Restraint in society is paramount among its members. Mistakes made by members of society are punished either as criminal activities or as minor errors. When a member of society commits criminal activity, he or she is subject to legal proceedings. The court will determine whether he is guilty or innocent. Unlike traditional society where offenders were treated equally when it came to their criminal activities, in the juvenile justice system, juveniles and adults are treated differently. Crime and delinquency sometimes reach a peak in prevalence and frequency acquired during the juvenile period. Juvenile offenders aged 18 and under face the juvenile system which, towards the end of the 19th century when the system was introduced, juveniles became subject to the juvenile system while adults were directed to the juvenile system. criminal justice. In the early ages, courts were used to try children as young as seven years old. It was until the beginning of the 19th century that the juvenile system was formed. The juvenile justice system is used to control and reduce crimes committed by adolescents and adolescents as adults. This article discusses the effectiveness of the juvenile justice system. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay. Adults are remarkably mature agents in making their own independent decisions and are subject to the consequences of their own actions, while minors are seen as forces of nature who still lack the capacity to make their own decisions, but they use their older family members and friends as decision makers, making them presumed to be controlled and restrained. The juvenile justice system is an issue up for debate in many countries because there is no time limit or proven rite of passage to determine when a juvenile can make their own decision. Normally, crime is noticeable among young people during their adolescence. The adolescent's unique condition creates tension in juvenile justice because children cannot cope with court decisions due to criminal offenses. Due to the lack of a specific time limit for a minor to be considered an adult, the juvenile justice system faces problems on how to punish the minor. Should the minor receive moral guidance or punishment as an adult who should face the consequences of his or her own actions? Interpretations that attempt to interpret the effectiveness of the juvenile system are not all taken into account because some interpretations explain how the juvenile system is effective in responding to offenses caused by youth by satisfying itself. The United States juvenile justice system is affected by key issues that affect its operation. First, the juvenile is effective in providing an acceptable moral and legal response to adolescent criminal activities. These offenses carry penalties that are also the same as in the adult system. However, these sanctions are less severe and very different in quality from punishments for adults. Two acceptable symbolic gestures should be adopted by the juvenile system as a means of communicating with the public, as Morris said, as there was a notable decrease in cases of murder and sexual assault between 1975 and 2005 , the number of adolescent males in the system facilitiescorrectional rates doubled between 1990 and 2005. Morris describes that although the juvenile justice system is effective in reducing criminal activity, it has failed to prevent adolescents from engaging in criminal activities such as abuse substances and improving self-esteem. The juvenile system is subject to gender bias in that males are treated as adults who should be brought to justice, while adolescent females are viewed as children who should be protected from assault. sexual. A fair juvenile court should consider all sexes equal before the law. According to Leve, Chamberlain and Kim, the number of teenage girls involved in life-threatening delinquency has increased in recent years. Effective measures should be instituted to ensure that the favored sex is equally aware of the consequences of engaging in criminal activities. In addition to gender bias in the juvenile justice system, education in rehabilitation centers is not the same as the education offered in public schools. . Leone and Wruble show that the type of learning in rehabilitation centers is different from the federal standards set forth in the Individuals with Educational Disabilities Act for people receiving rehabilitation services. The divergence in the quality of education has allowed parents and guardians to demand that their children receive the right education in the right conditions, like the rest of the world. Only a few offenders in the juvenile system receive at least six hours a day in school. Wasted time can be used to improve an offender's life. Correctional facilities should provide higher education than public schools to ensure that the affected person, after rehabilitation, is able to engage in the community without criminal activities. This disparity in the juvenile justice system in terms of educational equality shows that the system has a lot of work to do to be effective. Detention practices and racial discrimination also constitute a major ineffectiveness of the juvenile justice system. The system could be considered effective if it managed to prevent most young people from getting involved in activities considered criminal. Youth detention rates are naturally higher for minority groups than for the white majority. This clearly implies that the system is tainted by defined groups who are held to justice through arbitration. This has made the juvenile justice system a dumping ground for juvenile-related problems, enabled by detention and incarceration. Adolescents are also overcrowding detention centers, which is increasing exponentially due to the increase in violent methods used to resolve conflicts between them. One of the things that contributes to the ineffectiveness of the juvenile justice system in preventing adolescents is the lack of imposition of corrective measures leading adolescents to abrasive, criminal and externalizing behaviors. In general, the juvenile system is expected to have a transformative effect on offenders. Underwood and Lamis argue that mental status and suicide risk are diagnosed by more than 70 percent of incarcerated people, indicating that the juvenile system provides a dangerous life for offenders in corrections. This implies that offenders are subjected to negativity with emphasis on its magnitude. This negativity leads them to consider suicide as a way to escape society because they feel unfit to engage in society again. HeThis is a major factor that decreases the efficiency of miners. Due to growing inefficiency, the United States government and state administrations have found ways to improve the system to ensure positive transformation of younger generations. According to Seigle, minors The number of prisons in the system known at the end of 2011 had been reduced thanks to alternative detentions. The collaboration and commitment of judges and justice administrators contributed to the resolution of the juvenile system. Seigel posits that improving youth outcomes within the system can be undertaken by assessing adolescents' needs and risks. In addition, research guides the decision made by the judiciary and the allocation of resources. According to Seigel, the best way to reduce crime is to use young people to find solutions. This can be done through improved outcomes in youth spheres. In order to raise the standards of the juvenile justice system and make it more effective, the following means should be used: Firstly, first-time offenders and juvenile offenders should be offered immediate intervention. Instead of using conventional detention, diversion and probation would be used in correctional centers. Second: offenders who commit serious criminal activity for the first time should be intensively propagated and monitored in order to control the change in their behaviors. Third, community confinement is important, especially when offenders reoffend through the implementation of residential or non-residential programs in society. States should collaborate with key stakeholders in implementing these strategies. Authorities should also have adequate training to support the efforts necessary to maintain the system. An effective juvenile system must provide a morally appropriate approach and legal response to criminal behavior. Measures such as electronic tagging should be imposed to prevent problematic young men from committing crimes. This can be achieved by closely supervising and directly controlling them. There are other strategies that can be used to streamline juvenile justice, such as avoiding unnecessary detentions, reducing rearrests. interest rates, the fight against racial disparities and the appropriate use of public finances to improve the condition of minors. Additionally, it would be more beneficial if the exposed group was involved in understanding the behavior change. The system should help those leaving correctional services re-enter the community by providing support, which will promote favorable perceptions of the juvenile justice system. The system may also reduce interventions between the community and offenders, due to the difference between offenders in the institution and those in the community. According to Mears, Pickett and Mancini, a research group of university students was asked about their views on the juvenile system and the treatment of criminals. The interview results indicated that the juvenile system has failed to treat criminals appropriately, thus rendering the system ineffective. Statistics showed that 67% of investigators seek the system to strike a balance between rehabilitation and punishment of offenders. The audience also gave their approach, indicating that it was not strong. Leve, Chamberlain and Kim (253) also expressed their view that authorities should take into account the effectiveness of the system, 32.6 (2015): 517-527.