# data[].attributes.body
Agnew,R, 2012. Toward A Unified Criminology . New York: New York University Press.

Cunnen, C, White R, and Richasrds, K, 2015. Juvenile Justice. South Melbourne, Victoria, Australia: Oxford University Press.

Vogel, M and Messner, S. 2012. Social Correlates of delinquencyfor Youth in Need of Mental Health services: Examining the scope Conditions of Criminological Theories . Justice Quarterly, 29(4), pp.546-572.

# data[].attributes.body
While great social change may be practically hard to achieve through daily program development, and micro level policy,  concepts of strain, inequality, control and  offender-based programs can be explored For example:

education

training based

such programs aim to provide the offending youth with many opportunities to succeed. Some intervention programs are also in place to re-establish and re strengthen youths’ bonds and with their family too.

# data[].attributes.body
The tendency for young individuals to engage in crime is a reflection of the social divisions and inequalities of economic forms. In addition the process of criminalising of youth plays a great role, this explains how those in less advantaged position engage in crime, to surface their oppression. This same idea can be applied to other sociological issues such as the rape and abuse of women.
The theoretical context
Theories of the Social structure such as conflict theory of crime are significant, as valuable links are made between macro social forces and criminal behaviour.  In accordance to conflict theorists, crime is acknowledged  by examining how the powerful enforce and define their social order. How the less powerful respond to this, that is, This being criminal retaliation

# data[].attributes.body
Consensus Theory
This sociological lens does not work in favour of juvenile justice, as consensus theory encourages all individuals to share the same beliefs and routine to achieve justice. This concept is not possible as not all youths have opportunities to produce these values, this originates from the means of social class structure, failure to participate in consensus directly roots from deterioration of social control (Agnew, 2011). if youths are to participate in consensus, they can be taught to steer from deviant acts, this lesson comes from family, employment and education. Those who impose these very lessons are the reasons why consensus can be followed due to fear of losing for example; your job, education. Finally individuals are to be aware of deterrence and sanctions carried out by family but formally, by the criminal justice system. Youth criminalisation rates can reduce from this.

# data[].attributes.body
Conflict Theory
The analysis of juvenile justice in the lens of the conflict theorists embodies a social, economic and political approach, in regards to juvenile justice and youth criminalisation, conflict theory targets the contributions of the societal structure towards the delinquency and the exclusion of youth in the work force. The conflict theory demonstrates that deviant behaviour in response to this oppression is an inevitable reaction. Under conflict theory, laws in relation to juvenile justice are perceived as means a to suppress juveniles, to verify their place in the socioeconomic structure.

# data[].attributes.body
Do the consequences of class inequality and social class structure enforce youth crime?

The sociological issue of juvenile justice correlating with social class

Class has never imposed in the social analysis of juvenile justice, class is a social relation directly allied parallel with political, economic and social power. This is evident in how institutions are arranged, societal sources are distributed and how laws and the justice system is framed (Cuneen, White and Richards, 2015). Cuneen, White and Richards contend that individuals a ct in accordance with the resources collectively available to them. An example of these resources are are cultural in nature and materialistic, while the concept of class correlating with young children is substantially contingent, depending on friend family and resources changing over time.

Have juveniles always been involved in crime? is it a modern phenomenon?

Habitus is the focal point to  Bourdieu’s theory of social administration, it is seen as a manifestation of "social arrangements and material circumstances". Habitus is viewed as emerging initially in an individuals childhood, this correlating with their growing environment (Bourdieu and Wacquant, 1992). The "endlessly transforming" outcomes as a lens in which individuals interpret the world. The work of Bourdieu's Habitus holds much significance regarding young people's relationship with crime, it explores how certain things happen in a neighbourhood making crime the norm "a sense of routine and habit".

# data[].attributes.body
Children court sentencing principles
The criminal division of the children's court Victoria holds jurisdiction to determine and hear  and summary offences. These being offences against children, these also include charges for indictable offences. with  the ratification of the Children, Youth and Families Act 2005 (Vic), the jurisdiction of the children's court was broadened to include offenders aged 17 at the period of the offence. Before this, youth offenders of this age were tried in adult courts. Sentencing in the children's court is remarkably different in comparison to sentencing in adults jurisdictions such as The County Court.  The  Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) orders courts of adult jurisdictions that the means by which a sentence is imposed is due to:

Community protection

Deterrence

Rehabilitation

Denunciation

Rehabilitation in adults courts is one of the five other vital purposes for sentencing, while in the children's court rehabilitation is an overarching principle.

# data[].attributes.body
Over the past few decades , a large extent of research has accumulated on the means of risks associated with juvenile delinquency and the focus of criminalisation of youth (Vogel and Messner, 2012).  Great amounts of this research have aspired from theoretical perspectives, and to acknowledge the contemporary debates surrounding the nature of juvenile crime and juvenile justice, it is vital to think about.

Do the consequences of class inequality and social class structure enforce youth crime?

Have juveniles always been involved in crime? is it a modern phenomenon?

These type of questions arise when tracing the history of juvenile justice, it is ideal to consider the terms "youth", "juvenile" and "adolescent", these terms are not universal. The idea of  juvenile delinquency stems from early nineteenth century in accordance to Bernard (1992), the primary use of the term appeared in the 'Report of the committee for investigating the causes of the alarming increase of juvenile delinquency in the metropolis' report published in 1816 London. The notion of juvenile delinquency is traditionally contingent, that being the social concept developed at a specific time in history (Cuneen, White and Richards, 2015). The occurrence of juvenile delinquency seems to be perfectly modern, some may argue that it came about with the transition from rural into urban societies which is associated with five factors (Cuneen, White and Richards, 2015). These five factors being urbanisation, industrialisation, population increase, the breakdown of traditional mechanisms of social control and juvenile justice mechanisms that uncovers juvenile offending (Bernard and Kurlychek, 2010). While these factors are vital it  it is the perception of the class based nature of juvenile justice that is much more significant.
Transformation brought about :

The inauguration of industrial capitalism

Which created an urbanised working class

New systems of conduct towards young people centred youth of the new class,  the significant period in understanding the development of the distinct system that dealt with juvenile offenders is the second half of the nineteenth century. However the criminal justice system performed poorly in separating children from adults when trying juvenile offenders (Cuneen, White and Richards, 2015). Within Common law the age of criminal liability was seven years old, for children aged between 7 and 14, there was an assumption that they were incapable of committing an indictable offences (Doli incapax). However this could be argued at court that the child knew the difference between right and wrong. In regards to punishment, adults and children were treated alike and deterrence was the main objective. As the nineteenth century took a crisis turn in regards to social issues like urbanisation growth of the working class, there was also a shift in the way crime was being conceptualised (Cuneen, White and Richards, 2015). Classical criminologists viewed crime as a result of free will, and the function of punishment and deterrence. Though by the early nineteenth century there was expansion in classificatory systems regarding criminal causation relation to the rise of positivist criminology.

# data[].attributes.body
The juvenile justice system: focus on the criminalisation of youth directly for the committee of the Australian institute of health and welfare.