Children and Crime

It seems as though everywhere you look, minors are becoming, more often, the focus of crimes. Children are committing not only shop lifting crimes and vandalism, but they are running drugs and committing murders. Juvenile detention centers have, for a long time, been the easy fix. Children are not adults and locking them up is not only ineffective, it is some times considered to be immoral. Children generally do not commit crimes for the same reasons as adults, and "a majority of these children have a mental health or special education disability that does not get addressed in correctional facilities" (Mallett & Julian, 2008). This trend needs to change, there are plenty of engaging ways to prevent minors from becoming offenders, if only they are utilized. Eliminating the negative influences and replacing those with positive people and activities, will ultimately be, the only way to change the path that these children and young adults are heading down.

Today we still struggle to find a way to deter juvenile crime and keep our focus on rehabilitation. There are a number of programs aimed specifically on intervention and prevention. Schools team up with local police to teach drug and gang resistance, and communities offer programs directed toward positive activities to keep children off of the streets. There are many promising programs out there to assist in the prevention and intervention of youth offenders. Both the G.R.E.A.T. and D.A.R.E. programs are taught in schools as a method to educate children on the dangers of gangs and drugs. They are taught by police officers in upper and lower class neighborhoods. They are taught early, usually between fourth and sixth grade, to provide an early intervention to children who may need it. Another exciting program is the Big Brothers, Big Sisters of America. This is a one on one mentoring program designed to give children a positive adult role model. This program seems be at least some what successful. One study found that youth with mentors were 46 percent less likely to start using illegal drugs, 27 percent less likely to start drinking, and 32 percent less likely to assault another person, as opposed to youth without a mentor (Bartollas &Miller, 2008).

One fairly unique program for juvenile rehabilitation is a cottage built for violent offenders. The cottage is considered a maximum security training school designed to hold young men accountable for their actions and crimes. The cottage is more than a prison, the cottage staff takes on a very difficult role in rehabilitating and resocializing these youth. The staff is not only the correction officers, but the youth counselors, surrogate parents, and role models. The main goal behind this program is to allow the staff to play a central role in modeling conforming behaviors, strategies, and attitudes for their institutional "sons". They encourage theboys to adopt aspirations and goals more in line with the opportunities available to them in the community (Inderbitzin, 2007).

Boot Camps are another unique idea brought about, and used as a "scared straight" tactic. These are all wonderful programs that used in combination with good parental support, could be very effective. Parental support is really the only thing stopping these programs from really making a difference. There are a lot of parents that do not take the time to get their children involved with positive programs that could deter crime. Not to say that they are bad parents but there are a lot of children missing out on something that could change the outcome of their future. The other problem is the willingness of children to go to the programs offered. Every child needs to be involved with something so that he or she can figure out what they like to do. Children who have dreams and goals are going to be more focused and less likely to follow the wrong path. Financial concerns may also stop parents for enrolling their children in certain programs. One study was done on neighborhood responsibility and trust. The study was done by asking 8,782 Chicago residents' ten questions regarding the likelihood of their neighbors intervening if certain issues came up in their neighborhood, such as, violent acts, acts of disrespect, or acts of property damage. The residence were also asked questions pertaining to the neighborhood as a whole, such as, do people get along, are there shared values, and is there trust. The study found that a simple measure of neighborhood responsibility and trust accounted for more than 75% of the variation between neighborhoods in levels of violence." This establishes low neighborhood trust and responsibility as an important risk factor for violent crime.

It is also very important for social risk factors to be studied in order to better understand the way of thinking for a delinquent child in a situation where a child is not handed everything they need right from the get go.

An ideal future would be one free of crime; however that is very unlikely so as a society we need to learn to deal with juvenile crime in a better more efficient way. School counselors and parents need to work together to identify areas that may become a concern. Courts should require children to attend therapy or at least be assessed after breaking the law, and parents need to become more involved in the lives of their children. In the future hopefully the courts can become creative in their ruling and not relay on community service and probation so heavily. Community service is a great idea if it could be coupled with another program such as Big Brothers Big Sisters.

Crime is becoming more violent in our country, and it has created fear in the eyes of the people. Whatever can be done to stop the escalation of crime needs to be done. Children are impressionable and immature; we can not put sole responsibility of their choices on them. The drive to commit crimes comes from the community. We, as adults and a society, have to learn to control our anger in front of children, as we are where they get it. Jail for children is not the answer and as shown in this paper there are multiple alternatives to detention centers.

References:

Fite, P.J., Colder, C.R. (2007). Proactive and Reactive Aggression and Peer Delinquency: Implications for Prevention and Intervention. The Journal of Early Adolescence,27(2), 223-240. Retrieved January 28, 2008, from Research Library database. (Document ID: 1259511451).

Inderbitzin, M. (2007). A Look From the Inside: Balancing Custody and Treatment in a Juvenile Maximum-Security Facility. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology,51(3), 348-362. Retrieved January 30, 2008, from Research Library database. (Document ID: 1271841601).

Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S.W., Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Retrieved January 31, 2008 from http://www.tyc.state.tx.us/prevention/neighbor.html

Bartollas, C. & Miller, S.J. (2008). Juvenile Justice in America- 5th Edition. Pearson-Prentice Hall. Upper Saddle River, N.J.

Mallett, C.A., Julian, L. (2008). Alternatives for Youth's Advocacy Program: Reducing Minority Youth Incarceration Placements in Cleveland, Ohio. Juvenile & Family Court Journal,59(3), 1. Retrieved January 25, 2009, from Research Library database. (Document ID: 1556854961).

Drexler, M., (2000). Judicial review & the policy of federal abstention: A juvenile's right to ensure the existence of a "substantial federal interest". Michigan Law Review,98(4), 1007-1037. Retrieved January 25, 2008, from Research Library database. (Document ID: 54797792).