The Department of Juvenile Justice in Fulton County

Introduction 

Department of Juvenile Justice in Fulton County, Georgia (FCDJJ) has embedded substitutes for detention and rehabilitation systems. This practice follows fluctuations in the juvenile arrest rate within the county from the national average of 3,283 for the years ranging from 2013 to 2017 to figures that are below the national average. The department for juvenile justice has resorted to school law enforcement intending to maintain below the national average the teenage arrest rates. They have designed a coalition known as the Inter-Agency Governance Agreement (IGA) that the department plans to use in lowering the arrest and recidivism rates within Fulton County, Georgia. Through the coalition with school law enforcement, they have tabled proposals for additional school penalties to substitute arrests of juveniles (Kretschmar, Flannery, & Singer, 2016). The program is designed to separate the detention of hardened juvenile offenders with less violent offenders. This separation is based on the belief by FCDJJ that the rehabilitation efforts are significantly impacted by the arrest of hardened juveniles with less violent one. 

Within Fulton County, the department of juvenile justice may derive more achievements from the implementation of diversionary programs that rehabilitate young offenders and assist them from reoffending through family inclusion. Henderson, Boustani, and Magyar (2019) research on family initiatives established for different aspects of the juvenile justice system, and the findings support their efficiency in stimulating positive rehabilitation juveniles. The rationale for this study is to investigate the arrest and recidivism rates of juveniles. This is to comprehend whether the rehabilitation programs introduced by the department of juvenile justice in Fulton County, Georgia, are effective in reducing crime and recidivism. The study is meant to investigate whether the rehabilitation programs are effective in preventing delinquency in juveniles. The second goal is identifying other means that the minors, together with their families, can access to help more in the rehabilitation process. 

Background 

Nationally delinquent youth recidivism rates are greater than 50%, with some documented as high as 90% (Altschuler et al., 2016; Models for change, 2015). Research on juvenile recidivism has increased to understand better how risk factors are associated with juvenile delinquency. Georgia, including other states, were seeing recidivism rates above 50% with the cost of detaining youth in a long-term facility exceeding $90,000 annually (PEW, 2013). Understanding the value of detention and the high rates of recidivism, it is apparent there was a disconnect within the juvenile justice system. Diversion plans were put into effect to close the gap financially and statistically. From the mid-1970s until now, the evolution from punitive policies to community-based treatment policies has led to a decline in youth placed in custody (PEW 2013; Models for Change, 2015; Altschuler et al., 2016). 

The school-to-prison pipeline helps understand the background of why the juvenile justice system may have spiraled to extreme rates. Disciplinary policies and practices within the schools have aided the negative connection and interaction between students and law enforcement. The zero-tolerance policies have made minor and major infractions become suspensions and expulsions (Cole, 2019). Suspension and expulsions lead to juveniles being left alone during those times, opening the door to delinquent behavior and influences, also known as the concept for socialization. Often, students who express behavioral issues at school are acting out in response to stressful and/or dangerous conditions in their homes and/or neighborhoods. Removing them from school and returning them to an uncertain or unsupervised home environment hurts rather than helps their development (Cole, 2019). 

Problem Statement 

The main goal of setting up the juvenile justice system was and remains the rehabilitation of young people arrested. However, the rising recidivism rates across the country have raised the alarm on whether the system is failing on its goal. In Fulton County, Georgia, the overall juvenile arrest and recidivism rates within Fulton County between years 2013-2017, according to the U.S Office of Juvenile Delinquency was above the national average. According to a study report released in 2017 by Georgia's Office of Juvenile and Delinquency Prevention, juvenile recidivism was at 30% compared to the national average of 24% (Calley, 2014). Faced with high recidivism rates, Fulton County Department of Juvenile Justice (FCDJJ) may benefit from implementing rehabilitation methods aimed at helping juvenile offenders from recidivism. They can do so by including family-based diversion programs such as those researched on by Henderson (2019), including family intervention programs developed for various components of the juvenile justice system. Research has shown this to be effective in promoting positive rehabilitation amongst juveniles. 

Purpose of the Study 

The purpose of this research is to explore the juvenile arrest and recidivism rates. The second purpose is to evaluate the effectiveness of the rehabilitation programs practiced by the Fulton County Department of Juvenile Justice (FCDJJ). This will help in reducing crime and recidivism, thus deterring juvenile delinquency. To evaluate the effectiveness, this study will utilize a quantitative methodology. Additionally, this research aims to add to the existing literature on avenues that are available to juveniles and their families that could further assist in the rehabilitation process. 

Research Question and Hypothesis 

RQ1-Quantitative: What are the frequencies of the juveniles' arrest and rate of juvenile recidivism in Fulton County, Georgia? 

RQ2: Is there a significant relationship between the rate of arrests and recidivism among juveniles within Fulton County, Georgia. 

H1-Based on objective data, there is a statistically significant difference in the rate of arrest and recidivism rates among juveniles within Fulton County, Georgia. 

H0- Based on objective data, there is no statistically significant difference in the rate of arrest and recidivism rate among juveniles within Fulton County, Georgia 

Theoretical Framework 

There are a few theories that will help make up the conceptual framework of this research, social learning theory, and differential association theory. 

Social learning theory focuses on the influence of society on an individual. The attitudes and behaviors from individuals are only a response to the encouragement of those around us, support being positive or negative. Created by Ronald Akers, researchers in criminology most often use social learning theory to help explain crime and deviance (Crossman, 2019). This theory is so relatable to this topic since juveniles can be very impressionable and enticed to delinquent behavior based on the environment and influences around them. The life of crime can appear attractive and give a feeling of thrills and excitement. Combining this with a lack of consequences may do little to deter juveniles from delinquent behaviors. 

Differential association theory focuses on individuals choosing a life of crime when the reward of crime seems to outweigh the bonus of being law-abiding. This theory focuses more on how individuals decide on a life of crime versus why individuals choose a life of crime (Vinney, 2019). Juveniles may be able to understand and explain how they entered a life of crime based on influences, but may not always understand why. Intervention and diversion programs should take place in the early stages when juveniles begin to show behavioral issues. Interventions and diversions need to be more proactive than reactive. 

Nature of Study 

Based on the nature of the study, the proposed and most appropriate study design is quantitative methodology. The methodology is most appropriate when the data to be collected numerical values. It emphasizes numerical analysis of data collected, either mathematical or statistical, and objective measurement of the resulting data. This makes it possible to generalize the data across a group of people, thus helping to explain a particular phenomenon (McEvoy & Richards, 2006). The study design is also essential when the researcher wants to take an unbiased approach, thus increased the credibility of the results (Tashakkori, Teddlie &Teddlie, 1998). 

In this quantitative study, a Factorial Design (two nonmanipulated independent variables) will be used to identify factors associated with juvenile arrest and recidivism rates. The belief is that the lack of parental involvement leads to juvenile detention, and the lack of successful diversion programs leads to juvenile recidivism. The first nonmanipulated independent variable is the juvenile arrest record; the research begins here to understand the recidivism rate. The recidivism rate is my second nonmanipulated independent variable, recidivism being a juvenile rearrested within a year. Covariates included being assessed are the types of crimes being committed, i.e., delinquency A and delinquency B, both being felonies. 

Definition of Terms 

To clarify the terms as they are used in this study, the following descriptions are provided. 

Diversion: Programs and services designed to keep at-risk youth from entering the juvenile justice system (DJJ, 2017). 

Juvenile delinquent: A youth who has been found responsible for having 

Committed a delinquent act--the equivalent of being found guilty of a criminal 

Offense (DJJ, 2017). 

Juvenile recidivism: Measured by criminal acts, such as new law violations, both misdemeanor and felony offenses. These criminal acts could result in re-arrest, 

Reconviction, or return to juvenile detention facilities with or without a new sentence during the period when new crimes were committed (DJJ, 2017). 

Mentoring: Generally, it involves providing support and guidance to and spending 

Time regularly with a youth. Mentoring activities can include participating in sports, playing games, shopping, taking hikes, helping with homework, and doing chores (DJJ, 2017). 

Probation: A mechanism used by juvenile justice agencies. It is a form of sentencing that allows the juvenile to serve his or her sentence in the community under the supervision of the probation officer. When probation is imposed, the court can either withhold adjudication or adjudicate the juvenile as a juvenile delinquent (DJJ, 2017). 

Regional Youth Detention Center (RYDC): Georgia detention facilities that house 

Youth adjudicated for short-term secure residential facility placement (DJJ, 2017). 

Youth Development Campuses (YDC): Georgia detention facilities that house 

Youth adjudicated for a long-term secure residential facility placement (DJJ, 2017). 

Violent crime: Crimes of violence include rape, robbery, assault, or murder (DJJ, 2017). 

Assumptions 

A few assumptions were reached in this study. The assumption that juveniles with prior records who re-offend as adults are accounted for in data. Secondly, that there were more diversion programs offered by Fulton County DJJ. Lastly, the assumption that Fulton DJJ sent a higher percentage of juveniles to detention centers than reported. 

Scope and Delimitations 

This study focused on Fulton County DJJ arrest record and recidivism rates for years 2013-2017. Also, researching diversion programs offered with the county to gain understating of the programs that are most successful in reducing the juvenile recidivism rate. Youth who were charged and convicted as adults and teenagers who re-offended in adulthood were excluded from this project. 

Limitations 

Several limitations will affect this study, and which will influence how the research is conducted. One of the critical impediments to the study is the unavailability of data from the Fulton County Department of Juvenile Justice (FCDJJ), detailing the diversion programs where parental involvement is mandatory. According to Akesson (2014), parental participation in rehabilitation has proven to reduce the chance of recidivism by 30%, making it significant to have programs consider parental involvement. The Fulton County Department of Juvenile Justice (FCDJJ) is providing the alternatives to arrest offered. 

Another major limitation of the study is the scope of the study. As noted earlier, the range of recidivism is extensive. Due to this breadth, it is impossible to have conclusive research in all areas. Thus, this study will only focus on evaluating programs that can be used to enhance the effectiveness of the rehabilitation process. To alleviate the recidivism rates. This would limit the scope of the applicability of the findings of the study. 

Time is another major limitation. The study needs to be conducted within a specified period. Thus, limiting the amount of time that data can be collected. It may be impossible to exhaust all the relevant data, affecting the credibility of the study results. 

Significance of the Study 

Despite the rising rate of juvenile recidivism, there is very little information on the topic. The significance of this quantitative research is to implement further and enhance rehabilitation strategies that can be used by the Fulton County Department of Juvenile Justice (FCDJJ) to reduce recidivism. The researcher intends to identify essential strategies in reducing the trauma related to arrest and recidivism. Benson (2017) explains the belief that juveniles cope with the stressors associated with detention by committing additional delinquent behavior. 

Summary and Transition 

Juvenile arrest and recidivism are a much-researched subject. Researches have invested much time in understanding how to keep juvenile recidivism decreased. Diversion programs have become an alternative to detention but may be more useful before delinquency takes place. There are most often signs of misconduct in juveniles at an early age. Those signs must not be ignored and should be used to begin diversion programs and family interventions. Benson (2017) proposed an association in the juvenile system comprising official and parental involvement. The explanation given was that parents are more exasperated about their children when the juveniles are engrossed more and more into crime. The parents are less involved in the process of rehabilitating their children as they become increasingly frustrated. 

In chapter 2, the research will elaborate on the first age of the offense, peer influence, and family dynamics. The result supports the initiative by FCDJJ in propelling change through their juvenile system, which focuses on the reduction of teenage exposure to trauma to those that have a low frequency of reoffending (Robst, 2017). 

Chapter 2: Literature Review 

Introduction 

There is a significant problem of juvenile delinquency and recidivism in the United States, affecting the social order and functioning of communities. This problem peaked during the early 1990s with substantial arrests of youth offenders who were tried in courts of law. This rise in juvenile delinquency raised concerns among policymakers and the public, calling for government action to reduce the problem. Today, the rate of juvenile arrests as decreased dramatically, but there is still a problem with high rates of recidivism. Recidivism among juveniles is one of the essential concepts in criminal justice that explains a relapse into criminal behavior. Unlike adult recidivism, the national figures for juvenile recidivism are not readily available, especially for states that rarely post about the statistics. Research focusing on predicting young recurrence has been limited, with most studies focusing on adult crimes. 

There has been a significant problem with juvenile recidivism in the country despite a decline in arrest based on reports by the Department of Juvenile Justice. To effectively prevent juvenile delinquency, researchers believe in the need to examine the nature of adolescent delinquent behaviors (Agenyi, 2017). Scholars and practitioners have, for a long time, debated on whether punishment or treatment approach works best in reducing juvenile crime and recidivism. Several strategies have been proposed in the last few decades to deal with this persistent problem in the United States. 

Provided will be the research of juvenile arrest, delinquency, and recidivism in the State of Georgia as well as other states in the United States, including programs that have been put in place to manage the situation. Many studies on this topic suggest that juvenile's negative behavior reduce when different types of interventions increase. Let's begin with the historical background and structure of the juvenile justice system before discussing the risk factors to juvenile delinquency and recidivism. Lastly, the review discusses several diversion programs in Georgia that work as a treatment model for juvenile delinquents. 

Literature Search Strategy 

The researcher reviewed the literature on juvenile recidivism in Georgia, the United States of America, and contained statistics from both the State of Georgia and the United States. There were several articles on this issue of interest that provided data on the rates of juvenile delinquency and recidivism, as well as the risk factors. The researcher considered articles that focused on juvenile recidivism and appropriate intervention programs. The search was conducted from the Walden University Library, Sage Journals, and ERIC. 

Furthermore, data for this literature review was extracted from reports in the FBI arrests, state-wide published juvenile reports and summaries from the Office of Juvenile Justice Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) and Fulton County Department of Juvenile Justice (FCDJJ). Critical Words used in searching for journal articles include Juvenile delinquency; Juvenile recidivism; diversion programs; risk factors; and school discipline. Materials were selected if they met the search criteria of being published for more than five years and focusing on juvenile programs. 

Theoretical Foundation 

The theoretical ideology and perspective of Ronald Akers in the social learning theory inspired the foundation of this paper (Akers & Jensen, 2017). This is a criminology theory that describes how the social environment and resources can influence a person's behavior. The method offers a better understanding of juvenile recidivism by explaining crime and deviance while embracing variables that motivate and control criminal behavior. The social learning theory by Hirschi (2018) provides the theoretical foundation of understanding juvenile recidivism. The theory asserts that children learn to engage in crime through associations and exposure, thus emphasizing the importance of social control. Children will develop morals, attitudes, and behaviors based on the kind of association they have and the social environment they grow up in. 

The differential association theory can also be used to describe the problem of juvenile delinquency. This theory states that people learn and develop deviant behavior through their interaction with others (Akers & Jensen, 2017). The society and social setting of a child's environment subject them to learning abnormal behaviors. Theorists today are examining delinquency by focusing on the internal and external influencing factors, with most theorists agreeing on the importance of using both elements to understand misconduct before determining the best response to intervene. 

The social support theory is an essential theoretical foundation when looking to understand juvenile recidivism. Social support refers to the emotional resources that a family provides, such as encouragement, comfort, and love that has the potential to reduce criminal behavior. When such support is consistent, the youth may feel accepted in society, thus reducing the chances of reoffending. The support can be achieved by providing tangible resources and high levels of emotional support (Akers & Jensen, 2017). The family is the primary institution that determines whether a child develops delinquency or not. According to these theories, a child who is raised in a negative family environment may use violence as an escape mechanism. Such individuals who lack family support end up in street gangs and develop criminal practices in adolescent years. This emphasizes the importance of family and social support for juvenile delinquents. 

Literary Progression 

Juvenile Justice of Historical Background 

The best way to understand the juvenile justice system is by examining its historical background and structure. In America, the juvenile justice system emerged after a series of concerns regarding the treatment of youth offenders. Reformists looked for ways to separate children from adults when they proposed the formation of a juvenile court system. Initially, the criminal justice system treated children as adults and punished equally regardless of if the child understood the wrongfulness of his actions (Sickmund & Puzzanchera, 2014). Reformers believed children below the age of 14 were not capable of determining the illegality of their acts and could not stand trial for a felony. It was critical, therefore, that a separate court is set up in which prosecutions for minors were conducted, bearing in mind the child's ability to process the magnitude of the case at hand. At the same time, these courts focused on warning minor offenders, deterring future crimes rather than punishing children for minor offenses. 

A juvenile court system was established in 1899, changing the treatment of juveniles through several propositions. For example, the juvenile system proposed a need to create a facility for dealing with troubled youths rather than sending them to prisons. The reformers advocated for children below 18 years to be treated differently from adults, which led to the creation of a house of refuge. The juvenile justice system was developed to deal with young offenders separately from adult offenders, with the first juvenile court opening in 1899 (Monahan, Steinberg & Piquero, 2015). The legal concept of minor status emerged from a recognition that juveniles had different cognition and moral capacity compared to adults and should be treated from an angle of reform rather than punishment. A minor in the eyes of the law is someone under the legal adult age of 18, though this legal age varies in various states and countries. In this regard, the juvenile justice system focused on individuals under the legal age of 18 who are found on the wrong side of the law (Agenyi, 2017). Its primary purpose was to provide rehabilitation services by following the best interest of a child. 

Since its establishment, the structure of the juvenile justice system has not gone through many reforms, mostly retaining its goals and purposes. There have been some differences in interpreting minor rights that determine how to run the court system. The system began by operating under the philosophy of parens patriae, where the court acts as a parent. Later, the Delinquency Protection Act was enacted to enhance juvenile protections by separating from the adult courts (Agenyi, 2017). Another proposal was established to provide a procedural due process that entailed the right to remain silent, representation by a lawyer as well as the right to cross-examine the witnesses. This due process also allowed juveniles a right to be represented by an attorney as well as determining whether the offender will be tried as a minor or an adult. 

The working of a juvenile court starts by the prosecution office in a county sending a petition to the minor probation department for an incident involving youth offenders. Once received the juvenile probation department process the appeal based on the laws of the state, before holding a preliminary inquiry in the issue. This is followed by informing the youth offender of the charge, then deciding whether to handle the case formally or informally depending on the intensity of the wrongful act. A formal process in court is done for an offender who contests the charges while an informal means of adjudicating hearing is done for an offender who admits being involved in the act as they enter a plea (Agenyi, 2017). 

In establishing the juvenile justice system, it was determined that a child would become deviant when they lack a stable social environment. In this regard, the history and development of the juvenile court have presented a picture of a caring and benevolent system that promotes the best interests of a child. The system allowed children to be separated from adults in the legal process of civil and criminal law. The early juvenile justice system had goals and purposes that were different from those of punishment and deterrence, as they focused on probation, supervision, and short-term treatments (Monahan, Steinberg & Piquero, 2015). 

Age of the First Offense 

Several demographic factors of a person have been consistently found to predict juvenile recidivism. Such factors include the age of first offense, gender, race as well as socioeconomic status of youths. Age is an essential factor when examining the rates of juvenile recidivism and can be used to understand why some people re-offend with a similar crime. The age of first offense has emerged as an essential risk factor to juvenile recidivism. Research has shown that an individual is most likely to repeat a misdemeanor if they are involved in delinquency at an early age (Myers, Chan, & Mariano, 2016). 

Juvenile recidivism impacted by age is highly likely since the offender, in most cases during the first offense, gets off with a slight warning. On the other hand, a young offender is not mature enough to grasp the magnitude of their actions; therefore, after correction, they still would not have understood the fact that crime is an adverse action. Older offenders, on the other hand, have an advanced understanding and perception sense, and therefore can quickly be impacted by the correctional experience they are subjected to in juvenile correctional facilities. Having fully experienced the consequences of their actions, older offenders are better placed on developing a sense of changed mindset and perspective. 

Children with an early introduction to the criminal justice system lead them to a life of crime that is easy to repeat if they lack proper guidance from society. Studies have shown that a child is likely to re-offend if they encounter the justice system at an early age compared to those who enter it in the later years of adolescents (Myers, Chan, & Mariano, 2016). For example, delinquents ages 12 and under are more often placed in diversion programs to prevent recidivism than those who are first sentenced when they are older. Other studies have shown that children who are arrested at an early age are more likely to be incarcerated by the time they turn 18 (Myers, Chan, & Mariano, 2016). 

It is easy to understand recidivism by considering the age of first offense and the type of crime committed during this first arrest. Such children are likely to grow into adult criminal jurisdiction doing the same evil. The research has shown that youths who enter delinquency early are most likely laced to be incarcerated in adult prisons by the time they get to their 22 nd birthday (Myers, Chan, & Mariano, 2016). This research has shown the effect of age on recidivism by comparing age bands and the rate of recurrence in the country. It showed that young sex offenders post a higher risk of recidivism. Research on the effect of age on juvenile recidivism is an excellent area of interest for forensic practitioners. It can be used when designing a treatment plan to reduce the rate of recurrence among juvenile offenders. 

Peer Influence 

The social environment that a child grows up in plays a vital role in the behavior that he learns and influence into delinquency and criminal behavior. This made peer influence essential aspects of juvenile delinquency and recidivism. Studies showed that an association with peers of delinquent behavior makes a child engage in recidivism and affects recovery (Nisar et al., 2015). A child is at risk of learning negligent acts when they are in contact with deviant peers. Nisar et al., (2015) stated that children would learn that crime is acceptable from their interaction with peers in the social environment and will learn how to commit the offense based on the social environment. The nature of peer relationships, family environment, and social setting that a child associates defines juvenile deviance. 

Various research works have indicated the close connection between lack of family guidance and peer pressure in teenagers, and they are prone to committing criminal offenses. Generally, children who are not closely monitored and guided by their family members are left to fend for themselves in the streets, thereby getting themselves mixed up in street gangs. Peer pressure has an adverse effect on the child of the teenager. It introduces them to not only alcohol and drug consumption but also criminal life. These kids get involved in hood gangs, and if left unattended to, there is a high risk that their involvement in a group and illegal activities will only get extensive. 

Studies have shown a relationship between peer contagion and juvenile recidivism (Nisar et al., 2015). Peer contagion is defined as an influence that juveniles in a neighborhood setting have on other children that makes them re-offend. In this regard, studies have claimed that children in a troubled neighborhood have high tendencies of reoffending when they encounter other juveniles. This association has also been shown to determine the type of crime that a person commits or re-commits. Individuals are most likely to engage in drug crimes when they associate with other troubled youths participating in drug activity. 

Research has shown how the contextual forces for a person’s social network determine the crime specialization as well as patterns of crime. Teenagers are likely to re-offend when they live in the vicinity of high crime offenses. Those residing in high-risk drug areas are likely to engage in drug crimes while those staying in a neighborhood with high incidents of property crime tend to re-offend with property crime. This showed an association between the community and the type of recidivism in crime for juvenile offenders (Nisar et al., 2015). Juveniles released from probation or prison have difficulties avoiding associations with delinquent peers, which increases the recidivism rate. It becomes difficult when growing up in a neighborhood with an environment that abhors delinquency, making it difficult to intervene and correct behaviors. 

Research on peer influences focuses on an aspect of gang membership and how it determines recidivism among the youth. Research has shown that gangs influence deviant customs in juveniles by isolating them from pro-social arenas (Pyrooz, Sweeten & Piquero, 2013). Teenagers who are found in a delinquent gang mostly dissociate from other social groups and end up reoffending after reentry into the community. Adolescents in a gang tend to show higher levels of delinquency and recidivism. Gangs represent the effect of peer influence on youth delinquency. Gang membership has been developed as an adolescent-oriented phenomenon that influences criminal behavior and high chances of reoffending (Pyrooz, Sweeten & Piquero, 2013). Once a person reenters the community, there are high chances of reverting to the same gang and reoffending. 

Family Dynamics 

Children born in a troubled society are more likely to develop into delinquency due to their association with crime, and the fact that they lack societal guidance. Children growing up in a family setting where adults have poor moral behavior is a factor in juvenile delinquency and recidivism since they lack moral guidance from their elders. Children who lack a good personal relationship with their parents or guardians are at risk of learning delinquency because they may act out thinking it is a way of gaining the attention of their elders and peers (Meldrum, Encalada & Connolly, 2017). On the other hand, such children without a significant relationship with a parent are more susceptible to criminogenic influenced by the society they live in (Meldrum, Encalada & Connolly, 2017). A lack of family cohesion deprives children of social attachment and support that is needed to nurture a morally upright child, as well as the lack of moral guidance. Children are left to discover for themselves the right ethical decisions from the wrong ones. Family dynamics are more diverse when it comes to the black community. 

Black families have reported less family cohesion and guidance than the white race due to the fact that black families are more focused on stabilizing financially to the extent that the upholding of principles is placed on the backstage. In the same manner, children from the non-white communities, due to the fact that they face a lot of social prejudice, have developed into crime and violence. What this implies is that due to the fact that the black community is predominantly associated with the use of violence as a means of self-defense against racism, children growing up in these families learn no better means of communication apart from violence. More black families engage in theft and the trade of illegal drugs as the only means of trade they can afford. From a young age, children are influenced by these prevailing family situations in crimes that they grow up not knowing any better means of sustenance. 

According to Meldrum, Encalada & Connolly, (2017), the rate of crimes in black families, mainly through the running of cartels, is higher than in any other racial family setting. It can be argued that racial disparities introduces families of color into the illegal side of life in which children are expected to take over the cartels, hence are groomed, almost by default nature, from a young age. This would explain why statistics point out that children from troubled families are more prone to be rowdy and unorderly in the school setting. Troubled families in this case refers to a family’s history in crime and illegal activities, in which black families are more prominent. 

Troubled families include the spectrum in which the children are brought up in violent homes. According to psychologists, children who experience a lot of violence growing up are more likely to be violent when they grow up. This is because they nurture the notion that violence is the only way to assert one's presence in society. Children who are raised by parents and guardians who abuse alcohol and drugs are likely to consume drugs and alcohol when they grow up. In the same manner, children who are raised in violent homes, or with guardians who are into theft are likely to become violent and thieves as they grow. Therefore, it is essential that from a young age, children are brought up in stable environments where they are taught the value of personal principles and virtues. 

Crime is sometimes blamed on family dynamics, including poor parenting and abuse. For example, cases of child maltreatment such as neglect, and abuse can create an environment for delinquency and recidivism. Children develop aggressive and violent behavior based on how they were raised in their families. The family strain during childhood years is another factor in juvenile recidivism. Children who are not raised with structure and positive guidance could begin turning to the streets, in the process compromising the behavior of a child. 

In discussing family dynamics, an aspect of family support emerges as crucial in understanding juvenile delinquency and recidivism. Family support entails the emotional attachment that family members provide to the child in the form of encouragement, affection, and necessary resources. The family can influence the behavior of a child since children reside with their parents, which means support or lack of family support determines the direction that a child takes. Parents can take the initiative to help their children through proper parenting and teaching appropriate moral values. A discussion on the emotional theory also takes center stage when discussing family dynamism, since children who receive emotional support from their parents can form secure attachments that deter them from delinquency (Taylor, 2016). Studies have shown the relationship between emotional attachment and juvenile delinquency, whereby a strained emotional attachment breeds misconduct and criminal behavior. 

Family support in affirming the child is critical in encouraging the child to trust in themselves and to spread the love they are shown in the family to those around them. According to statistics, children who are taught a lot of love from home are more accommodative of other people in the surrounding, whether or not these individuals share the same school of thought with them. Simply put, children who are shown affection and are affirmed do not get easily irritated when other people disagree with them, but instead spread the same devotion and understanding they are taught at home. In the same aspect, children who do not receive love and support from their homes are generally bitter and upset and are emotionally detached from the environment. Being detached implies showing no affection or understanding, especially to those individuals who do not share the same school of thought. They, therefore, resort to violence as the only means to make a statement and are therefore more prone to juvenile offenses than the rest. 

Emotional attachment and support are a crucial component when trying to understand juvenile recidivism in the United States. According to the attachment theory, there is a bond that children establish with their parents, which helps in emotional development. This bond is necessary for maintaining a child to grow into a responsible adult. Researchers have observed how appropriate emotional support helps to deter crime and delinquency in the community (Taylor, 2016). In this regard, the emotional attachment and support can be developed when looking to reduce the rates of recidivism. It is essential to examine the implications that family dynamics have on juvenile delinquency and use the findings to produce the best intervention for juvenile delinquency. 

School Experiences and the School to Prison Pipeline 

Another important factor when discussing youth and delinquency is the school experiences and their effect on a child. Schools form an essential part of child socialization, providing an environment for learning social norms while interacting with other children to develop into responsible adults. Teachers also provide guidance to students, making school an essential part of juvenile delinquency based on the experiences that a child has at school. Studies have described the impacts of disciplining children by expelling them from school as it drives a person into crime (Mallett, 2016). Removing children from school deprives them of an outstanding learning environment while possibly disposing of them in an atmosphere of crime. Removing students from the school environment puts them into the unsupervised or problematic home environment that would affect their social development. 

Racial discrimination practiced in school also impacts the learner's likelihood to engage in juvenile delinquency. Black learners in the school setting mostly get picked on by their white colleagues. This not only creates an intense atmosphere in which the learners are not able to alongside each other, but it also breeds juvenile delinquency. Learners who are discriminated against in these circumstances would mostly reiterate by harming the students who bully them. Such actions include picking fights with each other in the school setting. The degree of such acts depends on the degree of bullying the black student’s experience. 

A suspension or expulsion that removes a child from the school environment can subject them to a social environment where they interact with other troubled youths. This means the child may end up spending time with other juvenile delinquents in the streets that can encourage engaging in criminal activities. As a result, theorists have been discussing the school-to-prison pipeline, which describes how schools have become a conduit to the juvenile justice systems (Mallett, 2016). This school to prison pipeline explains how school experiences can create a ground for juvenile delinquency by pushing children out of schools and into the criminal justice system. The process has been blamed for criminalizing children by putting them in early contact with the law enforcement officers through the zero-tolerance policies. This system was developed by the zero liberal policies in schools, mandating harsh punishments for all infractions. This policy means the school does not tolerate any violation of school rules regardless of its intensity. As a result, there has been an increase in suspensions and expulsions, with suspensions increasing by 51 percent while expulsions are jumping by 32 percent (Paretta, 2018). 

Studies have also shown that students are twice as likely to be arrested when they are suspended or expelled from schools. Such students are also expected to get into contact with the juvenile justice system before the age of 15, making it difficult to walk away from crime (Monahan, Steinberg & Piquero, 2015). Children who fail to complete high school to suspension or expulsion are likely to be incarcerated in less than two years after they are removed from school. Once a child encounters the police through disciplinary cases, chances are they will drop out of high school before graduation. 

According to journal articles, students are often pushed into the criminal justice system when they are put into contact with the police for disciplinary purposes. This includes having daily police presence to protect students and ensure safety, as there are many incidences where the police are involved in handling disciplinary issues (Paretta, 2018). This can play a role in juvenile delinquency as the criminal occurrences can negatively impact students. The presence of law enforcement agencies in schools increases the likelihood of arresting children under 15 years. Mallett (2016) showed that the school-to-prison pipeline is a severe issue in the country that causes significant harm to juveniles. 

This process of the school-to-prison system is often fueled by racial bias, often placing minority in prison systems while resulting in the burgeoning of the prisons. Black Americans are the majority in prisons compared to other races. Research from school-to-prison has shown that racial disparity in incarceration begins with this pipeline (Monahan, Steinberg & Piquero, 2015). The minority groups tend to face more significant suspension and expulsion rates and, therefore, high chances of getting into the criminal justice system. Studies have shown that the school-to-prison system has shown that minority groups are punished more frequently and harshly than other racial groups (OJJDP, 2015). The suspensions and expulsions for minority students are more than double than any other ethnic group. The disparity is especially more significant among non-serious offenses such as violation of dress code but punished harshly — most students who are arrested while in school rarely complete high school. 

While discussing the effect of school experiences, researchers have mentioned the influence of the labeling theory to understand why children end up in the criminal world. The labeling theory plays a crucial role in this school-to-pipeline system and juvenile recidivism since children are likely to identify and behave in ways that reflect how others label them. In this regard, labeling kids as "bad or troubled" by the school authority leads them to internalize the label. This is because most students who get in the criminal justice system while in school are mostly labeled as juvenile delinquents, which affects their education completion (Sharlein, 2018). There is also an aspect of the stigma associated with labeling children as criminals. This stigma can rub badly on the youth by creating experiences of depression, anger, and confusion of being mistreated. As a result, this experience can drive a person into delinquency. The encounters often affect the child from succeeding academically or even completing school. 

The school policies and practices of criminalization and exclusion associated with the school-to-prison pipeline are linked to the juvenile and criminal justice system. Punishing children for minor classroom misbehaviors plays a role in pushing students to the street and into the criminal justice system (Mallett, 2016). Researchers have proposed putting to an end these policies that prioritize punishing over correcting through harsh tactics such as zero tolerance. There should be an emphasis to end the school-to-prison pipeline and support more effective discipline for behavior modification. Children belong in school and should remain within this school environment. Keeping the at-risk kids in the class can be a better way of diverting them from engaging in criminal activities. 

Research on zero-tolerance policies in schools has shown it contributes to pushing students out of schools into the dangerous world of crime. The punitive measures tend to criminalize students and create an environment for juveniles. At the same time, results have shown that increased surveillance and attempts to control the at-risk deviant youth in society often foster the criminal behavior intended to prevent (Monahan, Steinberg & Piquero, 2015). 

Juvenile Arrest Statistics 

The National Center for Juvenile Justice has been involved in keeping records of juvenile arrests in the United States based on data published in the FBI's own crime. This literature review considered the rate of juvenile arrests in the State of Georgia and the United States. The statistics include the total juvenile arrests, the number of violent crime and property crimes as well as the number of detained juveniles from violent and property crimes. Findings from these statistics have indicated that there is a decline in the rate of juvenile arrests across the country in all demographic aspects (OJJDP, 2015). This is partly due to policies enacted to reduce minor crimes that have led to a reduction in the number of youth offenders across the country. These policies emphasized correction rather than punishment, leading to a reduction in the name of juvenile arrests. 

Research on juvenile arrests in Georgia and across the country shows a decline in the number of juvenile arrests in the last decade. The study has shown a decrease in the number of juvenile arrests by over 70 percent since 1997 (The National Reentry Resource Center, 2014). The research examined national trends in serious violence to determine why juvenile crime has been dropping dramatically in recent decades (Monahan, Steinberg & Piquero, 2015). The number of juvenile arrests includes various types of delinquency such as drug violations; property crimes; crimes against a person, and public order offenses. Teenage arrest rates for drug violations were at its lowest level in 2016, as well as arrests for property crimes such as burglary, arson, and theft that were at their lowest in 2016 since 1980. The patterns of offending by juveniles have also been changing since 1980 with an emphasis on treatment rather than punishment. In 2017, the number of juvenile arrests in Fulton County was 886, a drop from 892 in the previous year. 2015 had recorded 1,059 cases of juvenile arrests. 

Juvenile arrest rates for crimes of murder have reduced in the last five years in Georgia and other states within this country, as with other forms of violent crimes such as assault and homicide. The arrest rates for violent crimes have substantially declined for every younger group, with juveniles showing the most significant decline by falling more than 65 percent (The National Reentry Resource Center, 2014). There has been a reduction in the number of arrests for violent crimes such as aggravated assault and robbery, registering a more than 50 percent decline in Georgia. The Juvenile murder arrest fell by 44 percent between 2013 and 2018 when it reached its lowest level (The National Reentry Resource Center, 2014). 

Recent data has shown that male offenders are more than female offenders among the juveniles arrested in Georgia and around the United States (Thompson & Morris, 2013). Boys are three times more likely to engage in crime compared to girls, and they are also more likely to be adjudicated. There is a higher drop in male juvenile offenders compared to females because males commit most violent crimes. The number of juvenile arrests has reduced for all races in recent years, according to data from the OJJDP. Violent crime arrest rates for black youth remains more significant than that of white children. Juvenile arrest rates decreased for all genders and racial groups since 2007 compared to the previous decade. 

However, it is interesting to observe that while statistics show a declining level in male offenders, the rate for female offenders has been on a steady rise over the years (Roth, 2016). This can be attributed to the fact that the traditional paradigms of crime, such as upbringing, have been shifting in recent years. Traditionally, the difference between the rates of juvenile offenses committed by males and females has been influenced by how members of the different sexes are raised. Some of the characteristics that determine juvenile delinquency include less education, aggression, more mental health problems, and higher rates of abuse and poverty (Roth, 2016). Understanding these factors is essential to determining the statistics of male and female offenders. In the past, females committed fewer offenses than their male counterparts. 

Females who were exposed to less informal education, like the majority of males, were highly likely to commit offenses than the females who were exposed to informal learning. Informal education focuses more on training children on skills and principles, which are essential in deterring crime because it raises self-awareness on the part of the child, as well as the ability to choose between rights and wrong (Abajobir et al., 2017). However, with the advancement of formal education, children are less likely to benefit from informal learning, thus have decreased moral consciousness. This explains why females nowadays have almost the same crime rates as males. 

Mental health problems as a factor affect both males and females, in the same manner, thereby exposing them to the same levels of committing juvenile offenses. Mental instability is becoming more rampant in contemporary society where juveniles of both sexes are affected by various risk factors, such as the need to conform (Baysan Arabaci & Taş, 2017). This further leads to the risk of exposing them to drugs and alcohol abuse, which not only impairs their judgment but has the long term effect of impacting their mental health. Mental health is essential when it comes to making sound life decisions. In correction facilities in Georgia, and across America today, teenagers are committed for offenses such as burglary and violence, which do not necessarily qualify for criminal activities, but rather the disturbance of social peace and disorder (Underwood & Washington, 2016). This implies the fact that mental health instability is on the rise for teenagers impacting their judgment to the point that they are not able to think rationally, but instead resort to violence since they are highly irritable. 

Higher rates of abuse and poverty in Georgia and the rest of America have been vital in leveling the difference in rates between male and female juvenile offenders, higher rates of poverty, for instance, are becoming more prevalent in households with low income across the state, thereby exposing both genders to the same risk factors; crime (Garbarino & Plantz, 2017). These children resort to crime as a means to raise finances to support both themselves and their families at large. It is interesting to observe how the campaigns for gender equality in the past decade have led to social awareness on the fact that the girl child equally has the right to fight for the sustenance of the family. This awareness has been interpreted in various spectrums, including crime, in which both genders believe they have equal rights to fight for the sustenance of their families, regardless of the activity involved therein. In downtown Georgia, for instance, more females are joining hood gangs and other criminal cohorts where they fight to make their voices heard. 

Higher rates of gender abuse and violence have also led to the "female awareness" in which females fight for equality on whatever level they can. In so doing, the state continues to experience an uproar of female violence as a means of retaliation for the gender violence they are subjected to. In this aspect, violence can be perceived as the only means of defense the females can mount against male chauvinism. 

Another factor that determines the rate of juvenile delinquency is the race. According to, blacks make for the most significant number of teenage delinquency rates in Georgia. In a race ratio released by in 2017, the proportion of blacks to Hispanic or Latino juvenile offenders, who make up for the second largest category, was 3.1:0.1 for arrests, 5.7:1.4 for detention, and 5.2:1.3 for imprisonment in Georgia (Underwood & Washington, 2016). These statistics point out that the black race makes up for the most significant percentage of juvenile delinquency in the state. To understand these statistics, it is crucial to determine the factors that contribute to the highest teenage crime rates in the black community. One of these factors is the lack of employment within the black community. Georgia, like most of the states in America, still experiences racial discrimination. Due to bias, the black community finds it difficult to land themselves stable and well-paying jobs in the states. The lack of employment leads to increased crime rates as individuals strive to sustain their livelihoods and pay their bills in any way they can. However, the high juvenile offense rates, contributed by racial disparity occurs in learning institutions. Schools in Georgia are highly characterized by racial discrimination in which students of color are discriminated against, and bullied by their peers. This creates a sense of insecurity on the part of the students with color who feel out of place. To get back at the students who bully them, most of the black students resort to violence as a means of self-defense. 

According to Underwood and Washington, 2016, racial disparity in schools across Georgia has been on the rise in recent years. This implies that not only do students have to worry about the bullying they are subjected to by their fellow students, but also by the systems of punishment the schools have put in place in which black students face more severe disciplinary measures than the rest of the student body. In 2016, for instance, a group of black students came together to fight against the racial disparity in public schools' suspension and expulsion. These students, pushing for reforms from both the state and federal education departments, hinted towards the fact that racial disparity makes it easy for them to not only get along with the other student body but creates a sense of insecurity regarding school officials. Understanding this aspect is instrumental in understanding the factors that push black students into considering violence as the only way to assert their capability in the school. Had the learning institutions been more considerate of the black kids when it comes to school policies, then most of these kids would have resorted to making their presence felt through their academic performance. 

It is argued, therefore, that juvenile delinquency is not only a means of mischief but also a means of getting back at the manipulative and oppressive systems of governance at whatever level. In other words, juvenile delinquency is a way in which children defend themselves, and stand for what is right; equality. Understanding delinquency from this perspective is essential in putting in place mechanisms not only to punish juvenile violence but also to put in place mechanisms for inclusivity and diversity at the school. Like the 2016 students pushing for educational reforms pointed out, it is difficult to learn in an environment where one feels unwelcomed unless they have a means of getting back at their oppressors by making them pay. This indicates that unless educational reforms are considered on the same level as juvenile delinquency reforms, then it does not matter what correctional changes are put in place, violence in learning institutions will still be witnessed. 

Reports have also reported that there are fewer juveniles getting prison sentences for crimes, and more people are adopted into rehabilitation and diversion centers. Regardless of gender, juvenile arrest rates for most offenders have declined in the last decade. The relative decline was more significant for males than females for all types of crimes. For example, the aggravated assault rate or simple assault rate for males had a more substantial decline compared to female crimes (Thompson & Morris, 2013). 

Statistics on juvenile arrests in Georgia and the entire country indicates a decline in the rates of arrests and sentencing (The National Reentry Resource Center, 2014). Despite the reduction in the number of juvenile arrests, recidivism rates among juvenile offenders remain high. The recidivism rate for juveniles in Georgia was 48 percent in 2017 despite a decline in the number of arrests. The rate of juvenile recidivism in the United States is estimated to be about two-thirds of all releases into the community (Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice, 2017). 

Risk Factors of Juvenile Recidivism 

Recidivism refers to the tendency of a convicted criminal to re-offend after they have been released from prison. Juvenile recidivism is the tendency of a juvenile to re-offend after they have been discharged or released from their crimes. Recurrence can be described as the act of an offender to commit another offense once they have been released from correctional facilities, or after they have been reprimanded. The crime committed the second time can be of the same nature as the former, or of a different nature. The degree of the latter offense also varies in that it can be of a lesser or a higher degree, although the second scenario is mostly the case. The rates of recidivism have remained consistently high in the country, leading to researchers in this field to determine the factors associated with reoffending. This literature review on the risk factors of juvenile recidivism has shown that several factors can influence a youth offender to engage in repeat crimes (Akesson et al. 2014). 

The rate of recidivism is an indication of the degree to which released inmates are rehabilitated and the quality of correctional programs offered to inmates. In many states around the country, over 80 percent of the youth who are incarcerated end up being rearrested due to reoffending with similar crimes within three years (Alper & Durose, 2018). In Fulton County, recidivism rates were at 21.3% in 2017, a 0.1% drop from 2016’s 21.4%. The outcomes for youths on community supervision is not much better on the behavior of youth offenders. Among the youth who were arrested during the one-year follow-up, studies have shown that half of those were re-arrested within the first three months. This shows the extent of recidivism in the country, especially among the juvenile delinquency. 

Several factors contribute to this high rate of recidivism in Georgia, as well as the entire country. These factors can be categorized into several categories, including mental, physical, environmental, as well as social factors (Hirschfield, 2018). These risk factors are also related to the individual, family, school, as well as the neighborhood and social environment. Understanding the risk factors of juvenile recidivism is crucial in developing the appropriate intervention model. Physical elements can comprise elements that can then drive a person into crime. They include factors such as unemployment, inadequate housing, or lack of social services. There is also research linking delinquency with victimization, where a person who is victimized has diverse behavioral consequences that expose them to misconduct (Sickmund & Puzzanchera, 2014). 

When it comes to understanding unemployment as a risk factor associated with juvenile recidivism, it is critical to point out that an individual likely commits a crime due to unemployment, i.e., as a means to get financial aid for themselves and their family. After such a person has been charged with the offense and served their punishment, there is a high likelihood that they will still commit a crime since the factor that pushed them to commit suicide in the first place (unemployment) remains unchanged (Wolff, Intravia, Baglivio & Piquero, 2018). Understanding recidivism from this aspect is essential in putting in place mechanisms that will ensure that the offender is exposed to economic opportunities once they are released back into society. One of the interventions that can be adopted is the placement of the offender in rehabilitation centers that offer vocational training. This ensures that the offender is equipped with the technical know-how for a given activity that they could engage in once they have been released. Vocational training ensures that the offender is prepared for a business that will act as a source of income, thereby solving their unemployment issue. 

The social support relations are a risk factor to juvenile recidivism that comprises of home conditions. According to research, social support is an important aspect when looking to reduce reoffending, as the social bonds existing in society decreases the likelihood of recidivism by providing an outlet to discuss personal issues and get accepted (Akesson et al. 2014). Family relationships also play a role in determining whether a person will engage in the same behavior again. A lack of social support between a child and his parents can increase the risk of juvenile delinquency or recidivism. 

Social support implies that it is critical for an offender to be incorporated back into society once they have been cleared of their charges and undergone rehabilitation. This ensures that they are guided on the way they should go to get their footing into society and establish peaceful coexisting (Leverso, Bielby & Hoetler, 2015). The lack of social support is mostly manifested in the discrimination ex-convicts face when they reenter society. Due to the mentality that they are a threat to social peace, most community members do not want to associate with ex-convicts. One may find themselves isolated and unable to socialize with the people they once called friends and family. 

To solve the issue of the lack of social support, it is essential that the community members are guided on their role in helping the ex-convicts get back to the way of life in the community and contribute to the welfare by sharing what they have learned in the correctional facility. The lack of social support is critical in promoting recidivism in that it advocates for discrimination and the desire for the ex-convict to get back at the people discriminating against them. This explains why such a convict would be highly likely to commit an offense that is of a greater magnitude than their first offense. 

Youths living in disadvantaged neighborhoods are also likely to recidivate, mainly the black community. Studies on the risk factors have indicated how poverty can be linked to juvenile delinquency, where children staying in poor backgrounds are pushed into a life of crime. Most juveniles who witness crime within their neighborhood are at risk of committing a crime in the first arrest of reoffending once they reenter the community (Alper & Durose, 2018). Children living in impoverished neighborhoods or those in deprived areas are highly likely to engage in violence or crime. 

Poverty as a factor for juvenile recidivism possesses a social risk for a juvenile offenders who may express their interest at looking for resources to answer to their various needs, regardless of the means used (Vidal, 2017). It is critical to understand this aspect to ensure that the risk of recidivism is addressed from its root cause. In solving poverty, just like in solving employment, it is critical that the offender is introduced to vocational training in which they are taught how to be economically productive without necessarily having to rely on a third party for employment. This is particularly critical because with the rising number of university graduates in various fields, the chances of jobs in the state, as well as the rest of the country, are becoming slimmer by the day. To address this, it is essential that people, especially offenders, are taught on how to be self-reliant economically by being creative and innovative in the sense that they can operate their own economic endeavors. 

The criminal history of a person is another risk factor when considering recidivism in the United States. This entails the history of arrests, prosecution, or the history of antisocial behavior in a child. For example, the history of anti-social behavior in a child, including prior felony arrests, detention, or residential placements, increases the likelihood of reoffending. Personal characteristics, such as the personality of a person, play a role in juvenile recidivism. Research has shown that the temperament of a person, such as aggression and impulsivity, plays a role in recurrence. Youths exhibiting an indication of problematic personality with low levels of self-control are likely to recidivate (Alper & Durose, 2018). 

Criminal history is influenced by a number of factors, such as common anti-social factors, as well as the offender's mental health condition. It is critical, therefore, that the correctional facility an offender is taken to offers them holistic correctional mechanisms, including therapy (Palmer, 2018). Unless an offender is guided on the way they should go, both morally and mentally, there is a high chance that they will commit the same offense once they have been released back into society. This is because they shall not have been offered the intervention to enable them to decide between what is right and wrong morally. Self-control is another critical area of personal history that is better addressed by therapeutic interventions. Individuals who are prone to anger are highly likely to disrupt the social peace once they are released into society since they are unable to think calmly and rationally before reacting to a situation. In this case, their recidivism level is high, unless they are guided on anger management techniques. 

Studies have shown an association between peer influence and juvenile delinquency, especially dealing with gangs. Research from the journal articles indicated how gang affiliations could increasingly drive recidivism among youth after release (Pyrooz, Sweeten & Piquero, 2013). The gangs influence a person in criminal behavior and delinquency and make it difficult for a person to quit crime. There is an aspect of substance abuse associated with peer pressure, which is another risk factor to recidivism among youth offenders. 

In this aspect, it is critical that the delinquent is taught on personal principles and guided on self-awareness, in which case they are able to stand up for themselves and not sink into peer influence. Peer influence mostly results from the lack of personal esteem in which an individual feels the need to conform with a given group of people so that they are able to discover their value and worth (Barrus, 2019). In other words, juvenile delinquent correctional facilities should be an avenue for teenagers to be asserted on their personal strengths and the need to act on their own accord rather than be misguided by groups of individuals whose perception in life is not aligned with the individual's. This will equally go a long way in rehabilitating the delinquent from substance abuse, which otherwise impairs their judgment, and makes it difficult for them to make sound decisions on their own regarding the direction they would like to take as individuals. 

Another factor for juvenile delinquency related to race is racial disparity the delinquent is subjected to. Most high school violence occurs as a means of self-defense in which the students of color try to get back at their fellow students who discriminate against them for their racial origin. If such environments are not corrected from the point in which the students of color are taught to embrace each other, regardless of their skin color, then the juvenile correction will do very little to correct the situation (Calleja, Dadah, Fisher & Fernandez, 2016). This is because once released back into society, the students who have been committed will go back to the same predisposing environmental factors of racial discrimination in which they will continue to be teased by their peers. These students, in most cases, will still react the same they did before; with violence. This creates a vicious cycle of discrimination and violence. It is crucial, therefore, that those long-lasting solutions are implemented on both ends in which the offender is taught on other avenues to asserter their self-worth apart from violence. In the same aspect, it is critical that students of color are taught the importance of inclusivity and embracing diversity, thus promoting peaceful coexistence in the school environment. 

Although various factors contribute to juvenile recidivism, the most influential factors are family attachment and their support capacities. Since most children spend their childhood residing with the family, the research emphasizes the need to develop a secure emotional attachment between parents and children as a way of reducing delinquency (Taylor, 2016). These risk factors influence delinquency among youth offenders and can be used in designing treatment programs. The focus is to address these risk factors with the aim of reducing the likelihood of future criminal behavior among the youth. 

Juvenile Diversion Programs 

To reduce recidivism in the juvenile justice system, diversion programs have become more prevalent around the country. Diversion programs were developed with the purpose of lowering early contact between the youth and the criminal justice system. The main intention of juvenile diversion programs is to handle the immature acts in an informal order instead of bringing them to courts since this can stigmatize the youth. Diversion programs focus on first offenders who have little contact with prisons and need supervision and guidance to help them reform evil ways. Diversion programs also focus on individuals who do not have any criminal record (May, Barranco & Stokes, (2015). 

Juvenile diversion is an intervention strategy in the juvenile justice system that entails redirecting youth offenders away from formal processing into rehabilitation, while still making them accountable for their evil deeds. In most cases, these diversion programs are made with the purpose of helping low-risk youth offenders, such as first-time offenders who can be mentored without having to imprison them. The advantage of diversion programs is their little cost in comparison to the cost of imprisonment or formal court proceedings. Cost is a crucial aspect to maintain control of with the ever-expanding criminal justice system. The main goal of diversion programs is to reduce the rates of recidivism among juvenile offenders (Kretschmar, Flannery & Singer, 2016). 

Juvenile diversion programs are grounded on the labeling theory, which speaks on the effect of labeling a person as good or evil. Diversion is based on reducing the aspect of criminalizing children by putting them in contact with the criminal justice system early. Diversion programs seek to minimize the effects of those associations and labeling by reducing contact. Research has shown that recidivism occurs when youths are further processed into the juvenile justice system, as they are put in touch with other juveniles who may influence their behaviors to worsen (Kretschmar, Flannery & Singer, 2016). The effect is mostly felt among first offenders, emphasizing the need for diversion programs. 

Several diversion programs are implemented in Georgia that entails providing appropriate sanctions to juvenile offenders that are different from adult offenders. There is a juvenile arbitration program, as well as an educational forum that seeks to help youths stay away from crime (Sharlein, 2018). Diversion programs look towards assisting the child to become productive citizens, especially towards individuals who have a higher risk of recidivism. They consist of prevention and intervention programs. Some of the programs offered in Fulton County, Georgia include the Community Restorative Boards; Family Dependency Treatment Court; Juvenile Drug Court; The Mediation Program; Learning Club; as well as Citizen Review Panel (Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice, 2017). 

Most diversion programs are done before charging the youth or before initiating them in any formal court procedures. Pre-charge diversion occurs with lower-risk youth, whereby the court diverts children from other offenders before they are prosecuted in the court of law. A post-charge diversion program occurs after a youth offender has been charged or prosecuted. The offenders must agree to be part of the diversion program before finalizing the plans, which means there is no further judicial processing (Kretschmar, Flannery & Singer, 2016). 

Effectiveness of diversion programs 

Many states and localities have explored diversion programs as a way of keeping youth out of the juvenile justice system. Research on the efficiency of diversion programs has shown that the programs have been successful in curbing re-offending tendencies among juveniles (Schlesinger, 2018). Individuals who go through this program and complete all requirements are less likely to re-offend or continue with criminal activity as adults. Diversion programs come in many forms, though the basic principle is to allow youth offenders the opportunity to change. 

Montgomery County in Texas has a diversion program effective in reducing recidivism among juveniles. The school-based diversion model is designed to stem the flow of troubled teens by diverting them towards the needed behavioral health services. The program facilitates education that is aimed at preventing future offenses by the offender. The programs connect youth offenders with the required services, which reduces needless arrests and referrals to the juvenile system. They turn schools to treatment, rather than punishment for children with mental health needs. 

The probation-intake diversion model program adopted by the state of Texas, known as the Front-End Diversion Initiative (FEDI), is a pre-adjudication diversion program in Texas that focuses on diverting youths with mental health needs (Schlesinger, 2018). This program aims to divert the young offenders from adjudication by putting them in with specialized care to receive training and mentorship. Research has shown that states with this diversion program model have been successful in reducing the number of youth arrests and re-offending. Youths who participated in FEDI were significantly less likely to be mediated than those participating in traditional supervision. 

In Ohio, diversion programs are not mandatory but are recommended by the courts to help curb the child's delinquent behavior. The court requires parental/guardian involvement in the program and have consequences for the child if the program is not completed. According to OJDA.gov, program sanctions may include but are not limited to, the following: community service hours, restitution, letters of apology, written assignments, curfews, and restriction of privileges. In addition to sanctions, services such as drug or alcohol assessment, testing and treatment, academic testing and tutoring, mental health assessment, and therapy and counseling may be a part of the agreement. 

The state of Florida's Juvenile Justice Mission statement is “…It is our mission to increase public safety by reducing juvenile delinquency through effective prevention, intervention, and treatment services that strengthen families and turn around the lives of troubled youth." Florida and other states have diversion programs that juveniles may participate in before a delinquent act takes place (FDJJ, 2019). 

There are also community restorative boards that have been implemented as a diversion program in Georgia. This program emphasizes the need to divert first-time offenders who are arrested for minor crimes by removing them from the court system. This diversion program involves citizenry conducting consultations between the child and their family members to discuss the offense and its negative consequences (Kretschmar, Flannery & Singer, 2016). In this program, probation officers work with the youth offenders to ensure they comply with the sanctions such as community service, counseling, or restitution issued by the Community Restorative Boards. Research has shown that children who complete these sanctions, rarely re-offend, and they are accepted into the community, which seals the youth's record. 

There is a diversion program known as the learning club in Fulton County, Georgia, targeting children between 11 and 17 years convicted of misdemeanor crimes. This is an educational program that seeks to provide an alternative means of punishing crime rather than imprisonment (Mears et al., 2016). The court mandates students to attend sessions that comprise of assessment and mentorship as well as discussing career opportunities. Research has shown that the learning club acts as a protective factor to reduce the risk factors of juvenile delinquency and recidivism. It ensures that children go through education to minimize the chances of becoming repeat offenders, while also going through service learning and cultural engagement. Children go through encouragement, mentorship, and guidance that helps reduce chronic delinquency through early intervention. 

The citizen review panel, another diversion program that has been implemented in Georgia to reduce the rate of recidivism; works by using individuals who volunteer to review plans for children placed in the juvenile court, including their status and welfare (Mears et al., 2016). The volunteers make up the staff that holds monthly meetings to review cases and ensure all plans are appropriate to the needs of the family. The focus is to ensure the programs make reasonable efforts that can reunify the family or provide permanency for the child. 

The Juvenile drug court diversion program in Georgia targets youth offenders who are involved in the use of alcohol and other drugs. It targets youth offenders between 14 and 17 years who are on probation or supervision due to drug-related offenses. The juvenile drug court refers to an intervention program that is highly structured to provide therapeutic intervention to rehabilitate the youth and protect the community. The focus is to reduce recidivism in youth offenders as well as drug addiction as a risk factor through treatment. This includes offering incentives for participants who comply with the program while giving graduated sanctions to those engaging in negative behaviors. The program also focuses on empowering participants to make better choices. Participants who complete the program will have their juvenile court records sealed. Research has shown that this program has been effective in reducing the number of youths in detention facilities by offering educational support, mentoring, and individual or group counseling. 

A diversion program, known as the mediation program, has been effectively used in several states to reduce juvenile delinquency and recidivism. Mediation is used to divert cases from the court by fostering an environment where a child is responsible and accounts for all his actions. The program also looks to address the needs of a youth offender by modeling conflict resolution techniques (Kretschmar, Flannery & Singer, 2016). The effectiveness of mediation is based on the belief that children can work out a solution to their problems by meeting in private settings with a neutral person. Once they reach an agreement, it will be signed by a juvenile court judge, making it an order of the court. 

Some benefits of diversion programs include leading to decreased rates of recidivism in the state while leading to less crowded detention facilities. Other benefits include increased family participation with more appropriate treatments at the community level. Another purpose of the diversion programs is to effect rehabilitation without creating the stigma of guilt (Kretschmar, Flannery & Singer, 2016). They have been useful in avoiding the labeling effects, which involves youths obtaining a social label as delinquent that contributes to further recidivism. 

Summary and Transition 

Based on the research of several literary works regarding recidivism rates in the United States, showing the social variables examined within each article on juvenile recidivism. The study has considered several risk factors leading to recurrence and the interventions that can help deal with repetition. The rate of juvenile arrests has reduced over the last two decades, though recidivism is still on the rise. There was a 54 percent drop in youth arrest within the previous two decades, though concern remains on the high rates of recidivism among juvenile offenders. The recidivism rate for juveniles in Georgia was 48 percent in 2017 (Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice, 2017). 

This research has discussed several risk factors leading to juvenile recidivism. Studies have shown that most youth offenders who are released from prison, rarely find jobs or enroll back in school. This makes recurrence significantly more likely to happen. The transition phase of community reentry for juveniles takes time after release, which is a critical time for youths who need emotional and social support to function as right-minded citizens (Agenyi, 2017). Studies have shown that the rates of recidivism are high immediately after release, but it tends to reduce one person is accepted in the community. 

The main goal of the juvenile justice system in the United States is to reduce the rate of recidivism. This is possible once there is a proper understanding of risk factors, which help in coming up with effective interventions. Based on this research, prevention strategies towards reducing recidivism should focus on the internal and external factors influencing a person's behavior. Juvenile correction agencies have the responsibility of developing risk-reducing interventions with high-risk young offenders (Agenyi, 2017). Juvenile offenders need a more stable, directed, and protected the process from reducing the rate of recidivism successfully. The idea of wrap-around has been successful in reducing the recurrence of adults and can be applied to the youth. The social interaction theory can be used where social norms are woven to help prevent recidivism behaviors. 

In chapter 3, the research design and methodology of the study will be discussed. Included in this chapter will be the role of the researcher, data collection, and analysis procedures. 

References 

Abajobir, A. A., Kisely, S., Williams, G., Strathearn, L., Clavarino, A., & Najman, J. M. (2017). Gender differences in delinquency at 21 years following childhood maltreatment: A birth cohort study. Personality and Individual Differences, 106, 95-103. 

Agenyi, J. (2017). Recidivism in the United States – an overview . Retrieved from https://atlascorps.org/recidivism-united-states-overview/ 

Akers, R. L., & Jensen, G. F. (2017). The empirical status of social learning theory of crime and deviance: The past, present, and future. Taking stock (pp. 37-76). Routledge. 

Akesson, Bree et al. (2014). Parental Involvement with the Criminal Justice System and the Effects on Their Children: A Collaborative Model for Researching Vulnerable Families. Social Work in Public Health , 27(1-2), 148–164., 

Alper, M., & Durose, M. R. (2018). 2018 Update on Prisoner Recidivism: A 9-Year Follow-up Period (2005-2014). Special Report, NCJ 250975 , 1–24. Retrieved from https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/18upr9yfup0514.pdf 

Calley, N. G. (2014). Juvenile Offender Recidivism: An Examination of Risk Factors. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 21 (3), 257–272. 

Altschuler, D. M., Hussemann, J., Zweig, J., Bañuelos, I., Ross, C., & Liberman, A. 

(2016). the sustainability of juvenile programs beyond the second Chance Act funding. Urban Institute. Retrieved from 

https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/77696/2000611-The 

Sustainability-of-Juvenile-Programs-beyond-Second-Chance-Act-Funding-The 

Case-of-Two-Grantees.pdf 

Barrus, K. (2019). Michaela Soyer: A Dream Denied: Incarceration, Recidivism, and Young Minority Men in America. 

Baysan Arabaci, L., & Taş, G. (2017). Dragging Factors in Juvenile Delinquency, Mental Health Problems, and Nursing Care. Journal of Psychiatric Nursing/Psikiyatri Hemsireleri Dernegi, 8 (2). 

Calleja, N. G., Dadah, A. M., Fisher, J., & Fernandez, M. (2016). Reducing juvenile recidivism through specialized reentry services: A second chance act project . Journal of Juvenile Justice, 5 (2), 1. 

Cole, Nicki Lisa, Ph.D. (2019, August 21). Understanding the School-to-Prison Pipeline . Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/school-to-prison-pipeline-4136170 

Crossman, Ashley. (2019, September 9). What Is Social Learning Theory? Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/social-learning-theory-definition-3026629 

Florida Department of Juvenile Justice. (2019). Retrieved from 

http://www.djj.state.fl.us/services/prevention 

Garbarino, J., & Plantz, M. C. (2017 ). Child abuse and juvenile delinquency: What are the links? In Troubled youth, troubled families (pp. 27-40). Routledge. 

Georgia Department of Juvenile Justice. (2017). Quick Facts . Retrieved from: www.djj.state.ga.us. 

Henderson, C., Boustani, M., & Magyar, M. (2019). Applications and broad impact of family psychology. American Psychological Association, 2 , 267-280. http://dx.doi.org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1037/0000100-017 

Hirschfield, P. (2018). The Role of Schools in Sustaining Juvenile Justice System Inequality. Future of Children, 28 (1), 11-35. Retrieved from: edu.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/article/720680 

Kretschmar, J., Flannery, F., & Singer, M. (2016). Diverting Juvenile Justice-Involved Youth 

With Behavioral Health Issues from Detention. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 27 (3), 

302-325. 

Leverso, J., Bielby, W., & Hoelter, L. F. (2015). Back on the streets: Maturation and risk factors for recidivism among serious juvenile offenders. Journal of Adolescence, 41 , 67-75. 

Mallett, C. A. (2016). The school-to-prison pipeline: A critical review of the punitive paradigm shift. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 33 (1), 15-24. 

May, D., Barranco, R., & Stokes, E. (2015). Do School Resource Officers Really Refer Juveniles to the Juvenile Justice System for Less Serious Offenses? Criminal Justice Policy Review, 29 (1), 89-105. Doi: 10.1177/0887403415610167 

Mears, D. P., Kuch, J. J., Lindsey, A. M., Siennick, S. E., Pesta, G. B., Greenwald, M. A., & Blomberg, T. G. (2016). Juvenile court and contemporary diversion: Helpful, harmful, or both? Criminology & Public Policy, 15 (3), 953-981. 

Meldrum, R., Encalada, D., & Connolly, G. (2017). At the end of their rope: A research note on the influence of low parental self-control and juvenile delinquency on parental exasperation . 

Models for Change Mental Health/Juvenile Justice Action Network: Working together to improve services and policies for youth with mental health needs involved with the juvenile justice system. Retrieved (January 10, 2015) from 

http://www.modelsforchange.net/about/Action-networks/Mental-health-Juvenile 

justice.html 

Monahan, K., Steinberg, L., & Piquero, A. R. (2015). Juvenile justice policy and practice: A developmental perspective. Crime and Justice, 44 (1), 577-619. 

Myers, W. C., Chan, H. C., & Mariano, T. Y. (2016). Sexual homicide in the USA committed by juveniles and adults, 1976–2007: Age of arrest and incidence trends over 32 years. Criminal Behavior and Mental Health, 26 (1), 38-49. 

Nisar, M., Ullah, S., Ali, M., & Alam, S. (2015). Juvenile delinquency: The Influence of family, peer, and economic factors on juvenile delinquents. Applied Science Reports, 9 (1), 37-48. 

Ohio Department of Youth Services. (2019). Retrieved from 

https://www.dys.ohio.gov/ 

OJJDP. (2015). OJJDP Statistical Briefing Book. Online . Retrieved from http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/corrections/qa08201.asp?qaDate=2013 

Palmer, L. T. (2018). The Predictors of Juvenile Recidivism: Testimonies of Adult Students 18 Years and Older Exiting from Alternative Education. 

The Pew Charitable Trusts (July 2013). Georgia's 2013 juvenile justice reform. Retrieved 

From http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/legacy/uploadedfiles/pcs/content 

level_pages/reports/Georgia20201320Juvenile20Justice20Reform20Summary20Brie 

fJuly2013pdf.pdf. 

Paretta, L. T. (2018). The Impact of Public Policy Decisions on Juvenile Recidivism in the 

United States: A Retrospective Examination, Vol 13 Issue 1 January – June 2018, 

137–146. 

Pyrooz, D. C., Sweeten, G., & Piquero, A. R. (2013). Continuity and change in gang membership and gang embeddedness. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 50 (2), 239-271. 

Robst, J. (2017). Disposition of charges, out-of-home mental health treatment, and juvenile justice recidivism. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 61 (11), 1195-1209. http://dx.doi.org.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/10.1177/0306624X15615383 

Roth, J. J. (2016). Gender differences in acquisitive delinquency: A macro-level routine activity analysis. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 41 (4), 796-813. 

Schlesinger, T. (2018). Decriminalizing racialized youth through juvenile diversion. The Future of Children, 28 (1), 59-82. 

Sharlein, J. (2018). Beyond Recidivism: Investigating Comparative Educational and 

Employment Outcomes for Adolescents in the Juvenile and Criminal Justice 

Systems. Crime & Delinquency, 64 (1), 26-52. 

Sickmund, M., & Puzzanchera, C. (2014). Juvenile offenders and victims: 2014 national report . 

Taylor, C. J. (2016). The family's role in the reintegration of formerly incarcerated individuals: The direct effects of emotional support. The Prison Journal, 96 (3), 331-354. 

The National Reentry Resource Center. (2014). Measuring and Using Juvenile Recidivism Data to Inform Policy, Practice, and Resource Allocation, 1–16. Retrieved from https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Measuring-and-Using-Juvenile- Recidivism-Data-to-Inform-Policy-Practice-and-Resource-Allocation.pdf 

Thompson, K. C., & Morris, R. J. (2013). Predicting Recidivism Among Juvenile Delinquents: Comparison of Risk Factors for Male and Female Offenders. Journal of Juvenile Justice, 3 (1). 

Underwood, L., & Washington, A. (2016). Mental illness and juvenile offenders . International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 13 (2), 228. 

Vidal, S. (2017). Juvenile parole. The Encyclopedia of Juvenile Delinquency and Justice, 1-4. 

Vinney, C. (2019, June 6). Sutherland's Differential Association Theory Explained . Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/differential-association-theory-4689191 

Wolff, K. T., Intravia, J., Baglivio, M. T., & Piquero, A. R. (2018). The protective impact of immigrant concentration on juvenile recidivism: A multilevel examination of potential mechanisms. Crime & Delinquency, 64 (10), 1271-1305.