Extensive research has shown that young people are not mature enough to
face the justice system in the same way as adults because certain parts of
their brains are not yet fully developed (Kurlycheck, 2011, p. 9). This
incomplete brain development categorises them as vulnerable, with an increased
possibility of engaging in criminal activity while seeking self-identity.
Crimes committed by young people, therefore, require urgent attention from the
justice system. Measures such as rehabilitation should be established to help
young offenders transform themselves, as they are still in the process of
development, rather than subjecting them to harsher punishments as adult
criminals—punishments that could increase the likelihood of recidivism in the
future. This paper argues that young offenders should not be treated as adult
criminals; instead, they should be given opportunities for rehabilitation that
can help them become beneficial members of society. This paper will examine
three main reasons why young offenders should not be treated as adult
criminals: first, young offenders are recognised as children and require
protection by the justice system; second, transferring them to adult prisons
limits their access to rehabilitation and self-improvement; and third, adult
prisons harm their mental health rather than helping them reform.
Young offenders are categorised as children and therefore need to be
protected by the justice system. As children, they are not sufficiently capable
of dealing with adult courts, which may result in decisions that severely harm
their future. Evidence shows that when young people commit offences, their
understanding of the consequences of their actions is not fully developed
(Kurlycheck, 2011, p. 2). It is the responsibility of the justice system to
provide this protection. As Lyons (2011, p. 2) argues, juvenile courts exist
not to criminalise youth but to address the needs of young people and society.
Therefore, reducing the severity of punishment or providing opportunities for
rehabilitation can help young offenders become better individuals. What these young
offenders primarily need is protection—protection that enables the justice
system to help them avoid incarceration and to safeguard their future and their
place in society.
Another significant issue is that young people who commit crimes and are
transferred to adult courts are likely to lose opportunities for positive
transformation. Kurlycheck (2011, p. 2) cites criminologist Donna Bishop’s
suggestion of a “core status transformation” from “redeemable youth” to
“unsalvageable adult.” It is also argued that young offenders affected by
juvenile justice decisions—which are theoretically designed based on societal
perspectives of juvenile delinquency—should be provided with opportunities that
meet their developmental needs through rehabilitation (Abrams, 2013, p. 5). By
contrast, when young offenders as young as 16 are required to face adult courts
and harsher sentences, they are deprived of rehabilitation options. Ensuring
access to rehabilitation systems can help safeguard the future of these young
offenders.
In addition, the psychological development of young people is at serious
risk when they are treated as adult criminals. Teplin et al. (2006, as cited in
Howell, 2009, p. 16) argue that “nearly three-fourths of detained female youths
and two-thirds of detained male youths have a psychiatric disorder.” Treatment
by inmates or staff in adult prisons can expose young males and females to
physical and sexual abuse, which negatively affects their behavioural
development and increases the likelihood of future recidivism (Kurlycheck,
2011, p. 7). Such treatment and assaults are common in many adult prison
environments, and their impact on young inmates is likely to result in
long-term mental health problems. These effects do not end with incarceration
but continue to affect young people after their release, potentially making
them harmful to society rather than productive members of it.
There are claims by conservative reformers who argue for a more
punishment-oriented approach in juvenile courts, including proposals for “just
deserts” in juvenile justice practices (Krisberg & Austin, 1993, p. 4).
This argument is often based on the principle of retaliation— “an eye for an
eye, a tooth for a tooth” (Lyons, 2011, p. 6). However, punishment is not the
most effective way to educate young offenders and does not guarantee that they
will refrain from committing further crimes. Evidence shows that within three
years of release, approximately two-thirds of offenders are rearrested, and
more than half return to prison (Langan & Levin, 2002, as cited in Howell,
2009, p. 13). Furthermore, Krisberg and Austin (1993, p. 4) state that “there
is no credible research evidence that these tougher penalties actually have
reduced youth crime.” Therefore, harsher punishment does not improve outcomes
for young offenders or reduce crime; instead, it negatively affects their
physical and mental well-being and their ability to reintegrate into society.
This paper has argued that it is essential for the justice system not to
treat young offenders as adult criminals. Young offenders need protection and
opportunities for rehabilitation to prevent them from becoming vulnerable
victims within adult prisons. The insights presented may help reduce the number
of youths transferred to adult courts, decrease rates of rearrest and
reincarceration, and lower the prevalence of mental health disorders among
young offenders. Greater efforts are needed to ensure that rehabilitation
systems are available to support young offenders, improve societal perceptions
of youth, and help them transform into productive members of society. Treating
young offenders as adult criminals effectively shuts down their chances for
meaningful change.
NB: This paper was prepared during the final English Professional Program (EPP) at VUW and may still be relevant to the current situation in Timor-Leste.
