In “Startling Finds on Teenage Brains,” Paul Thompson--a neuroscientist at UCLA--argues that minors should not be sentenced as adults because their brains are not the same as adults’ brains. Even though Thompson believes that minors should be held accountable for their crimes, he presents evidence from recent studies to explain the differences between the brains of minors and adults. It is not surprising that Thompson uses logical evidence to defend his position, given that he is a scientist. However, Thompson frequently uses emotional persuasion--or pathos--to convince his readers that sentencing minors as adults is both unjust and uninformed. Through his use of structure and emotionally charged language, Thompson attempts to convince readers
Is there a massive difference between the mind of a 17 and 18 year old? If moral and ethical responsibility is tied to age and the development of the brain, why shouldn’t we set the line at 25? Following the logic of developmental and age differences, the punishments should be lowered for those who are under 25. But we know that will not happen, because the age difference and brain development is not a major factor in determining moral responsibility. The major factor is the mental capability that is often determined by psychiatrists where insanity is determined to be a factor.
In Gail Garinger’s, “Juveniles Don’t Deserve Life Sentences,” she argues that juveniles have great potential in being able to change their lives for the better. Garinger starts off with the superpredator theory which involves kids who will commit crimes in groups, and in response, laws were made to easily try kids as adults in court. Even with the superpredator prediction never coming true, the laws that were made still exist. Garinger then moves on to describing how teens are different than adults in many different aspects. Garinger states, “As a former juvenile court judge, I have seen first hand the enormous capacity of children to change and turn themselves around” (Garinger par.
I also disagree with the fact that children lack maturity; to a certain level they do as well as some adults. There are some adults that never reached the age of maturity, but that does not mean that they should get a lesser time when committing a crime just because they are not mature. Lastly, I believe anyone is capable of being rehabilitated no matter what age they are; if they have the desire and are willing to put in the work to be reformed, then they should be given that option with strict stipulations (Flynn, E.H,
Juveniles are aware of their actions, unless they have a psychological disorder even if that includes life in prison without parole, or if the juvenile has a brutal childhood. The general argument made by Paul Thompson in his work, Startling Finds on Teenage Brains, is that as teens grow, they are developing mentally as well. More specifically, Thompson argues that teens act a certain way because of changes in their brain. He claims, “With repeated brain scans of kids from three to twenty, we pieced together “movies” showing how brains grow and change”(Thompson). Thompson states that studies have shown that the brain has changes when being three to twenty years of age.
Life is short, coming-of-age is important to fathom and treasure. As you grow and develop to the world you encounter situations that will make you see the world differently. Stories, encounters, and even playing around the house can cause people to see from a new perspective. Coming-of-age involves recognizing different perspectives.
In “Should Juvenile Offenders Be Tried as Adults,” psychologist Laurence Steinberg poses the point that it is logically impossible to make the age of the offender irrelevant when analyzing criminal justice policy. The approach that is taken when implementing laws should lawfully be altered when the case at hand concerns a defendant whose knowledge of the law is limited by intellectual immaturity (Steinberg 602). Unlike adults, young children are not capable of fully recognizing the concept of “right and wrong.” For example, an
It can be argued that trying juveniles as adults doesn’t take into consideration the maturity or the development of the individual (Regoli, 2019). When we look at an individual's development, it’s important to consider both adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and the bioecological system. Youth’s development is dependent on the environment in which they are raised and grow. This is why we also consider Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological systems theory. Factors such as an individual’s school, family, friends, or community all contribute to the individual’s development.
Juveniles should not be imprisoned for life without the possibility of parole! In the Frontline documentary “When Kids Get Life” we are introduced to 5 cases in Colorado where teenage boys had been sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Over 2,200 juveniles have been convicted of crimes and sentenced to life without parole in the 46 states of which have judicial waiver laws. Nathan Ybanez, Trevor Jones, Jacob Ind, Erik Jensen and Andrew Medina are the teenagers profiled in the documentary.
Psychologists must address questions that may not be routine in the competency assessments that are currently implemented for adult defendants. One of the key problems that need to be assessed in a juvenile defendant is their grasp of the element of risk inherent in criminal proceedings and associated with their abilities to adopt a future orientation in weighing the risks that are also associated with the trial process and plea bargaining (Grisso, 2003). In respect to juveniles, especially the younger ones the facility to appreciate the implications of matters that involve pleas, penalties, and waiver rights may become problematic. Some juveniles the lack of an ability to understand the concept of long-term personal future and possible consequences of decisions and actions that are taken from them in the course of immediate involvement in the criminal justice system (Grisso, 2003). Though there are many concerns that are identified of juveniles within the adult courts, there is insufficient time and resources for many of the public defenders that have the responsibility to defend juveniles with minimal familiarity with the workings of the criminal justice system than the average adult defendant (Grisso, 2003).
In knowing the importance of the prefrontal cortex, it is also important to know that this is only considered developed at age 25 making it the last thing in your brain to develop. Juveniles are less than 75% developed at the age of 15, leading them to make impulsive irrational
The book I have chosen is Your Child’s Growing Mind: Brain Development and Learning by author Jane M. Healy, PH.D. This book has a total of 409 pages which includes the select bibliography and the Index. In this book, Healy wanted to give parents or caregivers an insight on the development of their child. Parents and caregivers need to better understand the many concepts of their child’s development. Mental and brain development is a vital part of a child’s ability to learn.
Brief History Jean Piaget was a Twentieth century Swiss psychologist and was the first psychologist to systematically study the cognitive development of children. Thomas (2005) wrote that early in Piaget’s career he worked with children and his observations and interactions with the students led him to the theory that a young person's cognitive processes are inherently different from those of adults (pp. 188-9). According to Ahmad, et al. (2005) , Piaget showed that when compared to adults, young children think in differently and he then came to the conclusion that cognitive development was an ongoing process which occurred due to maturation and interaction with the environment (p. 72).
Some people believe that juveniles shouldn’t get sentenced to life in prison because of brain studies, age, and the way of living. Recent brain studies have suggested that teenagers suffer from brain-tissue loss, this might be the reason why they commit idiotic decisions. In Gail Garingers article “Juveniles Don’t Deserve Life Sentences” she states “Young people are biologically different from adults.” Then she talks about the young adolescents being sentenced to die in prison. Also how there is a myth about the superpredator and how children are hopelessly
In “On Punishment and Teen Killers”, by Jennifer Jenkins, she reveals how she was a victim of a teen murderer and believes that actual science supporting teenage brains does not negate criminal culpability. She argues, “If brain development were the reason, then teens would kill at roughly the same rates all over the world”, (Par 6). Jenkins believes that supporting evidence on teenage brains does not serve as an excuse to not sentence juveniles to life without parole. She also believes that some teens will never change and find redemption for their actions. Her point is valid in that juveniles cannot be excused for their crimes, however Jenkins lacks the insight that much like how the brain changes through age, a teenager can transition from immaturity to maturity.
