Juvenile Law: Status Offenses

Some acts are considered criminal only when minors commit them;
these are called juvenile status offenses.
In juvenile cases, a "status offense" involves conduct that would not be a crime if it was
committed by an adult -- in other words, the actions are considered to be a violation of the law
only because of the youth's status as a minor (typically anyone under 18 years of age). Common
examples of status offenses include underage drinking, skipping school, and violating a local
curfew law. In an average year, approximately 20% of all juvenile arrests involve status offenses.
Read on to learn what types of conduct constitute status offenses, how status offense cases are
handled, and what penalties might apply to status offenses. (To learn more about other cases
that are handled by the juvenile system
Types of Status Offenses

The kind of conduct that might constitute a status offense varies by state. The most common status offenses
include:

truancy (skipping school)

violating a city or county curfew

underage possession and consumption of alcohol

underage possession and use of tobacco

running away, and

ungovernability (being beyond the control of parents or guardians).

How States Handle Status Offenses

Traditionally, status offenses were handled exclusively through the juvenile justice system. But in the 1960s and
1970s, many states began to view status offense violations as a warning signal that a child needed better
supervision or some other type of assistance to avoid future run-ins with the law. This view is grounded in fact
-- research has linked status offenses to later delinquency.
For the most part, state goals in dealing with status offenses became threefold:

to preserve families

to ensure public safety, and

to prevent young people from becoming delinquent or committing crimes in the future.

In this vein, the 1974 Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act emphasized "deinstitutionalizing" status offenses. This
meant giving prosecutors broad discretion to divert status offense cases away from juvenile court and toward
other government agencies that could better provide services to at-risk juveniles. Diverting a case before a
delinquency petition was filed also allowed a young person to avoid the delinquent label -- some believed that
label itself impeded a juvenile's chances for rehabilitation.
In 1997, only one in five status offense cases were formally processed by the courts, and even fewer status
offense cases actually made it to juvenile court in the first place. That's because law enforcement officers are
less likely to refer status offense cases to juvenile court, compared with delinquency cases. Of those status
offense cases that do get referred, 94% involve liquor law violations.

Today, most states refer to status offenders as "children or juveniles in need of supervision, services, or care." A
few states designate some status offenders as "dependent" or "neglected children," and give responsibility for
these young people over to state child welfare programs.
States approach status offenses in a number of different ways. In some states, a child who commits a status
offense may end up in juvenile court. In other jurisdictions, the state's child welfare agency is the first to deal
with the problem. Some states have increased the use of residential placement for offenders, and others
emphasize community-based programs. But, in all states, if informal efforts and programs fail to remedy the
problem, the young person will end up in juvenile court.
Penalties for Status Offenses

For juveniles who do end up in juvenile court over a status offense, the kinds of penalties the court may impose
vary from state to state. Common penalties for status offense violations include:

suspending the juvenile's driver's license

requiring the juvenile to pay a fine or restitution

placing the juvenile with someone other than a parent or guardian (such as a relative,
foster home, or group home), or

ordering the juvenile to attend a counseling or education program.

If a juvenile violates a court order, most courts have the authority to order the juvenile's detention at a secure,
locked facility. And, in some states, courts can require that the juvenile's parents attend counseling sessions or
parenting classes.
Curfew Violations

Curfew violations are the subject of some controversy. Curfew laws are established locally, by cities or counties.
Typically, they prohibit young people under a certain age (usually 18) from being in a public place during
certain hours (between 11 p.m. and 6 a.m., for example). Most curfew ordinances contain exceptions for things
like travel to and from work or school events. For the most part, local governing bodies enact curfews with the
goal of preventing juvenile crime and keeping the peace.
How curfew violations are handled -- and what penalties might be imposed -- will vary depending on the city or
locality. In some jurisdictions, police bring curfew violators to a center where they must wait to be picked up by
a parent or guardian. Often, the police officer is given discretion to issue a warning or simply take the minor
home. Sometimes the curfew violator faces fines, mandatory community service, enrollment in after-school
programs, or the loss of driver's license privileges. In extreme cases, a curfew violator might end up in juvenile
hall. In some jurisdictions, parents who knowingly allow curfew violations could also be subject to fines.
Challenges have been mounted to some curfew laws on the basis that they violate juveniles' First Amendment
rights to free speech and association. One recent example involved a curfew law imposed by the city of
Rochester, New York. The New York Court of Appeals struck down that law as unconstitutional, but a number
of other curfew ordinances have been upheld after being challenged in court.
Truancy

A minor is considered truant (absentee, a student who stays away from school without leave or explanation.) if
she or he skips school without a valid excuse and without the knowledge of a parent or guardian. States and
school districts have different standards as to how many absences are required before a student will be deemed
truant. In some states, the number is three per year. In others, it's as many as 18 absences.
Schools are usually the first in line to enforce truancy laws and even have the authority to refer truancy cases to
juvenile court when necessary. Police officers have the legal power to detain truant children who are outside of
school grounds. Many states also hold parents accountable for their children's truancy, imposing fines or even
jail time on parents who fail to ensure sure that their children are in school.

Truancy accounts for the majority of status offense cases in the juvenile system, and studies have show a strong
link between truancy and future delinquency, not to mention difficulty in school. For this reason, many states,
counties, and schools have begun to crack down on truancy.

Penalties for juvenile offenders

Juveniles aged 12 to 17 who commit an offence are penalised under juvenile criminal law. The court may also
apply juvenile criminal law to adults aged 18 to 22 years.

No prosecution of children under 12

Children under the age of 12 cannot be prosecuted. If a child commits a minor offence, for instance theft or
vandalism, the police will talk to the parents. They may also send the child to the youth care office, which will
either provide counselling or refer them to other services. If a child under 12 really gets out of hand, the court
will intervene by, for example, appointing a family supervisor to monitor the child.

HALT programme
Juveniles who commit minor offences may be referred to the HALT juvenile crime prevention programme. This
provides them with the opportunity to put right what they have done wrong. They can, for instance, apologise to
the victims and pay for any damage done. If they fulfil their obligations and complete their HALT programme
successfully, they will not have a criminal record.
If a juvenile refuses to take part in the HALT programme or does not complete it successfully, their case is
referred to the public prosecutor. This will usually result in prosecution.

Alternative sanctions for juveniles

An alternative sanction for juveniles consists of a community service order (unpaid work), a training order (a
training project) or a combination of the two. The Child Protection Board supervises juveniles who have
received alternative sanctions.

Youth detention
Juveniles who have been sentenced to youth detention are sent to a young offenders institution. The maximum
sentence for juveniles aged 16 or 17 is two years. For juveniles aged 12 to 15 the maximum is one year.
While in youth detention they attend school and are given extra lessons in, for instance, social skills and anger
management.

Youth protection and custody order

Some juveniles require intensive treatment and counselling to avoid repeat offending, for instance because they
suffer from a behavioural disorder. In such cases the court can impose a PIJ order for placement in a youth
protection and custody institution.

A PIJ order is valid for at least three years and may be extended to a maximum of seven years. During the final
year, the juvenile is allowed out under certain conditions (conditional lifting of the order). They are then
monitored by the youth probation service.

Overnight detention
Overnight detention is a form of provisional detention. The juveniles go to school during the day and are held in
a young offenders institution outside school hours and overnight. This allows them to continue their studies or
work

Behavioural programme order

What happens if a custodial sentence is too severe, but a suspended sentence would be too light? In that case a
behavioural programme order (gedragsbenvloedende maatregel, GBM) can be imposed on the juvenile. A
GBM consists of one or more training or treatment sessions, such as aggression training or a course on how to
stay off drugs and alcohol. The youth probation service monitors the progress of the GBM.

Other penalties and non-punitive orders for juveniles

Other possible penalties and non-punitive orders in juvenile criminal law are:

confiscation of property (such as scooters) and goods that have been obtained illegally (for instance by
theft or receiving stolen goods);

payment of a fine or damages.

Adolescent criminal law for young offenders aged 16 to 22

As of 1 April 2014, young offenders aged 16 to 22 can be tried either as a juvenile or as an adult, under
adolescent criminal law. This allows the court to take the offenders development into account. Some juveniles
need a tough approach, while others benefit more from guidance, even though they may be older.

Is stricter punishment the answer to juvenile crime?

Background and context

Juvenile justice is the area of criminal law applicable to persons not old enough to be held responsible for
criminal acts. In most states in the US, the age for criminal culpability is set at 18 years. In England the age of
criminal responsibility is 10 years old, Other countries have ages of criminal responsibility between these
extremes, for example, Turkey (14), Romania (12), Greece (12), Spain (15); Belgium and Luxembourg also
both set it at 18. The key issues in this debate are whether we should punish juveniles more in line with adult
punishment, or whether there should be special treatment for them.
Argument #1
Yes
The primary purpose of a justice is the prevention of
crime and the protection of the innocent. It is to achieve
these purposes that children should not be entitled to
lenient punishment. The purposes of punishment are
proportional retribution, deterrence and prevention of
crime. Rehabilitation should at best be a secondary aim.
Argument #2
Yes
The "desert" theory of punishment argues that the
retribution taken by society against an offender should
be proportional to the harm he has caused the victim. For

No
Child crime is different from adult crime in
that the offenders are, in most legal systems,
not deemed to be fully conscious moral
individuals. As such, the best way to deal
with them is through rehabilitation rather
than punishment.

example, a person who kills is more culpable than a

person who robs or hurts. As the harm caused by
children is no more than that caused by adults in a
similar offence, they should not be entitled to special
treatment. The assumption that children are not as

morally culpable as adults is false, and countries like

England recognise the age of criminal responsibility as
12 years.
No
Subjective culpability should play as important a part in
punishment as the harm principle. That is why murder is
punished more severely than negligent manslaughter,
Argument #3
Yes
Punishing children more leniently than adults
undermines the deterrent value of punishment. In 1998
in the US, 29% of all high school boys own guns. The
message being sent out would be that if children
committed crime that would be all right. In the state of
Virginia in a 1996 survey for example, 41% of youth
have at various times either been in a gang or associated
with gang activities. Of this, 69% said they joint because
friends were involved and 60% joined for excitement.
This clearly shows that youth do not take crime seriously
because of the belief that they will be leniently treated.

even though both cause the same harm. Children are not
capable of making the same moral judgements as adults.
That is why children are no allowed to vote, drive or
watch certain movies. It is in recognition of the inability
of children to form moral judgments that makes them
have less subjective culpability and therefore worthy of
lighter punishment.

No
The deterrence theory assumes that all crime is
committed by a rational evaluation. If indeed 8 or 10
year old children are capable of making rational
calculations, then the prospect of spending several years
in reform school should be no less a deterrent then
spending the time in jail. It is still a curtailment of their
liberty and if they are rational, they would not want their
liberty curtailed. The real problem is that most crime are
committed by people who do not make such rational
calculations before hand.

Argument #4
Yes

No

The best way to prevent crime in the short run is to lock

up the offenders. This prevents them from immediately
harming society. The longer term solution is that
children who have been imprisoned from recalcitrance
by the memory of the harsh punishment.

This is an argument that would justify imprisoning

anyone for life, as that is the surest way to prevent them
harming anyone. As this is plainly ridiculous, it must be
accepted that locking a person up is at best a short term
remedy and the long term answer lies in rehabilitation.

Argument #5
Yes

No

Rehabilitation (counselling and psychiatric treatment) is

a soft option that will make children believe that they are
spending short periods of time in a holiday camp. In the
US, more than half the boys who were put under
counselling orders after offences rather then under
detention ended up re-offending during the period they
were undergoing counselling. It is better if whatever
rehabilitation programme is planned takes place in some
sort of detention facility. They can still be separated
from hardened adult criminals, but that does not mean
they should not be detained for similar periods of time.

The only long term solution to juvenile crime is reform

of the child. Children are more susceptible to reform and
the rates of recalcitrance for child offenders under
counselling in the US is significantly lower than that of
adult offenders. Even if some end up re-offending, it
does mean that just under half of those who had been
given the chance to return to normal life took up that
chance and did not re-offend. Putting them in a prison,
and even worst with adult offenders is likely to increase
the chance of recalcitrance because they will be in the
same environment as other offenders who will be a
negative influence on them.