http://ordercustomessay.com/samples.php

1. Running Head: WAIVER AND TRANSFER PROVISIONS 1
Waiver and Transfer Provisions Of the Juvenile Court Statues
Course
Instructor
Name

2. WAIVER AND TRANSFER PROVISIONS 2
Introduction
The criminal justice system has the main goal of reducing crime in the society. Before
the introduction of the juvenile court system, juvenile offenders were treated in the
Adversarial Criminal Justice System, in the same manner as adults (Brink, 2004). These
influenced legislators in many countries to think of alternative procedures that could be used
in dealing with youthful offenders instead of subjecting them to the harsh treatment in the
criminal justice system. Consequently, this led to the establishment of juvenile courts that
focused more on rehabilitation rather than punishment (sellers & Arrigo, 2009). Court
proceedings were made more informal, and youthful offenders were since distanced from the
Adversarial justice system. Various states developed Juvenile court systems across the U.S
where offenders below the age of 18 were tried for their offences (Steward-Lindsey, 2006).
The American judicial system has undergone changes in the recent years particularly
the juvenile system. These has been as a result of complains from the public for the states to
be tough on crime. Various states have advanced different approaches that advocate for
juvenile waiver and transfer (Steiner & Wright, 2006). Juvenile transfer waiver laws are
statutes allowing young offenders to be transferred from juvenile courts to criminal courts.
This means that, they are prosecuted as if they are adult with the range of penalties being
great.
Overtime different states have adjusted their weaver laws. The following are the
classification of the various weaver laws that have been advanced (Schubert et all.,
2010).Discretionary waiver is the provision that allows juvenile court judges to transfer a case
involving a minor from a juvenile court to an adult criminal court. Mandatory waiver is when

3. WAIVER AND TRANSFER PROVISIONS 3
the state demands that juvenile offenders under the juvenile courts be transferred to adult
criminal courts. The state directs the juvenile courts to carry out this function. Presumed
waiver involves the state classifying cases into categories such that certain cases must be
transferred to adult criminal courts under the law. Statutory exclusion entails excluding cases
that involve youths from juvenile courts if the statutes do not support such an offence to be
tried under the juvenile courts. The final class that of once an adult always an adult. This
involves statutes in which the state stops juvenile courts from trying offenders who have ever
been tried under the adult courts for being tried in Juvenile justice system (Brink, 2004).
Overtime, states have advanced on their waiver laws to streamline the movement of
cases from juvenile courts to criminal courts so that prosecution becomes easier. This has
been accompanied by deletion of some offences from juvenile statutes in most jurisdictions or
adding simultaneous authority provisions to laws that are already established (Brink, 2004).
This paper critically analyzes the trend in the waiver and transfer provisions in juvenile court
statutes toward a criminalization of the juvenile court system.
Waiver and transfer provisions in juvenile court statutes and the criminalization of the
juvenile court system.
These provisions are intended to reduce crimes but scholars have been able to prove
that waivers and transfers cannot deter crime or reduce incidences of recidivism. Recent
trends in research show that the statutes concerning transfers and weavers do not in
themselves account for decreased levels of juvenile offending or reoffending (Steiner &
Wright, 2006). When juveniles are transferred to adversarial courts, the results are shocking
as most of them either recividate or leave the systems more hardened criminals. Putting the

4. WAIVER AND TRANSFER PROVISIONS 4
youthful offenders in same custody as the adults puts their life at risk, since they can easily be
injured by the adults. It has been observed that most of the youths who pass through the adult
system are always detained for longer periods that their counterparts and minority youths are
the ones who are often sent to the adult criminal justice system (Steiner & Wright, 2006).
Cognitive development and Juvenile fitness have a great influence on the lives of the
juveniles. When exposed to conditions where they are subjected to harsh treatment, they are
likely to experience lack of impulse control and slower brain development.
It is observed that transferring violent offenders directly to the adult system has not
been able to deter young people from offending. The media has also gone ahead to publicise
information about such statutes that involve direct transfer of violent juvenile offenders to
adult courts but that has also not bore any positive results. In studies where youthful offenders
have been transferred to the adult criminal justice system, the results have been compared
against those who have been treated in the juvenile justice system and a large disparity has
been observed (Steiner & Wright, 2006). Offenders from the adult justice system were
arrested for felonies at a higher rate compared to their counterparts who had been treated
under the juvenile justice system. Some scholars have carried out studies of institutions that
try to incorporate the two approaches of treatment and rehabilitation. The result has been a
decrease in levels of re-offending which however remains higher that the levels of reoffending
of youths treated under a plain juvenile justice system. The only type of offence that seemed
to have less re –offending rates for juveniles treated as the adult system included property
crimes.
The explanations for this observation are interesting. First, when transferred to the
adult system, most of the youths feel that they have been treated unfairly for their offences.

5. WAIVER AND TRANSFER PROVISIONS 5
They disagree with the state position of seeking justice and consequently develop a wrong
mentality against the state (Steiner & Wright, 2006). When released, the youths are likely to
reoffend to compensate for the injustices done against them by the state.
Treating juveniles under the adult system is a form of criminalising the Juvenile
system. Youths who join adult system, are disadvantaged since, they lack the chances to seek
employment and other opportunities in life. As such, when they are released, they cannot fit
well in the society (Steward-Lindsey, 2006).Consequently; they turn back to their former
ways of reoffending to earn a living. In addition, Juveniles who are exposed to the adult
system and are put in adult prisons are likely to become hardened criminals. These youths
interact most often with the adult offenders and as a result learn new skills and new means of
criminality from the mature inmates.
Those youths who are treated under the juvenile system are always well bred and find
it easy to interact with the prison staff and can easily be integrated into the society. Those put
in adult systems held that guards and staffs in adult court systems and prisons were harsh,
inhumane and indifferent and treated them as enemies. Those who were rehabilitated through
the juvenile system promised never to re offend again since; they had been empowered
through knowledge and fair treatment.
While in detention in adult prisons, youths are exposed to several risks. They might
not be compatible with the adults and as such may choose to commit suicide. The adults are
also likely to abuse them sexually or physically through assaults. Consequently, when they go
back to the community, they are often very damaged than their counterparts who were treated
in the juvenile justice system (Steward-Lindsey, 2006).This coupled with the violence

6. WAIVER AND TRANSFER PROVISIONS 6
observed in most of the adult prisons, makes the youths tougher and more hardened and as a
result they may engage even in more dangerous experiences.
Treating juveniles under these systems leaves them more desperate. The best approach
is to treat them with the intention of rehabilitating them so that, they are easily integrated into
the society. This is important as it helps the individuals and also protects the society form
criminals and crimes. Juveniles are still young and have not matured and therefore their mind
is not well built to be exposed to such experiences as those in mature prisons. Youths are
susceptible and cannot effectively think or reason on their own as adults would do. It has also
been shown that juvenile treated as adults are affected cognitively since it impairs their
cognitive development (sellers & Arrigo, 2009).
Conclusion
Therefore, the state must ensure that the number of youths being subjected to adult
treatment is reduced if not done away with. The states must also ensure that the proper
services, treatment programmes and sentencing procedures that fit the juveniles are used. The
transfer system and its related treatment of youthful offenders return the system back to the
times when there was no juvenile justice system.

7. WAIVER AND TRANSFER PROVISIONS 7
References
Brink, D. O. (2004). Immaturity, normative competence, and juvenile transfer: How (not) to
punish minors for major crimes. Texas Law Review, 82(6), 1555-1585.
David M., S. (n.d). Juvenile Offenders: The Supreme Court and the Sentencing of Juveniles in
the United States: Reaffirming the Distinctiveness of Youth. Child And Adolescent
Psychiatric Clinics Of North America, 20(Forensic Psychiatry), 431-445.
SELLERS, B. G., & ARRIGO, B. A. (2009). ADOLESCENT TRANSFER,
DEVELOPMENTAL MATURITY, AND ADJUDICATIVE COMPETENCE: AN
ETHICAL AND JUSTICE POLICY INQUIRY. Journal Of Criminal Law &
Criminology, 99(2), 435-487.
Schubert, C., Mulvey, E., Loughran, T., Fagan, J., Chassin, L., Piquero, A., & ... Cauffman, E.
(2010). Predicting Outcomes for Youth Transferred to Adult Court. Law & Human
Behavior, 34(6), 460-475.
Steiner, B., & Wright, E. (2006). Assessing the Relative Effects of State Direct File Waiver
Laws on Violent Juvenile Crime: Deterrence or Irrelevance?. The Journal Of Criminal
Law And Criminology, 96(4), 1451-1477.
Steward-Lindsey, S. (2006). Fulfilling the Promise of Kent: Fixing the Texas Juvenile Waiver
Statute. American Journal Of Criminal Law, 34(1), 109-126.