How did the neoclassical school change ideas about punishment for children and people with mental illness?

The neoclassical school of criminology emerged in the early 19th century as a modification of the earlier classical school, which had treated all criminal acts as deliberate, rational choices requiring a fixed penalty.1

The neoclassical school introduced a more nuanced approach by insisting on the recognition of varying degrees of moral and legal responsibility. Specifically, it argued that individuals such as children and those suffering from mental illness should not be held to the same standard of accountability as fully rational adults. By acknowledging that these groups might lack the capacity for the calculated decision-making assumed by the classical school, the neoclassical movement laid the groundwork for the principle of the "individualization of punishment"—the idea that the legal system should consider the specific characteristics and circumstances of the offender rather than focusing solely on the crime committed.1

This shift was a significant humanitarian advancement, as it moved away from rigid, abstract equations of crime and punishment toward a system that accounts for mitigating circumstances and individual capacity.12