Juvenile Justice System in U.S.: Punishment vs. Restoration

High recidivism rates among juveniles nationwide exemplify the failure of punitive models used to address juvenile crime. While juvenile justice is purportedly focused on rehabilitation, the majority of sanctions imposed by the juvenile justice system are punitive in nature. Detention and other forms of punitive sanctions in the juvenile justice system can impede youth's educational experiences, further exacerbate pre-existing mental health problems and limit youth's potential for healthy development. These adverse consequences illustrate a disconnect between punitive justice systems and the psychological dynamics of adolescent development that is characterized by heightened emotional vulnerability; nonetheless, adolescents exhibit substantial potential for growth and change. This paper will review the application of punitive and restorative justice models to juvenile offending through a developmental, psychological, and empirical lens. This paper will assert that punitive justice models focus on guilt and control and fail to consider the relational or contextual variables that may contribute to juvenile offending. Conversely, Restorative Justice employs a framework centered on responsibility for repairing the damage done to others, empathy toward victims, and reintegration into the community; therefore, Restorative Justice is more closely aligned with the developmental needs of adolescents. This paper will synthesize current research regarding recidivism, mental health, and systematic inequality to evaluate both the potential benefits and drawbacks to implementing Restorative Justice. In conclusion, this paper will argue that there must be a paradigmatic shift from punishing juveniles to restoring them to create a juvenile justice system that promotes accountability, equity and long-term community safety.