Midterm

Midterm Essay Student's Name Institution Course Instructor Date Question 1: Are the Systems that Comprise Juvenile Justice, such as Courts, Foster Care, And Detention Facilities, Biased? If so, how and Towards whom are they Biased? Both Historically And Currently, has the Treatment of some Groups Differed from the Treatment of other Groups in Juvenile Justice Systems? Do these Biases show any Sign of Changing? If so, how? Which Policies seem to have created Lasting and Meaningful Change? If not, What Policies or Practices do you Think could bring about Equitable Change? In modern societies, the problems surrounding juvenile justice systems are of great concern, triggering discourse on issues related to equity, fairness, and systemic biases. Alongside this, these institutions are still not free from biases that allow some young offenders to receive better treatment than others, especially marginalized persons. The juvenile justice system entails multiple components, including the court system, foster care, and custodial facilities, designed to rectify delinquent behavior in underage populations. Contrarily, past and current studies show that such systems experience systemic biases, which lead to disproportionate outcomes for black and Hispanic youths. Research reveals that minority race and ethnic pupils are over-represented in juvenile detention centers. This identifies the importance of the analysis and reform of these situations in order to decrease this social problem. This essay attempts to prove that biases still prevail in the juvenile justice system and amplify the already existing unequal treatment and disparate results for marginalized youths. It will draw on historical and current evidence and policy interventions by exploring the need for systematic changes to ensure fairness, equity, and justice in the juvenile justice system for the benefit of all the youth. The internal juvenile justice systems, including courts, foster care, and detention facilities, have shown factors of bias not just in the historical but even in contemporary times. These biases show up in the form of unequal treatment of marginalized groups, for instance, Black and Hispanic youths in the juvenile justice system (Bonnie et al., 2013; Moore & Padavic, 2010). For instance, the findings show that Black and Latino youth have higher rates of incarceration than their White counterparts among juvenile offenders (Rovner, 2021). This bias becomes evident throughout the youth justice process from the police arrest to sentencing, where the youth from Black and Latinx families are more likely to be arrested, held behind bars, and receive harsher punishment for the same offenses compared to their white counterparts (Bonnie et al., 2013; Moore & Padavic, 2010). An indication of biased treatment in a juvenile justice system is the over-representation of black and Latinx teenagers in schools, demanding exclusionary disciplines. This is shown in the study by Pearman (2021) on the impact of gentrification on school disciplinary patterns. Consequently, the study discovered that gentrification exacerbates the racial inequalities in-school suspensions, particularly among students of color. This prejudice spills over to the juvenile justice system, which in turn endorses systemic biasedness, allowing the unjust elements of power and elimination of equality through social structures. Racial and ethnic disparities continue to exist in juvenile justice systems, signaling the essentiality of indispensable, long-term changes. The policies to deal with systemic bias should adopt restorative justice by focusing on reconciliation, healing, and engaging the communities rather than the traditional reactive mechanism (Daly, 2002). Research shows that restorative justice programs bring down racial disparities and create an environment supportive of youth identity (Daly, 2002; Fisher et al., 2020). Some of the strategies that may help address systemic injustices in the criminal justice system include community-oriented measures, diversion programs, and non-incarceration alternatives for those committing non-violent offenses (Rovner, 2021). For example, diversion programs provide the youth an opportunity to get help in the form of support services and rehabilitative interventions before they are formally charged into the juvenile justice system. Such practices erode the foundational reasons for these offenses, such as poverty, trauma, lack of education and employment opportunities, and society's prejudices. To a certain level, studies of gender-based disparities in youth justice decision-making reveal discrimination against girls and girls of color who are more over-represented in secure confinement and served longer sentences relative to boys (Guevara et al., 2006; Lopez & Nuno, 2016). Eradicating the deeply hidden prejudices in the juvenile justice system is a matter of concerted effort, considering balance and impartiality in housing, education, health care, and employment. Community development, supporting underprivileged communities, and removing structural barriers to equity should be the focus of policies and legislation to enhance fairness in the juvenile justice system (McGrew, 2016). In conclusion, implicit biases remain among the serious factors that contribute to the unequal treatment of oppressed communities, mainly black and Latino youths. Addressing systemic disadvantages and imbalanced distribution of certain groups will require an approach that is multidimensional and, therefore, encompasses topics such as restorative justice, community intervention strategies, and alternatives to incarceration. Removing biases in the juvenile justice system by lawmakers and those involved in delivering services to the youth shall be a good start to establishing a society where all youth have equal justice and are respected, too. References Bonnie, R. J., Johnson, R. L., Chemers, B. M., & Schuck, J. A. (2013). Chapter: 3 Current Practice in the Juvenile Justice System. In Reforming Juvenile Justice: A Developmental approach. https://www.aecf.org/m/privy/Deep-End-Resource-Guide-4b-Summary-of-Reforming-Juvenile-Justice.pdf Daly, K. (2002). Restorative justice. Punishment & Society, 4(1), 55–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/14624740222228464 Fisher, B. W., Higgins, E. M., Kupchik, A., Viano, S., Curran, F. C., Overstreet, S., Plumlee, B., & Coffey, B. S. (2020). Protecting the flock or policing the sheep? Differences in school resource officers' perceptions of threats by school racial composition. Social Problems, 69(2), 316–334. https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spaa062 Guevara, L., Herz, D...