Raise the Age: Stop Taking Away Childhood
Mele Buice (PPS ‘25)
For an individual to be punished for a crime, they must meet both Actus Reus (criminal liability of the guilty act) and Mens Rea (acknowledgment of culpability, or, of the guilty mind). However, children are unable to comprehend the concept of Mens Rea due to their limited understanding of consequences and punishment in our “adult society.” As a result, they should not be held to the same legal standards as adults who have been living within our social, cultural, and legal norms for several decades. The difficulty arises in determining the appropriate age at which juveniles should be separated from adults in court and the criteria used to make this decision while remaining rehabilitative. In my opinion, the age at which a juvenile can be tried in an adult court should be raised to 21.
Research indicates that the brains of young people are not fully developed until their mid-20s, which can be attributed to the maturation of three key structures responsible for regulating motivated behavior — the amygdala, nucleus accumbens, and prefrontal cortex. Due to these developmental differences, adolescents cannot be held to the same standards of behavior control as those with more developed brains (Ernst, Pine, & Hardin, 2006). Additionally, the Juvenile court system was established in a different era, and today’s youth face a vastly different world. Many lifetime milestones, such as completing education, obtaining employment, and getting married — all of which have been linked to reduced criminal behavior — now occur later in life, and the courts laws should reflect that developmental difference.
Individuals in the juvenile and emerging adulthood age group are inclined to take more risks and be more susceptible to peer influence. They may also be more impulsive and less capable of postponing gratification. These traits, combined with a tendency to prioritize present over future concerns and to act out in emotionally charged situations, render them unsuitable for being classified as “adults” in court.
To address the unique biopsychosocial needs of underdeveloped brains, many states across the US have implemented Raise the Age laws, prioritizing rehabilitation over punitive measures. While most states have set the age threshold at 18 years old, a few states still adhere to the 16-year-old cutoff for juvenile court. Prior to 2017 and 2019 respectively, North Carolina and New York had their age threshold set to 15 years old. Some states, such as Vermont, are considering raising the age threshold to 20 or 21 years old, keeping them in family court rather than allowing for the potential of long prison sentences. (Vitale, 2021). Implementing the Raise the Age initiative, these laws aim to provide rehabilitative programs and support for developing adolescents rather than subjecting them to years in prison alongside criminal adults, which would separate them from their families and hamper their ability to become contributing members of society as they emerge into adulthood.
Adolescents who are detained in adult correctional facilities face significantly greater risks than those held in juvenile correctional centers. The Equal Justice Initiative reports that minors housed in adult prisons are at a five times higher risk of sexual assault and nine times more likely to take their own lives than those in juvenile facilities. Young offenders are less likely to experience successful rehabilitation within the adult criminal justice system, with a 34 times greater likelihood of reoffending than their counterparts in juvenile detention centers. Unlike juvenile detention, which emphasizes rehabilitation, adult jails and prisons tend to prioritize punishment. An article by the Coalition for Juvenile Justice remarked that “locking children up in adult facilities tells them we’ve given up on them.”
The Raise the Age initiative is vital for providing young adults and adolescents with the necessary support to process their legal transgressions, make amends for their criminal histories, and overcome any underlying stressors that may have led to their misconduct. By following the guidelines established by this initiative, states can now offer age-appropriate housing and programming to juveniles who have committed nonviolent offenses, thereby reducing the likelihood of recidivism (repeat offenses).
In today’s context, the prevalence of depression, anxiety, and trauma among young people has created an additional challenge for the justice system. Emerging adulthood has become a statistically significant data point, factoring in developmental, psychological, and legal considerations when implementing the Raise the Age laws.
Therefore the U.S. should take these examples and implement a federal policy for raising the age at which a juvenile can be convicted to 21.
Mele Buice (PPS ‘25) is from Brooklyn, NY and is a Public Policy Undergraduate at Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy. This piece was submitted as an op-ed in the Spring ‘23 PUBPOL 301 course. This content does not represent the official or unofficial views of the Sanford School, Polis, Duke University, or any entity or individual other than the author.
