Technical Assistance Partnership for Child and Family Mental Health |
|
|---|---|
|
Juvenile Justice and Systems of Care Frequently Asked Questions |
|
|
September 2003 Q: Why is the Balanced and Restorative Approach to Justice more palatable to communities than the old "best interest of the child" philosophy? One of the hardest things for society, victims, prosecutors, and those from juvenile justice, child welfare, education, and mental health to deal with is how to treat an emotionally disturbed child who has committed a crime. The response to the delinquent act must be framed in a way that satisfies the community, provides treatment for the child/youth, and meets the needs of victims. The criminal/delinquent act may have diminished the quality of life in a community, and that community has the right to want to be made whole again. Sometimes (maybe it's fair to say "usually") that which is in the "best interest of the child" fails to consider the community and/or victim(s) harmed by a delinquent act. Models that focus solely on "the best interest of the child" do a tremendous disservice to victims and their communities and have caused many to believe that the juvenile justice system is ineffective. The balanced and restorative approach to justice gives balanced consideration to community protection, offender accountability, and competency development, which may and should include therapeutic intervention whenever needed. Therefore, in the balanced and restorative justice approach, there can be punishment, treatment, and prevention, all of which are in the real interest of the child. No one wants an emotionally disturbed child to suffer in a harmful punitive setting, but allowing the child to have no consequences for his/her delinquent act does not help him/her. When this approach is implemented properly, the offender is held accountable to the victim(s), safety of the community and the quality of life are addressed, and the offender develops skills that will help him/her avoid future contact with the system. In addition, the offender is not committing new crimes during the time that he/she is restoring the harmed community because he/she is participating in a meaningful supervised activity that the community will appreciate.
|
|
|