Sociology

One of the important issues in the society today is youth crime. This pertains to the crimes committed by individuals who are seen by the society as youths often those who are aged 18 and below, the importance stemming from the results of this problem and what this reflects in the society in general (Goldson, Muncie, 2006, p. 71). The society accepts that the youth is different from adults in many different ways. Part of this difference is the manner by which they are handled by the government upon infraction and the committing of youth crimes. It is important to look at the youth crime policies to be able to understand them better, and for possible alternatives to be put forward for consideration and analysis, which are two of the main thrusts and focus of the discussion and analysis of this paper.

History of policy in the United States
The United States government has long dealt with the problem of youth crime and juvenile behavior resulting to criminal actions. One of the important and long term policies of the United States is that compared to other countries wherein youth and juvenile criminals are treated as adults, the US government treats youth and juveniles through a process that is not completely similar with adults. There is a significant importance in being tried in court as an adult and being tried in court as a minor, or a youth or juvenile offender. The history of the US government policy on youth crime is rooted in the enactment of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Act of 1974 (Sowers, White, Dulmus, 2008, p. 321). This gives the federal government guidance on how it would pursue cases on youth crime and juvenile criminal actions. Under the policy, youth crimes should be tried under a juvenile court system which is specifically designed so that it is fully capable in handling this particular type of case.

Youths implicated and charged in cases of youth crimes possess the privileges of a common accused individual, such as the right to refuse self-incrimination and more important, the right to counsel (Omaji, 2003, p. 67). These are secured by the US legal system for the accused in youth crime cases as far back as 1967. From the 1970s all the way to the 1980s, the policy regarding youth crimes involves the focus on the form of punishment via service to community programs. With the growing cases of more violent youth crimes, the condition changed, making incarceration and more severe penalty the choice form of penalty for youth crime offenders who were found guilty of very violent youth crimes (Sowers, White, Dulmus, 2008, p. 321). It is described largely as a form of cycle in the history of justice reform and policy, including move towards punitive as well as rehabilitative approach to handling youth crime cases. However, some things remain consistent, like the creation of places where youth crime offenders are placed either for rehabilitation or for punishment. An important aspect of the history of youth crime policy is that change is consistently advocated by individuals and groups who want to change the policy. Some end up successful while others have to make do with the status quo.

Current Policies in the United States
The current policies in the United States regarding youth crime involves the focus on incarceration as well as rehabilitation and the effective re-integration to the society after serving time in facilities especially made for youth crime offenders.  There are slight variations in how youth crimes are handled in a state-per-state basis. The general umbrella policy for youth crimes today in the United States involves the protection of the youth crime offender and the observation of the youth crime offenders rights and privileges when in trial and when incarcerated. Segregation of adult and youth offenders in facilities is also an important part of the US government policy in youth crime.

Part of the current youth crime policy is the undertaking of programs to decrease and lessen the number and tendencies for the occurrences of youth crime so that less and less youths will be sent to facilities for punishment and rehabilitation. Part of the current policies and integral to this, are laws and bills enacted in the past that strongly impact youth crime, the rights of the youth crime offender and the process of handling this type of cases in the court of law.

Future of policies in the United States
It is hard to predict the possible policies affecting youth crime. Definitely, there is very little chance for radical change in the policies on youth crime considering how the society views the youth and how the modern society always chooses its course of action every time the youth is involved. Future policies may impact the focus on choosing which between the two forms of punishment rehabilitation and social service versus severe punishment and incarceration. These will be given weight and importance in the coming years, based largely on the developments inside youth crime. If it becomes worse, the government might review and revise its existing policy on youth crime and youth crime offender and shift towards more severe action to use as deterrence for future youth crime and youth crime offenders. Lobbyists and policy makers will have to contend with the existing situation on youth crimes. They will have to listen to propositions affecting youth crimes that fellow legislators will present that can trigger change.

Policy Analysis
The existing set of policies in the United States regarding youth crimes can be viewed in two different perspectives. In one side, it can be seen as the US using kid gloves on youth crimes which makes other youths feel that it is okay to commit youth crimes. The government will not come down strong upon them, which, in turn encourages more and more youth crimes all across the country. The policy has its merits in consideration to how the youth should be appraised alongside their mental capability for sound decision making. If they are not yet capable to rationalize fully, they should not be punished so severely for the actions that they did in an age where they are still not fully developed in the socio-political aspect, that is, in consideration to the full understanding and appreciation of the law and how it can impact his or her life. In a sense, this creates a sort of double standard in crime trial. If a person is merely a month too old to be tried as youth and thus subjected to adult trial, does this mean that in a months time, the individual transitioned from the youth stage to the adult stage

Still, the policies ensure that the youths have enough on themselves post-youth crime offending days to start a new life and to be a productive individual. This is a good reason why the policy should be more on rehabilitation and less on severe forms of punishment which can seriously negatively impact the youth. While there are many criticisms in the different aspects of youth crime policy, changes will happen either as a result of the criticisms or simply because it has become a necessity.

Alternatives  analysis and evaluation
There are many different possible alternatives in some of the aspects in youth crime policies. For example, in the policy regarding punishment and penalties, the government should also consider including in the penalties the removal of the youth crime offender in his or her original place. It should also consider relocating the youth somewhere where he or she can start a new life and be far from the people that have a strong influence on the youth to commit crimes. It is also important that part of the policy is the creation of programs designed to study the possibility of identifying ideal relocation sites. The sites should have low or zero tendencies for gangs (for youth crime offenders affiliated to gangs) and the creation of a stricter monitoring of the travel patterns of the youth offender to help him or her stay away from his or her previous environment that has led to the commission of the crime.

Another possible alternative is the implementation of the stricter policy on youth crimes. This means reinforcing all aspects of youth crime to make it stricter and stiffer in responding to and handling youth crimes. The government should consider the changes in the human development. Is the 18 year old of today similar to the 18 year old individual 20 or 40 years ago If the human body matures faster today, then the policies in youth crime should be revised. This could mean that individuals possessing adult capabilities are being treated under juvenile and youth crime court system which may not be suitable and sufficient for this particular case anymore. 

There are many other different possible alternatives that can be offered to the existing set of policies involved in handling youth crimes and juvenile criminal actions. What is important is that these alternatives are studied intensively and extensively to determine which among possible alternatives and changes are suitable and can best address and handle the situation youth crime and juvenile criminal actions. It is becoming more complex and is changing in condition and complexity as years go by and as social conditions continuously affect the youths and their experiences and impact the tendencies for youths to commit youth crimes. Overall, alternatives can be considered as a positive development. They bring something new to the table. The question on youth crime policy is that whether the government is focused on helping the youths change or punishing the youths to deter them from doing it again and to act as deterrence to other possible future cases of youth crime of the similar type. In both instances, the alternatives can be seen as an initiative that should be strongly considered because of its potential to decrease youth crime and to also help in the rehabilitation of the youth crime offender.

Implementation plan
The implementation of alternatives is an issue that should be addressed in consideration to per-state acceptance and use, stages, monitoring and evaluation and appraisal of the alternatives as they are implemented. The implementation should start with covering which states would integrate the alternatives to their present set of youth crime policies. The implementation should also be supported by necessary monitoring of particular groups and agencies. This should be done to detect if the alternatives are contributing to positive or negative changes in the youth crime conditions in the society, and if it is serving its purpose like helping in the rehabilitation of the offenders, etc. A final assessment paper should also be created at the end of a prescribed length of time of study, research and observation. The text should be considered in the deliberation as to whether the use of alternatives should continue, stop or if changes is necessary to make it more effective, consistent to the previous efforts. This should also include cognitive and social features of childhood and adolescence (to) influence the content of juvenile crime policy (McCord, Widom, Crowell, 2001, p. 14). It is a sad fact of life that the society is burdened with the growing problem of youth crimes.

However, it is important that the government continues to do everything it can. This is to make sure that not only is the youth crime handled well through existing policies but more importantly, it is not closing its doors to possible changes and development that can impact the policy on youth crime and help the youth crime offenders at the same time.