There is a debate between the verdict of whether or not juvenile convicts should have a life with or without parole. A child is not an adult therefore their actions should not justify the way they are tried in a court. If a jury is reluctant to give minors the same rights as adults, it would be inequitable to try them as an adult. In lieu of spending millions of dollars to keep an adolescent incarcerated, the parole board can assess one after they have matured into adulthood and decide whether it is appropriate to return to society. Many cases have been accidental, therefore if one did not deliberately commit a crime they deserve another chance. One must consider the distinct circumstances of each offender that should lead to the banning of
…show more content…
I do agree with the majority of Supreme Court justices who argue to abolish mandatory life in prison for juveniles because the human brain development continues well our 20’s pertinent throughout one’s adolescence. According to Thompson “ The biggest surprise in recent teen brain research is the finding that a massive loss of brain tissue occurs in the teen years”(Thompson). explaining that the lost brain tissue comes from areas that control impulses, self control, and risk taking. The frontal lobe plays a vital role in the ability to project future consequences and decide right from wrong. The teenage brain undergoes eccentric behavior that impairs the ability to reason. The loss of brain tissue can be used as evidence that teenagers are not fully developed and should not be tried as an adult in the legal system due to cognitive development. While youths should be punished for their crimes it should be done in a development totally appropriate way according to their age not their crime. It would be reasonable to keep young teens in the juvenile system where the public safety concerns and fellow offenders can be held accountable and …show more content…
Teenagers do not have the ability to watch R-rated movies alone, vote, smoke, gamble, etc compared to an adult subsequently if they are not allowed to make adult decisions or partake in adult activities they should not be convicted as adults. Additionally, children cannot finish their education in jail, nor can they continue to grow like their peers. In jail, children will be isolated from the rest of the world and not be given the opportunity to start over and become something more than their crime or mistake. People should not expect the same outcomes from two different age brackets especially when comparing adolescents to adults. Juveniles are less mature than adults, more susceptible to peer pressure, and cannot choose which environment molds them into a certain way. They still have a future ahead of them and could possibly learn from this experience and help others in the future. According to Gail Garinger “ as a former juvenile court judge, I have seen firsthand the enormous capacity of children to change and turn themselves around. The same malleability that makes them vulnerable to peer pressure also makes them promising candidates for rehabilitation (Garinger)” explaining that with an opportunity a child can grow from their past and have a positive effect on society. Adolescents and children should be given life with parole because of the positive effects it has on
I do agree with the majority of Supreme Court justices who argue to abolish mandatory life in prison for juveniles because the human brain development continues well our 20’s pertinent throughout one’s adolescence. According to Thompson “ The biggest surprise in recent teen brain research is the finding that a massive loss of brain tissue occurs in the teen years”(Thompson). explaining that the lost brain tissue comes from areas that control impulses, self control, and risk taking. The frontal lobe plays a vital role in the ability to project future consequences and decide right from wrong. The teenage brain undergoes eccentric behavior that impairs the ability to reason. The loss of brain tissue can be used as evidence that teenagers are not fully developed and should not be tried as an adult in the legal system due to cognitive development. While youths should be punished for their crimes it should be done in a development totally appropriate way according to their age not their crime. It would be reasonable to keep young teens in the juvenile system where the public safety concerns and fellow offenders can be held accountable and …show more content…
Teenagers do not have the ability to watch R-rated movies alone, vote, smoke, gamble, etc compared to an adult subsequently if they are not allowed to make adult decisions or partake in adult activities they should not be convicted as adults. Additionally, children cannot finish their education in jail, nor can they continue to grow like their peers. In jail, children will be isolated from the rest of the world and not be given the opportunity to start over and become something more than their crime or mistake. People should not expect the same outcomes from two different age brackets especially when comparing adolescents to adults. Juveniles are less mature than adults, more susceptible to peer pressure, and cannot choose which environment molds them into a certain way. They still have a future ahead of them and could possibly learn from this experience and help others in the future. According to Gail Garinger “ as a former juvenile court judge, I have seen firsthand the enormous capacity of children to change and turn themselves around. The same malleability that makes them vulnerable to peer pressure also makes them promising candidates for rehabilitation (Garinger)” explaining that with an opportunity a child can grow from their past and have a positive effect on society. Adolescents and children should be given life with parole because of the positive effects it has on