Incarceration Type and Family Intervention as Determinants of Essay

Incarceration Type and Family Intervention as Determinants of Recidivism in Juvenile Delinquency - Essay ExampleThe risk of facing harsher punishment through possible captivity in heavy(a) prisons blossomed as a way to deter recent persons from engaging in violent crimes. Supporters of insubstantial incarceration in self-aggrandising prisons therefore rely on its supposed deterrent value.Despite the ontogenesis concern about teenaged force-out, many opponents of the current system have continually pointed out that the risks involve in imposing adult penalties to new-fashioned offenders far outweigh the presumed benefits. Convicted teens are placed in adult correctional centers in the hope that the harsher environment would better rehabilitate them. The opposite seems to be the case.Many opponents of adult incarceration, for example, believe that it does not deter juvenile violence at all. This theory has is supported by some(prenominal) studies. Allard (2002), for exampl e, found that adult correctional centers actually had a negative effect on juvenile delinquents. Compared to their counterparts who were hold in juvenile centers, transferred juvenile offenders released from adult correctional centers have been found to have a higher(prenominal) tendency for repeated outlaw behavior. (Allard 2002) In the same study, recidivism was shown to be noticeably more significant among juvenile offenders who had been incarcerated in adult prisons. Such findings are diametrically opposed to the theory that adult punishment would whiz to more effective rehabilitation for juvenile delinquents.This stand is further supported more recent take a shit which revealed that the mental states of juveniles being sent to adult prisons did not significantly differ from those being sent to juvenile centers. This finding debunks the notion that juveniles sent to adult prisons are different from the regular juvenile delinquent, a depraved youth whose behavior already warr ants harsher measures. Beyers (2006) study of 50 juvenile delinquents that he had fiddleed in the course of some(prenominal) years as a psychologist rejected the notion of harsh punishment as the catch-all solution for juvenile crime. His study, instead, forwarded the conclusion that while juveniles sent to adult prisons have almost negligible differences from those retained in juvenile centers, the juveniles which are produced at such prisons come out harder and more prone to recidivism.We may thus logically entertain the existence of a relationship between incarceration type and recidivism or repeated criminal behavior. The truth of this statement would have weighty implications both on the juvenile criminal system as well as the legal policies that are currently being implemented in addressing juvenile violence and crime. Aside from asking ourselves whether harsher punishments are truly effective in curbing juvenile crime, we also encounter questions about alternative mechanism s. Grisso (1996), for one, points out the manifest challenges being faced today in the field of juvenile justice. New ways to discourage juvenile delinquency must be adequately examined. More importantly, Grisso (1996) offers the dress that harsher prison conditions for juvenile offenders through incarceration in adult correctional facilities may actually be doing more harm than good. Social