peer response

REPLY TO MY CLASSMATE RESPONSE

CLASSMATE’S RESPONSE

Criminal justice public policy has the ability to influence positive change in relation to juvenile justice incarceration if pragmatically applied. Through the establishment of public policy supportive of prevention programs, intervention services, and rehabilitation in lieu of prosecution, limiting the exposure of juveniles to the criminal justice system and decreasing recidivism may be achieved (Schmalleger, 2016). The collaborative evaluation, analysis, development, and implementation of public policy by the police, courts, and corrections components of the criminal justice system are essential to the success of the criminal justice system (O’Leary, Van Slyke & Kim, 2010; Peak & Giacomazzi, 2019).

Juvenile public policy developed and implemented by the police may repair problems associated with juvenile justice incarceration rates. Establishing policing policies, which incorporate programs and projects providing for improved police-community relations and interactions with juveniles, has the potential to result in law enforcement mentors influencing juveniles to make correct choices when confronted with decisions that may result in criminal consequences. Such policing public policies may contribute to the lessening of juvenile justice incarceration rates. As such, recidivism may decrease as well (Gau, 2018; Peak & Giacomazzi, 2019).

Juvenile public policy developed and implemented by the courts may repair problems associated with juvenile justice incarceration rates. The developing of court policies supporting programs that provide alternative sanctions while correlatively imparting deterrence and rehabilitation may contribute to the lessening of juvenile justice incarceration rates. Accordingly, recidivism may decrease as well (Gau, 2018; Peak & Giacomazzi, 2019).

Juvenile public policy developed and implemented by corrections may repair problems associated with juvenile justice incarceration rates. Instituting corrections policies that focus on education, teaching trade skills, mental health therapies, and drug treatments to juveniles may contribute to the lessening of juvenile justice incarceration rates. As a result, recidivism may decrease as well (Gau, 2018; Peak & Giacomazzi, 2019).

Although, not an absolute criminal justice policy, the development and implementation of public policy that focuses on providing for the basic needs of juveniles, such as shelter, sustenance, and safety, may result in mitigating circumstances that have the potential to lead a juvenile to commit criminal actions and behaviors in order to survive such as the joining of gangs (Gau, 2018; Peak & Giacomazzi, 2019).

In conclusion, interagency relations among the police, courts, and corrections components of the criminal justice system has the potential to impart communication and amicable discussion as to potential solutions to issues and problems being encounter throughout the criminal justice system. Accordingly, collaborative government has the potential to result in the development of juvenile public policy that facilitates the greatest potential for prevention, intervention, and rehabilitation. The optimal outcome attempting to be achieved through the development and implementation of public policy regarding juvenile incarceration is the reduction of rates in juvenile incarceration and decreased recidivism (Gau, 2018; Schmalleger, 2016).

References

Gau, J. M. (2018). Criminal justice policy: Origins and effectiveness. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

O’Leary, R., Van Slyke, D. M., & Kim, S. (Eds.). (2010). The future of public administration around the world: The Minnowbrook perspective. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Peak, K. J., & Giacomazzi, A. L. (2019). Justice administration: Police, courts, and corrections management(9th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.

Schmalleger, F. (2016). Criminal justice: A brief introduction (11th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.