Repeat offender cases have attracted intense scrutiny not only from the criminal justice system, but also psychiatrists and related studies. They have tried to establish and find out more on the possible factors that can contribute to incidences of repeated crimes. As some offenders already have served jail terms that are designed to correct them and instill change in their lives. Therefore, with repeated rates of offenses that include those of Juvenile have left many with questions of whether the reforms and punishments that such offender’s get to be irrelevant in instilling change. And, therefore, calling out for change and improvements in the strategies used to correct and introduce change in such offenders as well as consideration of other possible approaches and alterations. The very many questions relating to repeated Recidivism Rates among Juvenile Offenders has attracted intense research in the subject of crime and the topic of Recidivism Rates among Juvenile Offenders. It has resulted in scholarly and professional articles that discuss and present different variables related to the subject. It is, hence, essential to support such research and studies that try to unearth the possible reason and variables that encourage Recidivism Rates among Juvenile Offenders. Thus, develop pragmatic solutions to reduce the rates and also elaborate on possible reasons that make the correctional intervention instituted fail to realize the desired results and outcomes in the short and long-term.
Lane (2018) scholarly piece presents an in-depth view and facts about the findings and research conducted commissioned by the president of the US that provided a retrospective on law enforcement and administration of justice report. The work asserts and notes the progress made in addressing the juveniles concerns relating to crime and points out the research on the causes, consequences and best responses to be implemented by the policymakers. They have all been enhanced recently to reach the highest level supported by facts and statistics data that shows the progress made with each intervention approach used. As a result, the practitioners, as well as policy makers all, have lessons to learn in moving forward addressing the concern objectively. Some intervention applied have produced a positive result while others have had little impact as had been anticipated and, consequently, resulting in further questions that inquires the differences concerning outcomes. Lane (2018) works notes intervention and recommendation that were presented in the commission’s findings that include that state positive actions and encouragement when juveniles repeat offenses and, hence, forms the recommendations it applies and encourages the message of hope. As most of the proposals do not support more harsh punishments as a correctional measure, but encourages sustainability concerning interventions asked that can still give the juveniles another chance and opportunity to correct their mistakes and initiate positive changes. They include developing a policy of not hurting, but providing more help as well as the provision of better procedural protection. It also notes that continuation of building and refining more evidence-programming to implement solutions that are proved to be functional. Also, tailor services to suit different scenario and different backgrounds that the juveniles come from so that pragmatic services can be initiated. Additionally , it notes that tackling community problems would play a direct and indirect role in repeating such occurrences such as providing opportunities to the community that might include employment and upkeep. It also encourages building and developing empathy that would enable them works together with the juveniles in the correctional options chosen as well as a building data system. It would enhance capturing true and accurate information and data to help in the analysis and review of implemented options and their impacts to strengthen and encourage positive actions and interventions. Finally, it recommends investing in resources that empower teens and children that would help shape them positively such as encouragement of teens and children to engage in active activities such as sports by building sports facilities and related infrastructure that can make the juveniles involved and, thus, less involved in crimes and breach of the law. Lane (2018) piece, hence, notes the role that every stakeholder involved or concerned with juveniles affairs can play to enhance positive outcomes in the short and long-run.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Jacob and Lefgre (2003) also present an exciting dimension that the subject attracts. It first poses an essential question that gives hint and direction that the research takes about the issue. The piece studies the effect that school has regarding the prevention of crimes and repeated offenses that juveniles more often go through. It analyzed and reviewed 29 jurisdictions across the country, and the findings asserted that Juveniles crimes decreased by over 14 percent when schools were in session and, therefore, concludes by recommendation how incapacitation and concentration play an essential part in reducing juvenile crimes. Jacob and Lefgre (2003) work provides evidence and proves that supports the ideas presented in work by Lane (2018) piece and specifically among the recommendations posted such as that encourages investments in resources that excites children and teens such as sports facilities. It is because such facilities would pin down juveniles and children and encourage them to engage in positive activities that would make them occupied and engaged and, consequently, less idle to participate in criminal activities as indicated in the study and findings that revealed reduced crime rates among juveniles when schools are in session.
The scholarly work of Valuiskov, Bondarenk, and Arutiunian (2017) equally present the dynamics and variables that control and determine the aspects that link and relate to juvenile crimes at an individual level as well as at a group level. It brings essential elements of group psychology where it notes that children or teens behave differently when alone and when in a group of people. The piece discourages the use of repressive measures among teenagers that are implemented by the responsible authorities as correctional measures that deter teens from engaging in crime and breaking the law. It notes that long-term approaches that view the society from a bigger perspective would result in more and sustainable solutions that would reduce teenager’s engagements in crime particularly that encourages socio-economic empowerment that the piece asserts is among the leading causes of teen’s participation in a crime. Valuiskov, Bondarenk, and Arutiunian (2017) notes that repressive programs that try to intervene and provide correctional measures are only meant to treat the symptoms and not the root causes of the increased juvenile engagements in crime and, therefore, it implies that addressing the socio-economic aspects would result in more sustainable solutions to the problem. Recidivism Rates among the Juvenile Offenders increase is recorded more in societies that have poor socio-economic status characterized by poverty and high rates of unemployment and opportunities for its people that include juveniles. The authors also propose a custom-made solution for and different approaches applied in various cases after a thorough analysis of crime among the youths that would provide more information and leads of the possible push towards crime as not all the circumstances arise from challenging socio-economic status. Where some are due to abusive parenting styles that make the juvenile retaliate by engaging in crime as an option of instituting revenge and release of stress. The latter example is typical in wealthy families and backgrounds, and such an option would require more of psychological intervention and related approaches and measures that can solve the problem objectively. The recommendation in Lane (2018) work that encourages tailor service, thus, would resonate well with the work of Valuiskov et al., (2017) that also proposes individual custom intervened to be included among the solutions that reduce Recidivism Rates among Juvenile Offenders.
Munyo (2015) develops a model that uses behavior as a predictor of the possibility of engaging in crime. The past encounters and choices made by children would enhance and contribute substantively to the decisions made of either supporting legal actions or processes or participate in a crime. It also notes how socioeconomic status and legal conditions determine how crime and related activities not only impact and affect the juveniles but also adult’s population. Munyo (2015) also notes the difference that exists between juveniles and adults and the different level when the same crime happens. The model further predicts and forecasts that when the age limit of the juvenile crime is reduced to a significant majority, it will reduce the juvenile crime incident significantly as most of the juvenile criminals more often share the same age groups and often are in the transition part of life into adulthood. The piece also notes and discourages harsher punishments for juveniles and states that because it increases the chance of repeat crime in the future. Such models as shown by Munyo (2015) should be encouraged as they can contribute positively to the formulation of policies and strategies employed that would help address the concern regarding juvenile crime objectively. The already discussed articles share the same sentiments with the work of Munyo (2015) that discourages harsher punishment. The possible reason that many of the scholars and articles propose the reduction of more stringent and repressive programs is the fact that they appreciate and note the challenge that comes with the teenager's transition process into adulthood. Specifically, the adolescent stage in life where many youths try to explore world issues and affair that might lead them to commit crimes. Some of the behavior posted by the juveniles, hence, results from a combination of biological, psychological and psychological measures that when incorporated with the environment that they grow or are found in, might enhance the chance of such youths engaging in criminal activities. The age bracket of most juvenile offenders also shows many similarities in different parts of the world.
Another scholarly source Welsh et al. (2008) looked at economics variables and quantified the impact of juvenile crimes regarding costs to the victims that include not only theft of their property but also the destruction of the property that stores such goods. It also looks at the economic costs to the entire society and the economic burden that juvenile crimes have to the society that includes locking them in jail and offers the basic and essential services such as shelter, food, guiding and counseling services among others. The piece is vital as it brings more information and knowledge concerning the economic variables and such information can play a critical part on the formulation of policy as well as choosing policy and intervention actions that can enhance positive and objective results concerning the challenge of juvenile crimes. Policy and research that notes the economic impacts of violent crimes, thus, is essential that might determine the actions and strategies implemented regarding juvenile crime. It is imperative to note that different societies have different economic position and status and, therefore, it would be logical and pragmatic to choose options that would resonate well with the economic position of a given particular society that would determine the approach and strategy employed in addressing the crime rates linked with juveniles. For example, societies that might feel the burden of harsh punishments to the juveniles that include imprisonment would be more expensive concerning costs. They might formulate strategies such as the elimination of prisons sentence to juveniles and also categorization of crime in the level or category of its seriousness and, therefore, only those crime that is considered, as well as repeat offenders, get the harsh punishments. It would also eliminate the economic burden. Another approach is to encourage fines and penalties for the juveniles and their parents or guardians rather than implement harsher disciplinary procedures. Hoeve et al. (2014) share the same sentiments with Welsh et al. (2008) that note how economic variables and aspects have to be considered in the determination of policies and strategies applied to address the challenge of juvenile crimes. It indicates how financial debts by young people that include students can contribute and increase the chance for them involved in crimes and special crimes such as that of forgery to help them address the financial stress that results from financial debts. The study findings indicated a strong association between debt and crime and, hence, it would be essential for concerned stakeholders to formulate policies and strategies that would help empower the youths in financial management tips as a life skill. It would not only help them during their youthful days but also when they are adults to intervene and manage different issues related to finance that would reduce their chances of engaging in crime. It also would encourage them to invest when they have the financial management skills that would provide additional options and source of income that implies the possibility of a stable financial position. Many youths often have opportunities and access finance but the financial skills that many lacks makes them vulnerable and engage in activities that do not add value to their finances and, consequently, reduces the opportunity of additional income that can contribute positively in lowering crime in youths.
The scholarly work by van der Put, Creemers and Hoeve (2014) brings an exciting perspective of drug use and compares the crime between the two groups among the youth that relates to recidivism. The study findings assert that youth in the substance use category have more risks and are more vulnerable and exposed to criminal activity that those who do not use substance and drugs. They are also likely to repeat offenses than their opposite peers. The findings indicate that aspects of risk factors that lead juveniles into crime have to be considered and address objectively among the options and strategies that stakeholders formulate regarding the subject. It is, hence, essential to devise different approaches among the youths and juveniles that address the repeat of Recidivism Rates among Juvenile Offenders for substance users and others who do not use substance but engage in crimes.
James et al. (2013) also present essential aspects regarding the topic. It analyses the measures and programs that are instituted after the juveniles, and young adults have been released from prison and the impact that such programs have in reducing recidivism. It recommends the implementation of individual treatments and custom made approach rather than using group or generalized approach. Custom made solution, hence, are preferred as the best option in the piece chosen that resonates with Lane (2018) as well as Jacob and Lefgre (2003) work.
Assink et al. (2015) share the same sentiments with van der Put et al. (2014) that note how substance use increases the risks and vulnerable of users to engage in repeated crimes than other options and risk factors such as family type and parenting styles among others. The authors note that risks factors play an essential role that results in juvenile engaging in crimes and suggest that when the risks factors are addressed positively, it would have a positive impact that would help all the concerned stakeholders address the concern of Reducing Recidivism Rates among Juvenile Offenders objectively. They encourage incorporation of a multi-strategy that would incorporate reduction of risks factors as well as other impacts and variables that results in repeated crime actions among juveniles and young adults.
Kim, Merlo, and Benekos (2013) show how the increased demands for evidence-based solutions to address issues in society has proved relevant and reducing Recidivism Rates among Juvenile Offenders is not exempted. The authors note that not all options and strategies employed in discussing the different concerns regarding juvenile offense and recidivism work as projected. They, for this reason, suggest the provision of specific opportunities and strategies that would work best in the environment for juveniles in jails, prison, parole or probation settings and, thus, application of strategies that are evidence-based that prove to results in high output and returns should be encouraged in each context. The specialization element and aspects, thus, help more positive returns in addressing the concern objectively. Weaver and Campbell (2015) also share the same sentiments with Kim et al. (2013) that encourage the use of evidence-based approaches to providing solutions to the different concern about the subject. The findings also assert that a more favorable outcome is experienced from after-care programs that are well presented and implemented strategically and hence support the evidenced-based approach to provide solutions.
Prisco (2015) brings an exciting picture in the discussion by introducing parental involvement and commitment to instituting changes and help to the juveniles. It is essential to note that many parents in contemporary times have put much efforts and priority in careers and businesses and, therefore, many find it difficult to create time and engage with their families due to commitments. Juvenile sex offenses are addressed explicitly by the authors that note that juvenile sex offenders that participate in treatment have shown lower recidivism rates than adult offenders or untreated juvenile sex offenders. The piece, thus, encourages parents to be involved in the intervention actively approaches used that target to help juveniles as evidence show that they are likely to change when their parents show concern and empathy to them. It also increases the bond between parents and children reducing the communication gap that exist that possibly lead to communication breakdown resulting in stress and action that breached the rule of law. Finally, Miller and Therrien (2018) note how the disabled groups have been neglected in the study and subject of juvenile’s intervention relate to crime. Their piece notes how people with a disability whether physical or mental need to be addressed to help overcome their challenges and reduce the Recidivism Rates among Juvenile Offenders. They suggest special care and attention that might include drastic intervention and special programs to support such groups intervene positively the challenges likely to expose them and increase their risks to the related offenses. The work, thus, presents a dynamic approach that stakeholders can also look into and note how people with disability can be helped in the short and long-term overcome the challenges they have related to crimes as a whole.
In conclusion, the different articles presented show dynamic variables and factors that affect juvenile involvement in crime directly as well as indirectly. Other critical stakeholders that include the criminal justice system, as well as psychiatrists and parents among others and the roles and actions that they can apply in reducing Recidivism Rates among Juvenile Offenders, are shown. All stakeholders, for this reason, need to work together and corporate in providing sustainable solutions regarding strategies and policies that would help address the concern objectively.
References
Assink, M., van der Put, C. E., Hoeve, M., de Vries, S. L. A., Stams, G. J. J. M., & Oort, F. J. (2015). Risk factors for persistent delinquent behavior among juveniles: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review , 42, 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2015.08.002
Hoeve, M., Stams, G. J. J. M., van der Zouwen, M., Vergeer, M., Jurrius, K., & Asscher, J. J. (2014). A Systematic Review of Financial Debt in Adolescents and Young Adults: Prevalence, Correlates and Associations with Crime. PLoS ONE , 9(8), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0104909
Jacob, B. A. & Lefgre, L. (2003). Are Idle Hands the Devil's Workshop? Incapacitation, Concentration, and Juvenile Crime. The American Economic Review , 93(5): 1560-1577.
James, C., Stams, G. J. J. M., Asscher, J. J., De Roo, A. K., & der Laan, P. H. van. (2013). Aftercare programs for reducing recidivism among juvenile and young adult offenders: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review , 33(2), 263–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2012.10.013
Kim, B., Merlo, A. V., & Benekos, P. J. (2013). Effective correctional intervention programmes for juveniles: review and synthesis of meta-analytic evidence. International Journal of Police Science & Management , 15(3), 169–189. https://doi.org/10.1350/ijps.2013.15.3.310
Lane, J. (2018). President’s Crime Commission: Past and Future. Addressing Juvenile Crime. What Have We Learned, and How Should We Proceed? Criminology and Public Policy , 17 (2): 283- 307.
Miller, A. A., & Therrien, W. J. (2018). Returning Home: Reducing Recidivism for Juvenile Offenders With Disabilities Through Transition Planning. Beyond Behavior , 27(2), 108–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/1074295618766517
Munyo, I. (2015). The Juvenile Crime Dilemma. Review of Economic Dynamics , 18 (2015): 201-211.
Prisco, R. (2015). Parental Involvement in Juvenile Sex Offender Treatment: Requiring a Role as Informed Supervisor. Family Court Review, 53(3), 487–503. https://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12169
Valuiskov, N.V., Bondarenk,L.V. & Arutiunian, A.D. ( 2017). Juvenile Crime: Current State and Dynamics. Journal of Politics and Law , 10(4): 225-232.
van der Put, C.,E., Creemers, H. E. & Hoeve, M. (2014).Differences between juvenile offenders with and without substance use problems in the prevalence and impact of risk and protective factors for criminal recidivism. Drug & Alcohol Dependence . 2014;134:267-274. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2013.10.012
Weaver, R. D., & Campbell, D. (2015). Fresh Start: A Meta-Analysis of Aftercare Programs for Juvenile Offenders. Research on Social Work Practice , 25(2), 201–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049731514521302
Welsh, B.C., Loeber,R., Stevens, B.R., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Cohen, M. A. & Farrington, D.P. (2008). Costs of Juvenile Crime in Urban Areas. A Longitudinal Perspective. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 6 (1): 3-27.
