11.1 History of juvenile justice
11 min read•august 21, 2024
The history of juvenile justice reflects society's evolving views on youth crime and rehabilitation. From its origins in the late 19th century to modern reforms, the system has balanced punishment with protection, shaping how we address youth offending.
Key developments include the creation of separate juvenile courts, landmark cases extending due process rights, and shifts in punishment approaches. Recent reforms focus on evidence-based practices, community alternatives, and addressing racial disparities in the system.
Origins of juvenile justice
- Juvenile justice emerged as a distinct system in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, focusing on rehabilitation rather than punishment for young offenders
- This shift reflected changing societal views on childhood, adolescence, and the malleability of youth behavior
- Understanding the origins of juvenile justice provides insight into the evolving approaches to addressing youth crime and delinquency
Early reform movements
Top images from around the web for Early reform movements
History of Social Progress | Organizational Behavior and Human Relations View original
Is this image relevant?
Culture and Activism | HIST 1302: US after 1877 View original
Is this image relevant?
History of Social Progress | Organizational Behavior and Human Relations View original
Is this image relevant?
Culture and Activism | HIST 1302: US after 1877 View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 2
Top images from around the web for Early reform movements
History of Social Progress | Organizational Behavior and Human Relations View original
Is this image relevant?
Culture and Activism | HIST 1302: US after 1877 View original
Is this image relevant?
History of Social Progress | Organizational Behavior and Human Relations View original
Is this image relevant?
Culture and Activism | HIST 1302: US after 1877 View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 2
- Child-saving movement advocated for separate treatment of juvenile offenders
- Houses of Refuge established in major cities provided alternatives to adult prisons for youth
- Reformers like and Lucy Flower championed specialized courts for juveniles
- Progressive Era reforms emphasized education and rehabilitation over punitive measures
- Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children founded to protect vulnerable youth
Parens patriae doctrine
- Legal concept positioning the state as a parental figure for children lacking proper care
- Allowed courts to intervene in cases of neglect, abuse, or delinquency
- Justified separate legal proceedings for juveniles based on their unique needs
- Emphasized rehabilitation and protection rather than punishment
- Influenced the development of juvenile courts and their informal, non-adversarial nature
Creation of juvenile courts
- First juvenile court established in Cook County, Illinois in 1899
- Spread rapidly across the United States, with most states adopting similar models by 1925
- Focused on individualized treatment and rehabilitation of young offenders
- Informal proceedings allowed judges broad discretion in handling cases
- Emphasized confidentiality to protect youth from stigma and promote successful reintegration
Evolution of juvenile rights
- The juvenile justice system underwent significant changes in the mid-20th century, shifting towards a more rights-based approach
- This evolution reflected broader civil rights movements and growing concerns about due process in juvenile proceedings
- Understanding these changes is crucial for analyzing the balance between rehabilitation and legal protections in juvenile justice
In re Gault case
- Landmark 1967 Supreme Court decision that extended due process rights to juveniles
- Arose from the case of 15-year-old Gerald Gault, who was committed to a state institution without proper legal protections
- Established key rights for juveniles in delinquency proceedings:
- Right to notice of charges
- Right to counsel
- Right to confront and cross-examine witnesses
- Protection against self-incrimination
- Marked a shift towards more formal, adversarial juvenile court proceedings
Due process protections
- Right to be represented by an attorney in juvenile court proceedings
- Requirement for adequate notice of charges and hearings
- Standard of proof in juvenile cases raised to "beyond a reasonable doubt"
- Protection against double jeopardy applied to juvenile adjudications
- Right to appeal juvenile court decisions
- Limitations on use of juvenile records in adult criminal proceedings
Juvenile vs adult proceedings
- Juvenile proceedings remain more informal and flexible than adult criminal trials
- Focus on rehabilitation and best interests of the child in juvenile cases
- Confidentiality of juvenile records to protect future opportunities
- Limited public access to juvenile court hearings
- Different terminology used (adjudication instead of conviction, disposition instead of sentencing)
- Broader range of dispositional options available in juvenile cases
Key historical legislation
- Federal and state legislation has played a crucial role in shaping the juvenile justice system over time
- These laws reflect changing societal attitudes towards juvenile delinquency and rehabilitation
- Understanding key legislation provides insight into the goals and priorities of juvenile justice policy
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act
- Passed in 1974 to improve and standardize juvenile justice practices across the United States
- Established the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP)
- Mandated core requirements for states to receive federal funding:
- Deinstitutionalization of status offenders
- Separation of juveniles from adult offenders in secure facilities
- Removal of juveniles from adult jails and lockups
- Emphasized community-based programs and delinquency prevention efforts
Juvenile Justice Reform Act
- Passed in 2018 as an update to the
- Strengthened core protections for youth in the juvenile justice system
- Promoted evidence-based practices and programs
- Improved data collection and reporting requirements
- Emphasized racial and ethnic disparities reduction efforts
- Increased focus on trauma-informed care and mental health services
State-level juvenile codes
- Vary by state but generally establish the structure and procedures of juvenile courts
- Define age limits for juvenile court jurisdiction (typically 18, with some variations)
- Outline specific offenses and behaviors that fall under juvenile court jurisdiction
- Establish guidelines for and alternative interventions
- Provide framework for confidentiality and sealing of juvenile records
- Determine criteria for transfer of juveniles to adult criminal court
Shifts in juvenile punishment
- Approaches to juvenile punishment have evolved significantly over time, reflecting changing societal attitudes and research on youth development
- These shifts have impacted the types of interventions and sanctions used in the juvenile justice system
- Understanding these changes is crucial for evaluating the effectiveness of different approaches to addressing juvenile delinquency
Rehabilitation vs retribution
- Early juvenile justice system focused primarily on rehabilitation and reform
- 1980s and 1990s saw a shift towards more punitive approaches (get tough era)
- Recent trends show a return to rehabilitative models based on evidence-based practices
- Debate continues over appropriate balance between accountability and treatment
- Increasing recognition of adolescent brain development in shaping juvenile justice policies
Juvenile boot camps
- Gained popularity in the 1990s as an alternative to traditional incarceration
- Modeled after military basic training with strict discipline and physical activity
- Aimed to instill discipline, respect for authority, and personal responsibility
- Research showed limited effectiveness in reducing recidivism
- Many programs closed or modified due to concerns about abuse and lack of therapeutic elements
- Shift towards more holistic, trauma-informed approaches in recent years
Alternatives to incarceration
- Diversion programs redirect youth from formal court processing
- Community-based interventions allow youth to remain in their home environments
- Electronic monitoring as an alternative to secure detention
- programs focus on repairing harm and victim-offender mediation
- Specialized courts (drug courts, mental health courts) address underlying issues
- Intensive probation supervision provides close monitoring and support in the community
Juvenile justice system structure
- The juvenile justice system consists of various components working together to address youth delinquency and promote rehabilitation
- Understanding this structure is essential for analyzing how juveniles move through the system and the interventions available at different stages
- The system's design reflects the goal of balancing public safety with the unique needs and potential for reform of young offenders
Intake and diversion
- Initial point of contact for youth entering the juvenile justice system
- Intake officers assess cases and determine appropriate course of action
- Diversion programs offer alternatives to formal court processing:
- Community service
- Counseling or therapy
- Educational programs
- Restitution to victims
- Aims to reduce stigma and negative consequences of formal court involvement
- Criteria for diversion may include offense severity, prior record, and youth's circumstances
Juvenile detention centers
- Secure facilities for short-term confinement of youth awaiting court hearings or placement
- Provide education, medical care, and basic needs for detained youth
- Risk assessment tools used to determine necessity of secure detention
- Alternatives to detention include:
- Home detention with electronic monitoring
- Day and evening reporting centers
- Shelter care for youth unable to return home
- Efforts to reduce unnecessary detention and racial disparities in detention decisions
Juvenile correctional facilities
- Long-term residential facilities for adjudicated delinquent youth
- Range from minimum security group homes to more secure institutions
- Provide education, vocational training, and rehabilitative programming
- Focus on addressing underlying factors contributing to delinquent behavior
- Specialized units for youth with mental health or substance abuse issues
- Reentry planning and aftercare services to support successful community reintegration
Landmark Supreme Court cases
- Supreme Court decisions have significantly shaped the juvenile justice system over time
- These cases have established important legal principles and rights for juveniles in the justice system
- Understanding these landmark cases is crucial for analyzing the constitutional framework of juvenile justice
Kent v United States
- 1966 case addressing procedural requirements for transferring juveniles to adult court
- Established that juveniles are entitled to a hearing before transfer to adult jurisdiction
- Required courts to provide a statement of reasons for transfer decisions
- Emphasized the importance of considering a juvenile's amenability to treatment
- Set precedent for due process protections in juvenile transfer proceedings
- Influenced subsequent state laws on juvenile transfer criteria and procedures
McKeiver v Pennsylvania
- 1971 case addressing the right to jury trials in juvenile delinquency proceedings
- Supreme Court ruled that juveniles do not have a constitutional right to jury trials
- Reasoned that jury trials would undermine the informal, rehabilitative nature of juvenile courts
- Emphasized the distinction between juvenile adjudications and adult criminal trials
- Allowed states to determine whether to offer jury trials in juvenile cases
- Continues to be debated in light of increased formality in juvenile proceedings
Roper v Simmons
- 2005 case prohibiting the death penalty for offenders under 18 at the time of their crimes
- Based decision on Eighth Amendment prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment
- Cited scientific evidence on adolescent brain development and reduced culpability
- Recognized international consensus against juvenile death penalty
- Established principle that juveniles are categorically less culpable than adults
- Influenced subsequent cases on juvenile sentencing (Graham v Florida, Miller v Alabama)
Juvenile justice reform movements
- Reform movements have played a crucial role in shaping and improving the juvenile justice system over time
- These movements reflect evolving understanding of youth development, effective interventions, and social justice concerns
- Understanding these reform efforts provides insight into current trends and future directions in juvenile justice
Restorative justice approaches
- Focus on repairing harm caused by juvenile offenses rather than solely punishing offenders
- Involve victims, offenders, and community members in the resolution process
- Common restorative practices in juvenile justice:
- Victim-offender mediation
- Family group conferencing
- Circle sentencing
- Aims to increase offender accountability and empathy
- Promotes healing for victims and communities affected by juvenile crime
- Growing evidence of effectiveness in reducing recidivism and increasing victim satisfaction
Evidence-based interventions
- Emphasis on using scientifically validated programs and practices in juvenile justice
- Examples of evidence-based interventions:
- Multisystemic Therapy (MST)
- Functional Family Therapy (FFT)
- Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)
- Focus on addressing risk factors and building protective factors for youth
- Rigorous evaluation and quality assurance to ensure program fidelity
- Increased funding and support for implementation of evidence-based programs
- Challenges in adapting evidence-based models to diverse populations and settings
Community-based programs
- Shift towards keeping youth in their communities rather than residential placement
- Examples of community-based interventions:
- Wraparound services
- Mentoring programs
- After-school and youth development programs
- Emphasis on family engagement and strengthening support systems
- Collaboration with schools, mental health providers, and other community organizations
- Aims to reduce negative impacts of removal from home and community
- Challenges in ensuring adequate resources and support in high-need communities
Contemporary issues
- The juvenile justice system faces ongoing challenges and evolving concerns in the 21st century
- These issues reflect broader societal trends, new research findings, and changing perspectives on youth justice
- Understanding these contemporary issues is crucial for analyzing current policies and proposing future reforms
School-to-prison pipeline
- Refers to policies and practices that push students out of schools and into the juvenile justice system
- Disproportionately affects students of color and those with disabilities
- Contributing factors:
- Zero-tolerance policies
- Increased presence of law enforcement in schools
- Harsh disciplinary practices for minor infractions
- Reform efforts focus on:
- Implementing restorative practices in schools
- Reducing reliance on exclusionary discipline
- Improving school climate and student support services
- Collaboration between education and juvenile justice systems to interrupt the pipeline
Racial disparities in juvenile justice
- Persistent overrepresentation of youth of color at all stages of the juvenile justice system
- Disparities most pronounced for African American and Latino youth
- Contributing factors:
- Implicit bias in decision-making
- Socioeconomic factors and community resources
- Differential policing practices
- Reform efforts include:
- Data collection and analysis to identify points of disparity
- Cultural competency training for juvenile justice professionals
- Implementing objective risk assessment tools
- Increasing diversity in juvenile justice leadership and workforce
Juvenile life without parole
- Controversial practice of sentencing juveniles to life in prison without the possibility of parole
- Supreme Court decisions have limited but not eliminated the practice:
- Miller v Alabama (2012) prohibited mandatory life without parole for juveniles
- Montgomery v Louisiana (2016) made Miller retroactive
- Ongoing debate over appropriateness of life sentences for juvenile offenders
- Some states have banned juvenile life without parole, while others retain the option
- Reform efforts focus on:
- Providing meaningful opportunities for release based on rehabilitation
- Developing specialized parole processes for juvenile lifers
- Addressing the needs of individuals who have spent decades incarcerated since youth
International perspectives
- Juvenile justice practices vary significantly across different countries and cultures
- Examining international approaches provides valuable insights for improving domestic juvenile justice systems
- Understanding global trends helps contextualize national policies and identify innovative practices
United Nations guidelines
- Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) establishes international standards for juvenile justice
- UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (Beijing Rules) provide guidance on:
- Age of criminal responsibility
- Diversion and alternatives to formal processing
- Specialized juvenile justice institutions
- UN Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency (Riyadh Guidelines) emphasize:
- Early intervention and prevention strategies
- Community-based approaches
- Addressing root causes of delinquency
- UN Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty (Havana Rules) focus on:
- Conditions of confinement
- Education and rehabilitation programs
- Reintegration support
Comparative juvenile justice systems
- Minimum age of criminal responsibility varies widely (7 to 18 years old)
- Some countries (Scotland, Japan) use welfare-based models emphasizing care and protection
- Others (England, Wales) employ justice-based models focusing on accountability
- Scandinavian countries known for rehabilitative approaches and low youth incarceration rates
- Some nations (New Zealand) incorporate indigenous justice practices into juvenile systems
- Varying approaches to juvenile courts:
- Specialized youth courts
- Family courts handling both child welfare and delinquency
- Adult courts with modified procedures for juveniles
Global trends in juvenile rights
- Increasing recognition of children's rights in juvenile justice processes
- Growing emphasis on diversion and alternatives to formal court processing
- Shift towards restorative justice practices in many countries
- Efforts to reduce use of detention and incarceration for juveniles
- Increased focus on addressing mental health needs of justice-involved youth
- Emergence of specialized courts (drug courts, mental health courts) in various nations
- Ongoing challenges in implementing international standards in resource-limited settings
Key Terms to Review (23)
Albert Cohen: Albert Cohen was an influential American sociologist and criminologist best known for his work on delinquent subcultures and the role of status frustration in youth behavior. His theories, particularly those articulated in 'Delinquent Boys,' emphasize how lower-class boys create subcultures that counter mainstream values as a response to their inability to achieve social status through conventional means. This understanding links closely with broader themes of economic strain and the history of juvenile justice.
Big Brothers Big Sisters: Big Brothers Big Sisters is a nonprofit organization that provides one-to-one mentoring relationships between adult volunteers and children, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds. This initiative aims to foster positive youth development, offering guidance, support, and encouragement that can help mentees achieve their full potential. The program has roots in early 20th-century America and has evolved to address the unique challenges faced by at-risk youth today.
Chicago Juvenile Court: The Chicago Juvenile Court was established in 1899 as the first specialized court in the United States aimed at dealing with juvenile offenders. This court was created in response to growing concerns about the treatment of young people in the legal system and sought to provide rehabilitation rather than punishment, reflecting a shift in societal attitudes toward juvenile delinquency and justice.
Child savers movement: The child savers movement was a social reform initiative in the late 19th and early 20th centuries aimed at improving the welfare of children, particularly those involved in the juvenile justice system. This movement sought to provide protection and rehabilitation for young offenders instead of punishment, reflecting a growing awareness of the need for a separate justice system for minors. Advocates believed that children were not fully responsible for their actions and needed guidance, education, and support rather than incarceration.
Comprehensive Crime Control Act: The Comprehensive Crime Control Act, enacted in 1984, is a significant piece of legislation aimed at addressing various aspects of crime prevention and control in the United States. This act was designed to create a more unified and effective federal response to crime, particularly focusing on drug offenses, violent crimes, and the juvenile justice system.
Control Theory: Control theory is a sociological perspective that explains how individuals are prevented from engaging in deviant behavior through social bonds and controls. It emphasizes the role of societal factors, such as attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief, in maintaining social order and deterring delinquency. This theory suggests that strong social connections and personal investment in conventional activities can protect individuals, particularly during childhood, from falling into delinquent behaviors.
Diversion Programs: Diversion programs are alternative interventions designed to redirect individuals, particularly youth, away from the traditional criminal justice system and toward rehabilitative or supportive services. These programs aim to address underlying issues such as behavioral problems, mental health needs, or substance abuse, ultimately preventing future delinquent behavior and reducing recidivism rates.
Get Tough Policies: Get tough policies refer to strict and punitive approaches aimed at addressing juvenile crime, emphasizing harsher penalties and a zero-tolerance attitude towards delinquency. These policies emerged as a response to rising concerns about youth crime in the late 20th century, aiming to deter potential offenders through severe consequences rather than rehabilitation or support. This approach often leads to increased incarceration rates for juveniles and prioritizes public safety over developmental considerations.
In re Gault: In re Gault is a landmark Supreme Court case from 1967 that established the constitutional rights of juveniles in delinquency proceedings, ensuring they are granted the same due process protections as adults. This decision marked a significant shift in the juvenile justice system, emphasizing that young people should not be denied fundamental legal rights merely because of their age. The ruling laid the groundwork for future reforms aimed at protecting the legal rights of minors and reshaping how juvenile courts operate.
Jane Addams: Jane Addams was a prominent social reformer and the co-founder of Hull House in Chicago, which became a pivotal settlement house that aimed to improve the living conditions of immigrants and the urban poor in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Her work laid the foundation for social work and influenced reforms in juvenile justice, particularly regarding the treatment and understanding of youth within the legal system.
Juvenile Delinquency Prevention and Control Act: The Juvenile Delinquency Prevention and Control Act is a federal law enacted in 1974 aimed at addressing and preventing juvenile delinquency through a variety of programs and interventions. This act established the foundation for federal funding to support state and local initiatives that focus on preventing youth crime and rehabilitating juvenile offenders. By promoting community-based services and encouraging alternatives to incarceration, the act aimed to reduce the number of youths involved in the justice system.
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act: The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) is a federal law enacted in 1974 aimed at improving the juvenile justice system and preventing delinquency among youth. It emphasizes the need for community-based programs, deinstitutionalization of juvenile offenders, and the protection of juveniles from adult criminal justice processes. This act plays a vital role in shaping the history of juvenile justice, influencing court processes, and guiding probation and parole systems for young offenders.
Juvenile waiver: A juvenile waiver is a legal process that allows for a minor to be tried as an adult in criminal court rather than in juvenile court. This mechanism reflects a significant shift in how the justice system treats young offenders, especially those charged with serious crimes. The juvenile waiver has implications for sentencing, rehabilitation opportunities, and the overall approach to juvenile delinquency.
McKeiver v. Pennsylvania: McKeiver v. Pennsylvania is a landmark Supreme Court case from 1971 that addressed the rights of juveniles in the legal system, specifically concerning the right to a jury trial. The Court ruled that juveniles do not have a constitutional right to a jury trial in delinquency proceedings, highlighting the distinct nature of the juvenile justice system, which is focused on rehabilitation rather than punishment.
Montgomery v. Louisiana: Montgomery v. Louisiana is a landmark Supreme Court case decided in 2016 that ruled the 2012 decision in Miller v. Alabama, which prohibited mandatory life sentences without parole for juvenile offenders, should be applied retroactively. This ruling highlighted the evolving understanding of juvenile justice and the importance of rehabilitation over punishment, especially for young offenders.
Parens patriae doctrine: The parens patriae doctrine is a legal principle that allows the state to act as the guardian for those who are unable to care for themselves, particularly minors. This concept originates from the Latin term meaning 'parent of the nation' and emphasizes the state's responsibility to protect the welfare of children and youth in situations where they may be at risk or involved in unlawful activities. The doctrine has significantly influenced the development of juvenile justice systems, shaping how courts approach cases involving minors and their rehabilitation rather than punishment.
Racial disparities in juvenile justice: Racial disparities in juvenile justice refer to the unequal treatment and outcomes that different racial and ethnic groups experience within the juvenile justice system. These disparities can manifest in various stages, such as arrest rates, charging decisions, sentencing, and overall treatment within the system. Understanding these disparities is crucial to addressing broader social inequalities and ensuring that all youths receive fair treatment regardless of their race or ethnicity.
Restorative Justice: Restorative justice is an approach to justice that focuses on repairing the harm caused by criminal behavior through inclusive processes that engage all stakeholders. This method emphasizes accountability, healing, and the restoration of relationships, rather than punishment alone, making it relevant in understanding childhood behavior, cultural influences, aging offenders, socioeconomic factors, and juvenile justice systems.
Roper v. Simmons: Roper v. Simmons is a landmark Supreme Court case from 2005 that ruled it unconstitutional to impose the death penalty on individuals who were under the age of 18 at the time of their crime. This decision underscored the evolving standards of decency in society regarding juvenile offenders and highlighted the differences in culpability between minors and adults. The ruling played a significant role in shaping juvenile justice and raised awareness about the treatment of young people within the legal system.
Scared straight: Scared straight is a juvenile intervention program designed to deter young people from engaging in criminal behavior by exposing them to the harsh realities of prison life. The approach typically involves at-risk youth visiting prisons where they meet incarcerated individuals who share their experiences, aiming to instill fear and discourage delinquent activities. This method connects deeply to broader discussions about prevention strategies and the effectiveness of fear-based tactics in juvenile justice.
School-to-prison pipeline: The school-to-prison pipeline refers to the troubling national trend where students, particularly those from marginalized communities, are funneled out of educational institutions and into the juvenile and criminal justice systems. This phenomenon is often driven by harsh disciplinary policies, zero-tolerance laws, and a lack of resources that disproportionately affect at-risk youth. It highlights how factors like educational attainment, literacy levels, and historical approaches to juvenile justice can impact a student's trajectory, ultimately contributing to higher rates of incarceration among those who experience it.
Social learning theory: Social learning theory posits that individuals learn behaviors, including criminal behavior, through observation and imitation of others, particularly within their social environments. This theory emphasizes the importance of social interactions and experiences, suggesting that behaviors are reinforced through rewards or punishments from these interactions, thereby shaping future actions.
Status Offense: A status offense is a type of non-criminal act that is considered a violation of the law only because of the age of the individual involved. These offenses include behaviors such as truancy, running away from home, and underage drinking. They are significant because they highlight how societal norms and laws can vary based on the age of an individual, reflecting broader themes in juvenile justice history.