Juvenile crime and the management of juvenile delinquents continue to be long-controversial issues. Professional opinions regarding the treatment of said offenders oscillate between rehabilitation, punishment and currently rehabilitation. Finding a balance between public safety and the offender's mental and emotional development prompts scrutiny and debate about laws and methods regarding the treatment of youth. Juvenile law focuses on rehabilitative services, when transfer to adult court is necessary, and alternatives to incarceration. Understanding children's mental and emotional development is critical to developing an effective offender adjudication and rehabilitation system. DJS.state.md.us notes that, in the nineteenth century, trying juveniles separately from their adult counterparts became an apparent necessity. Attempts by social reformers have highlighted that sentencing a child in an adult (criminal) court could result in a worse fate for the child than if the court had taken an alternative route. Before 1899, when the first juvenile court was established, a juvenile delinquent was treated as an adult regardless of his or her untested decision-making abilities. “The main difference between juvenile and adult courts was that juvenile courts were 'civil' in nature while adult courts were 'criminal'.” (djs.state.md.us) Rehabilitative procedures remained stable until the 1980s, when youth crime experienced a violent surge, instigating the public to deviate from gentlemanly practices. Legal professionals have once again begun to prosecute offenders as adults, thus sending them to criminal court and potentially to adult prison. “But Scott and Steinberg note that lawmakers and the public now appear to be reconsidering their views once again. A justice system that operates in… middle of paper… honing its criminal skills, depression, sexual abuse, suicide, and higher recidivism rates (Law and Human Behavior Tried as an Adult, Housed as a Juvenile: A Tale of Youth From Two Courts Incarcerated Together Jordan Bechtold and Elizabeth Cauffman Online First Publication, August 5, 2013. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000048).“Court officials must balance the interests of public safety with the needs of youth when making decisions about what program to place a juvenile and what level of restriction is required. Juvenile offenders who commit serious and/or violent crimes may require imprisonment to protect public safety and intensive supervision and intervention to rehabilitate. On the other hand, many offenders can be effectively rehabilitated through community-based supervision and intervention. (James Austin, Kelly Dedel Johnson and Ronald Weitzer)”