Trying Juveniles as Adults is Counterproductive and Should Be Avoided
Source: Elizabeth Bruenig. "Harsher Penalties for Juveniles are Counterproductive - The Atlantic." June 10, 2026. www.theatlantic.com
The Gist
The author argues that treating young criminals like adults in court doesn't work and actually makes things worse. She points to research showing that kids who go through the adult system are more likely to commit crimes again, while states that keep teens in juvenile court see crime rates drop.
Conclusion
Harsher penalties that try juveniles as adults are counterproductive and should be avoided in favor of rehabilitation-focused approaches
Premises
- Decades of studies show that incarcerating juveniles leads to higher rates of rearrest compared to those diverted from prison
- Juvenile crime and arrests have plummeted by about 75 percent since peaking in 1995, indicating current harsh approaches are unnecessary
- States that implemented 'raise the age' laws saw significant decreases in juvenile arrests (Massachusetts saw 56% drop, Connecticut saw 50% drop)
- Neurological research shows adolescent brain development affects juveniles' susceptibility to risky behaviors, making them less culpable than adults
- The recent push for harsher penalties is driven by pandemic crime spikes and political opportunism rather than evidence-based policy
- Youth offenders lack political representation, making them easy targets for 'tough on crime' rhetoric that provides emotional satisfaction over effective solutions
Assumptions
- Rehabilitation is more effective than punishment for reducing juvenile recidivism
- Juvenile brain development research should inform criminal justice policy
- Statistical trends in crime rates are more reliable indicators than high-profile individual cases
- The primary goal of juvenile justice should be reducing future crime rather than retribution
- Political motivations often override evidence-based policymaking in criminal justice