Juvenile System: A Case Study

Conclusion: Overall, the current juvenile system is very much so causing strain and separation between juvenile delinquents and their parents (Gauthier et al., 2004; Taylor & McQuillan, 2014; Whelan, 2003), which is often times connected to high recidivism rates (More Services, 2012; Ryan et al., 2014; Trulson et al., 2005), as well as having an adverse effect on the youth’s potential for familial reunification (Amandoala, 2009; D’andrade & Huong, 2014; Dorsey et al., 2014; Garfinkel, 2010). Since there is much evidentiary support for parent involvement and support being a deterring factor for juveniles (Baer & Maschi, 2003; Church II et al., 2009; Fletcher et al., 2004; Garfinkel, 2010; Maschi et al., 2013; Varma, 2007; Whelan, 2003; Williams & Smalls, 2015; Wisconsin Juvenile Justice Practice Model, 2015), the current structure of the juvenile system calls for reforms to make it more inviting toward parents and their desired involvement in order to combat the issues of recidivism (More Services, 2012; Ryan et al., 2014; Trulson et al., 2005), and failed reunifications (Amandoala, 2009; D’andrade & Huong, 2014; Dorsey et al., 2014; Garfinkel, 2010). By reducing the amount of out of home placements that a youth has to endure during their lifetime, there will not only be a positive effect on recidivism rates (Ryan et al., 2014; Trulson et al., 2005), but it will also help reduce the amount of trauma and stress related incidents that arise from having to be removed from your home (Baker et al., 2013; Dorsey et al., 2014; Gonzalez, 2014; More Services, 2012; Younes & Harp, 2007), as well as to clear up any confusion as to who plays what role in a youth’s life (Burke, 1991; Pooler, 2008; Siebert & Siebert, 2007; White, 2002). …show more content…
With fewer people becoming involved in the process due to staying at home for treatment, juveniles will be able to share more of an intimate bond with their biological parents, because the number of contacts and referrals will decrease due to no longer having foster parents or case workers in the picture to take on that role as an appropriate adult (Brewin, & Bailey, 2004; López et al., 2013; Pierpoint, 2000; White, 2002). In addition, it is imperative to allow for opportunities in the way of programming that open up new doors of involvement for parents (Garfinkel, 2010). …show more content…
There are a variety of studies done regarding different engagement techniques and programming, such as MST (Garfinkel, 2010; Liddle, 2010; May et al., 2014), and FIT (Trupin et al., 2011), and many others and how they all provide similar findings that they are quite helpful to those involved (Garfinkel, 2010; Peterson-Badali & Broeking, 2009; Wells & Wittington, 1993; Williams & Smalls, 2015). With these programs, bonds will be reestablished (Tilbury, & Osmond, 2006), due to more of an understanding of the situation at hand, and having the knowledge of how to create a stable living environment, and eventually familial reunification (Amandoala, 2009; Garfinkel, 2010; Maluccio et al., 1986), which are ultimately the main goals in a successful juvenile system (Amandoala, 2009; D’andrade & Huong, 2014; Dorsey et al., 2014; Garfinkel, 2010; Simms, & Bolden, 1991; Tilbury, & Osmond, 2006). The main structural reform of the system is that it has to change from more of a proactive to reactive style. Policies such as JIPs and CHIPs petitions occurred after a problem occurred or imminent danger is assessed (Waukesha Circuit Courts,