CRIMINOLOGY

Criminology: Status Offenses on Juveniles

Status offenses are those crimes that are committed by minors, people below 18 years of age. They are not considered a crime but are misconducts due to their age. If they had been adults, their same actions would have been considered illegal. These illegal actions could include drinking alcohol, smoking, unlawful possession of weapons or drugs, running away from home, or violating lawful policies. This paper aims at providing a stance on the discussion of status offenses. Juvenile courts in the United States have been adjudicated on such dependency cases, and many states have given their standpoints on how they should be adjudicated.

Analysis of Massachusetts Juvenile Court System

The analysis of the juvenile court system in Massachusetts depicts that several young persons of ages 12 to 18 are detained for having committed status offenses, largely alcohol drinking, and have been detained that have harmful effects on their personalities (Citizens for Juvenile Justice, n.a.). The data was retrieved from 2015 results, and it was inferred that these adverse effects later result in incarcerations in future crimes.

Massachusetts has been declared 46th worst among the rest of the states, where the racial and ethnic disparity is observed while arresting the youth offenders for incarceration. However, Massachusetts law declared in 2016 that children committing illegal acts would be provided free counsel regardless of their socioeconomic status or poverty level. It has also been deduced from the same data that children of color and certain ethnicities are detained at higher rates than the rest of juveniles.

Department of Youth Services (DYS) is responsible for taking the offenders as committed and lock up in incarceration facilities out of the home. The Massachusetts judge has the duty of adjudication for judging whether the child should be handed over to DYS until he or she reaches 18. After an arrest, when the case is given to the district attorney, the parents or guardians of the children are informed and consulted to conclude whether they should be imprisoned or released to their parents.

The children who end up being detained are less likely to complete their graduation as well. Their healthy social interactions are disturbed, which affects their behavior within incarceration. Therefore, the adjudication of only a small amount of offending juveniles, mainly 3% to 5%, is assigned to DYS.

Currently, Massachusetts police have taken precautionary measures to prevent such children from going deep into the juvenile court system. Alliances with therapeutic communities for children and Massachusetts police department have been made to make fewer children arrest with even lesser discrimination based on race and ethnicity. New Massachusetts justice law relevant to juveniles lowered the age gap to 70 to 12 years of children who became par with international standards. It meant that juvenile offenders of this age were to put to incarceration facilities, rather were consigned to social services.

Opinion on United States Juvenile Court Jurisdiction about Status Offenses

Keeping juvenile offenders under probation would have been a more suitable solution than keeping them locked in an incarceration facility since research has cited that it has negative outcomes. They might turn out to be more stubborn and commit crimes at a higher rate rather than self-regulating and improving one own self towards becoming a better human. Removing them from their homes and putting them in isolation in jail would worsen the matters since addressing the corrective actions would become harder (Arthur & Waugh, 2009).

Finding the causes for running away from homes, especially for girls, has been an acute issue since girls are prone to be exposed to sexual abuse at detention or probation centers. Dealing with troubled girls or...

…also be adjusted based on the periods, such as having the drivers license suspended for two months, given to the social service agencys care for four months, or guardian is assigned for his probation for six months, etc.

Moreover, recommendations for not opting for serious punishments for the juvenile offenders in status offense cases and focusing more on their behavioral change than making them adamant should be adjudicated by the courts. For instance, connecting the young people who are troubled and find difficulties in their daily lives with social services promptly should be contemplated.

Policymaking for such efforts should be done without considering race and gender so that within the US, Blacks and other diverse background youth should be cared for on equal terms with the Whites. Suppose Blacks are observed to be involved in crimes at a higher rate than Whites, as mentioned in the beginning in discussing Massachusetts juvenile court findings.

In that case, it becomes a serious issue to be emphasized by Massachusetts and overall US lawmakers. This discrimination should be eradicated from the early years of adolescence. Later adult tears crime could be avoided, and severe punishments from the jail and detention centers should be prevented. The US crime will further decline if early interventions are designed and implemented.

The state-level policies could be createdto promote an ecosystem where the Commonwealth for children would be in the hands of their parents, guardians, social community helpers, and the government. The discrimination parameters would be eliminated to promote a healthy living society, free of crime, collectively and inclusively of all races. The policies could include raising juveniles upper age gap to 18 to 20 years (Citizens for Juvenile Justice, n.a.). Other strategies can encompass attention on educational results, health effects, and long-term projections of the juveniles attitudes by the court instead of…