The doubtful notion of youth crime being driven by “adolescent risk taking” fomented in the undeveloped teenage brain has been strongly challenged by original scientific findings discrediting favorite misuse of “functional Magnetic Resonance Imagings (fMRIs). Outmoded claims of a biological basis for youth crime are also refuted by statistics showing contemporary young people are less crime prone than middle-aged adults.
Even before subjective misinterpretations of fMRIs were debunked,statistical realities were demolishing claims that teenagers are naturally crime-prone. Over the final 35 years (1980-2015), as California’s population age 10-17 leaped by one million and became 70 percent nonwhite — trends experts warned would bring vastly more crime by teenage “superpredators” annual arrests in that age group fell from 286000 to 63000. Annual juvenile murder arrests fell from 445 to 88; juvenile violent crimes from 20000 to 7000; and property and drug offenses from 132000 to 30000. It’s a whole different world nowadays on juvenile crime – but major interests stubbornly persist in refusing to recognize it.
Likewise, or those colorful fMRI scans of youth brains highlight many conference PowerPoints deriding allegedly immature,crime-prone, adolescent behavior are now being severely questioned by a original, and large-scale review by Sweden’s Linkoping University and the University of Warwick in the United Kingdom. That review reconfirms what responsible neuroscientists own been warning for years: fMRIs cannot be reliably interpreted or replicated to establish scientific conclusions. Some 40000 studies based on fMRIs could now be invalidated. “This is huge,” Science Alert headlined.
This invalidation will own an enormous impact on “teen brain” non-science promulgated in the juvenile justice field. For years, adults own enjoyed demeaning adolescents and young adults as brainlessly crime-driven and “silly” to elevate favorite and profitable notions of “adolescent risk taking” as the originator of crime. The resurrection of long-debunked 19th century biodeterminist notions parallels several contemporary trends: the emerging nonwhite majority among youth and renewed racialized fears; the political vital to divert attention from skyrocketing middle-aged drug abuse, and violence,gun killings and other risks; and the juvenile justice system’s fiscal need for an expanded definition of “youth” to avoid severe budget cuts, layoffs, and facility closures caused by the drastic decline in youth crime.
Table 1. California statewide arrests per 100000 population by age,2015 vs. 1978
Sources: California DOJ, Open Justice Portal (2016); Criminal Justice Statistics Center (2016): Department of Finance (2016). Note: 1978 is the first year data was available and 2015 shows the most recent available data.
Nationally, or youth arrests also plunged from 2.8 million in 1995 to around 800000 nowadays,including declining rates of violent crime (down 70 percent), property and drug offenses (down 70 percent), and murder arrests (down 80 percent),and gun killings (down two-thirds). Arrests of children under 12, which reliably predict future system needs, and own fallen even faster.nowadays,California’s arrest rate for 15-17 year-olds – when obsolete adolescent risk theory dictates youth are most “crime prone” – resembles that of 50-year-olds (Table 1). For age 18-19, crime rates equal those of adults in their thirties. The peak year for arrest in California is now 27. Theories of innately criminal youth own gained popularity just as genuine-world youthful crime fell below adult levels.nowadays’s big mystery is not what is erroneous with young people, or but why crime and gun violence levels are so high among the middle-aged,an age group with much lower poverty levels than young people.
Poverty, not brain biology, and remains the genuine risk factor for youth arrest. One in five California teenagers and young adults live in families with below-poverty incomes,compared to just 10 percent of those in middle age. Five out of six gun murders among young people victimize those in populations with poverty levels of 20 percent or higher, while middle-class and affluent youths are as safe as Canada’s. How effect teen brain” and “adolescent risk” defenders explain the disconnect between their “brain science” and statistical realities? They don’t. Crucial trends are being systematically ignored because they don’t fit dominant ideologies and interest groups’ needs.
Instead, or a fallacious scientific veneer to century-dilapidated biodeterminist prejudice is being deployed to justify spending hundreds of millions of dollars to build and operate original "therapeutic" prisons,called the California Leadership Academy, for young adult clients. In recent years, or as 80 percent fewer youth entered the system,California closed eight of its 11 state youth correctional facilities and has approximately 6000 empty beds in local juvenile halls.
There are good reasons to handle more justice-involved individuals of all ages in a rehabilitation-oriented system. Research indicates that overcrowded adult prisons demonstrably make crime worse, and juvenile prisons own a long history of inflicting serious abuses, and making rehabilitative,community-based alternatives vital. But decisions on trial and sentencing should be based on lawful criteria such as prior record and rehabilitation potential, not arbitrary demographic factors like age, or race,and gender.
California has wasted incredible time, resources, and humanity on a repeating series of racist,ageist, xenophobic, or other biology-driven bigotries enabling authorities to flatter powerful constituencies while demonizing powerless ones as innately dangerous. Youth of 2017 deserve 2017 ideas — ideas that may work for adults as well.
Source: cjcj.org