Deinstitutionalization Of Status Offenders Policy Analysis

As a Society, we emphasize that children are our future and how they have the potential to keep changing the world, which is why we must invest in their future. However, it seems that those children that are classified or seen as deviant are not a part of that vision of having the potential to make a positive impact. Therefore, their life does not matter, which is why they get lost in a system and carry a mentality that they do not matter. A major purpose of prison is to cause rehabilitation, being able to allow these individuals incarnated to become enable them to be a law abiding citizen. Even though, that is the purpose of prison if it is not working for adults then we must have a better solution for our youth because once they age out of …show more content…
The Coalition for Juvenile Justice (CJJ) have recommended two policies that seem to be a good start for changing the system such as a Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders and Disproportionate Minority Contact policy. The Deinstitutionalization of Status Offenders policy defines it as, “Status offenses are acts that are not deemed criminal when committed by adults, but carry juvenile court sanctions for youth because of their legal status as minors.” The policy focus on eliminating small offense crimes that cause most juveniles to get detained. This policy will allow the state to have a limited number of juveniles arrested; however, it causes the adolescent to get away with minor crimes such as running away, caught with alcohol, and breaking curfew, which can be a problem. This policy seems to be more efficiently; however, it lacks the initiative to address adolescent being in inhumane solitary confinement. The Disproportionate Minority Contact policy focus is one reducing the number of minorities being sentence harsher than others such as minorities that receive life without parole more than others. This policy allows children that come from different socioeconomic backgrounds to be on the same playing field. Both policies are good; however, both policies need a little more