社会政策essay代写范文—Juvenile Sentencing and Policy

社会政策essay代写范文—青少年量刑及政策，本文是一篇留学生管理专业的Essay写作格式参考范文。谈到刑事司法系统和青少年，有很多案例对青少年司法系统产生了巨大的影响。这些案例来自于管理某些源自于处理青少年进入框架的观点。由于青少年完全不同于成年人，他们需要管理他们的具体方式和个案的前提下。青少年并不等同于成年人，因为青少年并非生来就是成年人。青少年通常对什么是错误没有最模糊的概念，在某些情况下，他们周围没有方向或巨大的影响来引导他们走上正确的道路。因此，本文将讨论青少年量刑政策对相关利益相关者的影响，法院在制定或执行该政策中所扮演的角色，以及改变该政策的建议。以下是管理学essay范例写作的全部内容，是一篇符合国外大学Essay写作格式要求的范文，供参考。

Introduction引言

With regards to talking about the criminal justice system and adolescents, there have been numerous cases that have had a huge effect on the juvenile justice system. The cases emerge from managing certain perspectives that originates from dealing with adolescents entering the framework. Since adolescents are altogether different from grown-ups, they need to manage them a specific way and a case by case premise. Adolescents are not regarded equivalent to grown-ups since adolescents are not created as grown-ups. The adolescents don’t generally have the foggiest idea what is directly from wrong and in some cases they don’t have the direction or great impacts around them to lead them the correct way. Therefore, this paper will discuss the effect of the juvenile sentencing policy on involved stakeholders, the role of the courts in creating or enforcing the policy, and recommendations to change the policy.

The effect of Juvenile Sentencing Policy on involved Stakeholders未成年人量刑政策对相关利益相关者的影响

  A center capacity of the adolescent equity framework is to anticipate reoffending by young people who have carried out acts that would be viewed as wrongdoings whenever submitted by grown-ups. “Even if the court is an active partner in the broad prevention activities of the community, it will retain the primary responsibility for responding to adolescents who were not prevented from engaging in illegal behavior” (Bonnie, Johnson, Chemers,Schuck, 2013). The court will keep on deciding the sort and power of intercessions for the youths and families that precede it. Viability lies in the framework’s capacity to mediate with the correct immature wrongdoers and utilize the correct sort and measure of intercession. “The court is required to examine the methods for assessing adolescents at different points of contact with the system, and intervening in the adolescent lives, and to promote the core task of preventing reoffending” (Bonnie, Johnson, Chemers,Schuck, 2013).

青少年公平框架的一个核心能力是预测青少年的再犯罪行为，这些行为在成年人提交时将被视为错误行为。“即使法院在广泛的社区预防活动中是一个积极的合作伙伴，它也将保留对那些没有被阻止从事非法行为的青少年作出反应的主要责任”(Bonnie, Johnson, Chemers,Schuck, 2013)。法院将继续决定在此之前对青少年和家庭进行代祷的种类和权力。其可行性在于该框架能够与正确的不成熟的不法分子进行调解，并利用正确的调解种类和措施。“法院需要审查评估青少年在系统不同接触点的方法，并干预青少年的生活，并促进防止再次犯罪的核心任务”(Bonnie, Johnson, Chemers,Schuck, 2013)。

The role of the courts in creating or enforcing the policy法院在制定或执行政策方面的作用

Procedures were led with minimal open or network consciousness of how the adolescent court worked or what befell the youngsters who showed up before it. As opposed to binding the adolescent in prison with grown-ups, the early adolescent courts made a probation framework and separate recovery and treatment offices to furnish minors with supervision, direction, and instruction. “The U.S. Supreme Court determined the Constitution requires that youth charged with delinquency in juvenile court have many of the same due process rights guaranteed to adults accused of crimes, including the right to an attorney and the right to confront witnesses against the juvenile” (Juvenile Law Center, 2019). The Supreme Court stretched out extra sacred rights to youth, including the privilege to have the charges against the adolescent demonstrated past a sensible uncertainty and the privilege against twofold risk. States established components to move youth from adolescent to grown-up criminal court for preliminary and discipline. At times, these new laws burdened youngsters with the most serious sentences—demise and existence without the plausibility of parole. “Many of the new state laws also exposed youth to the dangers and potential abuses attributed to incarceration with adult offenders—much like they had experienced before the creation of the original juvenile court more than a century earlier” (Juvenile Law Center, 2019).

青少年法庭是如何运作的，以及出现在法庭上的青少年遭遇了什么，这些程序在引导时几乎没有开放或网络意识。与把青少年和成年人一起关在监狱不同，早期青少年法庭制定了一个缓刑框架，并单独设立了康复和治疗办公室，为未成年人提供监督、指导和指导。“美国最高法院裁定，宪法要求在少年法庭被控犯罪的青少年享有许多与被控犯罪的成年人相同的正当程序权利，包括聘请律师的权利和与证人对证的权利”(少年法律中心，2019年)。最高法院为青少年赋予了额外的神圣权利，包括对青少年的指控可以超越合理的不确定性的特权，以及防止双重风险的特权。各国设立了将青年从青少年转移到成人刑事法庭进行初步和惩戒的组成部分。有时，这些新法律给年轻人带来了最严重的刑罚负担——死刑和没有假释的生存。“许多新的州法律还将青少年暴露在与成年罪犯关押在一起的危险和潜在虐待行为中，就像他们在一个多世纪前最初的少年法庭成立之前所经历的那样”(少年法律中心，2019)。

The present juvenile justice system still keeps up recovery as its essential objective and separates itself from the criminal equity framework in significant manners. “With few exceptions, in most states delinquency is defined as the commission of a criminal act by a child who was under the age of 18 at the time; most states also allow youth to remain under the supervision of the juvenile court until age 21” (Juvenile Law Center, 2019). In lieu of jail, adolescent court judges draw from a scope of legitimate choices to meet both the security needs of people in general and the treatment needs of the young, despite the fact that young might be bound in adolescent remedial offices that again and again look like grown-up penitentiaries and prisons, routinely forcing restorative practices, for example, isolation, strip look, and the utilization of concoction or mechanical restrictions. Youth are entitled instructive programming while imprisoned. Instructive and helpful programming might be given in the kid’s locale or the kid might be put out of the home in a private treatment program and requested to go to class on-grounds. In contrast to grown-up criminal procedures, adolescent court hearings are frequently shut to individuals from the general population and records in certain states stay secret, shielding youngsters from disgrace and guarantee outcomes when their records are openly accessible. In any case, adolescent records have progressively turned out to be increasingly available, and in many jurisdictions are not consequently fixed or canceled when the youngster turns into a grown-up.

Recommendations to change the policy建议改变政策

 In the province of Tennessee, the adolescent equity conveyed approach suggestions to ensure open security and contain costs by concentrating framework assets on the most noteworthy hazard youth. Tennessee additionally prescribed averting further adolescent equity framework inclusion of lower level youth through early reaction; and supporting powerful practices however proceeded with oversight and reinvestment in a more grounded continuum of proof based administrations statewide. “The Coalition for Juvenile Justice (CJJ) – comprising more than 12,000 juvenile justice practitioners, law enforcement officials, youth development experts, community service providers, youth, families, and legislators in all U.S. states, territories and the District of Columbia – has prepared these policy recommendations to support prevention, early intervention, family empowerment, and developmentally-appropriate approaches to reclaim and rebuild the lives of youth who come into contact with the juvenile justice system” (CJJ, 2019).  The suggestion is to reestablish appointments for the adolescent equity programs, guarantee proper usage and oversight of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, dispose of the legitimate court request, reauthorize the runaway and destitute youth act, and expand on demonstrated methodologies to build school commitment and accomplishment for all young and avoid the conflation of school discipline approach and adolescent equity framework sanctions, otherwise called the “school-to-jail pipeline;”. Another change to the strategy is to guarantee that dealt youth are treated as survivors as opposed to being condemned, and make projects to protect the children and networks.

在田纳西州，青少年公平传达了确保公开安全并控制成本的方法建议，办法是将框架资产集中在最值得注意的危险青年身上。田纳西州还规定避免进一步的青少年公平框架通过早期反应将较低水平的青少年包括在内;然而，支持强有力的做法是通过监督和再投资在全州范围内建立一个更有根据的、以证据为基础的政府。“青少年司法联盟(CJJ)——由12000多名青少年司法从业者、执法官员、青少年发展专家、社区服务提供者、青少年、家庭以及美国所有州、领地和哥伦比亚特区的立法者组成——准备了这些政策建议，以支持预防、早期干预、家庭赋权、以及适合发展的方法，让接触到青少年司法系统的青少年恢复和重建生活”(CJJ, 2019)。建议是重新任命青少年公平项目，确保青少年司法和犯罪预防法案的正确使用和监督，处理合法的法院请求，重新授权离家出走和贫困青少年法案，并扩展已证明的方法，以建立学校的承诺和成就的所有年轻人，避免将学校纪律方法和青少年公平框架制裁混为一谈。也被称为“从学校到监狱的管道”。战略的另一个变化是，确保被处置的青少年被视为幸存者，而不是被谴责，并制定保护儿童和网络的项目。

Conclusion结论

 As this finishes up the adolescent condemning and arrangement talk, we have discovered that rebuffing adolescents isn’t generally the best alternatives. The objective of adolescent equity framework depends on recovery. For example, adolescents ought not to be condemned to death if under the age 18 and can’t be given the sentences of existence without the chance for further appeal since the person is considers these disciplines merciless and uncommon for adolescents. On the off chance that the framework can restore the adolescents and give the person in question devices they may require, they can have another opportunity at completely changing themselves around.

随着青少年谴责和安排谈话的结束，我们发现，拒绝青少年通常不是最好的选择。青少年平等框架的目标取决于恢复。例如，未满18岁的青少年不应该被判处死刑，而且在没有进一步上诉的机会的情况下不能被判处存在罪，因为这个人被认为这些纪律是无情的，对青少年来说是罕见的。如果这个框架能让青少年恢复正常，给那些有问题的人他们可能需要的设备，他们就有机会彻底改变自己。

References参考文献

留学生Essay相关专业范文素材资料，尽在本网，可以随时查阅参考。本站也提供多国留学生课程作业写作指导服务，如有需要可以咨询本平台。