Forensic Psychology 10 Psychology Essay Research Paper

Forensic Psychology
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Forensic Psychology
Question One: Why Juvenile Courts procedures being termed as quasi-civil, and is there anything that can be altered to avoid such reference?
The legislators defined juvenile courts as quasi-civil, in a bid to avoid the Constitutional restrictions that apply to criminal prosecutions (Bartol & Bartol, 2017). Many ways render juvenile courts as quasi-civil, especially in terms of court authority, justice system terminologies, and children reforms. The minors appearing in juvenile court were considered "delinquents" as opposed to being called defendants. The cases proceedings handle at juvenile courts are considered civil as opposed to criminal. The minors are adjudicated as opposed to being found guilty, and being detained, instead of being jailed.
Furthermore, final court decisions were classified as disposition instead of a sentence. The minor offenders are ordinarily accused of committing a delinquent act instead of being charged with a crime. The case proceedings start when either a probation officer or prosecutor files a civil petition against the minor and charging the minor, or juvenile of criminal statute violation, and asks the court to consider the juvenile a delinquent. If such charges are proven, and delinquency is determined, the juvenile court holds discretionary powers and authority to make a decision based on the best interest of the minor.
The quasi-civil nature of the juvenile courts is grounded on the historical context of children's reforms and their social welfare. Thus, it means that juvenile courts were part of children's changes and social well-being, and this makes such courts act in the best interest of the child. The ultimate outcome was to create an informal institution that focused on neglected and delinquent children under the age of 16, as contemplated by the legislators who framed the Illinois Juvenile Court Act of 1899 (Bartol & Bartol, 2017). This Act directed the juvenile courts to focus on rehabilitative management rather than punishment: this explains the philosophical foundation during the modern juvenile system. In many instances, the prosecutors did not require to prove their evidence ‘beyond a reasonable doubt.’ Thus, the quasi-civil approach was mean to lower standards because they were not intended to punish the minor offenders for wrongdoings but to find out what went wrong and designed a plan of preventing such criminality. As a result, the quasi-civil nature of juvenile courts may not go away any time soon, if we still hold the rationale of child reforms and social well-being as espoused by the framers. Doing away with the quasi-civil idea would mean that we are fully drifting into full adult courts with associated stringent standards in criminal justice.
Question Two: What are the possible negative outcomes of the psychologist labeling a juvenile?
The juvenile delinquent labeling often brings stigmatization in society. The community is likely to develop negative attitudes and perceptions due to juveniles being associated with deviant behaviors. As a result, juveniles are often stigmatized, which makes them appear unworthy, lose a sense of civiliza...