In my opinion, life imprisonment without parole for juveniles is a very harsh decision. I believe that as young individuals, juveniles may be involved in homicides as a result of peer influence, drugs, or bad decisions. They should be given a chance for parole in the future since they have an opportunity to change and make better decisions in life. Juveniles are culpable for their actions because they know it is wrong to perform these actions. However, in Millers vs Jacksons' case, the two fourteen-year-old boys were involved in separate homicides due to robbery. The fact that they were both fourteen led to a significant debate that made them receive partial culpability, but this did not mean they would escape punishment.
Critical evaluation of the judgment passed to the boys led to different opinions in the justice sector. Justice Elan Kagan stated that the Arkansans and Alabama Court decisions were cruel to the teenagers. His judgment is proof that it is impossible for youths to be irredeemably corrupt. According to developmental science, adolescent's involvement in crime shows their cognitive and psychosocial immaturity (Berk, 2019). They are different from adults since they have not attained full neurological development to make rational decisions and to assess risk and consequences. Teenagers lack maturity and the sense of responsibility and are thus highly prone to negative influence. Research shows that adolescent is a stage of maturation imbalance ( Moriearty, 2014) . It is when the brain system learns of self-regulation, yet it is a stage of high neural responsiveness to emotional, social, and appetitive stimuli. When making decisions on juveniles’ crimes it is important to consider the juveniles' background since those who come from troubled homes are more prone to negative emotions and thus engage in antisocial acts. The Miller v Alabama case enabled the reconstruction of the rules on juvenile judgment on homicide cases to give them a chance to mature and make more informed decisions.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
References
Berk, C. D. (2019). Children, Development, and the Troubled Foundations of Miller v. Alabama. Law & Social Inquiry , 44 (3), 752-770.
Moriearty, P. L. (2014). Miller v. Alabama and the retroactivity of proportionality rules. U. Pa. J. Const. L. , 17 , 929.
