Raising the Age

• Published date: 01 February 2017
• Date: 01 February 2017
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12257

POLICY ESSAY

RAISING THE AGE OF MAJORITY

Raising the Age

Raising the Issues

Elizabeth Cauman

Sachiko Donley

April Thomas

University of California, Irvine

Most people agree that a 5-year-old who, in a fit of anger, pushes someone down

the stairs should not be treated the same way as a 35-year-old who does the

same. Nevertheless, the decision to process juvenile cases through the criminal

court system becomes less clear-cut when considering, for example, an older teen who is

15, 16, or 17 years old. In fact, many states have established upper and lower age limits

for transfer to adult processing, allowing some discretion in the range between these limits.

Those below the lower limit cannot be processed as adults. Those above the upper limit

must be processed as adults. Those cases falling in between are discretionary.T he limits, the

applicable offenses, and the degree of discretion granted to district attorneys and/or judges

all vary from state to state. Some states have no lower age limit, meaning that a child of any

age can be processed as an adult. The upper age limit in most states is 18, but several states

prosecute all 17-year-olds as adults, and some, including New York and North Carolina,

prosecute all youths older than 16 as adults.

A growing body of evidence from developmental science has consistently found

that key aspects of mature judgment continue to develop into the mid-20s. Although

16-year-olds may have cognitive abilities similar to adults, their ability to avoid impulsive,

short-term, peer-influenced decisions in highly emotional situations (the situations most

youths find themselves in when making criminal decisions) remains significantly dimin-

ished until around age 25. Because they are not yet fully mature, adolescents are more

amenable to change and receptive to interventions that address psychosocial deficiencies.

It has also been argued that they should be held less culpable for their crimes than adults

Direct correspondence to Elizabeth Cauffman, Psychology & Social Behavior, University of California, Irvine,

4308 Social & Behavioral Sciences, Irvine, CA 92697 (e-mail: cauffman@uci.edu).

DOI:10.1111/1745-9133.12257 C2017 American Society of Criminology 73

Criminology & Public Policy rVolume 16 rIssue 1