English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

One of the underlying foundations of Western criminal justice is the notion that human behavior is the product of rational choice. The creation of separate justice systems for juveniles and adults is based on the idea that fundamental differences in rationality exist between these two groups. Since its inception, the establishment of upper and lower boundaries demarking the juvenile justice system has been a highly contentious issue, both scientifically and politically. Critically, this debate stems from the largely arbitrary nature of the boundaries. Over the last thirty years a sufficiently large body of psychological and neurological empirical work has examined the development of decision-making and rational choice in late childhood, adolescents, and adulthood. The current article discusses the implications of this research on the establishment of upper and lower age jurisdictions for the juvenile justice system, as well as how adolescent decision-making influences other key aspects of the justice process such as competency to stand trial.

bergen journal of criminal law and criminal justice

Developmental Psycho- Neurological Research Trends and Their Importance for Reassessing Key Decision-Making Assumptions for Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults in Juvenile/Youth and Adult Criminal Justice Systems