Fast Facts on Young Minds

A young woman with red hair and a denim jacket is smiling and looking over her shoulder. She is carrying a tote bag.

Here are 10 fast facts you should know about juvenile justice and neuroscience:

  1. Brain Development: Adolescent brains are still developing—particularly the prefrontal cortex, which is responsible for decision-making, impulse control, and thinking through consequences.

  2. Neuroscientific Evidence: Neuroscience has shown that adolescents are more likely to act on impulse and less likely to consider long-term consequences compared to adults, due to their still-maturing brains.

  3. Risk and Reward: Adolescents have heightened sensitivity to rewards, making them more prone to risky behaviors when compared to adults.

  4. Legal Implications: Neuroscientific findings have influenced juvenile justice policies, leading to arguments against severe punishments for juveniles, such as life without parole.

  5. Supreme Court Rulings: In cases like Roper v. Simmons (2005) and Miller v. Alabama (2012), the U.S. Supreme Court cited brain development research in their decisions to abolish the death penalty for juveniles and to rule mandatory life without parole for juveniles unconstitutional.

  6. Rehabilitation Potential: The plasticity of the adolescent brain—its ability to change and grow—suggests a higher potential for rehabilitation, making treatment and educational programs more effective than punitive measures.

  7. Sentencing Practices: Neuroscience supports more lenient and rehabilitative sentencing practices for juveniles, emphasizing the importance of age-appropriate interventions.

  8. Behavioral Interventions: Programs designed to improve decision-making skills, emotional regulation, and impulse control can be particularly effective for juveniles and young adults.

  9. Policy Reforms: Neuroscientific insights have led to reforms in juvenile justice systems worldwide, advocating for the consideration of developmental science in policy-making.

  10. Ethical Considerations: There is ongoing ethical debate about the extent to which neuroscientific findings should influence legal responsibility and the age at which individuals should be considered fully culpable for their actions.