1018 Words Essay on Juvenile Delinquency

1018 Words Essay on Juvenile Delinquency

Different approaches have been used to define and explain the term ‘juvenile delinquency’, like the legal approach, the social work approach, the psychological approach, and the sociological approach.

The legal approach, which is based on normative formalism, tends to explain delinquency in specific terms in order to protect the public from dangerous conduct and to protect the delinquent from unjust acts by the police and the courts. The social work approach is informal and therapeutic. The psychological approach is analytical.

These two approaches (i.e., social work and psychological) are primarily concerned with the welfare of the individual delinquent and attribute only secondary importance to the security of the social group in which he committed his delinquency.

The sociological approach views the delinquent as a member of his social group, and the delinquency as a deviation from group norms and as a disruptive force in the smooth functioning of organised social life (see, Knudten and Schafer, Juvenile Delinquency, 1970: 29).

In the legal approach to misconduct of a juvenile, the stress is on the following requirements: (1) that a specific charge be levelled against the defendant, (2) that it be defined in definite terms by law, (3) that the offence be proved rather conclusively, (4) that protection be given to the accused during trial against conviction by false, misleading, irrelevant or immaterial evidence.

In the sociological approach, the focus is on two aspects: age and conduct or status. Age is important from the point of view of maturity chronological, mental and social. A child below a certain age is considered to be irresponsible by reason of immaturity.

The ‘conduct’ concept of delinquency has evolved from an appreciation of the danger that the young offender may easily become an adult criminal if no deterrent or rehabilitative influences play upon him. Hence, the effort to curb anti-social traits in their incipience.

In terms of age, a juvenile delinquent is considered an underaged criminal, i.e., one who is between the age of 7 and 16 or 18 years, as prescribed by the law of the land. The maximum age today for juvenile delinquents according to the Juvenile Justice Act of 1986 is 16 years for boys and 18 years for girls, but earlier, according to the Children Acts, it was different in different states.

In states like Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Kerala, Maharashtra, Punjab, and Madhya Pradesh, it was 16 years but in states like Bengal and Bihar, it was 18 years. In states like Rajasthan, Assam, and Karnataka, it was 16 years for boys and 18 years for girls. Apart from age, the nature of offence is vitally important.

Children who are involved in ‘status offences’ such as truancy, vagrancy, immorality, and ungovernability also fall within the definition of juvenile delinquents. Neumayer, Ivan Nye and James Short Jr., Richard Jenkins, and Walter Reckless have also emphasised ‘type of behaviour’ in the concept of juvenile delinquency.

According to Walter Reckless (1956), the term ‘juvenile delinquency’ applies to the “violation of criminal code and/or pursuit of certain patterns of behaviour disapproved of for children and young adolescents”. Thus, age and behavioural infractions prohibited in the statutes are important in the concept of juvenile delinquency.

The ‘behaviour content’ in juvenile delinquency is important in the sense that there is a difference in the approach/attitude of judiciary and that of administrators. The judicial approach requires the proof of fairly definite offences.

The administrative view, to the contrary, is that since delinquents are not criminal in character, and the courts are designed to children who are unadjusted, the courts should not seek to define and segregate delinquency but to discover and treat the maladjustments of children who appear before them.

This raises the central issue of who should be brought before the court and who should the court adjudicate as delinquent? Is the child who has run away from home once or several tones, a delinquent?

Is the child who reacts rebelliously to the hostility of his step-mother at his home, a delinquent? Is the boy who stays out with his friends till late hours in the evening and causes much anxiety to his family, delinquent?

Is the boy who wants more freedom and behaves in a very independent fashion, a delinquent? How then, may one distinguish the problem child, the adventurous child, and the delinquent? To solve this problem, five categories of deviation have been set up to consider the level at which the court may take control (see, Knudten and Schafter, op. tit., 43):

1. Deviant situational factors, where the child is exposed to deleterious home and community influences, e.g., broken home, economic insecurity, vice in the home, unhealthy recreation, slum neighbourhood, places of moral risk like cheap hotels, etc.

2. Behavioural problems of personal unadjustment to the environment; e.g., temper tantrums, nail-biting, etc.

3. Antisocial attitudes wherein the child reveals reactions antagonistic to authority but without serious overt aggressiveness; e.g., hostility, guilt-feelings, isolation, anxieties.

4. “Waywardness” or “Incorrigibility” or the violation of relatively non-serious community conduct standards; e.g., truancy, running away from home, disobedience, fighting, etc.

5. Serious illegalities or the violation of criminal conduct norms; e.g., theft, burglary, rape, assault, robbery, homicide.

Some scholars are of the opinion that certain types of attitudes and deviant conduct, as in the above-mentioned categories 1, 2, and 3, may better be dealt with by non-judicial social agencies-public or private-and by non-court personnel.

This, however, raises an important question. If there are no appropriate agencies in the society, such as case-work organisations, psychiatric resources, etc., should the court then take over the cases of maladjustment of juveniles? In a society like India, this is indeed a crucial problem. What is needed is differentiating between ‘slight’ deviation and ‘extreme’ deviation to work out a systematic philosophy and programme for treatment.

The difference between a delinquent child and an adult criminal is important from the case-work approach. The difference between the two is made in the conduct involved, in the methods employed by the court, in the philosophy and methods applied in treatment, and in the individual’s status, reputation and civil rights in the community after adjudication.