Moral Dilemma

Overview

Fear of out-of-control juvenile crime and a coming generation of “super-predators,” compellingly if erroneously described publicly and to Congress in 1996, has undermined the traditional practice of treating young offenders as different from adult criminals - less culpable because of their age and more amenable to rehabilitation. In recent years, the focus has turned to punishment and in particular to the transfer of increasing numbers of youthful offenders from juvenile to criminal courts. These “solutions” have been demonstrated to be doing more harm than good. This policy paper provides information on changes in the juvenile justice system and analyzes why the increased prosecution of juveniles in adult court is another failed “get tough” policy which is unjust and harmful to children and does nothing to increase public safety.

The Juvenile Court System is Historically Distinct from Adult Courts

The first court designed specifically to deal with children was established in Chicago one hundred years ago and led to the development of a separate juvenile justice system nationwide. Juvenile courts are responsible for dealing with children who are accused of committing two types of offenses: status offenses - violations of laws with which only children can be charged (e.g., running away from home); and delinquency offenses - acts committed by a child which, if committed by an adult, could result in criminal prosecution.

The premise on which the separate juvenile system rests is that children are developmentally different from adults and thus are more amenable to treatment and rehabilitation. The juvenile justice process centers on the individual child and takes into account the child's problems and needs, focusing less on punishment than on helping the child to change and so minimize the likelihood of future criminal behavior.

During the past ten years, fear of juvenile crime and criminals has undermined the basic concepts on which the juvenile court was founded. State legislatures and the federal government have turned increasingly to the more punitive adult model, requiring that even pre-teen children in some instances be treated as if they were equal in culpability and understanding to adults who commit similar crimes.

Recent trends in juvenile crime

Trends in juvenile crime provide no evidence that young people have become more crime prone or dangerous than in past years. The juvenile proportion of all arrests for serious violent crime in 1998 was about average for the preceding twenty-five years, while the percentage of propertycrime arrests involving juveniles has actually declined throughout most of this period. The one category of crime that diverged significantly from the overall trends during this period is murder. Murder by juveniles remained at a relatively constant level for the decade before 1985, but then underwent a large and disturbing increase. In 1993 the rate peaked, followed by a 48% drop in juvenile arrests for murder by 1998. As seen in the figure below, this overall rate hides two very different trends.

• Until 1985, the rates of gun and non-gun homicides followed a similar pattern.

• Between 1985 and 1994, non-gun homicides continued at a similar rate while ...