When the System Fails: Juvenile Prisons and the Breakdown of Social Justice

Historically, the distinction between crimes committed by adults and children was blurred. In many ancient and medieval societies, children were tried and punished similarly to adults, with little regard for their age or maturity. The idea that children were "little adults" predominated, and penalties could be equally severe, including capital punishment.

It was from the 19th century onward that philanthropic and reform movements began to emerge advocating for differentiated treatment for minors. Concern for abandoned children and the growing awareness of the need to protect them laid the groundwork for the creation of specialized institutions. In the United States, the first juvenile court was established in Chicago in 1899, marking a milestone in the conception of "parental" or "tutelary" justice, where the State assumed a parens patriae role, acting as a protective parent. This model, while seeking to protect, often did so at the expense of children's procedural guarantees, under the pretext of their "benefit."

In Latin America, this influence translated into the creation of patronage laws and juvenile courts, which, while presented as protective, in practice exercised broad control over the lives of children and adolescents, merging social assistance with criminal oversight. Many young people, particularly those living in poverty or neglect, were placed in "reform" institutions without having committed crimes, simply because they were considered "in an irregular situation" or "in moral danger," perpetuating stigmatization and confinement. This period, known as the tutelary paradigm, was characterized by judicial discretion and little or no participation of adolescents in their own cases.

Towards the end of the 20th century, largely driven by international recognition of children's human rights, a paradigm shift occurred. The shift was from a tutelary vision to a doctrine of comprehensive protection, which recognizes children and adolescents as subjects with full rights.

The paradigm shift in the treatment of children and adolescents in conflict with the law is based on international human rights instruments:

1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC): This international treaty is the most widely ratified in history and establishes a comprehensive set of civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights for all children under the age of 18. Regarding juvenile justice, the CRC emphasizes key principles such as the best interests of the child, the right not to be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, the right to legal assistance, the right to detention as a measure of last resort and for the shortest possible period, and the right to social reintegration. It also promotes the implementation of alternative measures to deprivation of liberty.

United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice ("Beijing Rules") of 1985: Although predating the CRC, these rules laid the groundwork for a more guarantee-based approach, promoting non-judicialization, diversion, and the use of deprivation of liberty only as a last resort.

United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty ("Havana Rules") of 1990: They complement the Beijing Rules, establishing detailed standards on the conditions of detention, the treatment of juveniles, their education, health, and contact with the outside world.

At the national level, most Latin American countries have adapted their legislation to the CRC, enacting new comprehensive protection laws or juvenile penal codes. In Argentina, for example, Law 26.061 on the Comprehensive Protection of the Rights of Children and Adolescents (2005) and the adaptation of provincial regulations seek to guarantee a juvenile criminal justice system that respects the principles of comprehensive protection, although implementation still faces significant challenges. These laws emphasize the need for due process, technical defense, specialized justice providers, and the priority of non-custodial measures.

Despite the regulatory framework, the reality in many juvenile detention centers falls far short of international standards. Statistical data reveal a worrying picture:

High rates of incarceration: Although confinement is promoted as a last resort, in many countries, incarceration remains the primary response to juvenile delinquency, even for minor offenses.

Overcrowding and precarious conditions: Many juvenile detention centers suffer from overcrowding, poor infrastructure, lack of basic services (health, hygiene), and a shortage of trained personnel.

Institutional violence: Physical, psychological, and sexual violence by staff or among inmates is a reported reality in many centers, contravening all human rights standards.

Lack of access to basic rights: The right to education, recreation, culture, and job training is often denied or limited within these centers, preventing true resocialization.

Studies and records from different countries show a consistent pattern:

Youth in situations of social and economic vulnerability: The vast majority come from low-income households, single-parent families, or marginalized communities. Poverty and social exclusion are determining factors in their interaction with the criminal justice system.

With histories of abandonment and violence: Many have experienced domestic abuse, neglect, dropping out of school, and exposure to violent environments from an early age.

Low educational levels and few job opportunities: School dropouts are common among these young people, which significantly limits their prospects for formal employment and social integration.

Mental health problems and addictions: A significant percentage have undiagnosed or untreated mental health disorders, as well as substance abuse problems, which are often underlying factors in their conflict with the law.

Victims of the system: Paradoxically, many of the young people who end up in the juvenile justice system have previously been victims of other systems (education, health, child protection) that failed to contain them or provide them with the necessary support.

In short, the current landscape of juvenile prisons, despite regulatory advances, reflects a system that, in many cases, not only fails to rehabilitate, but also deepens the inequalities and vulnerabilities of adolescents, becoming another link in the chain of social injustice.

The material conditions and environment within juvenile detention centers clearly reflect neglect and apathy. Overcrowding is a recurring problem, exceeding the facilities' designed capacity. This overcrowding not only generates discomfort but also fosters an atmosphere of constant tension, making coexistence difficult and increasing the risk of conflict among inmates.

In addition to this, institutional violence looms large. It manifests itself in various forms: from the disproportionate use of force and physical abuse by security personnel to psychological violence, threats, and humiliation. These practices not only violate adolescents' most basic human rights but also undermine any possibility of establishing a bond of trust or fostering an environment conducive to change. The impunity with which these abuses often operate reinforces the idea that young people are disposable and that their rights do not deserve to be respected.

Poor hygiene and precarious sanitary conditions are another alarming factor. The lack of adequate maintenance, a shortage of cleaning products, the poor condition of sanitary facilities, and limited access to drinking water are common problems. These conditions not only violate the dignity of young people but also pose a serious risk to their physical health, promoting the spread of diseases and the onset of dermatological or respiratory conditions.

Confinement in these conditions has a devastating impact on the mental and emotional health of adolescents. The deprivation of liberty, coupled with violence and the lack of positive stimuli, creates an environment conducive to the development of serious disorders:

Trauma: Many young people who enter the system already carry previous traumatic experiences (domestic violence, abuse, living on the streets). Confinement and the adverse conditions of the center can re-traumatize them or generate new complex traumas that will accompany them for life.

Anxiety and Depression: Uncertainty about their future, isolation from their families, lack of control over their daily lives, and constant fear contribute to high levels of anxiety. Depression is common, manifesting as apathy, loss of interest, sleep disturbances, and, in extreme cases, suicidal thoughts.

Stigmatization and Dehumanization: Being labeled as a "delinquent" and living in an environment that reinforces that identity produces profound stigmatization. Adolescents internalize the idea that they are beyond recovery, which undermines their self-esteem and reduces their chances of reintegration. Dehumanizing treatment in centers reinforces this perception, stripping them of their individuality and dignity.

These psychological and emotional impacts not only hinder their supposed "rehabilitation" process within the center, but also greatly complicate their subsequent social reintegration, creating additional barriers to their personal and professional development.

One of the pillars of juvenile justice discourse is rehabilitation. However, in practice, most juvenile prisons lack effective programs to facilitate this process.

Poor Education: While educational programs are often offered, they are often of low quality, with insufficient teachers, poor teaching materials, and a curriculum that is not tailored to the individual needs of young people. Many adolescents drop out of school within the facility or, if they complete it, do not obtain recognized certifications that would allow them to continue their studies or access employment.

Inadequate Mental Health Services: Despite the high prevalence of mental disorders and addictions, access to professional mental health services (psychologists, psychiatrists) is extremely limited or nonexistent. Individual or group therapies are not offered with the frequency and quality necessary to address their underlying problems.

Poor job training: Opportunities to learn a trade or acquire relevant job skills are minimal. When they exist, workshops are often rudimentary, with outdated equipment or lacking a focus on the demands of the current labor market. This means that young people leave school without the necessary tools to find decent employment, pushing them back into marginalization.

The absence of these opportunities not only violates their rights but also demonstrates that the system is more focused on containment and punishment than on true transformation and reintegration.

The most compelling indicator of the failure of a system based on deprivation of liberty as the sole or primary response is the high recidivism rate. Numerous studies show that young people who have spent time in juvenile detention centers are more likely to reoffend once they are released, compared to those who have been subjected to alternative measures to prison.

This is due to multiple factors: the lack of effective rehabilitation programs that address the root causes of their behavior, the stigmatization that makes it difficult for them to find employment and housing, the disconnection from their family and community support networks, and the exposure to "learning" criminal behavior within the facilities themselves. Prison, far from being a school of correction, often becomes a school of criminality, where young people acquire new criminal skills and deepen their antisocial identity.

Recidivism is not a failure of the individual, but irrefutable proof that the punitive model, focused on confinement and punishment without genuine rehabilitation, does not work. It reveals that the system, by failing to deliver on its promise of resocialization, perpetuates the cycle of crime and the breakdown of social justice.

Poverty is not a crime, but in the context of the juvenile justice system, the conditions associated with it are frequently criminalized. The young people who end up in prisons and detention centers are not a random reflection of society; rather, they overwhelmingly come from contexts of socioeconomic deprivation. They are adolescents from impoverished neighborhoods, with limited access to quality education, healthcare, decent housing, and employment opportunities.

The lack of social support networks, family disintegration resulting from precarious conditions, and early exposure to violent environments or informal (often illicit) economies are factors that make them especially vulnerable to coming into conflict with the law. The system fails to address these structural causes of crime, but instead limits itself to intervening when the situation has already escalated, punishing the consequences of an exclusionary socioeconomic model.

In essence, we observe a criminalization of poverty, where actions derived from necessity or a lack of alternatives are those that most frequently lead to imprisonment, while other forms of crime, which perhaps have a greater social impact but are associated with more privileged strata, go unnoticed or receive differential treatment. The young people most affected by the system are those for whom society has already failed before they committed any criminal act, leaving them without options and pushing them towards marginalization.

The breakdown of social justice is also manifested in the persistence of biases and discrimination within the juvenile justice system. These biases are not explicit in the laws, but operate implicitly in police, judicial, and prison practices:

Racism: In many countries, young people belonging to ethnic or racial minorities are disproportionately more likely to be arrested, prosecuted, and sentenced to prison terms, even for offenses similar to those committed by young people from the majority. This is due to racial stereotypes, "usual suspect" profiling, and heightened police scrutiny in their communities.

Classism: Socioeconomic status is a determining factor. Young people from wealthy families have access to better legal defense, diversion programs, and alternative measures, while impoverished youth rely on overburdened public defenders and face a less flexible system that tends to deprive them of their liberty. The lack of resources to pay bail or access private therapy also puts them at a disadvantage.

Gender: Female adolescents in conflict with the law tend to be fewer in number compared to males, but they are often penalized for behaviors related to gender-based violence they have suffered (running away from home to escape abuse, for example) or for minor offenses. Furthermore, women's centers often have fewer resources and specific programs, and they are more likely to be revictimized or subjected to moral policing. Lesbophobia and transphobia can also be factors of discrimination in access to and treatment within the system.

These systemic biases reveal that justice is not blind, but rather sees and punishes differently based on social origin, skin color, or gender, deepening existing inequalities.

The predominance of a punitive or retributive model in juvenile justice is one of the main reasons for systemic failure. This model focuses on punishing the offender, imposing a sentence proportional to the harm caused, and the idea that the young person's suffering compensates for the crime. Its goals are retribution, deterrence, and incapacitation (confinement). However, as seen in Chapter 2, this approach leads to recidivism and psychological harm.

In contrast, restorative justice proposes a radically different paradigm. Its primary objective is not to punish the offender, but to repair the harm caused by the crime, both to the victim and the community. This model seeks to:

Involve all parties: Victims, offenders, and community members actively participate in conflict resolution.

Identifying Needs: Focuses on the needs of the victim (material and emotional reparation, feeling safe) and the needs of the offender (understanding the impact of their actions, assuming responsibility, reintegration).

Promoting Accountability: The young person assumes responsibility for their actions by participating in the reparation process, understanding the impact of their decisions.

Reintegration: Seeks the young person's reintegration into the community through agreements that may include apologies, community service, mediation, or support programs.

Restorative justice offers a much more humane and effective alternative for conflict resolution, as it addresses the underlying causes of crime, strengthens community ties, and offers a genuine path to rehabilitation and reducing recidivism, aligning with the principles of social justice.

The success of any juvenile justice approach that aspires to be socially just depends crucially on the active participation of the community and family.

The family is the adolescent's first network of support and support. However, in many cases, the families of young people in conflict with the law are also victims of poverty, disorganization, and lack of resources. A socially just justice system should strengthen these families, providing them with psychosocial and economic support and tools to accompany their children's journey, rather than criminalizing or excluding them. Family contact must be guaranteed and promoted, as it is vital for the adolescent's emotional stability and future reintegration.

The community, for its part, is fundamental to crime prevention and the implementation of alternative measures to imprisonment. Community-based programs providing educational, sports, cultural, and job training support can offer young people the opportunities that the traditional system denies them. Furthermore, the community can play an active role in restorative justice, participating in dialogue or mediation circles that allow young people to repair the damage and be accepted back into their community. When the community is involved, stigma diminishes and more protective and resilient environments are created.

Ultimately, the exclusion of family and community from the juvenile criminal justice process is another sign of the breakdown of social justice, as it deprives adolescents of their most important pillars of support and hinders their true transformation. A system that seeks to be just must recognize and empower these essential bonds.

Adolescence is a crucial stage of development and formation, where identity, social skills, and future prospects are consolidated. However, confinement in juvenile prisons fundamentally disrupts and distorts this process. Adolescents deprived of liberty experience:

Deteriorated Mental and Physical Health: As mentioned, exposure to violence, overcrowding, and lack of adequate medical care leave lasting consequences. Disorders such as chronic depression, severe anxiety, post-traumatic stress, and substance abuse are exacerbated or develop in this environment, affecting their well-being long after their release.

Educational and Employment Failure: The interruption of their schooling and the lack of relevant job training condemn many to informal employment or unemployment. They leave without the necessary tools to compete in the labor market, which drastically limits their legitimate life options and pushes them back into marginalization.

Difficulties in Building Healthy Relationships: The environment of mistrust and violence within the centers can affect their ability to establish stable and healthy emotional bonds outside of them. This complicates their family and social reintegration, generating isolation and hindering the formation of positive support networks.

Stigmatization and Negative Self-Image: The "label" of having served time in juvenile detention haunts them, affecting their self-image and society's perception of them. This stigmatization hinders their access to opportunities and their acceptance in the community, which can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy of exclusion and recidivism.

In short, the system, instead of being a factor in development, becomes an agent of impoverishment in the lives of these young people.

The individual failure of adolescents within the juvenile justice system translates into a collective failure for society, perpetuating and magnifying vicious cycles of violence and exclusion:

Recidivism and Consolidated Offending: By failing to address the root causes of criminal behavior and by generating more harm than rehabilitation, the system increases the likelihood that young people will reoffend, and that they will do so with greater sophistication or violence. Prison, rather than serving as a deterrent, can become a "school for crime," where antisocial behaviors are reinforced and connections to criminal networks are established.

Intergenerational Legacy of Inequality: The deficiencies of the juvenile justice system not only affect adolescents but also impact their families and future generations. The poverty, lack of opportunities, and stigmatization experienced by parents or siblings who have experienced the system can be replicated in their children, creating a cycle of disadvantage that is extremely difficult to break.

Increased Social Vulnerability: A young population that has been systematically marginalized, traumatized, and deprived of opportunities is not only more likely to reoffend, but also less able to contribute positively to society. This creates a social burden in terms of public assistance, safety, and health, in addition to perpetuating the existence of severely excluded groups.

The system, therefore, does not solve the problem, but rather externalizes and chronicizes it, transferring its costs and complexities to the entire society.

Maintaining an ineffective juvenile prison system is not only a matter of justice, but also of social and economic viability. The costs of this model are enormous and multifaceted:

Direct Economic Costs: The construction, maintenance, and operation of detention centers are extremely expensive. The budget allocated to detention centers is significantly higher than what would be required for prevention programs, education, or socio-educational measures in the community. This often inefficient spending diverts resources that could be invested in public policies that truly address the roots of violence and crime.

Indirect Social Costs: High recidivism generates additional costs for public safety, judicial operations, and victim care. The loss of human capital, decreased labor productivity, and the erosion of the social fabric represent an intangible, but real and devastating cost to a country's development.

Human and Development Costs: Beyond the numbers, the highest cost is the irreparable damage to the lives of thousands of young people whose development opportunities are cut short. Every young person who fails to fully reintegrate represents a loss to society's productive and creative potential.

Investing in repression and imprisonment without investing in the underlying causes is an unsustainable public policy and, ultimately, impoverishes everyone.

A failing juvenile justice system has a corrosive impact on social cohesion and citizens' trust in their institutions:

Erosion of Social Cohesion: When a segment of the population, particularly the most vulnerable youth, is systematically excluded, stigmatized, and victimized by the State itself, deep fractures are created in society. The polarization between "us" (those "outside" who want a "firm hand") and "them" (the "criminals" who must be locked up) deepens, preventing the empathy and solidarity necessary to build a united community.

Delegitimization of Institutions: If the justice system, which should guarantee rights and promote equity, is perceived as a reproducer of injustices and a generator of violence, trust in the State and its institutions (police, courts, detention centers) collapses. This mistrust can lead to civic apathy, disregard for the law, and the search for parallel or violent solutions to conflicts.

Perpetual Insecurity: An ineffective system that produces recidivism does not generate greater security, but rather a chronic sense of insecurity. Society perceives that problems are not being resolved, which in turn fuels demands for even more punitive measures, creating a vicious cycle that increasingly distances itself from sustainable and humane solutions.

In conclusion, a failed juvenile justice system is not an isolated problem; it is a symptom and catalyst for a society that is less just, more divided, and less hopeful in its ability to build an equitable future for all its members.

The most effective strategy for reducing juvenile delinquency lies not in repression, but in comprehensive prevention. This means addressing the structural causes of social vulnerability that push adolescents into conflict with the law. True social investment involves:

Quality and Accessible Education: Guaranteeing access to free, inclusive, and quality public education from early childhood through adolescence. This includes tutoring programs, scholarships, full-day schools, and a relevant curriculum that connects them to future opportunities. School should be a space for support and development, not a place of dropout.

Comprehensive Health and Mental Health: Ensure access to physical and mental health services that are sensitive to the needs of adolescents, including addiction prevention and treatment. Many young people in conflict with the law have unresolved trauma or undiagnosed mental health conditions that require specialized care, not incarceration.

Decent Housing and Safe Environments: Home stability and living in safe communities with adequate infrastructure are essential. Public policies should focus on reducing the housing shortage and improving living conditions in the most impoverished neighborhoods, promoting quality public spaces that foster coexistence and development.

Opportunities for Labor and Cultural Development: Create and expand vocational training programs, youth job placement, and entrepreneurship promotion. Additionally, provide access to sports, cultural, and artistic activities that provide constructive alternatives to unproductive leisure time and develop skills and talents.

Comprehensive prevention is a long-term investment that generates more equitable, safe, and prosperous societies by breaking the cycle of vulnerability before it turns into conflict with the law.

Recognizing that incarceration should be a measure of last resort and for the shortest possible period of time (as established by the Convention on the Rights of the Child), it is imperative to develop and strengthen a range of socio-educational and community measures that offer more effective and humane responses to conflict with the criminal law:

Diversion or Referral Programs: Implement mechanisms to address minor or non-violent offenses outside the formal criminal justice system, referring youth to mediation, counseling, or social services programs.

Socio-Educational Community Measures: Replace incarceration with programs that engage adolescents in their community. This may include tutoring, psychological support, community service activities, job training, or participation in educational and sports workshops. These measures should be supervised and tailored to the individual needs of the youth.

Day Centers and Comprehensive Residential Care: For cases that require a higher level of support, but without the rigidity of a prison, day centers with structured activities or short-stay residential care can be established to provide a supportive and educational environment, with an emphasis on developing life skills.

Electronic Monitoring and Assisted Release: In specific cases, the use of electronic anklets or other forms of monitoring can allow the youth to remain at home or in a community setting, under strict supervision, ensuring public safety without resorting to confinement.

These alternatives are not only more cost-effective and humane, but have also proven to be more effective in reducing recidivism by allowing the adolescent to maintain their family and community ties and develop skills in a real-life setting.

Restorative justice is emerging as a fundamental pillar for a fair and effective juvenile justice system. By focusing on reparation and accountability, rather than mere punishment, it offers a more constructive path for all parties involved:

Victim-Offender Mediation: Promote safe spaces where the victim and the adolescent offender, with the support of trained facilitators, can discuss the incident, the impact caused, and possible forms of reparation (material, symbolic, or through community service).

Restorative Circles: Extend the restorative approach to the community, involving the young person's family, community leaders, and other relevant stakeholders in the search for collective solutions that enable reintegration and reparation.

Training of Justice Operators: It is essential to train judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and prison staff in the principles and methodologies of restorative justice so they can apply it effectively and overcome the inertia of the punitive model.

Legal and Policy Frameworks: Develop and implement regulations that institutionalize and prioritize restorative justice processes as an alternative or complement to traditional avenues.

Restorative justice empowers victims, holds offenders accountable, and strengthens the social fabric, which directly contributes to a more equitable and humane justice system.

The paradigm shift toward juvenile social justice cannot be solely a task of the State; it requires a strategic alliance with civil society and a sustained commitment to public policies:

Civil Society Advocacy: Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and civil society groups play a crucial role in denouncing human rights violations, investigating detention conditions, providing complementary services (education, psychological support), and promoting legislative reforms and public policies.

Public-Private and Community Partnerships: Promote collaboration between the State, the private sector, and communities for the design and implementation of prevention programs and alternatives to incarceration.

Constant Monitoring and Evaluation: Establish transparent mechanisms for monitoring and evaluating juvenile justice policies and programs, with the participation of civil society and independent experts, to ensure their effectiveness and compliance with human rights standards.

Adequate and Sustainable Funding: Allocate sufficient and sustainable budgets for prevention policies and alternative measures, recognizing that investment in these areas is much more cost-effective in the long term than spending on repression and confinement.

Public policies must be the driving force behind this change, but they will only be effective if they are built on dialogue and collaboration with all social stakeholders.

Finally, a key element for transformation is education and awareness-raising in society at large about the rights of children and adolescents, and about the complexity of juvenile delinquency:

Public Awareness Campaign: Develop campaigns that demystify juvenile crime, counter the "heavy-handed" rhetoric, and promote a deeper understanding of the causes that lead young people into conflict with the law. It is essential to change the social perception of juvenile offenders, transforming them from "social enemies" to subjects of law.

Training on the Rights of Children and Adolescents: Include training on the rights of children and adolescents in the curricula of law enforcement, judicial officials, social workers, and all professionals who interact with this population.

Participation of Formerly Incarcerated Youth: Give voice and space to the testimonies of young people who have passed through the system, so they can share their experiences and contribute to raising public awareness and designing more effective policies.

Only through an informed and empathetic society can we build a consensus for change and ensure that juvenile justice is truly a pillar of social justice, and not a factor in its collapse. The horizon is clear: abandon the illusion of prison as a solution and build a future where all adolescents, regardless of their origin, have the opportunity to develop their full potential.