It is indispensable to recall though, that the policies and solutions, advocated by the CRIN proposals, are not insinuating that children should be exempted from due, legal processes. The policy paper states that children should be held responsible for all criminal actions within the pursued capacity evolution and children’s rights advocacy. The recommendation is of a formal process of determining any dispute relating to the criminal responsibility. However, there are concerns from this approach, since entirely separating children from the criminal system is a complex issue that requires debate beyond policy papers by child rights advocates. Despite the assertion that this will not let children go free, there are concerns that the children rights advocates are taking the position of belittling the evolution in the child capacity as he/she grows. There is an argument that the demands for reduction in age or exclusion of all minors from criminal justice will lead to unforeseen consequence. A drug library group argues these children will be denied the due process. The children will be forced to accept or coerced under the guise of welfare, the compulsory treatment and interventions, which are no better than penal sanctions (druglibrary.org, n.d.).
Proposals by the American Legislature Exchange Council that have economic considerations of changing juvenile jurisdiction have its ramification. Giving individual states the power to rehabilitate and lock up delinquents is likely to cause feelings of non-repentance. Minors may not realize the gravity of correction and rehabilitation, since the correction is within the comfort zone of familiar environment. This argument parallels the state rehabilitation role (Moll, 2012).
The lack of consensus on many juvenile justice issues continues to make the solutions elusive. The continuance in obscurity of a need for age consciousness questions the direction of the juvenile system as corrective tool that bring out a better citizen. Politics and environmental chaos continue to haunt the process of a lasting solution. The above solution and policy changes do indicate, however, that aligning policy to goals of rehabilitation and integration will serve best in curbing the rising situation. The system needs to appreciate the role of age in the whole web of juvenile issues, and respond within the confines of wisdom through which, the system will serve its purpose. Employing diverse interventions, tapping into new social potentials, among other complimentary approaches list as apparent options to the problem (Hubner, 2005).