社會政策essay代寫范文—青少年量刑及政策,本文是一篇留學(xué)生管理專業(yè)的Essay寫作格式參考范文。談到刑事司法系統(tǒng)和青少年,有很多案例對青少年司法系統(tǒng)產(chǎn)生了巨大的影響。這些案例來自于管理某些源自于處理青少年進(jìn)入框架的觀點(diǎn)。由于青少年完全不同于成年人,他們需要管理他們的具體方式和個案的前提下。青少年并不等同于成年人,因為青少年并非生來就是成年人。青少年通常對什么是錯誤沒有最模糊的概念,在某些情況下,他們周圍沒有方向或巨大的影響來引導(dǎo)他們走上正確的道路。因此,本文將討論青少年量刑政策對相關(guān)利益相關(guān)者的影響,法院在制定或執(zhí)行該政策中所扮演的角色,以及改變該政策的建議。以下是管理學(xué)essay范例寫作的全部內(nèi)容,是一篇符合國外大學(xué)Essay寫作格式要求的范文,供參考。
Introduction引言
With regards to talking about the criminal justice system and adolescents, there have been numerous cases that have had a huge effect on the juvenile justice system. The cases emerge from managing certain perspectives that originates from dealing with adolescents entering the framework. Since adolescents are altogether different from grown-ups, they need to manage them a specific way and a case by case premise. Adolescents are not regarded equivalent to grown-ups since adolescents are not created as grown-ups. The adolescents don’t generally have the foggiest idea what is directly from wrong and in some cases they don’t have the direction or great impacts around them to lead them the correct way. Therefore, this paper will discuss the effect of the juvenile sentencing policy on involved stakeholders, the role of the courts in creating or enforcing the policy, and recommendations to change the policy.
The effect of Juvenile Sentencing Policy on involved Stakeholders未成年人量刑政策對相關(guān)利益相關(guān)者的影響
A center capacity of the adolescent equity framework is to anticipate reoffending by young people who have carried out acts that would be viewed as wrongdoings whenever submitted by grown-ups. “Even if the court is an active partner in the broad prevention activities of the community, it will retain the primary responsibility for responding to adolescents who were not prevented from engaging in illegal behavior” (Bonnie, Johnson, Chemers,Schuck, 2013). The court will keep on deciding the sort and power of intercessions for the youths and families that precede it. Viability lies in the framework’s capacity to mediate with the correct immature wrongdoers and utilize the correct sort and measure of intercession. “The court is required to examine the methods for assessing adolescents at different points of contact with the system, and intervening in the adolescent lives, and to promote the core task of preventing reoffending” (Bonnie, Johnson, Chemers,Schuck, 2013).
青少年公平框架的一個核心能力是預(yù)測青少年的再犯罪行為,這些行為在成年人提交時將被視為錯誤行為?!凹词狗ㄔ涸趶V泛的社區(qū)預(yù)防活動中是一個積極的合作伙伴,它也將保留對那些沒有被阻止從事非法行為的青少年作出反應(yīng)的主要責(zé)任”(Bonnie, Johnson, Chemers,Schuck, 2013)。法院將繼續(xù)決定在此之前對青少年和家庭進(jìn)行代禱的種類和權(quán)力。其可行性在于該框架能夠與正確的不成熟的不法分子進(jìn)行調(diào)解,并利用正確的調(diào)解種類和措施。“法院需要審查評估青少年在系統(tǒng)不同接觸點(diǎn)的方法,并干預(yù)青少年的生活,并促進(jìn)防止再次犯罪的核心任務(wù)”(Bonnie, Johnson, Chemers,Schuck, 2013)。
The role of the courts in creating or enforcing the policy法院在制定或執(zhí)行政策方面的作用
Procedures were led with minimal open or network consciousness of how the adolescent court worked or what befell the youngsters who showed up before it. As opposed to binding the adolescent in prison with grown-ups, the early adolescent courts made a probation framework and separate recovery and treatment offices to furnish minors with supervision, direction, and instruction. “The U.S. Supreme Court determined the Constitution requires that youth charged with delinquency in juvenile court have many of the same due process rights guaranteed to adults accused of crimes, including the right to an attorney and the right to confront witnesses against the juvenile” (Juvenile Law Center, 2019). The Supreme Court stretched out extra sacred rights to youth, including the privilege to have the charges against the adolescent demonstrated past a sensible uncertainty and the privilege against twofold risk. States established components to move youth from adolescent to grown-up criminal court for preliminary and discipline. At times, these new laws burdened youngsters with the most serious sentences—demise and existence without the plausibility of parole. “Many of the new state laws also exposed youth to the dangers and potential abuses attributed to incarceration with adult offenders—much like they had experienced before the creation of the original juvenile court more than a century earlier” (Juvenile Law Center, 2019).
青少年法庭是如何運(yùn)作的,以及出現(xiàn)在法庭上的青少年遭遇了什么,這些程序在引導(dǎo)時幾乎沒有開放或網(wǎng)絡(luò)意識。與把青少年和成年人一起關(guān)在監(jiān)獄不同,早期青少年法庭制定了一個緩刑框架,并單獨(dú)設(shè)立了康復(fù)和治療辦公室,為未成年人提供監(jiān)督、指導(dǎo)和指導(dǎo)?!懊绹罡叻ㄔ翰枚ǎ瑧椃ㄒ笤谏倌攴ㄍケ豢胤缸锏那嗌倌晗碛性S多與被控犯罪的成年人相同的正當(dāng)程序權(quán)利,包括聘請律師的權(quán)利和與證人對證的權(quán)利”(少年法律中心,2019年)。最高法院為青少年賦予了額外的神圣權(quán)利,包括對青少年的指控可以超越合理的不確定性的特權(quán),以及防止雙重風(fēng)險的特權(quán)。各國設(shè)立了將青年從青少年轉(zhuǎn)移到成人刑事法庭進(jìn)行初步和懲戒的組成部分。有時,這些新法律給年輕人帶來了最嚴(yán)重的刑罰負(fù)擔(dān)——死刑和沒有假釋的生存?!霸S多新的州法律還將青少年暴露在與成年罪犯關(guān)押在一起的危險和潛在虐待行為中,就像他們在一個多世紀(jì)前最初的少年法庭成立之前所經(jīng)歷的那樣”(少年法律中心,2019)。
The present juvenile justice system still keeps up recovery as its essential objective and separates itself from the criminal equity framework in significant manners. “With few exceptions, in most states delinquency is defined as the commission of a criminal act by a child who was under the age of 18 at the time; most states also allow youth to remain under the supervision of the juvenile court until age 21” (Juvenile Law Center, 2019). In lieu of jail, adolescent court judges draw from a scope of legitimate choices to meet both the security needs of people in general and the treatment needs of the young, despite the fact that young might be bound in adolescent remedial offices that again and again look like grown-up penitentiaries and prisons, routinely forcing restorative practices, for example, isolation, strip look, and the utilization of concoction or mechanical restrictions. Youth are entitled instructive programming while imprisoned. Instructive and helpful programming might be given in the kid’s locale or the kid might be put out of the home in a private treatment program and requested to go to class on-grounds. In contrast to grown-up criminal procedures, adolescent court hearings are frequently shut to individuals from the general population and records in certain states stay secret, shielding youngsters from disgrace and guarantee outcomes when their records are openly accessible. In any case, adolescent records have progressively turned out to be increasingly available, and in many jurisdictions are not consequently fixed or canceled when the youngster turns into a grown-up.
Recommendations to change the policy建議改變政策
In the province of Tennessee, the adolescent equity conveyed approach suggestions to ensure open security and contain costs by concentrating framework assets on the most noteworthy hazard youth. Tennessee additionally prescribed averting further adolescent equity framework inclusion of lower level youth through early reaction; and supporting powerful practices however proceeded with oversight and reinvestment in a more grounded continuum of proof based administrations statewide. “The Coalition for Juvenile Justice (CJJ) – comprising more than 12,000 juvenile justice practitioners, law enforcement officials, youth development experts, community service providers, youth, families, and legislators in all U.S. states, territories and the District of Columbia – has prepared these policy recommendations to support prevention, early intervention, family empowerment, and developmentally-appropriate approaches to reclaim and rebuild the lives of youth who come into contact with the juvenile justice system” (CJJ, 2019). The suggestion is to reestablish appointments for the adolescent equity programs, guarantee proper usage and oversight of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, dispose of the legitimate court request, reauthorize the runaway and destitute youth act, and expand on demonstrated methodologies to build school commitment and accomplishment for all young and avoid the conflation of school discipline approach and adolescent equity framework sanctions, otherwise called the “school-to-jail pipeline;”. Another change to the strategy is to guarantee that dealt youth are treated as survivors as opposed to being condemned, and make projects to protect the children and networks.
在田納西州,青少年公平傳達(dá)了確保公開安全并控制成本的方法建議,辦法是將框架資產(chǎn)集中在最值得注意的危險青年身上。田納西州還規(guī)定避免進(jìn)一步的青少年公平框架通過早期反應(yīng)將較低水平的青少年包括在內(nèi);然而,支持強(qiáng)有力的做法是通過監(jiān)督和再投資在全州范圍內(nèi)建立一個更有根據(jù)的、以證據(jù)為基礎(chǔ)的政府?!扒嗌倌晁痉?lián)盟(CJJ)——由12000多名青少年司法從業(yè)者、執(zhí)法官員、青少年發(fā)展專家、社區(qū)服務(wù)提供者、青少年、家庭以及美國所有州、領(lǐng)地和哥倫比亞特區(qū)的立法者組成——準(zhǔn)備了這些政策建議,以支持預(yù)防、早期干預(yù)、家庭賦權(quán)、以及適合發(fā)展的方法,讓接觸到青少年司法系統(tǒng)的青少年恢復(fù)和重建生活”(CJJ, 2019)。建議是重新任命青少年公平項目,確保青少年司法和犯罪預(yù)防法案的正確使用和監(jiān)督,處理合法的法院請求,重新授權(quán)離家出走和貧困青少年法案,并擴(kuò)展已證明的方法,以建立學(xué)校的承諾和成就的所有年輕人,避免將學(xué)校紀(jì)律方法和青少年公平框架制裁混為一談。也被稱為“從學(xué)校到監(jiān)獄的管道”。戰(zhàn)略的另一個變化是,確保被處置的青少年被視為幸存者,而不是被譴責(zé),并制定保護(hù)兒童和網(wǎng)絡(luò)的項目。
Conclusion結(jié)論
As this finishes up the adolescent condemning and arrangement talk, we have discovered that rebuffing adolescents isn’t generally the best alternatives. The objective of adolescent equity framework depends on recovery. For example, adolescents ought not to be condemned to death if under the age 18 and can’t be given the sentences of existence without the chance for further appeal since the person is considers these disciplines merciless and uncommon for adolescents. On the off chance that the framework can restore the adolescents and give the person in question devices they may require, they can have another opportunity at completely changing themselves around.
隨著青少年譴責(zé)和安排談話的結(jié)束,我們發(fā)現(xiàn),拒絕青少年通常不是最好的選擇。青少年平等框架的目標(biāo)取決于恢復(fù)。例如,未滿18歲的青少年不應(yīng)該被判處死刑,而且在沒有進(jìn)一步上訴的機(jī)會的情況下不能被判處存在罪,因為這個人被認(rèn)為這些紀(jì)律是無情的,對青少年來說是罕見的。如果這個框架能讓青少年恢復(fù)正常,給那些有問題的人他們可能需要的設(shè)備,他們就有機(jī)會徹底改變自己。
References參考文獻(xiàn)
留學(xué)生Essay相關(guān)專業(yè)范文素材資料,盡在本網(wǎng),可以隨時查閱參考。本站也提供多國留學(xué)生課程作業(yè)寫作指導(dǎo)服務(wù),如有需要可以咨詢本平臺。
相關(guān)文章
UKthesis provides an online writing service for all types of academic writing. Check out some of them and don't hesitate to place your order.