Social work with children
Juvenile delinquency, environmental pollution and drug abuse crimes are known as "the world's three major public nuisances." At present, the number of juvenile delinquents in our country has increased, and the trend towards younger age, gangs, and viciousness has caused great harm to social stability. The youth punishment system in the United States is multi-level and has a strong scientific nature. Although it is aimed at correction, it is definitely not ignored. Recently, news about the violence of minors has frequently triggered a lot of denizens' attention, and this concern has extended the discussion of juvenile crimes. The theory in related fields believes that penalties do not correct the juvenile crimes well. For young people whose mind and body are not yet mature, isolation from society will have long-term adverse effects on their future growth. At the same time, the correspondence between rights and criminal law also hinders the legal age of criminal responsibility. For example, if a 14-year-old juvenile commits the same punishment as an adult who is much older, why can't they vote? smoking, drinking, getting married? Of course, the more important idea is to proceed from humanitarianism.
The United States has been exploring the punishment system for juvenile delinquency for more than a hundred years. At present, it has formed a system of juvenile corrections including measures such as protection observation, family imprisonment, electronic surveillance, and training camps. It is worth learning. Probation does not deprive adolescents of the court's judgment of the personal freedom of the crime. As long as the juvenile does not further commit the illegal act and meets certain conditions, the "protection observation" can be applied. Currently, most states have used protection observation as a substitute for punishment. The main purpose of protection observation is to enable the teenager to receive treatment and guidance in the original community relationship and interpersonal relationship to restore his normal life. In order to achieve this goal, juveniles are generally required to abide by the law, attend school on time, and meet regularly to protect observers, operate within the community, and not be allowed to go out during the specified time period at night.
Another form of measure is family imprisonment called House Arrest. Adolescents who are imprisoned by the family are usually restricted from staying at home, except for schooling, work, and other things that are licensed in advance. Family imprisonment is generally managed and supervised by the Juvenile Court Protection Observatory, which includes daily meeting with juvenile delinquents and daily meetings with juvenile parents, teachers and employers. Relatively speaking, training camps are a relatively new and more rigorous form. In the training camp, young people are subject to militarized management, receiving 90-120 days of training and working 3 to 6 hours a day. The training camp also provides cultural education, holiday counseling, work technical training and employment training, as well as guidance on drugs and alcohol. After the training camp is over, the teenagers will return home and receive close supervision from the community (Cipriani, 2016).
In addition to restrictions on personal freedom, states in the United States now approve fines and damages as a substitute for punishment. Sometimes, compensation is required to receive “protective observation” treatment. The amount of compensation may be the amount that the judge decides to compensate according to the statement of the juvenile and the victim; or the judge may determine it according to his own knowledge, or may be decided by the victim and the juvenile delinquent. The youth punishment system in the United States is multi-level and has a strong scientific nature. Although it is aimed at correction, it is definitely not ignored or ignored. In contrast to China, the 10-year-old girl who took two years ago dropped the baby boy from the 15th floor. Apart from the parents’ loss of money, the teenager itself will not accept any corrective measures. Another area worth pondering is that this system is not static. The system of correcting juvenile delinquency in the United States itself also changes with the general trend of American society. The United States is a case law country. In case law, judges must not only follow precedents, but also create precedents, and quickly and flexibly reflect the different requirements of social development for legal adjustment through jurisprudence, and maintain the continuity and stability of law. Under the law, adapt the law to the real needs of social life, and timely establish legal norms that meet the needs of society.
In the 1980s and 1990s, the juvenile crime rate continued to grow and became a serious problem that plagued American society. Under this background, the American juvenile court and juvenile justice system characterized by the concept of “national parental rights” and “rehabilitation” also gradually changed. It tends to harden and move closer to the adult criminal justice system, and the welfare foundation of the traditional juvenile court has been shaken. To describe this process in Chinese discourse is the use of heavy codes in troubled times.
With the development of the economy, American society has more power to solve and prevent juvenile delinquency. The punishment of juvenile crime in the United States has begun to soften again. In 2005 and 2012, the US Supreme Court twice overturned the judgment of the lower court, declaring that the law “applicable to the death penalty for juvenile offenders” and “the application of life imprisonment for juvenile offenders” should be abolished. The result of this ruling means that two severe penalties for minors in the US criminal law have lapsed. Since then, juvenile offenders have not only been sentenced to death, nor sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. This shows that the US Supreme Court returned to the traditional welfare juvenile justice system on juvenile justice (Steinberg, 2013).
Bradshaw, Jonathan, ed. The Well-being of Children in the UK. Policy Press, 2016.
Cipriani, Don. Children’s rights and the minimum age of criminal responsibility: a global perspective. Routledge, 2016.
Steinberg, Laurence. "The influence of neuroscience on US Supreme Court decisions about adolescents' criminal culpability." Nature Reviews Neuroscience 14.7 (2013): 513.
If you have any queries please write to us
Join our mailing list