NCJ Number
91840
Date Published
1983
Length
22 pages
Annotation
This pamphlet comprises the transcribed debate between two well-known juvenile justice policymakers representing pros and cons on the issue of whether serious juvenile offenders should continue to be handled by a separate juvenile justice system and what criteria determine if a juvenile should be passed into the adult system.
Abstract
The speaker defending separate jurisdiction for juveniles argues that the juvenile justice system functions to fulfill the state's responsibility to protect and treat juvenile deviants who differ from adult offenders and can be rehabilitated. Furthermore, the juvenile system already has the capability of transferring to adult court those for whom juvenile processing appears inappropriate. The opposing viewpoint contends that in serious offense cases there is little difference between juvenile and adult offenders and that justice should be similar for persons committing similar crimes. Other arguments against the system are that juvenile court subjects its clients to abuse through informalities that constitute rights violations. Finally, this argument declares rehabilitation a failure. The issues raised in the debate are deemed significant for the future determination of justice policies in Ohio and the rest of the country. A short glossary of terms is provided.