Analyzing the Youth Justice System in Australian Society: A Report

This report provides a comprehensive overview of the youth justice system in Australia, examining its framework, theoretical underpinnings, and impact on society. It begins by outlining the structure of the penal system, including the processes for dealing with young offenders and the age limits for criminal charges. The report then delves into the theoretical support for the system, focusing on judges' orientations towards sentencing, particularly in cases involving sexual offenses and child victims. It also discusses the focal concerns theory and its role in the sentencing process. Furthermore, the report analyzes the societal impacts of the youth justice system, highlighting its effects on the health and well-being of young people, including the disproportionate representation of Indigenous youth in custody and the potential for childhood trauma. The report concludes with recommendations for improvement, including the use of retributive and reform-oriented approaches in the judicial process. The report references relevant literature to support its arguments and findings.

The system in Australian Society

Table of Contents
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................2
Main Body...................................................................................................................................................2
The framework of the system..................................................................................................................2
Theoretical support to the system............................................................................................................2
Impact of the system on society...............................................................................................................3
Recommendation.........................................................................................................................................4
Conclusion...................................................................................................................................................4
References...................................................................................................................................................5
1 | P a g e

Introduction
The report aims at stating the framework and the impact of the Youth Justice system in Australia.
The report discusses several aspects that underpin the system. This describes the Australian
society in this regard too. Teenagers should not include in the youth justice system. The youth
detention policies in Australia are quite stricter than in other countries. The people under 10
years old cannot be charged with criminal offenses in Australia. In New South Wales, detention
numbers of young people are that the other territories or states (Cornwell, 2013).
Main Body
The framework of the system
The penal system or a correctional system is referred to as a network of some agencies that
usually administers a jurisdiction's prisons and community-based programs. This system is one
of the largest parts of the criminal justice system. That includes prosecution, courts, and police.
The youth justice system or the Penal system in Australia is said to be the set of processes and
practices for tackling young children or allegedly committed an offense. Near about every state
of Australia posses certain youth justice policies, practices, and legislation.
The main processes with which the young teenagers are accused and sentenced are quite similar
to the legal orders. They are only charged when they are above the age of 10 or 10. Moreover,
there were separate justice systems for both children and adults. Under the youth system, the
upper age limit for treatment is 17 except Queensland. In Queensland, the age limit is 16.
However, the legislation for increasing the limit of age in Queensland has passed in the year
2016 and had been duly passed in 2018 (Aihw, 2018).
Young people in Australia must try to avoid the justice system. But when they are in contact with
the justice system they are only detained. It has to be kept in mind that detention should be
carried more safely. For addressing the main cause the NSW justice system needs to intervene as
early as they can. After reviewing the youth justice system in NSW it is found that wellbeing and
health are at huge risk.
2 | P a g e

In Victoria, the people who are aged between 18-20 may be sentenced to detention under the
state's dual-track sentencing system. This prohibits young children from entering to adult prison
at an early age. Youth people at the early stage make contact with a justice system where they
are interrogated by the police. Further legal action moves to court actions.
Theoretical support to the system
The theoretical support is reflecting the judges’ orientation towards supporting the sentencing of
the youth's sexual offense and criminal history. The adult offenders and the child victims, as well
as the judges, are considering the sexual offenses with offending against young children. In
particular, the judges are more concerned about the issues raised in the form of offenses for the
youths. The young offenders who are involved in abusing the children are often seen to be closer
to the age of the offender. This is identified as a serious issue and also sexual misbehavior is seen
(Kobayashi & Adams, 2017). While carrying out the sentencing process, the judges are appeared
to be using the retributive approach with these kinds of serious and persistent offenders.
The focal concerns theory is identified to be recognized in the form of a multifaceted and
complex process. In this theoretical framework, the different sentencing goals and the relevant
factors are considered for mitigating the young offense issues. The blameworthiness concerns are
reflected in the form of the perceived permeances of the behavior. Apart from this, the focal
concern theory is also helping the judges to refer to the legislation related to the guidance for
providing judgment (Jackson, 2011). Due to this reason, the theory is appropriately protecting
the children. The overall crime rates and the custodial sentences are found to be consisting of the
inter-provincial- variations which are leading to the dearth of information. These theoretical
frameworks are providing support to the penal system established for the youth in Australia.
Impact of the system on society
The youth justice system has several negative impacts over society. It has found that the health
and wellbeing of the youths are significantly affected by the youth justice system. During the
period of custody, several young people experience health problems such as mental illness. So,
the penal system is not supporting the health-related aspects of the youths during detention. A
major part of a civilized society is not accepting this type of activity in the youth justice system.
Among the youth who are in custody, it has found that almost 48 percent of people are
Aboriginal and Torres Islander (Stephenson, Woodhams & Cooke, 2013). To maintain the
3 | P a g e

societal balance, discriminative activities in the youth detention process have to be removed.
Through the person under the age of 10 will be not charged as criminal offenders, but, the
detention process can create significant childhood trauma in the mind of those children. This
type of thing can create significant misbalance within society. The mentally traumatized children
can take significant time to recover. The future of those children can be ruined. The detention
process in Australia is very much hard. This kind of detention system can provide a negative
impact on children and youths in the development process. There are several people exists who
argued that discrimination and racism are the most significant underlying issues in the criminal
justice system (Gale, Bailey-Harris & Wundersitz, 2010).
Recommendation
The retributive approach is reflecting the achievement of the goal for not to punish but to warn
the young offenders. The retributive approach is also providing support to the rehabilitation
process for young offenders. Apart from this, the backward-looking approach is also considered
as a justice model that is taken into account for the young offender punishment process (Nijhof,
de Kemp & Engels, 2009). The actual court practices are reflecting this process to provide
support to the other studies as is seen in this study. The actual practices are helping in the
establishment of the reform-orientation program which is used for the young offenders to remove
this issue from them. These recommendations are provided which are providing support to the
improvement in the judicial process for the youths and the teenagers’ offenders (Chartrand,
2014).
Conclusion
The overall description is reflecting the penal system for the youths and the teenagers present in
Malaysia. The description of the framework of the system is identified to be explained with the
help of the theoretical underpinnings of the system. The evaluation of the impact of the system
on Australian society is also explained in this study.
4 | P a g e

References
Aihw. (2018). Youth justice in Australia. Retrieved 2 October 2019, from
https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/19707990-1719-4600-8fce-f0af9d61331c/aihw-juv-
116.pdf.aspx?inline=true
Chartrand, V. (2014). Penal and colonial politics over life: women and penal release schemes in
NSW, Australia. Settler Colonial Studies, 4(3), 305-320. doi:
10.1080/2201473x.2013.864548
Cornwell, D. (2013). Civilising criminal justice. Hampshire, U.K.: Waterside Press.
Gale, F., Bailey-Harris, R., & Wundersitz, J. (2010). Aboriginal youth and the criminal justice
system. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jackson, D. (2011). The Role of Early Pubertal Development in the Relationship Between
General Strain and Juvenile Crime. Youth Violence And Juvenile Justice, 10(3), 292-310.
doi: 10.1177/1541204011427715
Kobayashi, B., & Adams, D. (2017). Criminal Justice Theories and Variations in Legal
Decisions Across Youth Justice Acts. Electronic Thesis And Dissertation Repository, 4490.
Retrieved from
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/520b/0023337f9da53877b781f3dcb9a7c1a5814e.pdf
Nijhof, K., de Kemp, R., & Engels, R. (2009). Frequency and seriousness of parental offending
and their impact on juvenile offending. Journal Of Adolescence, 32(4), 893-908. doi:
10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.10.005
Stephenson, Z., Woodhams, J., & Cooke, C. (2013). Sex differences in predictors of violent and
non-violent juvenile offending. Aggressive Behavior, 40(2), 165-177. doi:
10.1002/ab.21506
5 | P a g e