Conceptualization - Ewa Wierzba-Fokt

Conceptualization of the research problem "Will lowering the age of criminal responsibility
contribute to a decrease in crime among minors?" requires in-depth understanding and analysis
from the perspective of criminal law, psychology, and ethics. Here's how we can approach this issue
from each of these three areas:

Chapter I Criminal Law

From a criminal law perspective, it is crucial to understand how changing the age of criminal
responsibility affects the legal system and its ability to prevent juvenile delinquency. Criminal law
deals with defining the limits of liability, sanctions for violations, and systems of social
rehabilitation. Lowering the age of criminal responsibility could be seen as an attempt to toughen
sanctions on younger offenders in the hope of deterring would-be perpetrators. It is worth
examining whether and to what extent such changes will affect the frequency of committing crimes
among young people and how they will influence the future behavior of those subjected to
sanctions.

Chapter II Psychology
From the point of view of psychology, it is crucial to examine how lowering the age of criminal
responsibility will affect psychological development and behavior of minors. It is additionally
imperative to consider whether younger people can fully understand the consequences of their
actions and how various forms of intervention (punishments, rehabilitation programs) affect their
emotional and social development. Developmental psychology indicates that the brain of teeneagers
up to 18 is still developing, especially in the areas responsible for impulse control and risk
assessment. Therefore, research should focus on the question: "Does reducing the minimum
sentencing age lead to genuine behavioral improvement, or does it potentially create additional
psychological and social challenges?"

Chapter III Ethics

We should also consider the ethical and moral implications of reducing the age of criminal
responsibility. Firstly, ethics examines the fairness of these alterations within the framework of
treating adolescents as fully accountable legal individuals capable of facing criminal repercussions.
Secondly, ethics evaluates the equity of these changes within the context of treating teenagers as
fully responsible minors capable of confronting legal consequences.
Above rise question: "Is it fair and morally justifiable to lower the age of criminal responsibility,
potentially exposing younger people to challenging encounters within the criminal justice system?
Whether it is fair and justifiable to lower the age of criminal responsibility is a complex and debated
issue. Moreover, Ethical Responsibility vs. Criminal Responsibility must be considered.
The address of whether lowering the age of criminal responsibility is fair and morally justified is a
complex and debatable issue. It addresses many aspects, such as:

1. Moral responsibility and criminal liability:

◦ The standard view assumes that moral responsibility is necessary for criminal responsibility. In
other words, to be criminally responsible, one must bear moral responsibility for a given act.
However, some theorists argue that criminal responsibility should follow moral responsibility.

2. Children's opportunities and autonomy:

◦ Children's capabilities and autonomy increase over time. Although they have increasing rights
and responsibilities, the age of criminal responsibility remains low in many jurisdictions.
◦ Currently, in many places, children as young as 10 (Australia) and even 8 (South Korea) can face
criminal charges.

3. Doctrine of criminal liability:

◦ Legal doctrine often requires more than just the actus reus (physical act) and mens rea (mental
state) of a crime.
4. Calls to raise the minimum age:
◦ Supporters believe that the age of criminal responsibility ought to be raised.
◦ Raising the minimum age would protect younger people from potentially challenging encounters
within the criminal justice system.

In summary, the debate centers around finding an adjust between accountability and acknowledging
the various phases and potentialities of children's growth.

When evaluating ethical changes, it is essential to consider their impact on society. A critical
evaluation is necessary to determine whether these modifications improve overall efficiency or
result in heightened tensions and conflicts.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Chapter I
Conceptualization of the research problem "Will lowering the age of criminal responsibility
contribute to a decrease in crime among minors?" from the perspective of criminal law.

From a criminal law perspective, it is crucial to understand how changing the age of criminal
responsibility affects the legal system and its ability to prevent juvenile delinquency. The Criminal
law establishes the boundaries and outlines the permissible and prohibited actions within a society.
Lowering the age of criminal responsibility could be seen as an attempt to toughen sanctions on
younger offenders in the hope of deterring would-be perpetrators. It is worth investigating the
impact and extent of these changes on youth crime rates and how they will shape the future
behavior of individuals who have faced sanctions.

Conceptualization Procedure of the research problem "Will lowering the age of criminal
responsibility contribute to a decrease in crime among minors?" From a criminal law perspective, it
includes several key elements:

1. Definition and Scope of the Main Research Problem:

In Poland, the age of criminal responsibility is generally 17 years. It means that minors under 17
cannot be held criminally liable in the same way as adults. In their case, the provisions of the Act on
Proceedings in Juvenile Matters apply, which focuses more on social rehabilitation than on
punishment. The problem is to examine whether the legal change regarding lowering the minimum
age at which a person is liable to punishment for crimes will reduce the number of crimes
committed by young people. The study focuses on understanding the consequences of such a
change on the legal system and the social behavior of minors.

2. Review of Applicable Legal Provisions

It will be crucial to carefully examine existing legal provisions regarding the criminal liability of
minors, including:
1. Penal Code, mainly articles regarding criminal liability of minors.
2. The Act on Proceedings in Juvenile Matters determines the current approach to youth in the legal
system.
3. International conventions, and norms on the rights of children, and young people.
4. Legal Framework in Poland
5. Penal Code - OJ of 2022, item 1356 as amended The Polish Penal Code, also known as Kodeks
Karny (KK), serves as fundamental criminal-law legislation, specifying the principles of criminal
liability, including the age from which a person may be held liable.
6. The Act on Proceedings in Family Matters and Matters of Non-contentious Jurisdiction governs
legal proceedings related to minors - OJ of 2020, item 823 as amended. The act regulates in detail
proceedings towards minors, including the principles of adjudicating and implementing educational,
therapeutic, and social rehabilitation measures.
7. Penal Code (Art. 10 § 2) – specifies that a person under 17 years of age at the time of its
commission does not commit a crime. Instead of imposing criminal liability, it is feasible to
implement the measures outlined in the Act on Proceedings in Juvenile Matters.
8. Commentary on the Penal Code - ed. Marek Mozgawa. This item offers an in-depth analysis of
the provisions of the Penal Code, including those regarding the liability of minors, which may help
to understand the current legal status and the potential effects of its changes.

3. Comparative Analysis
Comparing Polish regulations with solutions adopted in other legal systems that have already
lowered the age of criminal responsibility may provide valuable conclusions about the potential
effects of such a change. This analysis should take into account cultural, social, and legal
differences.

Analyzing the impact of lowering the age of criminal responsibility would require access to
statistical data on juvenile delinquency and the effectiveness of various rehabilitation and punitive
measures concerning this age group. In general, available research in other countries often shows
that the severity of punishment does not always directly correlate with preventive effectiveness.
What is more important for deterrence is the greater emphasis on the certainty of detection and
consequences of the crime than the punishment itself.

4. Research Methods
a. Document Analysis: Review of applicable regulations and subject literature.
b. Analyze specific cases where changed laws have been applied - to see how these changes have
affected judicial practice and juvenile behavior.
c. Expert Interviews: Interviews with judges, prosecutors, and lawyers specializing in criminal and
juvenile justice to gain their perspectives on the potential impacts of the changes.

5. Research Indicators
The number of crimes committed by minors before and after implementing the new law is the
primary indicator of the effect of the lawful changes and measuring the return to criminal behavior
after application of sanctions.

6. Potential Conclusions
The study aims to determine whether and to what extent lowering the age of criminal responsibility
can effectively contribute to reducing crime among minors. The anticipated outcome will be a
foundational reference point for further discussions on the shape of legal policy towards juvenile
offenders, with possible recommendations for future changes in the law.
This conceptualization focuses solely on the legal aspects without directly considering the
psychological, social, or ethical impact of lowering the age of criminal responsibility on young
people. The legitimate investigation points to offer practical, evidence-backed insights that
policymakers and practitioners can utilize when formulating strategies to address juvenile
delinquency and facilitate rehabilitation. Seeking to understand the implications of lowering the age
of criminal responsibility requires focusing on data, trends, and experiences from other jurisdictions
to make an informed assessment of potential changes to the Polish legal system.

7. Analysis of possible legal and extra-legal consequences of lowering the age of punishment
for crimes.
1. Change in the Juvenile Justice System
Developing the issue of change in the Juvenile Justice System in the context of lowering the
conviction age requires a closer look at structural, functional, and philosophical aspects. In Poland,
as in many other countries, the juvenile justice system is based on the assumption that younger
people, due to their emotional and psychological development, should be treated differently from
adult criminals. It means focusing on rehabilitation, education, and reintegration into society, not
punishment.

Lowering the age of criminal conviction would require fundamental changes in the structure of the
juvenile justice system. There would be a need to increase the number of rehabilitation centers and
specialist youth courts equipped to deal with the needs and challenges of younger people. Resources
Customization of resources is essential to address the various offenses for which young individuals
may now be held accountable. This would necessitate offering diverse therapeutic, educational, and
vocational programs.

Increased Resources for Resocialization Programs

Bringing younger people into the criminal justice system as fully engaged participants requires a
significant increase in investment in rehabilitation programs. Programs should be tailored to address
the unique developmental requirements of 15-year-olds, encompassing educational, psychological,
and social support. They must also offer effective coping strategies for dealing with problems such
as aggression, substance use, or behavioral disorders.

Personnel training
A crucial factor in ensuring the successful operation of the modified system will involve providing
specialized training to judicial personnel, which includes judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and
social workers, on the intricacies of working with young individuals. Emphasis should be placed on
honing communication skills with younger individuals, comprehending their unique developmental
requirements, and employing effective social rehabilitation and mediation techniques.

2. Legal Implications
In the long run, modifying the juvenile justice system and reducing the age of conviction
necessitates continuous assessment and fine-tuning to guarantee successful rehabilitation outcomes.
The consequences of these modifications should be closely observed at both the personal and
societal levels, considering factors like recidivism rates, achievements in social and educational
reintegration, and the overall influence on juvenile delinquency.

The introduction of changes in the law, lowering the age of the criminal conviction, entails the need
to face new legal and organizational challenges. These changes require thoughtful modifications to
existing structures and the introduction of new solutions that respond to the unique needs and
circumstances of younger defendants.

Increased burden on the Court System

Lowering the age of criminal conviction increases the number of people subject to the jurisdiction
of criminal courts. This situation might lead to an increased burden on the legal system,
necessitating the hiring of additional judges and court staff and court facilities expansion to
accommodate the growing caseload. Cases involving younger defendants may be more complex
due to the need to consider developmental, family, and educational aspects, requiring more time and
resources to resolve them.

The need for training of judges and lawyers

Effectively managing cases involving younger defendants requires specialized training from judges
and attorneys. A suitable recommendation would be to provide education on developmental
psychology, youth work best practices, and alternative dispute resolution methods that may be more
appropriate for youth. Understanding the intricacies of human development can significantly
enhance their knowledge and awareness in this field.

Training should also focus on developing skills for an empathetic approach and understanding
challenges young defendants may face, promoting a child-focused approach.

Adaptation of Prison, Correctional, Resocialization, and Support Facilities.

The need to provide a safe and appropriate environment for younger defendants may require the
construction of new correctional and prison facilities or the adaptation of existing ones to meet the
needs of this age group.

These facilities should offer access to education, vocational, and therapeutic programs that are key
to resocialization. This requires increased investment in specialist staff such as teachers, therapists,
and social workers with work experience with young people.

New legal challenges also require an integrated approach that includes cooperation with the
education, health care, and social services sectors. This collaboration is essential to provide
comprehensive support for young defendants, focusing on their education, mental and physical
health, and social reintegration.

The implementation of changes also requires the development of monitoring and evaluation systems
that will enable the assessment of the effectiveness of the introduced solutions. In other words,
legitimate investigation points offer viable, evidence-backed experiences that policymakers and
professionals can utilize when defining methodologies to address adolescent misconduct and
encourage restoration.

To sum up, reducing the minimum age for criminal conviction introduces a host of novel
implications, both legal and beyond, necessitating intricate and carefully considered remedies. A
comprehensive strategy is necessary, considering both reforms in the legal system and the
establishment of support initiatives aimed at the needs and development of young people in conflict
with the law.

8 Summary
The proportionality of punishment for young people is a matter of fundamental importance,
requiring a thorough understanding of the complexity of young people's emotional and social
development. Penalties must be adequate to the age and level of mental maturity of the young
person but also effective in preventing crime in the future. The challenge is to avoid excessively
harsh penalties that may not bring the desired results in terms of social rehabilitation and, on the
contrary, contribute to further marginalization and stigmatization of young people.

Taking an individual approach to each case is crucial. Considering the context in which the offense
took place, a young individual's unique circumstances and life experiences enable a more targeted
adaptation of legal and intervention strategies, ultimately enhancing the likelihood of positive
transformation. This approach facilitates a deeper understanding of the requirements and potential
of young individuals within the context of their ongoing growth.

Being punished at a young age carries the risk of long-term consequences, including difficulties
with future employment, a higher risk of social marginalization, and the consolidation of a criminal
identity. Therefore, considering support systems is crucial to support systems that can help young
people reintegrate socially and professionally.

Access to education and career opportunities for minors who have been through the criminal justice
system is crucial to their reintegration. Investing in programs that support job skills development,
education, and qualifications is an effective strategy to reduce the risk of recidivism, paving the way
to a more stable and productive future. Development of alternatives to traditional punishment, such
as corrective programs, victim-offender mediation, and community-based interventions, may offer
more effective approaches for youth. Such methods focus on repairing the damage, teaching
responsibility, and comprehending the repercussions of the minor's deeds, which facilitates the
process of reintegration into society.

An integral element of the system should be providing access to psychological and educational
support that addresses the causes of criminal behavior. These programs should be available during
and after any sentence to support young people in solving problems and building positive futures.

Chapter II
Conceptualizing the impact of lowering the age of criminal responsibility on the psychological
development and minors behavior requires an interdisciplinary approach combining knowledge
from developmental psychology, criminology, and law. Inquiry revolves around whether younger
individuals can comprehensively grasp the repercussions of their actions and evaluate the
effectiveness of different interventions – punishment and rehabilitation programs – that affect their
emotional and social development.

Key research areas:

1. Mental development of young people and criminal responsibility:
Developmental psychology shows that the adolescent brain undergoes rapid development,
especially in the area responsible for impulse control and risk assessment. Research can explore the
scope and depth of these developmental processes that influence minors' ability to anticipate the
consequences of their actions and make decisions.

2. Understanding the consequences:

Analysis of whether and how lowering the age of criminal responsibility affects young people's
awareness of the consequences of their actions. In this context, it is worth examining whether
younger people can adequately assess the consequences of their actions and how education on legal
and social issues can influence this understanding.

3. Impact of penalties and rehabilitation programs:

Research focuses on assessing how different forms of intervention affect emotional and social
development of young people. Are punishments effective in changing behavior, or do rehabilitation
programs offer better results in reintegrating young people into society?

4. Long-term consequences:
Assesing long-term effects of lowering the age of criminal responsibility on minors' lives, including
their future behavior, educational and career opportunities, and social relationships.

5. Alternative strategies:
Alternative approaches to traditional punishment, such as mentoring programs and legal and social
education, can better support young people's development and prevent crime.

6. Methodology:
The study should use different research methods, including quantitative research (statistical data
analysis among punished youth, surveys) and qualitative research (interviews, case studies), to
obtain a comprehensive picture of the impact of lowering the age of criminal responsibility on
youth. When considering various factors, it will be crucial to consider the perspectives of
stakeholder groups, including young people, their families, social workers, teachers, and justice
system representatives.
Conclusions
This conceptualization highlights the need for a deep understanding of the psychological and social
context of lowering the age of criminal responsibility. Through a holistic approach and focusing on
supporting youth development, it is possible to address the crime problems among minors while
ensuring their healthy emotional and social development.

Chapter III
Conceptualizing the issue from an ethical perspective in the context of lowering the age of criminal
responsibility requires considering several points:

1. Definition of Justice:
Firstly, it is necessary to define what we mean by justice in the context of criminal liability. Is it
about the severity of the punishment appropriate to the crime, or perhaps about the possibility of
rehabilitation and reintegration into society? What values should be prioritized?

2. Maturity and Responsibility:

It is crucial to consider the extent to which younger people can understand the consequences of their
actions and to take action making decisions responsibly. Considering knowledge about brain
development and developmental psychology, one should consider whether lowering the criminal
age does not violate the principle of justice, which assumes full awareness of the consequences of
one's actions.

3. Potential Effects in the Criminal System:

It is also necessary to consider what consequences premature entry into the penal system may have
for a young person. What are the long-term effects of such interaction, both from an individual and
societal perspective? Is the system adapted to the resocialization needs of younger people?

4. Social and Moral Repercussions:

The next point is to analyze the impact of lowering the age of criminal responsibility on society as a
whole. How does this change affect young people's perception, interpersonal relationships, and
sense of security? Can such action lead to additional social tensions and conflicts?

5. Alternative Solutions:
It is significant to consider alternative forms of responding to crimes committed by younger people.
Are there other, more effective methods of preventing youth crime that may also be more consistent
with ethical principles? What roles can educational programs, social support, and other forms of
intervention play?

6. Balance Between the Protection of Society and Individual Rights:

Ultimately, balancing the need between the need to protect society from crime and the rights and
well-being of individuals, especially those in development is crucial. What measures can effectively
ensure both crime response and future prevention?

7. Summary
In the context of lowering the age of criminal responsibility for minors, ethics plays a significant
role in ensuring justice and protecting the rights of young people. There are many arguments for and
against lowering the age of criminal responsibility, decisions in this matter should be made based on
ethical principles.

One of the arguments for lowering the age of criminal responsibility is that young people may not
be fully aware of the consequences of their actions and need special protection and support.
Lowering the age of criminal responsibility can help prevent further crimes by focusing on the
rehabilitation and resocialization of minors rather than harsh penalties. However, a potential danger
exists where youth might face unjust treatment in the criminal justice system if they are not fully
aware of their rights and how to defend themselves.

On the other hand, some concerns not lowering the age of criminal responsibility may lead to an
increase in the number of crimes committed by young people who will not be afraid of the
consequences of their actions. Ethics in this context require taking into account the best interests of
minors and balancing the need to protect society with the needs of young people. Decisions
regarding the age of criminal responsibility must be fair, based on facts and scientific research, and
respect the principles of justice and equality before the law. In addition, appropriate rehabilitation
programs and support must be provided for young people in the criminal justice system to help
them get back on track and prevent further offending.

IV Final conclusions
To sum up, conceptualizing the problem requires an interdisciplinary approach that will allow us to
understand its complexity and multidimensionality. A study of the impact of lowering the age of
criminal responsibility on juvenile delinquency must consider a variety of legal, psychological, and
ethical aspects to fully understand the potential effects of such a change and its significance for
individuals and society. From a criminal law perspective, changing the age of criminal
responsibility is a technical and social issue. These requires legislative changes but also a
redefinition of the social perception of minors as subjects of law and responsibility. Lowering the
age of criminal responsibility, interpreted as a measure to tighten sanctions for younger people,
assumes that earlier entry into the penal system may result in increased prevention and deterrence
from committing crimes. However, such a change raises several questions and potential
consequences. Firstly, it is crucial to examine the extent to which younger people can understand
the consequences of their actions and the extent to which they can take responsibility for their
actions under the law. Differences in cognitive development between children, teenagers, and adults
suggest that young people may not have the full ability to anticipate the consequences of their
actions and make decisions acting with complete knowledge and careful judgment. Moreover, the
effectiveness of such a measure in the context of deterrence requires in-depth analysis. Existing
research on the impact of punishment severity on the propensity to commit crimes often shows that
it is not so much the severity of the punishment but rather the high certainty of its application that is
crucial for the deterrent effect. Therefore, lowering the age of criminal responsibility without a
simultaneous strengthening of crime detection and law enforcement mechanisms may not bring the
expected results in reducing crime among minors. We must also consider the impact of this change
on the social rehabilitation system. If minors are treated similarly to adults in criminal proceedings,
the central issue becomes how to tailor social services, education, and psychological support to
meet the needs of younger individuals. The aim of criminal law, especially concerning minors,
should be not only punishment but also striving for social rehabilitation and preventing recidivism.
Consequently, lowering the age of criminal responsibility requires a comprehensive approach that
considers the need to protect society and the well-being and rights of younger people. Such a
change should be preceded by a broad social debate and analysis of empirical data to ensure that
legal decisions are based on solid scientific and ethical foundations, and the legal system can
effectively respond to the challenges related to juvenile crime.