to women inmates. The following excerpt explains the dilemma "I am 7 months pregnant [and] I got pregnant here during a sexual assault. I have been sexually assaulted here numerous times! The jailers here are the ones doing it!"-- excerpt from a letter from an inmate in a jail in Alabama to Stop Prisoner Rape” (Summer, 2008). The Act does not do enough for women in prison. This issue is not considered and the women being raped in prison often become pregnant. This dehumanizes the female inmate further than male rape victims. She must give her child up for adoption; there are very few prisons that allow mothers the ability to raise children. This is how slaves were treated. The women in prison are not the state’s actual “property”. They are American citizens who are paying for a mistake. They should not have to pay with Rape and giving up their child.
Summer reveals that “Guards have unlimited access to prisoners and their living environment, including where they sleep and where they bathe. With such an imbalance of power, the likelihood of sexual assault increases. Sexual abuse in prison can range from forcible rape to the trading of sex for certain privileges. While the latter may seem consensual to some, the drastic power disparity makes the idea of "consent" almost laughable” (Summer, 2008). While it is illegal for prison guards to have intercourse with women, the fact remains that it is occurring. The Act should have created a same sex law and have female inmates guarded by females only. This will not prevent all female prison rapes, yet, it will provide for a reduction in the abuse created by the conflict theory.
Correctional officers and prison staff are untrained and do not know how to adequately deal with the issue of prison rape. Little is known about the influence and aid in prevention that prison staff gives towards the issue of rape. Hensley reveals this by stating “Few studies have concentrated on examining correctional officers and their attitudes toward rape and prison sexuality” (HENSLEY, 2000). The fact that the prison staff is not trained to prevent and report prison rape is of concern. This is one of the main issues that support the need for this legislation. The prison staff must be on the frontline defense in the zero tolerance stances that this legislation proposes. The Act provides for the training of prison staff.
The Act is seeking to create a standard of zero tolerance for prison rape. The Act is creating reporting standards for rape cases. This uniformity is needed in the States to ensure a standard to measure effectiveness of the Act while ensuring individual victims get help by the same standard. Each State has had different ways of reporting and documenting prison rape. This creates barriers in accurate data needed to implement better standards and may do more to silence victims rather than help them. The uniform standardization of prison rape reporting is a significant step in the right direction.
PREA is focused on a plan to create accountability among the officials for the prison rape cases and reporting them. The primary focus of the Act is research on the subject of prison rape. PREA is an Act that creates more bureaucracy than preventative law. “There are authorized to be appropriated for grants under this section $40,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2010” (PUBLIC LAW 108-79-SEPT. 4, 2003, 2003). This funding is more for research rather than prevention and inmate treatment. It seems like it is the preliminary research request before the law rather than the actual law. The fluff in the words does not go far enough to aid the inmate who is being raped. This Act is more of a grandstanding on the subject matter rather than a zero-tolerance to prison rape. The issue is at least being focused on and there is now elected officials who will give lip service to such a hushed issue in America. The Act is gender neutral therefore, unlike many other discriminatory practices; Women are included in the blanket coverage.
PREA allows for state certification when compliance to the Act is adhered to. The punitive recourse in a violation or refusal to comply with the Act is stated as a restriction of federal funds. I personally think that prison officials, who turn a blind eye to prison rape, should go to prison.



















Bibliography
PUBLIC LAW 108-79-SEPT. 4, 2003. (2003, SEPT. 4). Retrieved August 28, 2011, from PUBLIC LAW : http://www.justdetention.org/pdf/PREA.pdf
Blackburn, A. (2008, September). Sexual Assault in Prison and Beyond: Toward an Understanding of Lifetime Sexual Assault Among Incarcerated Women. The Prison Journal, 88, 351-377.
HENSLEY, C. (2000, December). THE HISTORY OF PRISON SEX RESEARCH. THE PRISON JOURNAL, 80, 360-367.
Summer, N. (2008, January 15). Powerless in Prison: Sexual Abuse Against Incarcerated Women. Retrieved August 29, 2011, from Alternet: http://www.alternet.org/reproductivejustice/73784