Question

What are the theoretical justifications for treating juvenile offenders differently than adult offenders, according to Kurlychek and Johnson? Should we deal with younger offenders harsher than older offenders at sentencing? Why or why note?

Answer 1

Most states consider a juvenile a person between the age of 10 to 18 , but in some states maximum juvenile age is 16 years. Above that age group are called as adults .

Sometimes older juveniles who commit serious or violent crimes are tried as adults, even though they would normally be considered juveniles.The courts use different terms for juvenile offenders than for adult offenders.The juvenile justice system is a court designed especially for minors and is generally thought to help rehabilitate the offender.

Kurlychek and Johnson are in support of juvenile court system. So acvording to them they must be given some special treatment. Here are few highlights.

1.According to them we must keep the juvenile justice system because many studies have shown that harsher punishments are used in juveniles in adult court when compared with juveniles in juvenile court, particularly for serious or violent .

2.Sending a juvenile to adult court at such a young age can be problematic for the child, because the court wants to be strict with the child by showing them that their behavior will not be tolerated and because in adult court the child will miss out on educational and rehabilitative programs more readily available in juvenile detention facilities. Kurlycheck and Johnson argue that “Juvenile courts are characterized by disposition options that fundamentally differ from adult courts in their symbolic meaning, punitive and treatment alternatives, and punishment goals” (2010)

3 in Pennsylvania stift Kurlycheck and Johnson compared a sample of juveniles tried in juvenile court with juveniles who were transferred to adult court and showed that the adult courts were harsher on the juvenile:   “On average, their sentences were 80 percent more severe than for their young adult counterparts”(Kurlycheck and Johnson 2010,729).

Juveniles are young law violators are less culpable, and thus deserve less punishment—no matter what kind of court might try and sentence them”(Kurlycheck and Johnson 2010, 729). Kurlycheck and Johnson also confirm what Katner is saying by explaining that “adolescents are at psychosocial disadvantages in terms of responsibility, peer influence, temperance, and perspective; they are less able to foresee future consequences of their actions

2.

Young offenders are aged between 18 to 21.while offenders above 21 are called as young offenders

While offenders aged between 21 are called adult offenders.

No we should not deal with young offenders harsher than old offenders because they are in such a state of adolescence where their is rapid growth and decision making becomes a problem .

Young offenders are malleable we can mould them in the shape whatever we want to.Harsh treatment may spoil their whole life so they are not given such treatments. They are still growing up and deserve a change. Their neurological system is still developing .