Juvenile justice system in the United States

Juvenile justice system in the United States




Many youngsters today grow up in the cities with high rate of crime and high rate of poverty . they young person’s experience difficulties in an attempt to remain out of trouble and even strive for a future with brighter benefits and self-protection. in order to eradicate all the problems and issues facing the youths, the Juvenile system of America was established with essential framework and target to deal with youth who are indicted with offences of criminality. The adolescent equity framework intercedes in good conduct by imploring the court, police, and contribution to correcting with the objective of recovery. In the course of recent years, new trends has emerged and developed all over the United States with regards to the mediate and treat adolescents regarding their criminal issues and wrongdoing. the article investigate the recorded improvement of justice and equity among the adolescent in the United States, its origin and predominant philosophy, differences between the juvenile and adult systems and finally the differences between dependency and delinquency with a conclusion.

keywords; juvenile, justice, United States

The historical development of the juvenile justice system

The legitimate idea of the status of juvenile, similar to the idea of youth itself, is generally new. The adolescent court framework was built up in the United States somewhat than a century prior, with the main court established in Illinois in the year 1899. Before the establishment of this court, youngsters were viewed as adults and grown-ups which made them to be punished after trial as grown-ups (United States, 2010)

Amid the dynamic period, which happened between 1880 and 1920, different effects including social factors in the United States were portrayed by vast influxes of migration and urbanization which sensationally increased. the immediate outcome left several poor youngsters who meandered within the streets and many ended up being criminals. At first, youngsters who were had sentenced violations camouflaged with offenders who were grown-up offenders. Due to the issues, activist of social practices, legislators, and different authorities understood that kids in combination of organized with grown-ups were able to learn criminal practices of the grown-ups. Due to the negative impact, the country decided to create isolate adolescent court frameworks to correct the young individuals (United States, 2010)

The origin and predominant philosophy of the juvenile system

Changes in ideological in the social origination of youngsters and in systems of cultural control amid the decades of the nineteenth century prompted towards the establishment of the first court of juvenile in the Illinois, County of Cook, the year 1899. in order to differentiate between adults and young offenders, philosophers of progressive tried to reform the juvenile court by developing new thoughts regarding adolescence and made the adolescent court as a welfare socially established to react to criminal and noncriminal offense by young people. The Supreme court of the United States decided to change the adolescent court into a different organization than the examination of the progressives (Bernard & Kurlychek, 2010)

Progressives researchers imagined a casual, optional and social welfare organization whose with the main aim of achieving the kids best advantages. through the Supreme Court the shields to safeguard the interest of the kids were grafted to deal with adolescent cases, in spite of the fact that the Court did not expect to adjust the remedial mission of the adolescent court. throughout the decades, legal choices, amendments of authority and changes within the managerial have adjusted the purposes and systems of adolescent courts. These progressions have changed the court of adolescent and not only encouraged a procedural nature but also the substantive meeting with criminal courts of the grown-up (Bernard & Kurlychek, 2010)

Differences between the juvenile and adult systems

In terms of classification of the juvenile where in most states, in many states, an individual accused of a wrongdoing between the ages of ten to eighteen is viewed as an adolescent while on the other hand an adult is a person above the age of eighteen. depending on the states however, others extend their furthest point to sixteen or seventeen as a court for adolescent (Jordan, 2006)

Court proceedings’ differences where a grown-up is blamed for a wrongdoing while an adolescent is blamed for a reprobate demonstration. it suggests the infraction the adolescent is accepted to have conferred is not too much genuine . Since they are not grown-ups, adolescents are not managed the privilege to an open trial by judge but their issues are chosen only by the judge (Jordan, 2006)

Objective differences in which for adults discovered to be liable of a wrongdoing, the courts concentration is to punish and basically, the courts endeavor to force a punishment to make the person who have committed the crime not wish to carry out a comparative wrongdoing again later on in which they are detained. while on the other side the courts of the adolescent court framework concentrates on rehabilitating the young persons. here the use of probation and parole are regularly utilized plus a project which is diversionary (Jordan, 2006)

Distinguish between dependency and delinquency

Dependency is where many youngsters with cases of adolescent attends the court proceedings on the grounds of lack of sufficient care from the parents or guardians. The judge is required to make an intense and essential choice to illustrate the way forward of helping the youngster either by taking him or her away from the conditions likely to be dangerous.

A juvenile delinquent on the other side focuses on cases of young kids who have committed a typical crime between the ages of ten and eighteen. Even though the minor will not have a trial which is of high standard like a grown up, but rather will experience an arbitration procedure where they will be sentenced. The cases begin by the time a prosecutor documents a petition to request the juvenile to be sentenced due to law violation (Zanan & Cox, 2017)

The reasoning behind confidentiality in juvenile court

The cases are extremely personal and sensitive since the proceedings of the criminal adolescent continually manage matters of an individual and highly touching. the court hearings of the family often include debate care, support of the youngster, neglect and social employees testimonials. Kids also are more open and might be willing to affirm their encounters and emotions about the dynamic of the family. thus due to these issues, the hearing are kept confidential to prevent the people to know the records which they might uncover the insider facts of the family (Zanan & Cox, 2017)

The cases should also be prevented since the larger part of procedures of the family court include delicate and individual family matters. the secret hearings are totally important to abstain youngsters from announcing mishandle occasions, sexual attack and different acts of harming declaration. when the records are kept sealed, the strategies allows the abusers to concede wrongdoing. Hence, the court records of the family are kept private in each state to make kids and families to feel the safety of the court (Zanan & Cox, 2017)

The importance of confidentiality

It helps the criminal wrong doors criminal in the future since the law comprehends that adolescents are not able to settle on reasonable and coherent choices as grown-ups. Thus the decision of courts to seal the criminal records of adolescent is not to cause harm the odds of litigant to acquire other beneficial business (In Tanenhaus & In Zimring, 2014)

Advances reputation and integrity for offenders of the juvenile hence the public cannot access the points of interest of the wrongdoing, enabling relatives to stay away from a shame and adverse notoriety. the media are also protected from getting to records enabling the youngsters not be humiliated and harmed openly (In Tanenhaus & In Zimring, 2014)


To sum up, the entrenched arrangement dealing with the equity of the adolescent in the United States has experienced several important changes as of late. Iit has moved from a model objectives to rehabilitate toward a significantly more approach to correction, the courts of America are able to process more adolescents as grown-ups than any time in recent memory. the advancements have both the positive sides as well as the negative sides whereas the positive effects is the rights of customarily delighted in by grown-ups in the equity of criminal framework have progressed to adult matters. in contrary the pattern prepares very young individuals in a framework set up to apportion correctional equity instead of focusing on formative advance and the guarantee of youngsters.


Bernard, T. J., & Kurlychek, M. C. (2010). The Cycle of Juvenile Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, USA.

In Tanenhaus, D. S., & In Zimring, F. E. (2014). Choosing the future for American juvenile justice. New York: New York University Press.

Jordan, K. L. (2006). Violent youth in adult court: The decertification of transferred offenders. New York: LFB Scholarly Pub.

United States. (2010). Girls in the juvenile justice system: Strategies to help girls achieve their full potential : hearing before the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Eleventh Congress, first session, October 20, 2009. Washington: U.S. G.P.O.

Zanan, B. H., & Cox, E. J. (2017). Pennsylvania juvenile delinquency & dependency law.