社會政策essay代寫范文—Juvenile Sentencing and Policy

社會政策essay代寫范文—青少年量刑及政策，本文是一篇留學生管理專業的Essay寫作格式參考范文。談到刑事司法系統和青少年，有很多案例對青少年司法系統產生了巨大的影響。這些案例來自于管理某些源自于處理青少年進入框架的觀點。由于青少年完全不同于成年人，他們需要管理他們的具體方式和個案的前提下。青少年并不等同于成年人，因為青少年并非生來就是成年人。青少年通常對什么是錯誤沒有最模糊的概念，在某些情況下，他們周圍沒有方向或巨大的影響來引導他們走上正確的道路。因此，本文將討論青少年量刑政策對相關利益相關者的影響，法院在制定或執行該政策中所扮演的角色，以及改變該政策的建議。以下是管理學essay范例寫作的全部內容，是一篇符合國外大學Essay寫作格式要求的范文，供參考。

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未成年人量刑政策對相關利益相關者的影響

  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個核心能力是預測青少年的再犯罪行為，這些行為在成年人提交時將被視為錯誤行為。“即使法院在廣泛的社區預防活動中是一個積極的合作伙伴，它也將保留對那些沒有被阻止從事非法行為的青少年作出反應的主要責任”(Bonnie, Johnson, Chemers,Schuck, 2013)。法院將繼續決定在此之前對青少年和家庭進行代禱的種類和權力。其可行性在于該框架能夠與正確的不成熟的不法分子進行調解，并利用正確的調解種類和措施?！胺ㄔ盒枰獙彶樵u估青少年在系統不同接觸點的方法，并干預青少年的生活，并促進防止再次犯罪的核心任務”(Bonnie, Johnson, Chemers,Schuck, 2013)。

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

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).

青少年法庭是如何運作的，以及出現在法庭上的青少年遭遇了什么，這些程序在引導時幾乎沒有開放或網絡意識。與把青少年和成年人一起關在監獄不同，早期青少年法庭制定了一個緩刑框架，并單獨設立了康復和治療辦公室，為未成年人提供監督、指導和指導。“美國最高法院裁定，憲法要求在少年法庭被控犯罪的青少年享有許多與被控犯罪的成年人相同的正當程序權利，包括聘請律師的權利和與證人對證的權利”(少年法律中心，2019年)。最高法院為青少年賦予了額外的神圣權利，包括對青少年的指控可以超越合理的不確定性的特權，以及防止雙重風險的特權。各國設立了將青年從青少年轉移到成人刑事法庭進行初步和懲戒的組成部分。有時，這些新法律給年輕人帶來了最嚴重的刑罰負擔——死刑和沒有假釋的生存?！霸S多新的州法律還將青少年暴露在與成年罪犯關押在一起的危險和潛在虐待行為中，就像他們在一個多世紀前最初的少年法庭成立之前所經歷的那樣”(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建議改變政策

 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.

在田納西州，青少年公平傳達了確保公開安全并控制成本的方法建議，辦法是將框架資產集中在最值得注意的危險青年身上。田納西州還規定避免進一步的青少年公平框架通過早期反應將較低水平的青少年包括在內;然而，支持強有力的做法是通過監督和再投資在全州范圍內建立一個更有根據的、以證據為基礎的政府。“青少年司法聯盟(CJJ)——由12000多名青少年司法從業者、執法官員、青少年發展專家、社區服務提供者、青少年、家庭以及美國所有州、領地和哥倫比亞特區的立法者組成——準備了這些政策建議，以支持預防、早期干預、家庭賦權、以及適合發展的方法，讓接觸到青少年司法系統的青少年恢復和重建生活”(CJJ, 2019)。建議是重新任命青少年公平項目，確保青少年司法和犯罪預防法案的正確使用和監督，處理合法的法院請求，重新授權離家出走和貧困青少年法案，并擴展已證明的方法，以建立學校的承諾和成就的所有年輕人，避免將學校紀律方法和青少年公平框架制裁混為一談。也被稱為“從學校到監獄的管道”。戰略的另一個變化是，確保被處置的青少年被視為幸存者，而不是被譴責，并制定保護兒童和網絡的項目。

Conclusion結論

 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.

隨著青少年譴責和安排談話的結束，我們發現，拒絕青少年通常不是最好的選擇。青少年平等框架的目標取決于恢復。例如，未滿18歲的青少年不應該被判處死刑，而且在沒有進一步上訴的機會的情況下不能被判處存在罪，因為這個人被認為這些紀律是無情的，對青少年來說是罕見的。如果這個框架能讓青少年恢復正常，給那些有問題的人他們可能需要的設備，他們就有機會徹底改變自己。

References參考文獻

留學生Essay相關專業范文素材資料，盡在本網，可以隨時查閱參考。本站也提供多國留學生課程作業寫作指導服務，如有需要可以咨詢本平臺。