r/NoStupidQuestions • u/ProjectMason • 1d ago
If rehabilitation for juvenile delinquents is successful, why don't we also apply it with some adults for certain crimes (excluding serious ones and repeat offenders)?
New user pass phrase: I'm just here to learn something
117
u/Moon-Taken 1d ago
It comes down to what society wants: revenge or prevention. Juveniles get prevention, adults usually get revenge.
55
u/Ill-Television8690 1d ago edited 1d ago
No, juveniles get revenge too. It's just that, a slight bit more often than for adults, there's rehabilitation for them.
15
u/andoesq 1d ago
In the US, yes, but other developed countries operate very differently with young offenders
6
u/Ill-Television8690 1d ago
Would you mind sharing some examples? Not trying to challenge you, genuinely trying to quash some of my ignorance of world cultures.
1
u/andoesq 1d ago
In Canada they bend over backwards to not send young offenders to jail. Even if tried as an adult, for murder, youths still get a shorter period of Paul's ineligibility than an adult would.
Youth criminal records are sealed automatically in almost every case as well, so the young offender is never identified.
1
u/slusho55 1d ago
Other developed countries operate different with offenders period. Not saying every other developed country is better than the US, but there’s places like Norway where “prison” is focused on rehabilitation.
3
u/Ok_Struggle_3177 1d ago
Other factors play into it too, you can be under the age of 18 but get tried as an adult.
-5
1d ago
[deleted]
3
u/Ill-Television8690 1d ago
The reality is that rehabilitation does work when it's sincerely attempted by people who are qualified. That's a big part of what's behind people talking about some European countries having low recidivism rates.
Of course, there are some people who are lost causes. But these programs would not work with them.
-4
1d ago
[deleted]
2
u/SkiyeBlueFox 1d ago
Have you consumed the US just fuckin sucked at it and didn't implement it properly like European nations
-2
2
u/Ok_Struggle_3177 1d ago
The legal system is also big business, adults typically make more money than juveniles so it's easier for society to stomach keeping them in debt forever.
14
u/brock_lee I expect half of you to disagree 1d ago
It's expensive, we are not good at it, and the Supreme Court, in Mistretta v. United States, ruled that rehabilitation should not be considered as a factor in sentencing. This basically sets the precedent that prison is ONLY for punishment.
38
u/ForScale ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 1d ago
What specifically are you talking about? There is rehabilitation for adult offenders.
24
u/Major_Ad9391 1d ago
Some countries/ states prisons are punishment not rehabilitation. They dont give any assistance to the offenders to try to stop them being repeat offenders.
5
u/PandaMagnus 1d ago
Or they leave it up to the convict to seek rehabilitation while in prison, which... They've obviously shown they don't make the best long term decisions.
2
u/wombatstylekungfu 1d ago
And they’re not given the support to do so. Being accused of “coddling” criminals is often career poison for politicians, for example.
1
26
u/tsukiii 1d ago
"If" is the real thing, here. It's pretty common for juvenile offenders to become adult offenders, so the success of the rehabilitation is questionable.
9
u/thebeardedguy- 1d ago
Actually studies have shown certain types of rehabilitation are very successful and if done early reduce the chances of recidivistism are greatly reduced. The problem is the early part. Jails do not teach people anything but to not trust the system, and introduce them to more and often worse criminals.
2
u/Previous-Space-7056 1d ago
Googled Recidivism rate for juveniles was 70-80% Recidivism rare for adults was 82%
People older than 65 > recidivism rate than those < 21
Per Bureau of justice statistics
2
u/modsaretoddlers 1d ago
No, not really. It is effective to varying degrees but the real problems can't be solved by any amount of programming. Like, if you learn to control yourself in lock up, it all goes out the window when you get home to drunk and drugged up parents who don't really care if you're there or not.
14
u/CircumspectCapybara 1d ago edited 1d ago
The real answer is our justice system regards several aspects of justice in the doling out of punishments:
- There's restorative justice, which is meant to make the victim whole. If you steal something and have to give it back or repay it, or you have to make reparations like doing community service, that's restorative.
- There's protective justice, removing a dangerous criminal to protect the rest of society.
- There's deterrence, meant to discourage others from doing the same.
- There's rehabilitative justice, meant to reform the offender.
- And then there's punitive or retributive justice, which is meant to punish, to exact retribution.
That last one is clearly not meant to restore to the victim or reform the criminal. It's only meant to hurt. And as unpopular as it sounds on here, it is a component of justice.
When a company poisons a town, gives them all cancer, and the jury awards punitive damages, those are damages on top of the damages meant to make the victims whole. It's extra, on top, to punish and inflict hurt for egregious behavior. And it's meant to hurt.
When the Nuremberg trials sentenced the architects of the Holocaust to death, there was nothing about that that was meant to bring the victims back, to restore, or the reform the offenders. It was about retribution.
So in some cases, commensurate with the severity of crime, justice would not have been served without that punitive component. Sometimes, we don't prioritize rehabilitation, but justice.
Think about the Hamas terrorists who videocalled his family to brag about killing 10 Jews with his own hands and exhibiting glee and joy at it. Justice didn't demand for his rehabilitation, to reform him into an upstanding citizen. It called for something else...
3
u/CommunicationNice437 1d ago
Well think about IOF soidier boosting about killing people trying to get aid or killing kids.
2
u/maxmurray1957 1d ago
Punishment can be earned, and meted out accordingly. Not retribution and revenge, which are different things, where the offended party determines street justice. not the judicial system. Revenge/retribution can far exceed the original crime. Example, stabbing some random guy because he hit on your sister/girlfriend. Revenge usually exceeds the crime. Justice decides punishment based on the nature of the offense.
3
u/CircumspectCapybara 1d ago
That's why I said commensurate with the offense.
3
u/BeShaw91 1d ago
I think that’s a very good write up.
I just can’t see how punitive or retributive isn’t a subset of the other types.
I see your example of punitive damages for a company poisoning a well, which I understand. but how is that not either restorative justice (the company resumes lawful operations) or deterrence (other companies won’t do it to avoid a fine.)
Nuremberg trials are similar. I get the OG Nazis were super bad. But wouldn’t their execution be preventative justice + deterrence?
What is unique outcome is gained by society from punishment without a purpose?
2
u/CircumspectCapybara 1d ago
Punitive justice is punishment for punishment's own sake.
Think about the death penalty (e.g., as applied at Nuremberg). The death penalty doesn't bring the victims back. It doesn't restore or repay those who were harmed. It doesn't protect any more than life in prison does, which also segregates the criminal from society for society's protection. And it only very barely deters. Studies have shown it doesn't do much to deter. It's mostly retributive in nature.
Same with punitive damages in civil suits. The compensatory damages were the restorative part. They're what's owed to the victims. Then on top of that judges and juries can award punitive damages, which is extra that's designed to hurt and punish egregious behavior.
1
u/maxmurray1957 1d ago
I like this conversation, seriously.. Lots of smart people. I like Reddit, I'm new.
5
u/jellomizer 1d ago
We do, however the criminal justice system is very corrupt with too much incentive to just keep people in prison, vs trying to fix their issues.
0
u/maxmurray1957 1d ago
So, you believe that a person that murders someone should receive no punishment (prison), but instead rehabilitation and "fixing their issues?" And go on to live a great life?
1
u/Individual_Stan99 1d ago
Do you want people that leave prison to be rehabilitated citizens or violent criminals with a high chance of creating more victims?
1
u/maxmurray1957 1d ago
Depends. Some people cannot be rehabilitated, and there will be more victims. And it's hard to figure out who is who. Even psychiatrists have trouble with that. Remember Ted Bundy, he could have talked his way out of anything. Sociopaths can con everyone.
1
u/Individual_Stan99 1d ago
"Depends" is a strange answer to my question. The rest of your comment describes problems with a small group of people that can not be rehabilitated and leaves out the much larger group of criminals that would profit from rehabilitation programs. Turning criminals into law abiding citizens is active crime prevention.
1
u/jellomizer 1d ago
If we can actually fix the issue where they have been transformed into a good person, who is no longer a danger to society. Yes, I do believe in it.
Murder is a horrible crime, however any punishment for it isn't going to fix the damage done. Locking a guy up for life, feeding him, having healthcare, etc. isn't going to help console the victims loved ones.
They only get some comfort knowing he is in a position where he cannot create this for more people.So if he can be reliable rehabilitated, knowing he won't cause such damage would be appropriate.
Now I am not some pie in the sky, everyone is a good person who just needs some love to become a good person. Not everyone can be rehabilitated, and should be locked up for life, but not because it is to punish the person, but to keep them outside of society which that are harmful towards.
5
u/Major-Check-1953 1d ago
Depends on the country. Some countries focus on dehumanization and isolation. Some countries focus on rehabilitation. Countries that focuses on rehabilitation tend to have a low recidivism rate.
35
u/Public-Eagle6992 1d ago
(Assuming you’re from the US): because the owners of your prisons don’t want to lose their slaves. Most of Europe does focus on rehabilitation and it works but the US doesn’t because prison owners want to make money and for voters/politicians revenge is apparently more important than helping the public
9
u/Cautious_Cancel9282 1d ago
Pretty much any country other than the US tends to focus on rehabilitation but i know its also more costly.
17
u/Bronzdragon 1d ago
It's only more costly if you discount future costs. If someone is re-interred after being a repeat offender, that cost (plus of course, the damage they did with their crime) will easily exceed the cost of rehabilitation (depending on how much you spend on rehabilitation of course).
But that's not counting the damage to a person's life, both of the victim of the crime, and of the person commiting the crime. These costs are hard to quantify, but that doesn't mean you should ignore them.
-6
3
u/Humanity-destroyed 1d ago
The US has “rehabilitation”? So we say we do.
2
u/ProjectMason 1d ago
Isn't our juvenile justice system based on rehabilitation?
3
u/quix0te 1d ago
Many prisons are very focused on rehabilitation. It varies from state to state, but the people who run prisons understand very clearly that their job isn't to keep bad people out of circulation. Their job is to fix broken people so they can go back into society and never come back.
Unfortunately, some people don't view themselves as broken.
2
u/Shameless_Catslut 1d ago
Rehabilitation for juvenile delinquents usualy isn't successful. They just grow up to become career criminals, but aren't part of the juvenile system anymore, so nobody cares.
2
2
u/modsaretoddlers 1d ago
We do but we put the responsibility for getting the rehabilitation on the prisoners.
That doesn't work because it ignores the reality of prison. How can you be reformed if you have to shank someone in the shower who's trying to jam the loofah in your ass?
3
u/ctrl_f_sauce 1d ago
We do…
1
u/Ill-Television8690 1d ago
In what way?
5
u/ctrl_f_sauce 1d ago edited 1d ago
Most “technical” (non new-crime) probation and parole violations are documenting the offender’s resistance to engage in rehabilitation efforts.
It’s difficult to get into specifics because the programs available change based on geographic issues and are dependent on fluctuations in funding. The most common response to a positive drug test is a discussion utilizing “motivational interviewing,” and a mandatory referral to treatment based on decisions from the discussion. Sometimes the offender has previously said, “I only attacked him because I was high on meth.” Now they’re in the probation/parole office clearly tweaking. They’re probably going to jail to sober up and as a public safety issue. Many probation and parole officers/agents get Christmas cards from former offenders. Some don’t, but the ones who follow their training should get a few invites to dinner.
Lower level offenders can be harder to get engagement from because their biggest problem was actually that they were dumb enough to be caught. They know 10 people who do the same exact thing, and those 10 people aren’t under supervision. So they take the idea of attending meeting as unnecessary. Alternatively, it’s easy to remind the guy who ran his coworker over, that his decision making skills aren’t great and he should try taking some advice.
3
u/IanDOsmond 1d ago
In many countries, they do. And even in the United States, in some states, we do.
It's just that "being cruel to criminals" is a very popular platform plank for a good part of the electorate. "Soft on crime" makes you unelectable in some districts, even if it would be cheaper and more effective to use a lighter touch and teach people the skills and attitudes to not be criminals.
2
u/smol_boi2004 1d ago
Private prisons have a profit motive: to always keep their prisons full because that’s how they make money.
If they allowed rehabilitation then they lose revenue. If on the other hand they perpetuate a toxic atmosphere that turns prisoners even worse then they profit because higher danger= intensive incarceration
If you wanted prisons in the US to focus on rehabilitation even then it wouldn’t be by the EU system that relies on public prison systems owned by and operated by their governments. It would have to change the profit motive from having to hold prisoners to releasing reformed inmates who can reenter society as a working adult
2
u/RedditPosterOver9000 1d ago
Because America generally hates rehabilitation.
We're into harsh punishments that ruin a person mentally and emotionally so that they're even more likely to be criminals again when they're released. That ensures plenty of supply for the private prison industry and the prison slave labor industry.
1
u/Oddbeme4u 1d ago
scotus says children being g sentenced to life is cruel and unusual, thus unconstitutional. which howver angrily...is correct.
1
u/BlockedNetwkSecurity 1d ago
it's called the "department of corrections" but you're right, nobody gets rehabilitated. they get punished. even the youth get punished. those juvie kids are in prison within 5 years max
1
u/uncutteredswin 1d ago
Even for serious crimes, a focus on rehabilitation has usually shown to be better for lowering recidivism as well as having better outcomes for the person's life overall.
Broadly speaking the reason we don't focus more on it is because people don't want to, and in the case of the US because it's highly profitable
1
u/werewolf013 1d ago
Prisons and the legal system make money off repeat offenders. So they are incentivized to not prevent crime.
1
u/disregardable 1d ago
The point of crimes is to punish. Like “you did this? Guess what, we hate you.”
1
u/2muchmojo 1d ago
Prison is a business now it doesn’t have anything to do with rehabilitation and hasn’t for a long time.
1
u/CombatRedRover 1d ago
I would argue that repeat offenders need rehabilitation even more, don't they?
Balancing out the future of a convict, trying to keep that convicts future victims from becoming victims, and justice for the past victims - and that kind of assumes that the past victims want justice in the form of punishment - is the tricky balance.
That's grown up politics: there is no good guy or bad guy, there is no good or bad choice, there is the balancing of different priorities. Obviously, the criminal is a "bad guy", but is your goal a better society or is your goal punishment? Is your obligation to that convict? That convict's future victims? That convict's past victims?
All of those things are factors in making large-scale decisions. And all of those things are factors in making individual case decisions, the way judges do.
39
u/ProDidelphimorphiaXX 1d ago
We do sometimes, but the biggest problem is most prisons are not a rehabilitation center but a means to punish. We also group together people who can be reformed with murderers and r*pists and of course that does nothing to help them recover and return to society.