PerfectCustomPapers | Electronic monitoring is often seen as “a prison without bars.”

Electronic monitoring is often seen as “a prison without bars.”

Electronic monitoring is often seen as “a prison without bars.” However, when it comes to juvenile electronic monitoring, it is not considered punishment but is seen as rehabilitative. Young people who would otherwise be detained are placed on electronic monitoring which can be akin to house arrest. Violations can include missing curfew, skipping class, or not obeying parents. A juvenile’s poor performance can result in increased time on electronic monitoring and probation. The result is a greater penalty than if they had never been on electronic monitoring and probation. What are your thoughts? Is juvenile electric monitoring an appropriate alternative to incarceration?

Sample Answer

Juvenile electronic monitoring (JEM) is a complex issue with both potential benefits and drawbacks. Here’s a breakdown of the arguments for and against JEM, along with considerations for its appropriate use:

Arguments for JEM:

Reduced Incarceration Rates: JEM can be an alternative to secure detention facilities, keeping youth in their homes and communities.
Maintaining Family and School Ties: JEM allows juveniles to continue attending school and interacting with family, potentially promoting positive social connections.
Cost-Effectiveness: JEM can be less expensive than incarceration, freeing up resources for rehabilitation programs.

Full Answer Section

Monitoring and Accountability:JEM can provide real-time monitoring, helping to deter further delinquent behavior.

Arguments Against JEM:

“Prison Without Bars”?:JEM can restrict movement and freedom, potentially mimicking some aspects of incarceration.
Limited Rehabilitation:JEM itself may not provide sufficient rehabilitation or address the root causes of delinquency.
Escalation of Punishment:As you mentioned, JEM violations can lead to harsher penalties, potentially creating a cycle of escalating restrictions.
Equity Concerns:Access to technology and reliable internet connections may vary across socioeconomic groups, raising concerns about equitable application of JEM.

Considerations for Appropriate Use:

Severity of Offense:JEM may be more suitable for less serious offenses, while more serious offenses might require different interventions.
Risk Assessment:A thorough risk assessment should be conducted to determine if JEM is appropriate for the individual juvenile’s situation.
Rehabilitation Programs:JEM should be coupled with rehabilitation programs to address the underlying causes of delinquency and promote positive behavior change.
Community and Family Support:Strong family and community support systems are crucial for the success of JEM.

Conclusion:

JEM can be a viable alternative to incarceration in certain situations. However, it should not be seen as a one-size-fits-all solution. Careful consideration of the potential benefits and drawbacks, coupled with robust rehabilitation programs and support systems, is essential for JEM to be an effective tool in the juvenile justice system.

Additional Thoughts:

Investing in preventative measures, such as educational opportunities and social support programs, could potentially reduce the need for JEM and incarceration altogether.
Ongoing research and evaluation are necessary to determine the long-term impact of JEM on recidivism rates and overall juvenile well-being.

This question has been answered.

Get Answer

No More Worries!

Paper Formatting

No Lateness!

Our Guarantees

Electronic monitoring is often seen as “a prison without bars.”

Sample Answer

Full Answer Section

This question has been answered.

Satisfaction Guaranteed

Why Choose Us