On youth court…..

Posted on by K

In case you haven’t noticed yet, I’m pretty interested in alternatives to incarceration, alternative sanctions in general, for individuals involved with the criminal justice system. In my elective class this semester, I learned of one alternative program for juvenile offenders that’s effectiveness kind of blew my mind: youth court. What is so incredible about youth court is that its essentially run entirely by young people in the community. I mean, yes, there are adults overseeing things, but the court staff consists of youth court members aged 10-18; the judge, the jury, the prosecutor, the defense attorney – all neighborhood kids.  When we are young, we are taught that peer pressure is an evil bad thing (did anyone else suffer through the DARE program?), but a youth court turns that idea on its head. The premise of youth court is that it harnesses the power of positive peer pressure to teach youth accountability to their community and put an end to patterns of disruptive behavior by addressing underlying causes of deviant behavior.

Youth court procedures vary depending on location but I’ll just give you a general overview on how it works. Youth courts get their cases through referrals from outside sources typically – the police, schools, community-based programs, the criminal courts themselves, social workers like us. After a referral, youth court adult staff members reach out to family and offender to explain the process and then if they choose to participate, schedule a hearing. The hearing is run entirely by youth members of the court. Youth members are teenage volunteers from the community. They receive extensive training in all the court roles. The youth members volunteer for a variety of reasons. One of the members that spoke to my class joined because his mother pressured him to. Another because it would look good on her college applications. The third because she, herself, had been a respondent in youth court and she wanted to give back to the program she credited with changing the course of her life for the better. Youth members act as the judge, jury and lawyers (referred to as advocates) during the hearing. The jury after hearing the case decides on a fair and appropriate sanction for the offender – community service, essays, psycho-educational workshops. Another interesting fact about youth courts is that, despite their inability to really enforce sanctions, they tend to have a high rate of compliance. One youth court in Brooklyn has a compliance rate of somewhere near 80%. Thats much higher than a typical criminal court.

I think this sort of program is a really amazing intervention option for social workers with clientele that includes youthful offenders.  We know that criminal courts don’t have a great reputation for providing services that address the underlying causes of crimes. For a teenager, getting to the cause of their destructive behavior can be particularly life altering. Youth courts provide a great opportunity to do this. They also provide a chance for socialization with peers that offenders might not have otherwise met; these relationships could have a positive impact on a youth. Additionally, from a youth court program, individuals learn more about the law. Maybe they learn how to react when police stop them or how to advocate for themselves to authority figures, all things that can greatly impact an encounter with law enforcement. As the humble social workers we are, we know that can never really know what sort of intervention our clients will respond best to. Some juveniles, like the one who spoke in my class, will benefit greatly from this sort of program, others will not but I really think we have to recognize referral options that may have a meaningful impact on our clients. We can’t  always be the catalyst for change, sometimes we need the community.

Read more here.

on Juvenile Justice……

Posted on by K

 

I just finished reading a book called “How to Live: A Search for Wisdom from Old People (while they are still on this earth)” by Henry Alford; long have I been a sucker for anecdotal wisdom from those who have been on this planet decades longer than myself. I don’t think there was one person whom the journalist/author interviewed that professed to having been wise since birth, giving the impression (and not a very unique one at that) that wisdom comes with age and presumably experiences. While I was reading this book, I thought of a story a friend had told me recently.This friend is an MSW student at one of the many other social works in NYC and through her field placement, she often comes across individuals who are involved in the criminal justice system. One of the clients she met with recently was just 16 when he was sentenced to 10 years in prison. Now the young man is 26 and, for all intents and purposes, just beginning his life. I don’t know about all of you, but I believe I can say with some confidence that I was considerably more wise at 26 than I was 16. The experiences I garnered in those 10 years have provided invaluable lessons that still influence the decisions I make now, at 29. For example at 17, I learned that I do not look good as a redhead. At 29, my hair remains its natural color, brown. At 18, I learned that I can survive out from under my parent’s roof. At 22, that lesson served me as I hopped into the passenger seat of a friend’s car and moved across the country to California. It played a role as well in my decision, 3.5 years later, to leave California and head here to New York City. Lessons like these (and a boatload of others) come over time when one has the freedom to make their own decisions, for better or worse. These are not things my friend’s client could learn inside a jail cell. Sure, there are things he learned that I (hopefully) will never have to learn, those being hard lessons learned about surviving in prison, no doubt;.  but those regular little lessons, the silly experiences that cause personal growth, my friend’s client was stripped of those when the judge ordered he be locked in prison for the next 10 years of his young life.

There is a growing debate in this country about the nature of the juvenile justice system. One that we should certainly have an eye on.  In the last five years, the Supreme Court of the United States has issued two important decisions on this matter. The first came in the matter of Graham v. Florida in 2010. This ruling established that juveniles could not be given life sentence for crimes not involving a homicide. The New York Times recently published this article (to which I posted the link last week) discussing a loophole defense invoked by some states, exorbitantly long sentences like 70 or 90 years are not technically “life sentences.”  Common sense would dictate that they are. The second ruling stemmed from Miller v. Alabama in 2012. This decision dictated that juveniles who committed homicide could not automatically be assigned life sentences. The Juvenile Law Center reports that 2,600 inmates nationwide are serving life sentence for crimes committed as a juvenile.

At the heart of these Supreme Court decisions is the idea that youthful offenders should be given a ““meaningful opportunity for release based on demonstrated maturity and rehabilitation.”   I interpret that (and I’m no Supreme Court Justice) as the chance to grow and improve with age. If I was still being punished for the rash decisions I made in my youth, I would still have red hair. I know its not as simple as that, and certainly, there are offenses that a youth can commit that demand severe punishment. But shouldn’t there be a chance for a future? In New York City, we have the Division of Youth and Family Justice whose goal is to work with families and youth to break patterns of recidivism and put youth offenders on the path to successful adulthood. This is the sort of program my friend’s client probably would have benefited from instead of a jail sentence. Just today, I read this article about “Girl’s Court” in Alameda County, California. Their objective is much the same, except the focus is exclusively on young female offenders. I’m of the opinion, though, that the wonderful work that is being done in  these juvenile justice courts and detention centers should have begun earlier in the office of a social worker; someone who can see the systemic and individual barriers facing these offenders (prior to them becoming such) and help identify the strengths they can use to overcome them to achieve positive outcomes.  I think this reform and debate is brilliant but its reactive and some may  argue –  too little, too late. How about us, social workers, take a different approach and start at the other end, doing some preventative work? Maybe then we could meet in the middle at a just juvenile justice system …. what do you think?

A little extra reading if you are so inclined: Racial Disparities in the Juvenile Justice System , New Trial Sought for George Stinney, executed at 14