OTHER VOICES

Why children, even when violent, should never be incarcerated

 A 16-year-old inmate at Mountain View Youth Development Center underwent surgery early Wednesday to repair a broken jaw he suffered from alleged fighting at the prison.
A 16-year-old inmate at Mountain View Youth Development Center underwent surgery early Wednesday to repair a broken jaw he suffered from alleged fighting at the prison.
Posted Oct. 24, 2013, at 2:18 p.m.

What do you do with children suspected or convicted of committing very adult crimes? The answer isn’t easy, particularly when violence is involved. One thing that’s clear, though: Standing policy should not be to warehouse youth in adult jails and prisons. Encouragingly, a new report from the Campaign for Youth Justice finds that, over the past eight years, nearly half the states have changed various laws to discourage shunting minors through the adult criminal justice system when it isn’t necessary.

Research has shown that locking up minors anywhere is rarely a great way to prevent repeat offenses. But when they have to be incarcerated, they need safety, structure and education.

Teenagers are not fully developed; their brains aren’t as capable of moral reasoning and impulse control as adults in their early or mid-20s. They don’t have as much mastery over their environment as adults do. There is also more hope of rehabilitating young offenders. Those are among the reasons that the Supreme Court last year insisted that punishment of minors must be properly “graduated and proportioned.”

Yet, the report notes there are some “100,000 youth who are placed in adult jails and prisons each year.” When minors are thrown into adult jails and prisons, often simply to await trial, they don’t get the structure and educational opportunities necessary for growth or rehabilitation. They are also extremely vulnerable to harm, including sexual abuse.

Since 2005, 23 states have changed policies to reflect these considerations, often with wide bipartisan support. Texas has made it easier for state boards or judges to place minors in juvenile detention, even if they are awaiting trial in adult court. Illinois has given juvenile courts jurisdiction over offenders up to 18 years of age. Arizona has offered minors more recourse to challenge their diversion into adult court.

Federal policy deserves at least some credit for this trend. Activists have pointed out that these sorts of reforms will help states comply with the 2003 Prison Rape Elimination Act, which is finally phasing in. The law obliges states to keep minors away from adults and to avoid inflicting the hell of solitary confinement on them. If states don’t comply, they could lose some federal funding.

It should not take that sort of federal stick, though, to encourage states to continue seeking the right balance between society’s need to punish crime and the importance of avoiding penalties that are overly harsh, ineffective or both.

The Washington Post (Oct. 16)

SEE COMMENTS →

ADVERTISEMENT | Grow your business
ADVERTISEMENT | Grow your business

Similar Articles

More in Opinion