Effects of Juvenile Institutionalization Essay ⋆ Essays on Controversial Topics ⋆ EssayEmpire

The first institution created solely for “wayward,” poor, and orphaned children was the House of Refuge in New York City in the late 1800s; most states soon followed New York’s lead with their own institutions. The creation of these types of institutions marked the beginning of a shift in the conceptualization of the definition of childhood; before this, children older than age 5 were viewed as small adults, capable of the same moral capacity as adults. Gradually, the idea that children are inherently different from adults and that the state had the responsibility to protect them took hold. The culmination of this evolution occurred in 1899, when the Juvenile Court Act created the first juvenile court.

In response to court cases that pointed to the need for constitutional protection of juveniles against their treatment as adults and confinement as status offenders, the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Protection Act of 1974 moved to deinstitutionalize many juvenile offenders. Of main concern were the negative cumulative effects of labeling on juveniles and their confinement as status offenders. (A status offense is behavior that is unlawful for minors, such as truancy or drinking alcohol.) This law identified four protections that states must provide to be eligible for federal funding: the deinstitutionalization of status offenders, “sight and sound” separation of juvenile and adult offenders, removal from adult jails and lockups, and the examination of the disproportionate confinement of minority offenders.

Types of Juvenile Institutions

Out-of-home placement options for juvenile offenders typically include a variety of public and private residential facilities, such as group homes, wilderness programs, boot camps, and training schools, operating under differing therapeutic approaches but sharing the common goal of rehabilitation. Generally, when authorities determine that institutionalization is necessary, juveniles are sent to training schools. These facilities, either secure or semi-secure, often appear physically similar to a public school, although some look more like an adult facility. Perimeter security is likely, although these facilities typically have a higher offender-to-staff ratio than adult facilities. Approximately 400 long-term secure facilities, mostly state run, exist for juveniles in the United States. Training schools typically house about 50 juveniles, although the larger ones can hold between 100 and 500 residents. Juveniles in these facilities typically have access to a number of treatment options, such as GED (general equivalency diploma) classes, a variety of counseling and vocational training programs, and peer group activities.

Negative Outcomes of Institutionalization

Many believe that juvenile institutionalization has a negative effect on juveniles and may in fact increase recidivism (future involvement in criminal behavior). While incarcerated, juvenile offenders interact with other delinquents, allowing them the opportunity to acquire and hone criminal skills, thereby fostering delinquent values and beliefs. Criminologists find that this bringing together of delinquent youth tends to increase delinquent acts, a process called “peer deviancy training.”

Incarcerated juveniles may recidivate at a higher rate than those treated in a nonsecure, community-based setting. Additionally, incarceration may increase the probability of a multitude of problems, such as physical injury while confined, mental health issues, and lower levels of educational achievement than for those treated within the community. Many juvenile offenders have learning disabilities and find it difficult to attain educational success once they are released. Furthermore, after release many find it difficult to obtain gainful employment as well, making them more susceptible to criminal activity to achieve economic goals.

According to labeling theory (also referred to as “social reaction theory”), a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy concept, juveniles who come into contact with the juvenile justice system experience increased alienation and reinforced criminal identity. Official efforts to control crime often have the opposite effect of increasing crime. Juveniles who are arrested, adjudicated, and punished are labeled as delinquents. Others then view and treat these people as criminals, and this increases the likelihood of subsequent crime for several reasons. Labeled individuals may have trouble attaining educational goals and obtaining legitimate employment, both of which increase their level of strain and reduce their stake in conformity. Labeled individuals may find that conventional people are reluctant to associate with them, and they may associate with other criminals as a result. This reduces their bond with conventional others and fosters the social learning of crime. They begin to see themselves in a negative or criminal context, which is reinforced by a society that views them as such. During this formative and developmental stage of self-identification among adolescents, the reaction of those around them helps shape their sense of self. As a result of the adolescent’s negative self-concept, he or she may find it more difficult to resist involvement in criminal activity and may be more likely to associate with like-minded negative peers, in turn increasing the likelihood of further involvement in the criminal justice system.

In addition, juveniles often ”age out” of delinquent behavior, meaning that as they age, graduate, meet a significant other, and become gainfully employed, they desist from criminal behavior and become productive members of society. Institutionalization disconnects juveniles from many prosocial factors, including family, school, and community, and may disrupt the aging-out process. Although many delinquents return to school after institutionalization, they are more likely to drop out and in turn experience higher rates of unemployment, lower pay, and poorer health than those who graduate from high school.

Bibliography:

Binder, Arnold, Gilbert Geis, and Bruce Dickson. 2001. Juvenile Delinquency: Historical, Cultural, and Legal Perspectives. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
Flowers, Ronald B. 1990. The Adolescent Criminal: An Examination of Today’s Juvenile Offender. Jefferson, NC: McFarland.
Lanctot, Nadine, Stephone Cernkovich, and Peggy C. Giordano. 2007. “Delinquent Behavior, Official Delinquency, and Gender: Consequences for Adulthood Functioning and Well-Being.” Criminology 45:131-57.

This example Effects of Juvenile Institutionalization Essay is published for educational and informational purposes only. If you need a custom essay or research paper on this topic please use our writing services. EssayEmpire.com offers reliable custom essay writing services that can help you to receive high grades and impress your professors with the quality of each essay or research paper you hand in.