The 12 year old boy imprisoned for 25 years after being tried as an adult

[xemmax]

If prison doesn't aim to rehabilitate people then how does it benefit society other than by a temporary removal of criminals, which ultimately may leave them with a high chance of reoffending?

 

[robinator]

I don't know. I'm just telling you what I know.

 

[xemmax]

Well if what you're saying is accurate (I don't know much about the US prison system) and they offer no rehabilitation program to anyone then it sounds like it needs a total overhaul if it is ever going to be able to offer any benefit to anyone.

 

[Foogirl]

We can all discuss this case until blue in the face, but the reality is we are a bunch of armchair quarterbacks, having no idea the specifics of the case. The judge probably had his reasons; all we know is the surfacy stuff released to the media.

Rehabilitation isn't offered to anyone in jail, whether they are 12 or 42. It is sad, but with the amount of money the federal prison system spends each year ($40,000 per inmate per year), I doubt they can scrape together any additional funds for rehabilitation programs.

The latest stats I could find, from 2010, show 211, 108 inmates in the federal prison system. That's $8.5 billion a year, just in incarceration costs.

I would agree with the bolded bit. There is undoubtedly more than we know. I seriously doubt they tried this kid as an adult when all he did was stand and watch.

I do think it is a good thing that the police have the option to try a child in an adult court for those particularly heinous crimes. It would be hard to imagine James Bulger's killers just being put in front of a children's panel.

Rehabilitation is offered to some degree in UK prisons. And it is successful to some extent. The problem is the number of short sentences means many don't get the opportunity.

 

[robinator]

But prison is not about rehabilitation; never has been. It's about punishment. Should there be rehabilitation? Of course. But as a nation that is trillions of dollars in debt, we would have to draw funds from other resources to pay for prisoner rehabilitation. So which programs should lose funding? Medicaid? Social services? Veterans Affairs? Foster care system? Which one?

 

[Foogirl]

But prison is not about rehabilitation; never has been. It's about punishment. Should there be rehabilitation? Of course. But as a nation that is trillions of dollars in debt, we would have to draw funds from other resources to pay for prisoner rehabilitation. So which programs should lose funding? Medicaid? Social services? Veterans Affairs? Foster care system? Which one?

I think that's maybe a fundamental difference. Here in the UK it is about both. We rely a lot on volunteers/charities to provide it, but it is available. The argument is, if you rehabilitate then re-offending goes down so fewer people end up there in the first place, but it absolutely needs capital funding which isn't always available. Kind of O/T but I have never understood why it costs more to keep a teenager in prison than it does to send them to a private school.

 

[robinator]

There may be private sectors providing limited rehab to our prisoners; I really don't know. But it isn't a federal program afaik

I understand the argument; it's rather chicken-or-the-egg, isn't it?

 

[xemmax]

Prison as punishment alone does not work, there must be a focus on rehabilitation in order to reduce reoffending and therefore reduce the number of people in prisons and the amount spent on them.

I am clearly not qualified to pick from your list of programs which should lose funding to accommodate this but if there was any desire to overhaul the system then I have no doubt funds would be allocated.

 

[robinator]

They'll raise our taxes, that's how they'll find funds


I am not a representative of the federal penal system, so please don't come down on me as if I have anything to do with it!

 

[Tiff]

I think as well rehabilitation only works for those who want to rehabilitate. You can lead a horse to the water but you can't force them to drink. But that applies to all aspects of life, not just prisoner reform.

 

[xemmax]

I don't know how it works there but surely during the annual budget they redistribute funding. That's what I was referring to when I said they would find the funding if they desired to.

And I'm definitely not coming down on anyone! It just seemed like you're quite opposed to what I'm saying.

 

[robinator]

No, I really don't have much opinion on it either way, tbh. I'm just passing along my understanding of how it all works.

 

[xemmax]

I don't know much about the US prison system like I said so I was just responding to what you said, I'm really talking from an ideogical perspective.

 

[Noelle610]

Honestly, punishing with no rehabilitation helps no one - not the criminal, the victim or society as a whole. The prison system in it's origins has aimed to "correct", hence the term corrections. One of the reasons solitary imprisonment became so popular in the US has to do with our puritanical roots - religious folks truly believed that if criminals had the opportunity to pray and reflect on their crimes that they would be remourseful.

I don't necessarily agree with this philosophy, but I don't think it's true that prison is all about punishment, at least not from a historical standpoint.

I guess it all comes down to how you view criminality. If you believe that most serious crimes (murder, rape) are committed as a result of mental illness, then rehabilitation makes the most sense. I'm not sure someone that severely mentally ill can conceive of "wanting" to be rehabilitated, but that doesn't mean strides can't be made. If you believe there are people who are truly "evil", well, then that's another story with a different solution.

 

[Natsku]

The way they do here, by using the child welfare services, seems to work fairly well. Of course children are still civilly liable here even though they're not criminally liable so if they commit crimes they can be taken to civil court and be ordered to pay fines to the victim (most youth crime is property crime or alcohol/identity crime).

would you say thats enough to fine someone which would actually be fining parents for serious crimes like rape and murder. Also out of interest do the victims of crime agree with system where you are

Rape and murder committed by a child is extremely rare, I don't think that would be a fining issue though, it would be an issue for the child welfare services to deal with by counselling (for a child, particularly a young child to rape or murder there must be something wrong with them), removing from their home if their home is contributing to their delinquincy and I think (not sure, I just vaguely remember reading something about it some years ago) in extreme cases they can put the children in a special school which would essentially be the equivalent of juvenile prison just without being a real prison.

Regarding the fines, I'm not sure how it works with younger children but when my OH was a teenage he was in a fight and it was considered assault and he is still paying the fine off for that, his parents didn't pay it, he just pays it month by month like paying off a loan.

Apart from when there was a string of violent youth crimes about ten years ago which caused a bit of public outcry, the general public doesn't seem to have much of a problem with the system. There is a mediation system for victims of the crime to meet with the young offender and work out their own way of dealing with what happened and how the offender can make up for their actions as well.
There was some talk of lowering the age of criminal responsibility but it doesn't look like that will happen, it seems on the whole that most people here agree with 15 being the age of criminal responsibility.

 

[Natsku]

Ahh I see we've moved on to discussing punishment vs rehabilitation. I didn't know that US federal prisons offer no rehabilitation at all, no wonder the system is so messed up there! Its pointless to punish without rehabilitating, it doesn't lower crime it just removes the criminal temporarily. The funding could be achieved by not locking up non-violent offenders and instead making more use of fines and community service for those offenders so money could be freed up (and indeed raised through the use of fines) for rehabilitating those that can be rehabilitated. Some people can't be rehabilitated though and those people should be locked up indefinitely, thats what they do here.

 

[Bex84]

Thats really interesting natsku. Maybe if pp said some is down to mental problems (i know by no means all) then mental health hospitals would be better. I do think rehibilitation needs to happen but some people will never admit guilt of what they did.

 

[Andypanda6570]

There are programs in the US prison system. A lot of them have been cut back, because of money so to say there are no programs isn't true. Substance-abuse treatment, vocational training and educational programs, all scheduled to be cut back, were designed to give offenders skills to help them hold jobs and make other changes. They are taught to handle anger, build self-esteem and search for the roots of their decisions to commit crimes, the better to avoid repeating them. There are also mental health programs were they do receive medication and seen by a psychiatrist.
In many prison systems, psychologists are the primary mental health care providers, with psychiatrists contracted on a part-time basis. Psychologists provide services ranging from screening new inmates for mental illness to providing group therapy and crisis counseling.
They also provide rehabilitative services that are useful even for prisoners without serious mental illnesses. For example, a psychologist might develop special programs for substance abusers or help prisoners prepare for the transition back to the community.

There are programs in place , but with a lot of cuts to our budget it may be dwindling..

 

[Piper84]

The way they do here, by using the child welfare services, seems to work fairly well. Of course children are still civilly liable here even though they're not criminally liable so if they commit crimes they can be taken to civil court and be ordered to pay fines to the victim (most youth crime is property crime or alcohol/identity crime).

would you say thats enough to fine someone which would actually be fining parents for serious crimes like rape and murder. Also out of interest do the victims of crime agree with system where you are

Rape and murder committed by a child is extremely rare, I don't think that would be a fining issue though, it would be an issue for the child welfare services to deal with by counselling (for a child, particularly a young child to rape or murder there must be something wrong with them), removing from their home if their home is contributing to their delinquincy and I think (not sure, I just vaguely remember reading something about it some years ago) in extreme cases they can put the children in a special school which would essentially be the equivalent of juvenile prison just without being a real prison.

Regarding the fines, I'm not sure how it works with younger children but when my OH was a teenage he was in a fight and it was considered assault and he is still paying the fine off for that, his parents didn't pay it, he just pays it month by month like paying off a loan.

Apart from when there was a string of violent youth crimes about ten years ago which caused a bit of public outcry, the general public doesn't seem to have much of a problem with the system. There is a mediation system for victims of the crime to meet with the young offender and work out their own way of dealing with what happened and how the offender can make up for their actions as well.
There was some talk of lowering the age of criminal responsibility but it doesn't look like that will happen, it seems on the whole that most people here agree with 15 being the age of criminal responsibility.

That sounds good. I think for that kind of system to work in the UK though, there would have to be a complete overhaul of how the press works. The way violent crime is reported is so irresponsible, even by the supposedly respectable broadsheets. It makes everyone a criminal justice expert and I'm afraid a lot of how the justice system works is intended to pander to people who've read about the cases and believe the only solution (even for children) is throw away the key.

Like the reforms in prisoner treatment announced today. I agree that policy regarding TV should not be down to the discretion of governors, but how is a uniform for the first two weeks in prison going to help with rehabilitation or reoffending rates? It's pure crowd-pleasing https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22341867

 

[Natsku]

The way they do here, by using the child welfare services, seems to work fairly well. Of course children are still civilly liable here even though they're not criminally liable so if they commit crimes they can be taken to civil court and be ordered to pay fines to the victim (most youth crime is property crime or alcohol/identity crime).

would you say thats enough to fine someone which would actually be fining parents for serious crimes like rape and murder. Also out of interest do the victims of crime agree with system where you are

Rape and murder committed by a child is extremely rare, I don't think that would be a fining issue though, it would be an issue for the child welfare services to deal with by counselling (for a child, particularly a young child to rape or murder there must be something wrong with them), removing from their home if their home is contributing to their delinquincy and I think (not sure, I just vaguely remember reading something about it some years ago) in extreme cases they can put the children in a special school which would essentially be the equivalent of juvenile prison just without being a real prison.

Regarding the fines, I'm not sure how it works with younger children but when my OH was a teenage he was in a fight and it was considered assault and he is still paying the fine off for that, his parents didn't pay it, he just pays it month by month like paying off a loan.

Apart from when there was a string of violent youth crimes about ten years ago which caused a bit of public outcry, the general public doesn't seem to have much of a problem with the system. There is a mediation system for victims of the crime to meet with the young offender and work out their own way of dealing with what happened and how the offender can make up for their actions as well.
There was some talk of lowering the age of criminal responsibility but it doesn't look like that will happen, it seems on the whole that most people here agree with 15 being the age of criminal responsibility.

That sounds good. I think for that kind of system to work in the UK though, there would have to be a complete overhaul of how the press works. The way violent crime is reported is so irresponsible, even by the supposedly respectable broadsheets. It makes everyone a criminal justice expert and I'm afraid a lot of how the justice system works is intended to pander to people who've read about the cases and believe the only solution (even for children) is throw away the key.

Like the reforms in prisoner treatment announced today. I agree that policy regarding TV should not be down to the discretion of governors, but how is a uniform for the first two weeks in prison going to help with rehabilitation or reoffending rates? It's pure crowd-pleasing https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22341867

Yeah crowd-pleasing policies is a problem. How prisons are run should be left up to the experts (psychologists, sociologists, criminologists etc.) not politicians. Politics should be taken out of the whole criminal justice system as politicians just pander to the public to get more votes and the general public does not know what actually works best at preventing reoffending (made clear by all the people who demand that prisons stop being "like holiday camps" and demand that everything is made harsher and tougher. Those people have no idea about what actually works but they are the people the politicians listen to, sadly)