# data[].attributes.body
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTKIp5nQRA0&t=300s

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
En el ring: Legalizar las drogas: A favor o en contra

If playback doesn't begin shortly, try restarting your device.

0:00

19:16

5:00 / 19:16•Watch full video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
En el ring: Legalizar las drogas: A favor o en contra

# data[].attributes.body
https://medlineplus.gov/spanish/druguseandaddiction.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introducción

¿Qué son las drogas?

Las drogas son sustancias químicas que pueden cambiar el funcionamiento de su cuerpo y mente. Incluyen medicamentos recetados, medicamentos de venta libre, alcohol, tabaco y drogas ilegales.

¿Qué es el consumo de drogas?

El consumo o uso indebido de drogas incluye:

Uso de sustancias ilegales, como:

Uso indebido de medicinas recetadas, incluyendo opioides. Esto significa tomar medicamentos de una manera diferente a la prescrita por el profesional de la salud. Incluye:

Tomar un medicamento recetado para otra persona

Tomar una dosis mayor que la recomendada

Usar el medicamento de una forma diferente de la que debe hacerlo. Por ejemplo, en lugar de tragar sus tabletas, puede aplastarlas y luego inhalarlas o inyectarlas

Usar el medicamento para otro propósito, como drogarse

Uso indebido de medicamentos de venta libre, incluyendo usarlos para otro propósito y usarlos de una forma diferente a la que se supone

El consumo de drogas es peligroso. Puede dañar su cerebro y cuerpo, a veces en forma permanente. Puede herir a las personas que le rodean, incluyendo amigos, familia, niños y bebés no nacidos. El consumo de drogas también puede conducir a la adicción.

¿Qué es la drogadicción?

La adicción a las drogas es una enfermedad cerebral crónica. Hace que una persona tome drogas repetidamente, a pesar del daño que provoca. El uso repetido de drogas puede cambiar el cerebro y provocar adicción.

Los cambios cerebrales de la adicción pueden ser duraderos, por lo que la adicción a las drogas se considera una enfermedad "recurrente". Esto significa que las personas en recuperación corren el riesgo de volver a consumir drogas, incluso después de años de no tomarlas.

¿Todos quienes consumen drogas se vuelven adictos?

No todos quienes usan drogas se vuelven adictos. El cuerpo y cerebro de cada persona es diferente, por lo que su reacción a las drogas también puede ser diferente. Algunas personas pueden volverse adictas rápidamente, o puede ocurrir con el tiempo. Otras personas nunca se vuelven adictas. Que alguien se vuelva adicto o no depende de muchas cosas, incluyendo factores genéticos, ambientales y del desarrollo.

¿Quién está en riesgo de la adicción a las drogas?

Varios factores de riesgo pueden hacer que sea más propenso a volverse adicto a las drogas, incluyendo:

Su biología: Las personas pueden reaccionar a las drogas de manera diferente. A algunas personas les gusta la sensación la primera vez que prueban una droga y quieren más. Otros odian cómo se sienten y nunca lo vuelven a intentar

Problemas de salud mental: Las personas que tienen problemas de salud mental no tratados, como depresión, ansiedad o trastorno de déficit de atención e hiperactividad (TDAH) tienen más probabilidades de volverse adictas. Esto puede suceder porque el consumo de drogas y los problemas de salud mental afectan las mismas partes del cerebro. Además, las personas con estos problemas pueden usar drogas para tratar de sentirse mejor

Problemas en el hogar: Si su hogar es un lugar poco feliz o lo era cuando era niño, es más probable que tenga un problema de drogas

Problemas en la escuela, trabajo o al hacer amigos: Puede usar drogas para distraerse de estos problemas

Andar con otras personas que usan drogas: Ellos podrían alentarlo a probar drogas

Comenzar a consumir drogas cuando es joven: Cuando los niños usan drogas, afecta cómo sus cuerpos y cerebros terminan de crecer. Esto aumenta sus posibilidades de volverse adicto cuando es adulto

¿Cuáles son las señales de que alguien tiene un problema de drogas?

Las señales de que alguien tiene un problema de drogas incluyen:

Cambiar mucho de amigos

Pasar mucho tiempo solo

Perder interés en sus cosas favoritas

No cuidarse a sí mismos, por ejemplo, no tomar duchas, no cambiarse de ropa ni lavarse los dientes

Sentirse muy cansado y triste

Comer más o menos de lo habitual

Tener mucha energía, hablar rápido o decir cosas que no tienen sentido

Estar de mal humor

Pasar rápidamente entre sentirse mal y sentirse bien

Dormir a horas extrañas

Ausentarse de citas o compromisos importantes

Tener problemas en el trabajo o la escuela

Tener problemas en las relaciones personales o familiares

¿Cuáles son los tratamientos para la drogadicción?

Los tratamientos para la adicción a las drogas incluyen consejería, medicamentos o ambos. La investigación muestra que combinar medicamentos con consejería brinda a la mayoría de las personas la mejor oportunidad de éxito.

La consejería puede ser terapia individual, familiar y / o grupal. Puede ayudar a:

Comprender por qué se volvió adicto

Observar cómo las drogas cambiaron su comportamiento

Aprender a lidiar con sus problemas para no volver a usar drogas

Aprender a evitar lugares, personas y situaciones en las que podría sentirse tentado a usar drogas

Los medicamentos pueden ayudar con los síntomas de abstinencia. Para la adicción a ciertas drogas existen medicamentos que pueden ayudar a restablecer la función cerebral normal y disminuir la ansiedad por consumir drogas.

Si tiene un trastorno mental además de una adicción, se conoce como diagnóstico dual. Es importante tratar ambos problemas para aumentar las posibilidades de éxito del tratamiento.

Si tiene una adicción severa, es posible que necesite tratamiento hospitalario o residencial. Los programas de tratamiento residencial combinan servicios de vivienda y tratamiento.

¿Se puede prevenir el consumo de drogas y la adicción?

Es posible prevenir el consumo de drogas y la adicción. Los programas de prevención que involucran a familias, escuelas, comunidades y los medios de comunicación pueden prevenir o reducir el consumo de drogas y la adicción. Estos programas incluyen educación y divulgación para ayudar a las personas a comprender los riesgos del consumo de drogas.

NIH: Instituto Nacional sobre el Abuso de Drogas

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Consumo de drogas y la adicción: MedlinePlus en español

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Hay varios tipos de tratamiento para el consumo de drogas, pero lo mejor es prevenirlo. Entérese sobre el consumo de drogas y la adicción.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.peta.org/features/are-humans-supposed-to-eat-meat/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
People who eat meat argue that it's "natural" for humans to consume animals. But is this true or just an excuse to ignore the horrific ways in which animals are killed for food? Are we really supposed to eat meat?

We Don't Like Blood

Most humans are revolted by the sight of blood, intestines, and raw flesh and can't tolerate hearing the screams of animals being ripped apart. The bloody reality of killing and eating animals is innately repulsive to us.

We Don't Have Carnivorous Teeth

Humans have short, soft fingernails and small, dull canine teeth. All true carnivores have sharp claws and large canine teeth that are capable of tearing flesh without the help of knives and forks.

Real carnivores' jaws move only up and down, enabling them to tear chunks of flesh from their prey. Humans can move their jaws up and down and from side to side, and we also have flat molars (which carnivores lack), allowing us to grind up fruit and vegetables with our back teeth like herbivores do.

Dr. Richard Leakey, a renowned anthropologist, says, "You can't tear flesh by hand, you can't tear hide by hand. Our anterior teeth are not suited for tearing flesh or hide. We don't ... have large canine teeth, and we wouldn't have been able to deal with food sources that required those large canines."

Our Digestive System Doesn't Like Meat

Carnivores have short intestinal tracts that allow meat to pass quickly through their digestive system. Humans' intestinal tracts are much longer, like those of plant-eaters. This gives the body more time to break down fiber and absorb the nutrients from plant-based foods.

Meat May Cause Food Poisoning in Humans

True carnivores gulp down chunks of raw flesh, relying on their strong stomach acids to break it down and kill the dangerous bacteria in meat that would otherwise sicken or kill them. Humans have much weaker stomach acids that are similar to those found in animals who digest pre-chewed fruits and vegetables. Without carnivorous stomach acids to kill the bacteria in meat, dining on animal flesh can give us food poisoning. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, meat is a significant cause of foodborne illness. Every year in the U.S. alone, food poisoning sickens more than 48 million people and kills more than 3,000.

Because of this, we must cook meat to make it easier to digest and to destroy bacteria, but there may be a link between cooking meat at high temperatures and the development of colon cancer.

Meat Can Cause Heart Disease in Humans

Carnivorous animals in the wild virtually NEVER develop heart disease or suffer from strokes-ailments that humans can suffer an increased risk of developing due to their consumption of the saturated fat and cholesterol found in meat.

Heart disease is the number one killer in the U.S., according to the American Heart Association. If humans were meant to eat meat, why do meat-eaters have a 32 percent higher risk of developing heart disease than vegetarians?

We May Be Getting Too Much Protein

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, most Americans get plenty of protein without paying special attention to what they eat. We're actually more likely to consume too much protein, resulting in nutritional deficiencies or insufficient fiber.

Eating too much protein may also increase your risk of developing heart disease and may worsen kidney function in people with kidney disease because the body can have trouble eliminating all the waste products of protein metabolism.

T. Colin Campbell-director of the Cornell-China-Oxford Project on Nutrition, Health, and Environment and author of The China Study -says, "In the next ten years, one of the things you're bound to hear is that animal protein is one of the most toxic nutrients of all that can be considered."

Didn't Our Human Ancestors Eat Meat?

During most of our evolutionary history, we were largely vegetarian: Plant foods, such as yams, made up the bulk of our ancestors' diet. The addition of modest amounts of meat to the early human diet came with the discovery of fire, which allowed us to lower the risk of being sickened or killed by parasites and bacteria in meat. This didn't turn our ancestors into carnivores but rather allowed early humans to survive in areas and during periods in which plant foods were unavailable or scarce.

Modern Meat Consumption

Until fairly recently, only the wealthiest people could afford to feed, raise, and slaughter animals for meat, but with the rise of the modern middle class, consumption of meat in the U.S. has almost doubled over the last 100 years.

Now, animal flesh is relatively cheap and easily available because of factory farming and government subsidies, and heart disease, strokes, cancer, and obesity are increasing worldwide.

Are Humans Supposed to Eat Meat?

Numerous studies have shown that meat is not ideal for the human body and may actually be making us sick and killing us. The human body is intended to function on plant-based foods that are full of fiber, antioxidants, unsaturated fat, essential fatty acids, phytochemicals, and cholesterol-free protein.

Do the compassionate thing for both animals and your body, go vegan. If you need help getting started, order yourself a free copy of PETA's Vegan Starter Kit.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
People who eat meat argue that it's "natural" for humans to consume animals. But is this true or just an excuse to ignore the horrific ways in which animals are killed for food? Are we really supposed to eat meat?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Así fue como el sexo, las drogas y las apuestas ayudaron a la gente a sobrellevar la pandemia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dos años después de la pandemia, el negocio nunca había estado mejor para el cannabis, las apuestas y la pornografía en Estados Unidos.

# data[].attributes.body
https://greengarageblog.org/7-top-pros-and-cons-of-juveniles-being-tried-as-adults

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Two Wisconsin girls, both 12 years old when they stabbed their classmates 19 times, are causing a heated debate of whether or not they will be tried in an adult court. In Wisconsin, however, any juvenile over the age of 10 who is charged with homicide or attempted homicide will be automatically tried as adults, which makes the debate moot and academic. Here is a list of certain points you should consider regarding this issue.

1. If they are convicted as juveniles, they would gain freedom from the system at age 25.
2. If the girls are tried in an adult court and found guilty, they could be in prison for the next 65 years.
3. They would first serve their prison term in a juvenile facility, and then transferred to an adult prison at the age of 18, which leaves plenty of room for the girls to become targets of abuse.

So the big question now is should we show sympathy for the girls or the victim? Should their punishment be reduced even if the crime they committed is something only adults are supposed to be capable of doing? Is it okay to accept the argument that they are unaware of the gravity of the crime at the time that they committed it? Isn't it a fact that the only difference between a juvenile and an adult suspect is age?

Juvenile crimes on the rise are not something society should ignore. But those who oppose trying juveniles in an adult court argue that it does not benefit the suspect or the society, if they are punished the same way as adults.

For a juvenile case to be transferred to an adult criminal court, it has to be eligible for a waiver. That is, the judge waives any protection that a juvenile court provides to a minor offender, treating him as an adult that should be punished accordingly. Now the waiver can be granted if the case meets the following factors:

The minor is older.

The charge is a particularly serious offense.

Lengthy juvenile record already exists.

Any rehabilitation efforts in the past have been unsuccessful.

Youth services required to help the minor would be lengthy.

Whether or not you agree to invoke the waiver petition depends on which side of the fence you are on. But the fact remains that trying minors as adults has its share of pros and cons.

List of Pros of Juveniles Being Tried as Adults

1. Deter and minimize crimes committed by minors
There is no denying that crimes committed by minors are on the rise. According to the Office of Justice Programs, the number of juvenile arrests made in 2012 is over 1 million, which may be alarming but is actually 37% less than the arrests made in 2003. Based on the violent crime index, aggravated assault has the highest number of arrests, followed by robbery, forcible rape, and murder and non-negligent manslaughter. If these offenders will be tried as adults and punished to the full extent of the law, they would probably think twice about committing a crime or violating the law.

2. Brings justice to the victims
Some offenses may be forgivable, but not for extreme crimes similar to what the Wisconsin girls committed. Taking a life is murder regardless of the age of the offender, and the penalties to be imposed must not discriminate. After all, the victim's life will never be returned, and the family will permanently lose their loved one. It is only right that justice is served accordingly, so that the victims and their families will also feel a sense of justice.

3. Correct a case of blind justice
One of the problems in juvenile courts is that they have a tendency to focus on the age of the suspect and not on the criminal act and the reason that it was committed. Even when a minor shows no remorse for the crime committed, the court still has the tendency to exercise leniency. Say a boy's found guilty and then imprisoned in a juve facility. When he is released at age 25, what are the odds that he would become a full-fledge adult criminal?

4. Trial by jury
In a juvenile court, the judge makes all the decisions. But if minors are tried in an adult court, there will be a jury that will help decide whether or not they are guilty. So their fate falls in the hands of a group of individuals and not just a single person.

List of Cons of Juveniles Being Tried as Adults

1. Minors will be put at risk
Similar to the concern of the lawyer and families of the Wisconsin girls, young offenders are at risk of being sent to an adult correctional facility if they are tried in an adult court. Imagine what would become of these young individuals when mixed with adult prisoners with horrific criminal records. How will these minors handle different situations in an adult prison?

2. Give the impression of lost hope
Some opponents argue that not all young offenders end up as full-fledged criminals. So throwing them in jail with adult offenders would take away any hope of rehabilitation. There is even a high probability that they would come out of prison a hardened criminal.

Another reason that juveniles should be given a leeway is that they don't always make responsible decisions. According to Laurence Steinberg, a psychology professor at Temple University, "Adolescent decision making is characterized by emotional and cognitive immaturity, intense peer pressure and heightened attitude toward risk. Their inability to consistently make responsible decisions makes them less blameworthy than adults."

3. Fewer varieties of punishment
In an adult court, criminals can only end up in prison, and even risk being given the death penalty. This gives minor offenders very little option when serving the terms of their sentence. Whereas in a juvenile court, offenders are given curfews, put under house arrest or sent to counseling. The problem with these punishments, however, is that they effectively take away a valuable lesson that a juvenile is supposed to learn while serving the terms of his sentence. Now, if he was in jail, he is likely to regret the choices he made.

About the Author
Brandon Miller has a B.A. from the University of Texas at Austin. He is a seasoned writer who has written over one hundred articles, which have been read by over 500,000 people. If you have any comments or concerns about this blog post, then please contact the Green Garage team here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
7 Top Pros and Cons of Juveniles Being Tried As Adults

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Two Wisconsin girls, both 12 years old when they stabbed their classmates 19 times, are causing a heated debate of whether or not they will be tried in an adult court. In Wisconsin, however, any juvenile over the age of 10 who is charged with homicide or attempted homicide will be automatically tried as adults, which makes the debate moot and academic.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.americanbar.org/groups/litigation/committees/childrens-rights/articles/2016/should-juveniles-be-charged-as-adults/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This story highlights an important aspect of our criminal justice system: the legal construction of juvenile crime. We now operate with the understanding that a juvenile's action may not be the same as an adult's-and, instead, that the juvenile might merit unique consideration under the law-and that punishment should perhaps be tailored to development and reform. However, there is lack of uniformity in how we define a "juvenile" and the process by which the law addresses a juvenile's actions. Jurisdictions have struggled to navigate the line between "leading a juvenile in the right direction" and "destroying the child." This struggle is not new to our criminal justice system.

Evolution of the Juvenile Court System in
the United States

In the 1700s, laws did not distinguish between juveniles and adults within the criminal justice system. According to a PBS Frontline online article, " Child or Adult? A Century Long View," children as young as seven years of age were charged, tried, and sentenced in adult criminal courts. This posed many problems, given that there were typically no distinctions made between age, gender, and mental illness, so prison and jail populations were mixed with juveniles and adult criminals. See Center on Juvenile & Criminal Justice, " Juvenile Justice History."

Progressive reformers of the penal system sought to change this, and the Society for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency founded the New York House of Refuge in 1825, an institution specifically for juvenile delinquents. "Child or Adult? A Century Long View," supra. The idea was to educate and rehabilitate juveniles so as to attack what were believed to be the roots of juvenile delinquency-a lack of moral education and standards. Id. These institutions proliferated across other cities and states, followed by the first juvenile court being established in Cook County, Illinois, in 1899. Id. Juvenile courts were designed to provide not only rehabilitative functions but also protective supervision for youth. "Juvenile Justice History," supra.

Problems with these early juvenile courts emerged. Judges had broad discretion over their cases without formal hearings, resulting in wide disparities in treatment of juvenile offenders. "Child or Adult? A Century Long View," supra ; "Juvenile Justice History," supra. In the 1960s, a series of cases made their way to the U.S. Supreme Court, establishing procedures and due process rights for individuals in the juvenile court system. Id. Ultimately, these decisions led Congress to pass the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act in 1974, which still governs the juvenile justice system. "Child or Adult? A Century Long View," supra. Through the act, states were offered grants to develop community-based programs as alternatives to institutionalization.

In the 1970s and 1980s, media reports began highlighting an upward trend in violent crime rates, which in turn shifted the political emphasis to being "tough on crime." As a result, sweeping reforms were passed in many states to make it easier to try juveniles in adult criminal courts, and more punitive juvenile justice laws were passed. "Child or Adult? A Century Long View," supra.

Violent crime rates and juvenile crime have been in a steady decline over the past 20 years; however, reforms to restore the juvenile court system to its original vision have not been as swift. U.S. Dep't of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prevention, Trying Juveniles as Adults: An Analysis of State Transfer Laws and Reporting (Juvenile Offenders and Victims, Nat'l Report Series Bulletin, Sept. 2011). If the point of juvenile courts is to deter and rehabilitate juveniles so that they can succeed as adults, then it is important to evaluate the success of that mission when a juvenile is charged as an adult in the criminal justice system.

Being "Transferred" to Adult Court versus
"Aging Out" of Juvenile Court

There are significant differences between states' treatment of juveniles within their court systems. All states have an "upper age of majority," by which one is considered eligible for juvenile court jurisdiction. If a juvenile is beyond that age, they are automatically within the jurisdiction of adult criminal court, regardless of the offense charged. This is to be distinguished from cases that can originate in juvenile court but whose jurisdiction can be "waived" to adult criminal court by judicial waiver, prosecutorial discretion, or statutory rule.

Every state determines at what age an adolescent is no longer considered a "juvenile" and becomes an "adult" for criminal justice purposes. Once the "juvenile" reaches the statutorily defined age and is accused of a crime, that individual will automatically be charged in the adult criminal system. According to Juvenile Justice Geography, Policy Practice & Statistics (GPS) information from 2015, the overwhelming majority of jurisdictions (41 states and the District of Columbia) define age 17 as the highest age that an individual can have a case originate in juvenile court. Juvenile Justice, Geography, Policy, Practice & Statistics, " Jurisdictional Boundaries." Seven states use age 16 as the upper age for juvenile court jurisdiction (Georgia, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, South Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin).

In only two states-New York and North Carolina-age 15 is considered the upper age of majority for juvenile court. In these states, if a juvenile is age 16 or 17, and gets charged with any criminal offense, the case is originated and tried in adult criminal court. However, in 2014, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo announced the formation of a state task force to evaluate and design a plan to reform the justice system in New York to raise the age. Jeffrey A. Butts & John K. Roman, Line Drawing: Raising the Minimum Age of Criminal Court Jurisdiction in New York (Feb. 2014). In North Carolina as well, there have been attempts to raise the age in the legislature, though no measures have passed to date. Rose Hoban, " Advocates Try Again to 'Raise the Age'," N.C. Health News, Apr. 1 2015.

In addition, according to the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, all states have laws that allow the transfer of a juvenile court case to the adult criminal court, typically under certain circumstances and within certain ages. Thus, the juveniles can be younger than the "age of majority" for juvenile court and still be transferred to adult court. Trying Juveniles as Adults, supra. There are three typical ways that a case can be transferred from juvenile court jurisdiction to adult court: judicial waiver laws, prosecutorial discretion or concurrent jurisdiction laws, and statutory exclusion laws.

Both the Juvenile Justice GPS and report from the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention explain that in a judicial waiver, the juvenile court judge has the responsibility of waiving jurisdiction, thereby sending the case to adult court. The judge will evaluate the waiver based on a variety of factors that typically include the juvenile's age and alleged crime. There are some circumstances where the waiver is presumed, but discretion ultimately rests with the juvenile court judge to make the waiver. Id.; "Jurisdictional Boundaries," supra . A formal hearing and guidelines are in place to assist the judicial waiver process.

In prosecutorial discretion or concurrent jurisdiction laws, there is a class of cases that could be brought before either a juvenile or adult court. It is typically within the prosecutor's discretion to determine which court will initiate the criminal charges. Some states have formal standards, but there may not be any statutory standards articulated that a prosecutor must follow when using his or her discretion. "Jurisdictional Boundaries," supra; Trying Juveniles as Adults, supra . There has been a rise in prosecutorial discretion laws.

With statutory exclusion laws, the legislature has typically granted the adult criminal court exclusive jurisdiction over certain types of cases involving juvenile offenders. When a case falls under one of the statutory exclusion laws, it is mandated that the case be filed in adult court rather than in juvenile court. "Jurisdictional Boundaries," supra; Trying Juveniles as Adults, supra .

In addition, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention's 2011 report found that states may have additional kinds of transfer laws. Some jurisdictions abide by a "once an adult, always an adult" rule, meaning that if a juvenile has been criminally prosecuted as an adult in the past, any future crimes will be automatically filed in adult court rather than juvenile court, regardless of the seriousness of the alleged offense. Trying Juveniles as Adults, supra . Some may have reverse waiver laws that allow juveniles who are charged in adult court to petition that court to have the case transferred to juvenile court; in these cases, the burden is on the juvenile to prove why the case should be transferred to juvenile court. Id. Last, there could be a blended sentence law under which juvenile courts have discretion to impose adult sentences or adult courts have discretion to impose juvenile dispositions. Id.

Impact on Juveniles Sentenced in Adult Criminal Court

The increase in laws that allow more juveniles to be prosecuted in adult court rather than juvenile court was intended to serve as a deterrent for rising youth violent crime. As such, it is important to evaluate what happens to juveniles who go through the adult court system to determine if they are "deterred" from future crime. A comprehensive literature review was completed by the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) School of Law's Juvenile Justice Project in July 2010 that reviewed the impact of juvenile cases prosecuted in adult court. The report, The Impact of Prosecuting Youth in the Criminal Justice System: A Review of the Literature, ultimately found that there has been little to no deterrent effect on juveniles prosecuted in adult court, and in many states, recidivism rates have actually increased.

Statistics compiled from 15 states revealed that juveniles prosecuted in adult court and released from state prisons were rearrested 82 percent of the time, while their adult counterparts were rearrested 16 percent less. Id. Meanwhile, studies have shown that juveniles prosecuted in juvenile court benefit from the services made available to them through that process, as juvenile institutions provide programs and resources specifically designed for juvenile development. Id. Juveniles in adult court often do not have the opportunity to acquire critical skills, competencies, and experiences that are crucial to their success as adults; rather, they are subject to an environment in which adult criminals become their teachers. Id.

"As a crime control policy, placing more young people in criminal court appears to symbolize toughness more than it actually delivers toughness, and that symbol may have a high price." Line Drawing, supra. The effects of being "tough on crime" mean that there is likely to be longer delays in the court process, longer time spent in pre-incarceration, exposure of juveniles to adult offenders, problems with controlling prison populations, and denial of needed services to juveniles. Id.

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention report evaluated a study of outcomes for juveniles prosecuted in adult court rather than in juvenile court and found that there were counter-deterrent effects of transfer laws. Trying Juveniles as Adults, supra . A summary of six studies found that there was greater overall recidivism for juveniles prosecuted in adult court than juveniles whose crimes "matched" in juvenile court. Id. Juveniles in adult court also recidivated sooner and more frequently. Id. These higher rates of recidivism can be attributed to a variety of reasons, including lack of access to rehabilitative resources in the adult corrections system, problems when housed with adult criminals, and direct and indirect effects of a criminal conviction on the life chances of a juvenile. Id.

Conclusion

The reason that juvenile courts were originally created in the nineteenth century was because society recognized that juveniles did not have the cognitive development that adults had, would benefit more from rehabilitative services to prevent recidivism, and needed more protections. Sociological and political shifting of attitudes caused legislators to believe they needed to be "tough on crime," and transfers of juveniles to adult court became more frequent. Results of those policies demonstrate that they have failed as recidivism rates for juveniles increased when prosecuted in adult court versus juvenile court.

Reforms need to occur just as swiftly as the reforms to prosecute more juveniles in adult court began, so that the emphasis can shift back to focusing on the best interests of the child when juveniles are charged with crimes. Juveniles need resources to equip them to succeed when they are released from juvenile facilities, rather than face the devastating effects of being housed in adult prison systems. Juveniles should be treated as juveniles in the court justice system, with a focus on rehabilitating rather than simply punishing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Should Juveniles Be Charged as Adults in the Criminal Justice System?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This story highlights an important aspect of our criminal justice system: the legal construction of juvenile crime. We now operate with the understanding that a juvenile's action may not be the same as an adult's-and, instead, that the juvenile might merit unique consideration under the law-and that punishment should perhaps be tailored to development and reform.

# data[].attributes.body
https://connectusfund.org/22-should-juveniles-be-tried-as-adults-pros-and-cons

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The United States is the only country in the world where the justice system will sentence children to death behind bars for the crimes that they commit. Although the conduct is usually deemed to be violent, which makes the individual a threat to the general population, there is no way out of the system if you are a juvenile tried as an adult and then sentenced to life in prison.

Cyntoia Brown is one story of about 10,000 who was sentenced as a juvenile for killing a man when she was just 16 years old. She was given clemency in 2019 after serving 15 years in prison for the crime. She has always maintained that her actions were in self-defense because the man she killed had purchased her for sex.

Brown reportedly shot the man while he was sleeping, and then stole his cash, guns, and truck as she fled the scene. Prosecutors argued that her motivation for killing was motivated by robbery instead of self-defense.

25% of the people who were sentenced to life in prison as a juvenile have no possibility of parole. As a nation, the pros and cons of having juveniles being tried as an adult is a subject with which many have been grappling for generations. It was as early as 1899 when the United States began creating the first courts for youth offenders. These are the key points to consider.

List of the Pros of Trying Juveniles as Adults

1. It offers a suitable penalty for severe crimes that some juveniles commit.
Even though they are juveniles because of their age, people under the age of 18 can commit severe crimes. According to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, there are approximately 350 killed each year because of a lone juvenile offender. Although this number is roughly 75% less than what it was in the early 1990s, it is still one of the highest rates in the world today. Approximately 40% of the murders that occur which involve a juvenile include an adult as well.

2. It reduces the chance that a repeat offender will commit multiple severe crimes.
From data released in 2016, the OJJDP reports that known juvenile offenders were involved in approximately 700 murders in the United States. That represents about 7% of all the known murder offenders which are in the country. Between 2003 to 2006, the estimated number of juvenile murder offenders increased by 32% after the drop from the 1990s before it was able to fall by 31% through 2016.

3. It treats teens who are almost adults as part of the adult system for the purpose of justice.
The severity of a crime that a juvenile commits typically increases as they get older. This trend is especially prevalent for homicide offenses. In 2016, approximately 9% of the known juvenile homicide offenders were under the age of 15. Within that same data set, 79% of the offenders were either 16 or 17 years old at the time they committed the crime. By sentencing them in a way that is similar to what an adult would receive, these older teens do not receive "credit" for the fact that they may only be a few months away from becoming a legal adult in the United States.

4. It creates a level of certainty in the justice system for victims.
Although it does not happen often, young children sometimes decide to commit premeditated crimes, including homicide, and the criminal justice system must respond appropriately. There is a case of a 10-year-old girl in the state of Wisconsin who was charged in 2018 in the killing of a 6-month-old, and state law requires anyone who is age 10 or above to have their case brought in adult court.

In this case, the 10-year-old girl allegedly dropped the baby boy, who then hit his head and began to cry. The girl then allegedly panicked, choosing to stomp him on the head to get him to be quiet. She told authorities that she was afraid that she would get into trouble. Prosecutors charged her with first-degree intentional homicide.

5. It provides a measure of consistency for the severity of the crime.
In 2006, the bodies of Marc and Debra Richardson, along with their 8-year-old son, were discovered in their home by an even younger boy who saw them through the window. The couple's 12-year-old daughter was missing from the home, so the first inclination for law enforcement was to think an abduction occurred. The reality of this crime scene is that Jasmine Richardson killed her parents and brother, stabbing the young boy in the chest while her boyfriend slit his throat. Her boyfriend was 23 and a "self-proclaimed 300-year-old werewolf." Jasmine was given 10 years in prison.

She was scheduled to complete her sentence in 2015, but then was released to the community in 2012 despite being convicted of a triple homicide.

6. It can offer services to the youth that would not be available in the juvenile system.
The juvenile system focuses on providing youth offenders with counseling, vocational development, and school access which allows them to continue with their studies. There may be some mental health supports available as well. When they are sentenced to the adult system, then they can take advantage of the additional programming that is available there, including addiction support, GED learning, and opportunity to continue an education.

7. It provides a way to teach accountability.
Children are often a product of their home environment. If illegal actions seem like they are "normal" or "accepted" in their household, then they will see that as being an acceptable course of action to take in the rest of society as well. Juvenile courts do not offer records that provide an explicit proof of lenience that is based on age, but the sentences offered to kids that are comparable to adult crimes suggest that this is a conclusion one could draw from the data. At some point, society needs to teach all youth, no matter what their home background may be, that there are actions which are permitted and ones that are not for the greater protection of everyone. Juveniles being tried as an adult is one way that we can begin this lesson.

8. It treats severe crimes with the seriousness that they deserve.
There are many crimes which children commit that are severe and draw into question how safe a community would be if they were allowed to be set free or serve a reduced or alternative sentence. Diante Pellum was 14 years old when he was accused of shooting another teen in the back of the head near Federal Way in Washington. Alexander Crisostomo was ordered to stand trial as an adult for killing a 41-year-old man when he was just 15. If these teens where given a standard youth sentence, then there is an excellent chance that they would be back on the street by the age of 25. Sentencing them as an adult gives the justice system the time it needs to offer a true chance at rehabilitation.

9. It provides the community with an opportunity to have a say in the process.
When children are tried in juvenile court, then the judge presiding over the case will have the final decision as to what the outcome of the proceedings will be. That means the judge is responsible for determining the guilt or innocence of the juvenile, and what their sentence should be for their crime. By transferring the case to the adult court system, it provides an opportunity for the community to weigh in on what they believe the outcome of the case should be. If they feel like it is improper to have the case held there, then they can take permitted actions as a juror to make that preference known.

List of the Cons of Trying Juveniles as Adults

1. It does not take into account the maturity of the child.
Laurence Steinberg works as an adolescent psychologist and he told Inside Edition in 2018 that it is rare to have juveniles tried as adults. In his opinion, this option for the justice system should be limited to teens who are at least 15 years old and are repeat violent offenders. In regards to the case of the 10-year-old girl in Wisconsin, Steinberg said that she wouldn't likely pass a competency test to stand trial in the first place. It is unconstitutional to try someone in court who doesn't know what is going on.

2. It does not usually offer an opportunity for rehabilitation.
In another case from the state of Wisconsin, two 12-year-old girls were accused of repeatedly stabbing their classmate to honor the Internet character "Slenderman." The Supreme Court for the state made the decision to try these two girls as adults. Both of them chose to plead guilty to the crime, of which their "friend" was able to survive. One girl was sentenced to 25 years in a mental institution, while the other was given 40 years. The adult system simply does not have the capacity to respond to the needs of children, especially those who are young, in ways that are developmentally appropriate.

3. It creates an element of risk for the child while they are in prison.
There are approximately 10,000 children who are currently housed in adult prison or jails on any given day in the United States. This response to the crime places them at a needless risk because a child is five times more likely to be sexually assaulted when serving time in an adult prison than they are if they are in a juvenile facility. These kids are 36 times more likely to commit suicide as well. There are untreated mental illnesses to consider, limited experiences in managing anxiety or trauma, and impulsive actions that are related more to biological development than logical outcomes.

Kalief Browder was 22 years old when he eventually committed suicide in June 2015. He had spent several years in solitary confinement as a teen at Rikers Island because he had allegedly stolen a backpack.

4. It reduces the number of options that are available for sentencing.
Judges who work in the juvenile justice system have multiple options available to them when sentencing children who commit a crime. Their options include house arrest, curfew, counseling, or treatment in residential programs in addition to juvenile facilities which are similar to jails or prisons. Moving a child into the adult court system exposes them to the mandatory sentencing guidelines which exist in most jurisdictions.

For the 10-year-old girl in Wisconsin who is accused of committing first-degree homicide, it is a Class A felony which can be sentenced to only life imprisonment. There are four articles of defense which can shift that penalty to something shorter, but it requires adequate provocation, unnecessary defensive force, the prevention of a felony, or the event occurred through coercion or necessity. There is very little wiggle room in these guidelines to address juveniles who are charged as an adult.

5. It creates more opportunities for youth to become repeat offenders.
The recidivism rates of juvenile offenders are typically much lower than they are for adults who are sentenced to jail or prison. General rates usually range from a low of 7% at 1 year of follow up to a high of 79% after 7 years of their initial release date. For youth offenders the rates range from a low of 0% after 1 year to a high of 41% after 5 years when following up if they were sentenced to a youth facility. When juveniles are with adults in the justice system, then their rates begin to climb to match those of the older offenders.

Statistics gathered from 15 different states revealed that juveniles prosecuted in adult court and released from a state prison had a recidivism rate of 82% compared to a 16% rate for their adult counterparts.

6. It prevents a child from having a fresh start even after they make necessary changes.
When children receive a conviction in the juvenile justice system, then their records are typically not accessible once they reach a specific age (usually 18 or 21, depending on their state). If the pre-teens or teens are tried and convicted as an adult, then this action stays on their permanent record. It becomes an accessible public record which employers, landlords, and others would research, which could limit their access to certain jobs or housing situations.

People who are convicted of a felony have an exceptionally difficult time trying to find employment in our current economy. Only 28 states have passed laws which ban employers from placing the conviction history of an individual on a job application. White males with a felony conviction receive a 17% callback rate, which is the highest of any demographic.

7. It does not reflect the understanding of the children in question.
There is an argument to be made that a 17-year-old committing a severe crime understands what they are doing and is willing to take on the risk of experiencing the potential for legal consequences because of their actions. When 9-year-old Cameron Kocher fired a rifle out of a window, accidentally striking his 7-year-old neighbor who was riding a snowmobile, that may not be the case.

When deciding to charge the young boy as an adult, the district attorney argued that Kocher lied in his answer - and lying is an "adult" response. He also fell asleep during the pretrial motions of the case, which showed a "lack of remorse" to prosecutors. We must remember that children and adults think differently, so trying to place adult responses on youth is not always appropriate.

8. It does not always reflect a measure of culpability.
Every day in the United States, offenders receive different sentences even if they caused the same harm because there are differences in culpability with each case. Adolescents are struggling with decision-making skills that are underdeveloped, immature, and impulsive. They do not experience future orientation in the same way that adults do. There is also a higher level of susceptibility to negative peer pressure in youth. Brain imaging reinforces the differences in physical structures that can impact the ability to reason or weigh the consequences of an action in children.

9. It does not provide them with youth-specific services.
Although there are advantages to having older teens in the adult system because they can take advantage of the available services, younger children require a juvenile-specific approach that is not available if they are tried and convicted as an adult. When kids enter the adult court system, then they do not usually have the same opportunity to acquire critical skills, experiences, or competencies that are critical to their future success as an adult. They are instead subjected to an environment where adult offenders become their teachers and idols, which can often lead to an ongoing cycle of crime.

10. It is a process which seems to disproportionally target minority demographics.
According to the 2016 juvenile justice report released by King County, WA, more than 85% of the defendants charged with robbery were 16 or 17 years old, with 50% of them using a firearm to commit their crime. Out of this group, African-American teens made up 43% of those who were filed upon during the study period for the report. When looking at the racial demographics of the county (which is where Seattle is located), only 6.2% of the population is African-American.

11. It does not give a defendant an opportunity to be tried by a "jury of their peers."
In the United States, you must be old enough to vote in order to sit on a jury. When teens under the age of 18 are charged with an adult crime, then one could argue that they are not having their case reviewed by people who are authentic peers. Someone who is in their 40s is going to have a very different life perspective than someone who is 16 years old. Although any crime deserves a potential consequence no matter how severe it might be, there is also a need to create a fair outcome which takes every element of the experience into consideration and that may not always happen when the decision is made to try juveniles as adults.

12. It can eliminate civil responsibilities for actions at the household level.
If a juvenile is charged with an adult crime, then such an action may limit the civil responsibilities that the parents have for the conduct of their child. Because the individual is being treated as an adult in the situation, some jurisdictions limit how victims can civilly pursue for damages that they may have suffered in that situation. There are other parental rights which may disappear in this situation as well, further limiting the way the legal system can attempt to make things right. In the quest to achieve justice, it is very possible to lose sight of it.

13. It creates a lifetime of effects for the child in question.
Charging juveniles in adult court will often cause exorbitant expenses that can often worsen the poverty that a family experiences. The economic burden of court costs, legal fees, restitution, and visitation can have long-term consequences for everyone involved. It creates a lifetime of negative impacts for the child because they have multiple obstacles in their way to create the change that is necessary - assuming that they are not serving multiple decades in prison for their crime in the first place.

The pros and cons of juveniles being tried as an adult are beginning to find some resolution. The Supreme Court of the United States declared that all states must retroactively apply a band on mandatory death-in-prison sentences for juveniles. Justice Kennedy at the time even wrote that children who commit heinous crimes are capable of changing. There is a need to protect the general population against violent actions. We also have a responsibility as a society to give our children a fighting chance for success.

Author Bio
Natalie Regoli is a child of God, devoted wife, and mother of two boys. She has a Masters Degree in Law from The University of Texas. Natalie has been published in several national journals and has been practicing law for 18 years. If you would like to reach out to contact Natalie, then go here to send her a message.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
22 Should Juveniles Be Tried as Adults Pros and Cons

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The United States is the only country in the world where the justice system will sentence children to death behind bars for the crimes that they commit. Although the conduct is usually deemed to be violent, which makes the individual a threat to the general population, there is no way out of the system if you are a juvenile tried as an adult and then sentenced to life in prison.

# data[].attributes.body
https://papersowl.com/examples/juveniles-tried-as-adults/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
How much more does the crime rate have to rise before we realize something needs to change? "The Juvenile Justice System was created to provide individualized rehabilitation to offenders of minor crimes such as truancy, shoplifting, and vandalism. But youth today are taking advantage of this lenient and outdated system and are committing violent crimes because they believe they will get off easy. It is a battle against the immeasurable loss of human life, personal security and wasted human resources. They fail to put themselves in the position of the daughters whose Dartmouth parents were brutally stabbed in the head and chest by 16- and 17-year-old boys or the pain of the Columbine [high school in Colorado] shootings. They forget that a crime is a crime, regardless of the offender's age and that sometimes the criminal justice system works harder for the criminal than the victim" (Estudillo, appohigh.org). Juveniles should be tried as adults.

There are benefits of trying juveniles as adults, most arguments that are found are against it, but research has found that it is very helpful. One of the benefits of trying juveniles as adults are that it minimizes and stops crimes committed by minors. According to the Office of Justice Programs, the number of arrests of people under 18 made in 2017, in the US is 809,700. This number has gone down 59% since 2008, but it is still very high.

By trying juveniles as adults it could help stop minors from committing violent crimes or any crimes at all. The court systems are now outdated and very lenient, which could very well be a problem. Today's youth take advantage of the outdated court systems and commit crimes because they know they won't get in very much trouble. After they commit a crime, even if it is a small crime, they are now criminals and when they realize that they won't get in trouble they will keep committing crimes. Eventually, some of the same ones that got off easy could end up doing a very serious crime like murdering someone or multiple people.

Another benefit of trying juveniles as adults is bringing justice, not only to the criminal but also to the victims families. The families of the victims will feel more at peace knowing the criminal that took the life or harmed their loved one is behind bars. They will feel better knowing that the criminal is no longer a threat to them or anyone else. No matter the age of the criminal, they will still feel threatened and be scared if that criminal is walking around free. These families and the victim will have to worry about looking over their shoulder every time they try to go somewhere or even when they are in their own home.

The reason a justice system was created is to stop criminals and keep them from committing any more crimes or at least show them there is a consequence for their actions. So, when juveniles are let off easy for a crime they learn that they can commit more crimes or the same crime and they won't get in trouble for it. They end up being repeat offenders and could eventually move on to more violent crimes. "The transition from adolescence to adulthood is a period of increasing severity of offenses and an increase in lethal violence. Most of the violence is directed at victims of the same age, and the age period of 16-24 is a high-risk time for violent victimization." (From Juvenile Delinquency to Young Adult Offending, www.nij.gov).

In a juvenile correction facility, there is only one person that determines the punishment of the minor. If the minor is tried in an adult court, they will have to go in front of a jury so there is more than one person that makes the decision. When going in front of a jury, there is more than one point of view. With a jury majority rules, so if multiple people agree that the minor should be punished then the minor will be punished.

There are pros to trying juveniles as adults but just like everything else it also has cons. One problem with trying juveniles as adults are that the minors will be put at risk. A juveniles competency is not as developed as an adult. Since they are not as competent as an adult is, they might not understand the court process and they might not have the competence to stand trial. Another problem with the development of a minor is that they are emotionally immature and they might not understand the consequences of the crime they committed.

One of the bigger issues with trying juveniles as an adult is the possibility of them being placed in a dangerous situation. After the minor is charged, they will be stuck in a jail cell with adults and in the cell, they are exposed to many possible life-threatening situations. "Juveniles confined in adult facilities face grave dangers to their safety and well-being, including significantly higher rates of physical assault, sexual abuse, and suicide than their counterparts in juvenile facilities" (Wood, ebscohost.com). The possibility of something like this happening is very concerning to the public and is the main reason so many people are against trying juveniles as adults.

Putting minors in jail instead of rehabilitating them like usual could cause them to lose hope. If they lose hope this could make them become an even worse criminal and instead of doing small crimes they could become more violent. They could eventually have the mindset that there is no way to rehabilitate them and that there is no way for them change. Even though the whole point of putting them in jail is to teach them a lesson it could always have a negative effect and do the exact opposite of what it was meant to do.

Everyone makes mistakes, especially at a young age and sometimes they are pressured into it by someone else. They might have gotten caught up in it with a group of people or pressured into it by "friends" or they might have just gotten mad and decided to do it so they could take their anger out. There are many factors to why the committed a crime but jail could be a little too harsh of a punishment for something so small. They deserve a second chance, they should get a punishment for committing a crime but jail is not always the answer. Even adults make mistakes and do stuff they should not do, but minors are stilling learning what is right and wrong.

Juveniles should be tried as adults because it helps to show them that there are consequences for their actions. Today's court systems are outdated and minors commit crimes because they know they will get off easy. If they start actually being punished for the crimes they commit, future crimes could be prevented and the crime rates will lower. This action could possibly prevent future violent crimes like Columbine, Sandy Hook, and other extremely violent crimes. ""Adult time for adult crime""-the mantra of the get-tough-on-juvenile-crime lobby-says nothing about the age of the offender, except for the fact that it ought to be considered irrelevant" (Steinburg,ebscohost.com).

Did you like this example?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Juveniles Tried as Adults - Free Essay Example | PapersOwl.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How much more does the crime rate have to rise before we realize something needs to change? "The Juvenile Justice System was created to provide individualized rehabilitation to offenders of minor crimes such as truancy, shoplifting, and vandalism. But youth today are taking advantage of this lenient and outdated