Capital Punishment vs Juveniles

0 Comment

Some of the policymakers (Williams, pp. 175) believe that innocent public stays protected by execution of serious young offenders. however, it is an agreeable fact that even imprisonment confronted by young offenders in prisons results in isolation from society that is adverse for children according to a number of child psychologists. Studies have noted that children are unable to acquire proper guidance in custody and remand and end up with getting opinions from wrong people, such as serious criminals and offenders, which seems to be quite true with the fact that a majority of youth offenders are convicted after two years of going from the police custody. In other words, juveniles are not equipped mentally and psychologically to deal effectively with right and wrong, ethical and unethical, and effective and non-ineffective agents on personal, as well as, social basis. According to some psychologists, states related to fear and reward play a dominative and crucial role in the early stages of a human life that are experienced by adolescents.
In this regard, capital punishment is not a proper way to handle young offenders, but an endeavor to avoid handling them. In other words, it is essential to draw a line between adult offenders and young offenders, when it comes to their punishment. Until now, a number of studies have been carried out to evaluate and compare the thinking and moral capabilities of children under 18 years old and adults. A majority of experts have observed that youth under 18 years old acts more often like a mentally disabled or a confused adult individual. (Williams, pp. 174-175) Every study has observed that adults play a vital role in the decision-making processes of a young individual, and most of the adolescents acquire guidance while making bigger decisions.
In the context of law, it also orders a different and diverse treatment for children and juveniles in the country.