Rehabilitation vs. Incarceration: Shaping the Future of Juvenile Justice

The ongoing debate regarding how to address juvenile crime has long revolved around the question of whether incarceration or rehabilitation is the more appropriate and effective response. This article will delve into the legal opinions and relevant data surrounding this discussion, focusing on whether the juvenile justice system should prioritise punishment or reform.

From its inception, the juvenile court system was originally designed to incorporate both punishment and rehabilitation but has over time become more closely linked with rehabilitation, in contrast to the adult criminal justice system, which is more focused on punishment. This is based on the fundamental principle that the youth are distinct from adults in terms of culpability and vulnerability. Early accounts of the origins of the juvenile court illustrate the juvenile court’s guiding doctrine of “parens patriae,” which in Latin refers to “the state as parent.” This doctrine envisions the juvenile courts to act as a surrogate for a parental figure and consider the primary focus to be the “best interests” of the youth in question. Additionally, this doctrine maintains that young offenders should be shielded from the harms of the regular justice system and redirected onto a more suitable path as to avoid a life of crime.

Recent decades however, have seen a global shift towards more punitive measures within the juvenile justice system, including legislative changes that allow more juveniles to be prosecuted in criminal courts and sentenced to prison. This recent shift raises significant questions about the effectiveness and appropriateness of such measures, especially considering the costs of incarceration and the long-term effects it may have on socially vulnerable youth. Punitive penal policies are often justified under the assumption that the general public demands harsh and drastic responses towards offenders. Contrary to this view, research suggests that the public is equally inclined to support crime reduction efforts through rehabilitation programmes as they are to support longer prison sentences. Thus, studies suggest that reducing crime might be the primary motivation of the general public and the means by which this is achieved is a secondary concern. Based on the research, given the relative cost-effectiveness and the positive social effect of rehabilitation, it seems more important to pursue it with greater intention.

Despite the high cost of imprisonment, there is very little evidence of its effectiveness in reducing the recidivism rate. Research suggests that instead of deterring individuals from committing future offences, prison may heighten the likelihood of recidivism, thus having the opposite intended effect on convicts. Removing young people from their community by isolating them from their homes, schools, and other social spaces, has an adverse effect on their development and behaviour, and is often counterproductive as it increases the likelihood of youth returning to the justice system. In some cases, incarceration also exposes youth to abuse and violence. This course of action contradicts adolescent development research by interfering with the natural process of maturation that helps most youths desist from delinquency. The negative effects of incarceration also disproportionately affect at-risk youth and youth of colour. Several alternatives to this approach have proven far more effective, with minimal long-term risks for youth.

Rehabilitation programs focus on providing youth with the resources, guidance, and assistance that are needed to address the reasons that they committed the crime and tackle other factors of their life that may prompt them to commit further crimes. Restitution programs may include behavioural therapy, educational/vocational training, community service, or life coaching to reduce and eliminate the chances of recidivism. Juvenile offenders are about 38% less likely to become involved in criminal activity when involved in a rehabilitation program. Adding a rehabilitation program to the disciplinary action of incarceration results in a 30% decrease in the reentry rate. Additionally, rehabilitation programs can be individualised to the offender, enabling young offenders to benefit from personalised assistance and guidance regarding their situation.

Many alternatives to incarceration have been proven to be far more effective than incarceration in deterring youth from a life of crime. There are several alternative programs which aim to reduce the recidivism rate of juvenile delinquents. For example, probation programs allow youth to remain at home under the supervision of a juvenile probation officer. These programs also enforce certain rules and conditions, such as random searches, curfews, meetings with the court, etc. Additionally, Fines or Restitutions may include counselling programs, community service, and/or wrist or ankle monitors to supervise young offenders.

Systematic reforms can be utilised to minimise youth incarceration and reduce the long-term impacts of incarceration on youth. Narrowing the pipeline to incarceration by avoiding arrests for less serious behaviour and diverting cases from the court will minimise the need for overreliance on the courts and also reverse existing disparities that are based on external social factors. Transforming probation practices to focus on connecting youth with opportunities and positive influences will play a part in redirecting youth towards risk-free behavioural patterns and strengthening their competencies and skills. Lastly, organising stakeholder meetings to explore alternatives to incarceration before placing a young person in a facility will ensure that all possible courses of corrective action are considered before resorting to an extreme decision that has long-term effects on youth well-being.

The UAE has its own specific laws and policies regarding juvenile delinquents, which are outlined in Federal Law No. (6) of 2022 concerning Juvenile Delinquent and Juvenile at Risk of Delinquency. The law states that a delinquent juvenile who has not reached the age of 12 at the time of committing a legally punishable act is not criminally liable. If a juvenile is between 12 and 16 years of age, the court can take judicial measures provided by the law instead of punishment. If a juvenile is over 16, the court can take judicial measures instead of the prescribed penalties. In the UAE, the judicial measures that a court can impose on youth offenders include Electronic Surveillance, Probation, Community service, and Counselling. The law also includes provisions for legal guarantees for juvenile trials, such as the presence of a Child Protection Specialist and a lawyer. These measures place a focus on rehabilitative measures rather than incarceration procedures to deal with juvenile crime, effectively placing the best interests and the long-term stake of the youth in mind.

Research suggests that rehabilitation is a more effective and appropriate response to juvenile crime than incarceration. While punitive measures may be the more traditional route, they do not address the underlying causes of delinquency and may even increase recidivism. Investing in rehabilitation programs and implementing system reforms that minimize unnecessary incarceration will create a more effective system of juvenile justice. The UAE's approach, as outlined in its Federal Law, reflects this understanding by giving priority to rehabilitation and offering a range of judicial measures aimed at addressing the needs of juvenile offenders.

Bibliography:

Jones CGA and Weatherburn DJ, ‘Willingness to Pay for Rehabilitation versus Punishment to Reduce Adult and Juvenile Crime’ (2011) 46 Australian Journal of Social Issues 9

Mendel R, ‘System Reforms to Reduce Youth Incarceration: Why We Must Explore Every Option before Removing Any Young Person from Home’ (The Sentencing Project9 November 2023)

Piquero A and Steinberg L, ‘Rehabilitation versus Incarceration of Juvenile Offenders: Public Preferences in Four Models for Change States Executive Summary’ (2007)

‘United Arab Emirates Legislations | Federal Law Concerning Juvenile Delinquent and Juvenile at Risk of Delinquency’

Wilson College, ‘Juvenile Justice: Rehabilitation vs. Disciplinary Action | Wilson College’

For any enquiries or information, contact info@thelawreporters.com or call us on +971 52 644 3004. Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels