The
lives of children in early American history vary greatly in comparison to the
lives of children today. The idea of a
childhood filled with leisure and fun was an unobtainable dream to children
raised in early America. Instead, an
historical account of the lives and treatment of children is more accurately
depicted as resembling the lives of mature adults. Furthermore, because children were viewed as
adults, children were criminally sanctioned and subject to severe physical
punishment like adults. By today’s
standards such treatment would be considered abusive and unethical. Although it would seem like a dramatic
transformation in ideology surrounding the treatment of children, the process
was actually very slow and gradual. Understanding
the historical perspective of how juvenile delinquents were treated upon the
founding of the United States and the numerous judicial and social advancements
that aided in the change of ideology allows for a more comprehensive
understanding of the current treatment of juvenile delinquents.
Early American history is marked by a very different
ideology of treatment towards children.
This difference stems from the family dynamics that existed. Early American families were forced to
perform extreme physical labor in order to maintain a household and survive;
therefore, children were birthed and raised with the sole purpose of being
helpful and contributing family members.
Due to the lack of medical advancements infant mortality rates were
extremely high. This resulted in
parents, especially mothers, avoiding attachment and emotional bondage to children. With the lack of attachment between parents
and children and the high expectations to preform physical labor, children were
viewed more as indentured slaves and property then family. Because of this, children were punished
severely for disobedience, unproductivity, and ill-temperament. (Siegel and
Welsh 11) Examples of such punishment
included whipping, beating, flogging, disownment, and even death. In addition to being viewed as property,
children were also viewed as adults as soon as capable of physical labor. Therefore, no distinction was made between
adults and children when it came to severity of punishment and criminal
sanctioning. Early judicial practices
reflect this ideology. For example, Massachusetts enacted the Stubborn Child
Law in 1646 which provided:
‘If any man have a stubborn
and rebellious sonne of sufficient years and understanding, which will not obey
the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and that when they have
chastened him will not hark unto them’ they could bring him before the court
and testify that he would not obey. If
the magistrate then found the child to be unrepentant and incapable of control,
such a child could be put to death. (Siegel and Welsh 23)
Although
some laws were in place to protect the wellbeing of the child, rarely were
there any cases of abuse brought to court and successfully argued. The practice of severe punishment and
treatment of juveniles lasted well into the late 1800’s.
Towards the late 1800’s ideology surrounding the
treatment of juveniles began to change due to the changing family dynamics. Children were no longer necessary for labor
purposes because of technological advancements.
Therefore, families began to have fewer children and for a new purpose of
enjoyment. In addition, medical
advancements significantly decreased infant mortality rates; therefore, children
became more closely connected with parents.
As a result, parents became increasingly concerned about the wellbeing
of their children. (Siegel and Welsh 16)
Society began to rethink the severe treatment of juveniles and pushed
for a more understanding and compassionate approach. During this time a group known as the Child
Savers became revolutionaries for the development of children’s rights. This very influential group lobbied for
children’s rights and the separation of adult and juvenile justice systems. Eventually the Child Savers were successful in
their endeavors and a formal juvenile justice system was created. (Siegel and
Welsh 19) The first juvenile court was
established in Cook County, Illinois, in 1899. (Frontline) The establishment of the court was centered on
the idea of parens patriae. According to
a Frontline documentary parens patriae means, “the State as parent-- which was
interpreted to mean that it was the state's duty not only to protect the public
interest in juvenile offender cases, but also to intervene and serve as the
guardian of the interests of the children involved.” (Frontline) This change in ideology set a strong
foundation for the continued development for a more structured juvenile justice
system.
As time progressed, further Judicial
advancements were made that aided in the development of a juvenile justice
system based on concern for the wellbeing and development of juveniles. Several land mark cases regarding juveniles
trace this transition. In 1966 in the
case of Kent v. United States, “The Supreme Court determined that
a juvenile is entitled to certain minimal rights and procedures before waiver
to a criminal court may be granted.” (NCJRS)
In 1967 the Supreme Court decided, “timely notice of specific issues,
notification of right to counsel and appointment of counsel if the family
cannot afford an attorney, protection against self-incrimination, and sworn
testimony subject to cross-examination" were mandatory requirements
afforded to juveniles In re Gault.
(NCJRS) Shortly after, in 1969, the Bill
of Rights was considered to apply to juveniles, which afforded the same
constitutional right to juveniles as adults.
(NCJRS) Most importantly in 1974,
Congress enacted the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, which
required the juvenile offenders be separated from adult offenders. (NCJRS) These land mark cases helped to further
create a juvenile justice system that was conscious of the fundamental rights
and needs of juveniles.
Although the treatment of juveniles
has become significantly more focused on compassion and understanding, the
juvenile justice system is still in limbo between early American ideology and
modern ideology. For example, in the 1980’s
and 1990’s violent juvenile crime began to rise. In response, the nation
developed a concern for public safety and began to implement harsher sanctioning
on juvenile offenders. (Livers) The
ideology of the justice system and the public began to revert back to the one
in place in early American history.
Harsher sanctioning and less tolerance has been the Juvenile Justice
System platform since the 1980’s.
However in more recent years, the idea of a more comprehensive and
merciful treatment of juveniles is again becoming a frontrunner in public
ideology. For example, in June of 2012
the United State Supreme Court banned the use of life without the possibility
of parole as a sentence for juvenile offenders. (Livers) Public ideology has and will continue to
fluctuate in response to current events and crime trends, as does, the
fluctuating limbo between severe sanctioning and more empathetic treatment.
The historical perspective of the
treatment of juveniles allows for a comprehensive analysis of how juveniles
were treated and why the treatment of juveniles has changed over time. In addition, understanding the historical
perspective of the treatment of juveniles allows for changes to be made to
better the juvenile justice system and the treatment of juveniles in the
future. Understanding the historical
perspective is key to implementing and maintaining a juvenile justice system
that has adequately balanced the punishment and treatment of offenders.
References:
Frontline.
"Child or Adult: A Century Long View." PBS. WGBH educational
foundation, 2012. Web. 2 Oct 2012. <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/juvenile/stats/childadult.html>.
Livers, Dr. Mary.
State of Louisiana. Youth Services Office of Juvenile Justice. U.S. History.
Office of Juvenile Justice, Print.
<http://ojj.la.gov/index.php?page=sub&id=230>.
NCJRS. U.S.
Department of Justice. National Crime Justice Reference Service. Jurisdictional
Technical Assistance Package for Juvenile Corrections. Office of Justice
Programs, 2000. Print.
<https://www.ncjrs.gov/html/ojjdp/juris_tap_report/ch2_01.html>.
Siegel, Larry J,
and Brandon C Welsh. Juvenile Delinquency, Theory, Practice, And Law.
11. Belmont: Wadsworth Pub Co, 2012. 1-31. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment