February 17th, 2020 
Assignment:
The planning director for the State Department of Juvenile Justice has asked for your advice on how to reduce the threat of chronic offenders. Some of the more conservative members of her staff seem to believe that these kids need a strict dose of rough justice if they are to be turned away from a life of crime. They believe juvenile delinquents who are punished harshly are less likely to recidivate than youths who receive lesser punishments, such as community corrections or probation. In addition, they believe that hardcore, violent offenders deserve to be punished; excessive concern for offenders and not their acts ignore the rights of victims and society in general. The planning director is unsure whether such an approach is ethical. Is it ethical to use tough punishment with kids because it may produce deviant identities that lock kids into a criminal way of life? She is concerned that a strategy stressing punishment is not only unethical, but it will have relatively little impact on chronic offenders and, if anything, may cause escalation in serious criminal behaviors.
The director has asked you for your professional advice on this ethical dilemma. Write a two-page memorandum: On the one hand, the system must be sensitive to the adverse effects of stigma and labeling. On the other hand, the need for control and deterrence must not be ignored. Is it possible to reconcile these two opposing views? Do you believe that the current methods of deterrence are working? Does the fear of the death penalty stop individuals from committing these crimes? What do you believe would be a better way to deter people from committing crimes? Be sure to research the topic and cite sources to support your views.
Please complete this assignment in Microsoft Word then submit it through Blackboard. This assignment must be two (2) pages in length (this does NOT include the reference page). Please 12-point Times New Roman font.
Posted in 