Photo by Kindel Media on Pexels
It all started as a dream. To be fair, it was, objectively, a lovely dream: a system of justice that takes troubled youth and humanely restores them into law-abiding citizens. Children all develop at different rates, and during this period, they often get into varying degrees of trouble. However, when that trouble crosses the line into something illegal, there must be a system in place that considers the developing brains of those involved and seeks to reform, rather than punish, so that they can grow up to be productive members of society.
This has been understood for centuries, which is why, in 1899, such a system was implemented, and they called it the Juvenile Court. But dreams, no matter how realistic, are seldom reality, at least not at first. Even in the early years of this system, there were conceivable problems. In 1940, a short film titled “Boy in Court,” funded by the National Probation Association, was released. It described the story of Johnny, a white, 15-year-old boy who was caught trying to steal a car with his friends. Johnny, as well as 200,000 other American children like him, was described as being “America’s number one problem” and having “twisted young lives.”
Instead of being sent to a reform school, Johnny is saved by his probation officer, who guides him towards youth sports. By the end of the film, Johnny is successfully rehabilitated, sporting slicked-back hair and wearing a neatly pressed suit.
It looks and sounds like a wonderful system. But there are important details to keep in mind. First, as mentioned before, Johnny was white.
In an article by the W. Haywood Burns Institute for Youth Justice Fairness and Equity, it was revealed how deeply discriminatory the juvenile justice system really was. From the very first year of 1899, black cases made up a greater majority of overall cases than they should have. Black children were severely let down by their local agencies and services.
But if the situation was bad in the northern states, of course, it was even worse in the South. There was such a large difference in how white and black children were treated that one could mistake the singular juvenile system for two entirely separate systems.
In the same article mentioned above, it describes the system in Tennessee like this: “White facilities were rich with resources, including a modern courtroom, several classrooms for educational and vocational training, a gymnasium, a garden, housing, and more. In contrast, the Black youth facility was a small cottage devoid of resources. Due process was also nonexistent. Black juvenile court was presided over by a police officer because the county’s juvenile court judge refused, as a matter of course, to leave White court.”
And the troubles continue into the modern age. In the 1990s, there was growing concern over the threat of gun violence in schools, and so, the zero-tolerance policy was born. According to the ACLU, “Zero Tolerance policies require schools to suspend or expel students for violating rules, no matter what extenuating circumstances there might be.” Often, such policies are put into place to protect minority students, such as those of color or LGBTQ+ members. While this is certainly a noble cause, the reality is that zero tolerance can often end up targeting these groups. In fact, these policies have been shown to worsen school safety/climate.
These policies were implemented to discourage bullies from abusing members of minorities; however, studies have shown that 40% of all school suspensions are for repeat offenders. This has led experts to believe that suspension or even expulsion is not in fact a deterrent, but rather a reinforcer.
These same studies have shown that LGBTQ+ members are up to three times more likely to get into trouble than the aggressor. For instance, an LGBTQ student will get into trouble for fighting against a bully more than the bully does. According to the National Library of Medicine, African American children have been suspended and/or incarcerated at higher rates than their Caucasian counterparts for over three decades.
Nowhere can this be seen more than in Middle and High Schools. African American boys get suspended at four times the rate of Caucasian boys, and this same disparity is true for African American girls as well.
To make matters worse, minor infractions are less and less likely to be handled by school administration and more likely to be dealt with by law enforcement. According to the CATO Institute, in the 2019-20 school year, 51% of public schools in America had armed law enforcement officers, also referred to as School Resource Officers (SROs), on site.
Significantly, African American youth are usually reprimanded by these officers for offenses such as public displays of affection and disorderly conduct. Very few, in fact, are for violent crimes. These encounters can often result in arrest or serious physical harm, usually for the student. It has been revealed that law enforcement officers tend to view African American students as being older than they are, which results in a tendency to treat them with the same harshness they would use for an adult.
In 1899, a system was put in place for the benefit of all children, in theory. But this system was made by men, and these men were filled with stereotypes and biases, which have seeped into the very foundation upon which this system of justice was built. While great steps have been taken to remove them, remnants of these corruptions are still with society today, and they are deeply detrimental to American youth, no matter the color of their skin.
According to the Sentencing Project, child incarceration has much higher rates of recidivism (rates at which formerly incarcerated people return to crime) as opposed to those who are given probation or other methods. Incarcerated children are also less likely to graduate high school, attend college, or get a good job in their adulthood. These youth are also more likely to suffer from dental, vision, or hearing problems in their later life, as well as possible PTSD.
This is the future that awaits the incarcerated youth of our country. The systematic flaws that existed in the 20th Century are still alive and well today. They must be confronted, and they must be fixed for the sake of those who will one day inherit this world.
Be First to Comment