al. 2001). This raises the most revealing and poignant question involved in the issue of imprisoning juvenile offenders. What is the point? If the point is to keep a dangerous criminal off of the streets, then young offenders are surely better off in juvenile penitentiaries. They will there be just as safely kept away from society as if they served their time in adult facilities. If the point is to punish them, then an entire host of questions arise. What is the purpose of punishing a child? How many parents would punish their children using a technique that is virtually guaranteed to make their children lifelong criminals and inmates? More importantly, why would you want to punish a child, in your capacity as a member of the legal profession? A high percentage of juvenile offenders are either in the foster care system, and effectively have no parents, or they have parents who are drug dealers or other criminals. Does it really make sense to punish a child for being born into such circumstances? Should not the approach rather be to help and rehabilitate …show more content…
Scholars have long since identified methods of treatment and interventions that actually reduce the rate of recidivism, rather than increasing it. Furthermore, like most incarceration programs in the United States, imprisoning young people costs much more than it benefits society (Duncan 2000). It is a striking fact indeed that American politicians, policy makers, law enforcement personnel—and in fact the voting public—would much rather pay to imprison a young black man, for life if necessary, than provide his mother with the opportunity to feed him the food that he desperately needs, and to house and clothe