We'll view the rest of "Juvies" this week, but since we didn't get much time to discuss Part 1 in class, I thought we might begin the conversation on the blog. Here are a couple questions to consider, but feel free to discuss other related themes or issues as well. I'd particularly like to hear about connections you made between the film, the articles we read for last week, and Alex's talk.1) Should we respond the same way when a 15-year-old commits a murder as we do when a 35-year-old does? Why or why not?
2) What were your feelings about the expression "You do the crime, you do the time," before watching the film? Is the film making you re-think your views, or not? Is the idea of "mandatory minimum" sentences a good one?
3) Michael Meade says in the film, "Youth are a reflection of the symptoms of the culture. A culture whose youth are committing increasingly vile crimes is a culture that has become increasingly vile." What is he saying? And do you agree?
4) How does all this impact the education system -- and, in particular, schools in our nation's cities?
14 comments:
This movie has opened my eyes on the world we live in. How can we charge these young individuals as an adult? I think it is unfair to give a 14 year old a life sentence. They haven't even begun to start their life. I found it very interesting the part where the doctor showed us how a juvenile's brain is a lot different then an adult's brain. The thinking patterns are extremely different. I do believe that these youths deserve to be punished for their crimes. However, the lowest sentence I saw on there was 25 years. That means that they won't be out of jail until they are at least 40. They have lost their entire life. Instead of getting these juveniles ready for life in society, we are taking it away from them.
I really liked this movie, but it was also upsetting. After hearing the stories of these VERY young kids, I feel like every story should be heard and every kids should be sentenced according to the circumstances. I know that may seem crazy - like it would be WAY TOO HARD to do, but that's the only way it seems fair. In the movie one kid recieved a worse sentence than another for the SAME CRIME. I don't understand how that works...
"You do the crime, you do the time," was an expression that I believed in not so long ago. After taking the Urban Field Experience class as well as learning/seeing new things in this class, I've changed my feelings about that statement. I disagree with it because it puts every kid/young adult in the same category. In the article which explained "mandatory minimum", it showed us that the "mandatory minimum" changed a lot throughout the years. I think it was an issue because people were getting unfair sentences. This is contradicting what I said earlier about hearing everyone's case... getting a sentence that fits their case, but I think it's important to have some kind of "mandatory minimum" to keep order.
When Michael Meade says is saying, "Youth are a reflection of the symptoms of the culture. A culture whose youth are committing increasingly vile crimes is a culture that has become increasingly vile," I think he's saying that it's not JUST the fault of the youth in a culutre, but the fault of the adults as well. Children learn from their caregivers...if the caregiving is not good, whether it's because the family is poor, split up, etc., the child will ultimately follow in the same footsteps. This is not ALWAYS the case, but it happens very often.
Children who come from poor families, broken homes, etc. tend to have a harder time in school - grades suffer, health suffers, and discipline is sometimes very low. This REALLY impacts education, not only for the student but also for the teacher. It becomes difficult for teacher to discipline a class, students get behind and thent he teacher is constantly taking time to get those students caught up with the rest of the class. Those are just a FEW examples, but obviously all of this has a big impact on education.
This documentary was surprising and upsetting. Numbers can tell you how many kids are in the prison system but when you actually see them and hear their stories, your emotions are harder hit. I was surprised at how many children had near-to or life sentences. They all came from similar backgrounds and never had the opportunities that all children should have. Often times the children in the prison system have not had the resources to get away from a risky lifestyle. As we said in class, and others have said here, you cannot put sole blame on the child. I may be wrong but I believe all people are innately good. I do not think anyone wants to hurt someone else when they are born. The experiences and subconscious events that take place in a child's life forms their world and consequently their reactions to it. I understand the government sets minimums and judicial standards for a reason, however when dealing with children each case must be fully investigated and circumstances need to be understood. I know this is hard to do in a system where tax dollars are needed for this type of investigation and children can just be a case number. However, something needs to be changed. As teachers and society members we need to be proactive. Legislators also need to be more sympathetic to these children and open to actual rehabilitation, the original purpose of juvenile prison, not just revenge. Getting out of prison when you are 40 or 50 and have spend 30+ years there is not rehabilitating. It is suppressing. It does not allow those children to be active members in society, because they have missed out on so much of the normal adolescent and adult experience. I feel like putting those kids back on the streets when they are 40 is like saying, "Thanks for serving your time, now that you have nothing and your friends are all gone, let's see what you can make of yourself." Hard prison time does not pay for the crime.
2. Even before watching the film I did not agree with "you do the crime, you do the time." I always knew of the social injustices people (mostly minorities)face. It seems that adults have forgotten how thier minds worked as children. Most people did many things without thinking first. I even remember the small troubles I had as an adolescence trying to be an "adult". We can not punish these children the way we are. In certain circumstances, things just happen. Once we get to the bottom of situations, and find the truth, we should punish them accordingly. I think there should be recovery programs for these students to go to if they did commit a horrendous act of violence. These children should if anything be placed in a seperate institution where they can be with their peers. They should still be educated, and given a second chance. After watching the movie I learned so much more about the juvinile detention situation. These children are wasting away.They need a second chance.
I’m usually not one to publicly “go against the grain” however, I think that juveniles should be punished accordingly for their crimes. While I don’t completely agree in life sentences for adolescents, I do feel that if a 17 year old is choosing to partake in adult activities, then they should be punished the same way an adult would be. Granted, it is sad that some of those teens from the video won’t get out of jail until their forties or fifties, but they were aware of the possible repercussions of their actions. If an 18 year old killed or paralyzed someone in my family, I would want them punished to the fullest extent of the law. It would not matter to me the circumstances of why they had a gun, or why they shot my family. Granted, the punishment would not make my loved one come back, but I think that knowing that the person who hurt my family was behind bars would help, for I knew that my loved one was getting justice. I will add though that I do not agree with the extra time that was put on that one kid’s sentence; how he received extra time for gang affiliation and having a gun, especially since it seemed like he really was not involved in the shooting.
I don't think it's acceptable to treat a juvenile offender and an adult offender the same way. From a scientific perspective, it's not the same crime. We saw in the video and many studies have shown that (at least most) adolescents are not capable of controlling impulses as well as adults, nor do they have the ability to see an abstract "future" very clearly. I think about myself as a fifteen-year-old. At the time, I thought I was "pretty much an adult," but ten years later, I can see how narrow my life was and how little I understood about adult responsibilities. Seeing how some of the juveniles had changed just in the time they awaited sentencing or becoming of age to join a federal facility showed me that they still had a lot of growing up to do. Some of them were still struggling to understand the full affect of their actions and punishments.
I have read Holler If You Hear Me , so hearing Alex's thoughts were very interesting. One thing I noticed was that his ideas about juvenile sentencing seemed to have changed since he was profiled in that book. In Holler , Alex says that he thinks juvenile gang members should be punished more severely and he thinks it would deter some of their behavior if they were taught a lesson. However, now he seems to think that the prison system is too focused on punishment rather than rehabilitation. I think this change can be attributed to his growth. He has a better understanding now, as an adult, of his actions and the "why" behind them. He didn't think that the prison life was doing much to change his lifestyle and habits, and reinforced the ideas that were showing up in our video and readings.
I'm looking forward to the end of the video!
While watching this movie, a thought constantly ran through my mind; "they are just KIDS!" Parents and teachers constantly use this statement to answer why kids do certain things or act a certain way. I know that the majority of us look back at something stupid we did in the past and kick ourselves in the butt for it. Our consequences for our mistakes would be a slap on the hand, a grounding, detention, or even an out of school suspension. In the end, we realized that we have matured, that we know it was wrong, and that we learned from our mistakes. I find it heartbreaking that the government will not give this kids featured in Juvies a second chance. I believe that locking these kids up in jail is just a quick fix to get them off the streets. I do not believe that the government is actually solving the problem. This is similar to expelling a child from school. Yeah the kid is out of your hair and the problem has been solved at school, but the child could be doing the same thing on the streets that he/she did in your classroom. These kids need to be fixed not solved.
For me, the most poignant parts of the documentary came in the moments where tears swelled in Duc’s eyes, his face betraying his pride and giving in to the hurt that lives deep within him. This documentary allowed me to see people, each with a complicated and painful inner-life, where before I might have just seen statistics. Having Alex come into class and tell his story opened my eyes even further.
It seems to me that putting someone in a prison or a detention center is to forget about them, or render them invisible. Maybe that has become our society’s objective, to keep these people away for as long as possible, and therefore erase the problem (when really we are just passing the problem along). But such an objective is ignoring the possibility of rehabilitation. This perspective assumes that people can not change, and makes the problem even worse.
I now feel that we have to amend the sentencing laws. A lot of these kids will not get the representation they need to combat absurd sentences, which are bolstered by “enhancement” rules. I feel that more people might take this perspective if they were given the chance to see the people, and not the statistics. I feel the juvenile justice system parallels with the education system here—the big decisions are often made when we see things from far away, but when we get up close, looking at the faces and hearing the voices of those who the rules most closely affect (most often, the kids) is when we really, truly see.
Classes overlap with the material they cover all of the time. However, when they talk about the exact same topic just about in the same week it is a little strange, especially when these classes are in two different departments. There was an assignment in another one of my classes that dealt with punishing adolescents who commit serious crimes. In regards to the question of “Should we respond the same way when a 15-year-old commits a murder as we do when a 35-year-old does?” I have mixed feelings. I grew up being given the impression that people should be punished for the crimes that they commit. I think that when dealing with a fifteen year old my idea is a little less harsh than how I feel about if the person was eighteen. I realize that that three years should not make much of a difference but for some reason in my mind it does. I do believe that a fifteen year old should know the difference from right and wrong but I also realize that their judgment is not always the best. I think that if a fifteen year old does commit murder they need to be punished is some sort of way. They have committed a murder and they do need to realize that what they did was wrong and that there are consequences for their actions. I do not necessarily think that they should be given the same sentence as a thirty-five year old. I realize people do dumb things when they are young but you cannot go around thinking that just because I am under a certain age I can act anyway I want without there being some type of consequence.
I am torn as to how I feel about the judicial dealings with minors. Because if you think about it, 18 is just an arbitrary number, there is no way to say for a fact that every person is an adult (in terms of physical, emotional, or cognitive/mental abilities)at the age of 18, but yet we rely on that number as if it was carved in stone. But it is just a number that at one point was decided upon.
I wish I could say that every case should get individual attention and that rulings should be decided on a case by case basis, but this is unrealistic. But I think that punishment should be approached just as teaching is. It is about the individual.
But this is not to say that I think some kids should get away with just going to juvy until they are 18, or even 21. I think kids need to know that whatever offense they committed was serious. As of now, some juvy centers are a joke when kids know that they will get off scott free at age 18.
I have seen this documentary twice now in two different education based classes. In the other class my professor passes out a sheet describing each kid as kid 'A', kid 'B' etc. The sheet described their crime and gave their age and gender. He polled the class based on the info on the sheet as whether or not they should be tried as a minor or an adult. Overwhelmingly the class stated most of the kids should be tried as adults and given adult sentences. The class responses followed the line, "You do the crime, you do the time." After the class survey, we then watched 'Juvies' and most everyone changed their minds. The documentary allowed us to see them as children and view their humanity. On camera the acted like children, the only adult actions that I saw was that they were learning from inmates how to act like adults and keep themselves safe in the system.
I don't think juveniles should be given a life sentence either. What lesson will they learn? My biggest problem with the juvenile justice system is the inequity. The sentences have a very large a range depending on the judge and how much money the kids has, and how many cases his public defendant already has on his plate. I researched on the CA justice website and the trend with trying young children as adults had to do with over populated and underfunded juvenile facilities. Some of the juveniles tried in adult court have higher sentences than adults who committed similar crimes. There is no equality for these kids in a system that was never truly designed for them. The enhancements are ridiculous, unless you have a repeat offender in the adult system.
The money spent to keep them locked up, could be spent on rehabilitation and education and it would be cheaper. It's a fact that education and rehabilitation can help break the cycle of crime. I know that it would be a lot of work, but I would like to see cases handled on a case by case bases.
My other idea is to find these excess attorneys and put them to work where they are needed. I hear that there are to many attorneys all the time, the state governments need to find a way to recruit the extras to work in the field of juvenile justice.
I would like to see a program that is comparable with what many teachers are offered, that if starting attorneys work for X# of years their federal student loans disappear or the are reduced. The cost to be an attorney is high, and the starting salaries are low I think in the end it would cost states and the Federal government less to create a program like this.
1.) This movie made me more aware of just how unjust our justice system is. I think that we should not respond the same way to a 15 year old commiting murder as we would a 35 year old doing so. One point that was made in class is that adolescence are not cognitively capable of making some choices. They may not understand exactly what they are doing. I think that you have to take into account the circumstances of why the murder was committed. You cannot treat every murder case the same. When I think of the word fairness in the classroom I think it means everyone getting what they need, not receiving the same treatment. The same goes with punishing criminals. A criminal should recieve the punishment that fits the circumstances of his/her crime not the same punishment as someone who committed a similar crime. Just like you can't treat every student in the classroom the same way, you can't give every murderer the same punishment.
2.) Before watching this movie O thought that if you were bold enough to commit a crime then you deserved whatever came your way. Now I am more aware of how unjust that mentality is. This film has definately impacted my views. I think that it is totally ridiculous to give a teenager a life sentence. By doing this we are giving up on them anf throwing their lives away. It is stupid to give someone a sentence based on what they may or may not do in the future. I might do a lot of stupid things in the future, but I am given the opportunity to decide whether or not I want to do those stupid things. We need to give these teenagers a chance to make those choices. I think mandatory minimum is a bad idea because you cannot treat every case the same. If you look at the circumstances of how, why, and when a crime was committed, then and only then are you able to decide a proper sentence.
3.) In a way I agree with what Michael Meade said about youth are a symptom of their culture. I agree that a child's culture forms the basis of their ideologies and decision making process. I think that just because a child is born into a bad environment does not mean that they will become a product of their environment. I think that if you send a child the message that they are only a product of their environment then you are telling them to give up on themselves. When I look at my own life, sometimes I wonder if I am just going to be a "reflection of the symptoms of my culture." Just because my father went to prison, does that mean that I am too? Just because my mother is poor does that mean that I am bound to be the same? My answer is no. I have chosen not to follow in my parents' footsteps. These kids in the video have made a choice to be a product of their environments. Just because you have been surrounded by a negative environment in your childhood does not mean that that is all you will ever know. You have to make the conscious decision to create change in your life. I do believe that our culture and environments have a profound effect on us, but they do not determine our futures. If that was the case I should be in prison right now because my father went to prison.
Great discussion on this thread. Thanks to everybody who's contributed so far. A couple things I'd like to add: First, I don't think it's a choice between either punishing kids or letting them get away with serious crimes. To me, it's more a question of the purpose of our responses to crimes committed by young people: Are we seeking punishment only, or do we believe in giving young people opportunities for rehabilitation and redemption? Should justice -- especially when we're dealing with kids or teens -- be punitive or restorative?
The other thing I want to address is Michael Meade's quote, "Youth are a reflection of the symptoms of the culture. A culture whose youth are committing increasingly vile crimes is a culture that has become increasingly vile." I might be wrong, but I don't think he's referring here to specific subcultures in the U.S., but rather to our mainstream culture, which sends contradictory messages to kids about violence -- condemning it on one hand and glorifying it (whether through war, media coverage, movies, video games) on the other.
I think that it is ridiculous how harsh the system is on juveniles. It is really extreme how they sentence them. How can the authorities expect someone who spent most of their life in prison to come out and be able to function well in society? Their record really makes it harder for them to move forward because some jobs and people refuse to give them a second chance to redeem themselves.
Post a Comment