SOCI-321 Study Guide - Midterm Guide: White Privilege, General Strain Theory, Anomie
16 Mar 2017
School
Department
Course
Professor
Youth Crime & Society Midterm #2
Chapter 5
Chapter draws attention to the positive developments in the youth justice policy field as well as
some of the challenges still ahead. Focuses on the inclusion of the voice of young people in
decisions that affect them.
The Legal Regulation of Childhood and Adolescence
➢ Binary system state focuses on protection of children until cross threshold (Age of
majority) into adulthood. State focuses by restrictions on freedom and investment in their
development with the intent the children will grow up to be law abiding, contributing
citizens. Around the world assumes the age of majority is where people are fully
autonomous and responsible for their own actions.
o Problem: focuses only on immature children and competent adults (they are
evolving people eg) self regulation in emotionally charged events are less than
adults, future-oriented decision-making less than adults, sensitive to peer pressure,
immediate incentives and high risk behaviours)
➢ Changes to age of onset allow changing capacities of young people based on notion
social welfare and welfare of young person can both benefit from reclassifications.
➢ Rather than treating youth like an adult for purposes of criminal responsibility is more a
reflection of societal values “adult crime equal adult time”
➢ Several justice systems undermine principle of confidentiality in youth justice
proceedings by increasing opportunity to share info about defendant
➢ Punitive stance eg) zero tolerance, curfew, naming & shaming rituals
➢ Best interest of child doctrine (interests of child are paramount in decision-making
regarding experience in CJS, key in UN Declaration of Rights of Child (UNCRC))
appears to be in direct opposition with trend of adulteration (youth re-emerging with
adult system). Imposing adult penalties and including young people in adult prisons have
led to serious problems
Codification of Separate System of Youth Justice in Canada
o Beijing Rules recognized special needs of young person and the promotion of
diversion from court proceedings
o Custody should be a last resort and all proceedings should be anonymous to protect
from lifelong stigma and labelling (stigmatization of young person as deviant)
o UNCRC 1989 children have right to be protected from degrading and cruel
punishment and receive special treatment in the justice system. Further states that
children below a minimum age is presumed to lack the capacity to infringe penal law
o treated in way consistent with age and desirability of child’s reintegration (introduce
back into community as productive person) and taking up constructive role in society
o UNCRC most ratified of all human rights but also most violated of human rights
treaties
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
o Breaching provisions does not lead any formal sanction
o Canada has continually violated the spirit of UNCRC by insisting on rule about
housing adults and youth separate facilities
o YCJA explicitly stated must be separate from adults prior to this time Canada did
not adhere to the UNCRC even though Canada ratified it in 1991
Diverting Children from a life of crime
o “Child savers” divert young people from harshness of adult system
o JDA singular approach focusing on social welfare with strong emphasis on “best
interests” doctrine of child welfare and protection
o As more attention came to inadequacies there was a call for more procedural safeguards
o Care versus control argument
o YOA elimination of social welfare concerns, still number of provisions within legislation
that recommended that alternatives to the CJS are preferable for first time offenders.
Contrary goals of rehabilitation and protection of society, led to an increase use of the
youth court and even greater use of custodial sentences(under YCJA sentencing youth to
custody). The YOA increased use of custody to the point Canada had the highest rates in
western world
o YCJA reduced number in custody. Focus on alternative to the formal system reserving
small number of serious persistent offenders, Safe Streets and Communities Act clarified
the definition of serious violent offences provided the imposition of adult sentencing.
o Several amendments aimed at strengthening youth system with a singular view of crime
control and public safety, the essence of legislation still retains a focus on diversion of
majority of young people in conflict with the law.
o Early prevention through school, community, and families helps avoid stigma and
labelling may be the most suitable alternative for people who offend community and
holistic approach
o Small number people persistent offenders who require a wide range of multidisciplinary
assistance set within a clear path over a fairly substantial period
o YCJA based on research show incarcerating people can do more harm than good, and the
most successful interventions should involve less criminal justice processing for majority
of offenders who are low-risk and low-need
o Formal processing does not control crime; it increases it on all measures studied
o Police caution programs are most effective in reducing recidivism
o For these reasons YCJA increased emphasis on extrajudicial measure to respond
appropriately while keeping them out of the CJS.
o Custodial sentences are a measure of last resort for the highest-risk offenders
Challenges faced by Youth with Highly Complex Needs
❖ Additional training and adequate funding for assessment and early intervention in the
education system for youth with learning disabilities and other mental disabilities that
may increase likelihood conflict with the law
❖ 80% repeat offenders were living with disabilities including mental health disabilities
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
❖ Canada stats indicate 1 in 5 kids who need mental health services receives them –
majority of illness report began in childhood
❖ Lack of engagement with treatment services providers has always been problematic
❖ Children with multiple mental health disorders are more likely to offend
❖ In Texas, implemented Special Needs Diversionary Program (SNDP) for youth sentenced
to formal probation with minor offences and diagnosed with mental disorders most
common mental disorder was substance abuse disorder, disruptive disorder, anxiety
disorder, and affective disorder. The study indicated that more than half of youth with
mental disorders were re-arrested within 1 year
o Individuals enrolled in SNDP had lower probabilities of re-arrest
o Provides evidence that there is a need for additional services given to large
number of youth placed on waiting lists for services, but also the impact of
providing targeted mental health treatment for youth with mental challenges
❖ Theory of Therapeutic jurisprudence developed to attempt to respond to youth with
complex needs. Main goal is to bring together the law with a variety of therapeutic
techniques while still allowing other values, such as justice and due process
❖ Mental health diversion programs are designed to be treatment-oriented and are based on
assumption that for certain people, problem-solving responses are more appropriate than
punishment
❖ The intent of such special services is to improve coordination across justice and social
service agencies, improve efficiency, increase probability of court proceedings, improve
quality of justice.
❖ Provision of diversion for youth provides more effective and appropriate treatment but
also facilitates development of community-based mental health services. Reviews of
studies point to improvement working relationships cross-systems groups, expedited
court proceedings into appropriate services and great likelihood of encouraging family
participation
Guiding principles “Blueprint for change” a model for treatment:
• Youth should not enter system solely to access mental health services
• Whenever possible divert into evidence-based treatment in community setting
• Least restrictive setting as possible
• Information should not be used that might jeopardize legal interests
• Services provided must respond to gender, ethnicity, race, age, sexual orientation,
SES, and faith
• Services meet developmental realities – simply not the same as adults
• Families/caregivers should be partners in treatment decisions and plans
• Multiple systems responsible – single agency or community should be
collaborative in nature, reflecting input and involvement in systems
• Routinely evaluated
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
Chapter draws attention to the positive developments in the youth justice policy field as well as some of the challenges still ahead. Focuses on the inclusion of the voice of young people in decisions that affect them. Binary system state focuses on protection of children until cross threshold (age of majority) into adulthood. State focuses by restrictions on freedom and investment in their development with the intent the children will grow up to be law abiding, contributing citizens. Changes to age of onset allow changing capacities of young people based on notion social welfare and welfare of young person can both benefit from reclassifications. Rather than treating youth like an adult for purposes of criminal responsibility is more a reflection of societal values adult crime equal adult time . Several justice systems undermine principle of confidentiality in youth justice proceedings by increasing opportunity to share info about defendant. Punitive stance eg) zero tolerance, curfew, naming & shaming rituals.
