For effective operation and success of this system, punishment for the misconduct should be the same irrespective of the age of the offender (Whitehead and Steven, 2006). Owing to these inadequacies and problems associated with juvenile laws, many critics have proposed for its complete overhaul or amendment of some of its laws, failure of which the crime rate among the young perpetrators would continue to escalate in the society. According to Scott and Steinberg (2008) some of these mitigation measures are juveniles should have complete DUEPROCESS rights such as right to trial by jury in the same way adult criminals are tried, freedom from the rehabilitation ideology associated with the juvenile system, allowing the juvenile to be tried to court once the young perpetrators are convicted and letting the juveniles to be accountable for their amoral actions. Theories of Delinquency Causation According to Banduras social theory, people acquire knowledge via observing others’ attitudes, behavior and results of those behaviors.
Based on this theory, majority of human conduct is learned through observation and modeling. This infers that through observing how others conduct themselves, one comes up with the idea of how newly acquired behaviors are carried out and eventually this explicit information works as a blueprint for action.
On the other hand, social learning theory illustrates human conduct based on continual reciprocal interfacing between behavioral, ecological and cognitive influences (Siegel and Welsh, 2012). In accordance with these observations, the rates at which juvenile crime cases or delinquencies are skyrocketing every year in our societies are astonishingly high. As per the Banduras theory, it is a common presumption that children acquire their behavior from the surrounding environment via observation and modeling.
In this case, the behavioral, ecological and cognitive influences that affects or mold the young people behavior is in the hands of their families and friends. Basically, excellent parenting involves giving the child proper love, care and guidance and anything less than this, contributes significantly to high rate of juvenile delinquencies among the innocent kids. Another cause of high rate of juvenile delinquencies is hereditary factors. Just like hereditary diseases such as diabetes and alcoholism, parental delinquency as a disease that can be past to the child (Clark, 1990). Improper upbringing of the child implies that parents have the inability to take care of one another.
Bernard, T. J. (1992). The Cycle of Juvenile Justice. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.
Burke, M. K. (1995). “This Old Court: Abolitionists Once Again Line Up the Wrecking Ball on the Juvenile Court When All It Needs Is a Few Alterations.” University of Toledo Law Review 26.
Clark, J. D. (1990). “Juveniles and the Death Penalty: A Square Peg in a Round Hole.” Mississippi College Law Review 10.
Finley, L. L. (2007). Juvenile justice. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.
Feld, B. C. (1991). “The Transformation of the Juvenile Court.” Minnesota Law Review 75.
Knauerhase, E. C. (2000). “The Federal Circle Game: The Precarious Constitutional Status of Status Offenders.” Cooley Law Review 7.
Martin, D. R. (2009). “Conspiratorial Children? The Intersection of the Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act and Federal Conspiracy Law.” Boston University Law Review 74.
Mills, D. L. (1996). “United States v. Johnson: Acknowledging the Shift in the Juvenile Court System from Rehabilitation to Punishment.” DePaul Law Review 45.
Scott, E. S., & Steinberg, L. D. (2008). Rethinking juvenile justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Siegel, L. J., & Welsh, B. (2012). Juvenile delinquency: theory, practice, and law (11th ed.). Australia: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Rosenheim, M. K.( 2002). A Century of Juvenile Justice. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
Whitehead, J. T., & Steven, P. L. (2006). Juvenile Justice: An Introduction. Cincinnati.