Handbook of Juvenile Forensic Psychology and Psychiatry

Uncorrected Proof

Handbook of

Juvenile Forensic Psychology and Psychiatry

2

3

Uncorrected Proof

Elena L. Grigorenko

Editor

Handbook of

Juvenile Forensic Psychology

and Psychiatry

5

6

7

8

9

Uncorrected Proof

Elena L. Grigorenko, PhD Child Study Center

Department of Psychology and Epidemiology & Public Health Yale University

New Haven, CT, USA

ISBN 978-1-4614-0904-5 e-ISBN 978-1-4614-0905-2 DOI 10.1007/978-1-4614-0905-2

Springer New York Heidelberg Dordrecht London Library of Congress Control Number: 2102930261

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

All rights reserved. This work may not be translated or copied in whole or in part without the written permission of the publisher (Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, 233 Spring Street, New York, NY 10013, USA), except for brief excerpts in connection with reviews or scholarly analysis. Use in connection with any form of information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed is forbidden.

The use in this publication of trade names, trademarks, service marks, and similar terms, even if they are not identified as such, is not to be taken as an expression of opinion as to whether or not they are subject to proprietary rights.

Printed on acid-free paper

Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com) 11

12 13 14 15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

v

Uncorrected Proof

Dr. Elena L. Grigorenko received her PhD in general psychology from Moscow State University, Russia, in 1990, and her PhD in developmental psychology and genetics from Yale University, New Haven, CT, in 1996.

Currently, Dr. Grigorenko is Associate Professor of Child Studies, Psychology, and Epidemiology and Public Health at Yale. Dr. Grigorenko has published more than 250 peer-reviewed articles, book chapters, and books. She has received awards for her work from five different divisions of the American Psychological Association (Divisions 1, 7, 10, 15, and 24); she also won the APA Distinguished Award for Early Career Contribution to Developmental Psychology. Dr. Grigorenko has worked with children and their families in the USA as well as in Africa (Kenya, Tanzania and Zanzibar, the Gambia, and Zambia), India, and Russia. Her research has been funded by the NIH, NSF, DOE, Cure Autism Now, the Foundation for Child Development, the American Psychological Foundation, and other federal and private sponsor- ing organizations.

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

vii

Uncorrected Proof

1 Introduction ... 1 Dana Shoenberg

2 Developmental Changes in Adolescence and Risks

for Delinquency ... 11 Baptiste Barbot and Scott R. Hunter

3 The “Why(s)” of Criminal Behavior in Juveniles:

The Long and the Short of It ... 35 Elena L. Grigorenko

4 Race and Sex Disparity in Juvenile Justice Processing ... 53 Kimberly Kempf-Leonard

5 Major Principles in a Minor Context: Forensic Practices

Involving Adolescents ... 69 Sandra B. McPherson

6 Juveniles and Criminal Responsibility Evaluations ... 83 Charles L. Scott and Matthew Soulier

7 Sentencing Juveniles to Life in Prison Without

the Opportunity for Parole ... 93 Jeffrey J. Shook

8 Transfer to Adult Court: Enhancing Clinical Forensic

Evaluations and Informing Policy ... 105 Debra R. Chen and Randall T. Salekin

9 Need for and Barriers to Inclusion in Health Research

of Justice-Involved Youth ... 127 Susan Bouregy, John Chapman, and Elena L. Grigorenko

10 Toward Establishing Standards of Practice in Juvenile

Forensic Mental Health Assessment ... 145 Kirk Heilbrun and David DeMatteo

11 Assessment in Juvenile Justice Systems: An Overview ... 157 Robert D. Hoge

12 Mental Health Assessment of Juveniles ... 169 Cynthia Morgan-D’Atrio

49 50

51 52 53

54 55 56

57 58

59 60 61

62 63 64 65 66

67 68 69

70 71 72

73 74 75 76 77

78

79

Uncorrected Proof

13 The Juvenile Forensic Court Clinic in Theory

and Practice ... 203 John F. Chapman

14 The History, Development, and Testing of Forensic

Risk Assessment Tools ... 217 Jay P. Singh

15 Assessing Juveniles for Risk of Violence ... 229 Mary Alice Conroy

16 Becoming More Therapeutic: Motivational Interviewing as a Communication Style for Paraprofessionals

in Juvenile Justice Settings ... 241 Angela R. Wood, Ralph J. Wood, and Susan M. Taylor

17 At the Junction of Personality Theories: Working

with Juvenile Offenders ... 255 Elena L. Grigorenko

18 Services for Youth in Closed Settings: Gaps in Services ... 283 Faye S. Taxman, Sara Debus-Sherrill,

and Carolyn A. Watson

19 Implementing Evidence-Based Practices for Juvenile

Justice Prevention and Treatment in Communities ... 299 Nancy G. Guerra and Kirk R. Williams

20 Preventing Early Conduct Problems and Later

Delinquency ... 311 Christopher J. Trentacosta and Daniel S. Shaw

21 Treating Juvenile Offenders: Best Practices

and Emerging Critical Issues ... 325 Paul Boxer and Sara E. Goldstein

22 Psychopharmacological Treatment of Youth in Juvenile

Justice Settings ... 343 Lenore Engel, John Abulu, and Roumen N. Nikolov

23 IICAPS: A Treatment Model for Delinquent Youths

with Co-occurring Mental Health Disorders ... 359 Jean A. Adnopoz, Joseph L. Woolston,

and Kathleen M.B. Balestracci

24 Serving Dually Diagnosed Youth in the Juvenile

Justice System ... 373 Sarah W. Feldstein Ewing, Shirley M. Smith,

and Hilary K. Mead

25 Treating Juvenile Sex Offenders ... 387 Jeanne Bereiter and David Mullen

80 81 82

83 84 85 86 87

88 89 90 91

92 93 94

95 96 97 98 99 100

101 102 103

104 105 106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

Uncorrected Proof

26 Sexually Transmitted Infections in Juvenile Offenders ... 407 William L. Risser and Jan M. Risser

27 A Self-Regulation Model for the Treatment of Pathological Juvenile Firesetters ... 419 Alan I. Feldberg and John H. Lemmon

28 Mentor Programming for At-Risk Youth ... 441 Donna Macomber and Elena L. Grigorenko

29 Responding to Child Trauma: Theory, Programs,

and Policy ... 455 Steven Marans, Deborah Smolover, and Hilary Hahn

30 Psychosocial Treatment of Traumatized Juveniles ... 469 Carla Kmett Danielson, Angela Moreland Begle,

Lynsay Ayer, and Rochelle F. Hanson

31 Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Among Youth Involved

in Juvenile Justice ... 487 Julian D. Ford

32 Trauma and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Among Youth

in the Juvenile Justice System: A Critical Appraisal ... 505 Tina Maschi, Matt Stimmel, Keith Morgen,

Sandy Gibson, and Areen O’Mary

33 Juvenile Offenders with Disabilities: Challenges

and Promises ... 523 Antonis Katsiyannis, David E. Barrett, and Dalun Zhang

34 Ensuring that They Learn ... 543 Candace A. Mulcahy and Peter E. Leone

35 Female Juvenile Offenders ... 555 Leslie D. Leve, Patricia Chamberlain, Hyoun Kim,

and Dana K. Smith

36 Juvenile Gangs... 569 Wesley G. Jennings and J. Mitchell Miller

37 Juvenile Forensic Psychology and Psychiatry:

The Movement Toward Data-Based Innovations ... 581 Thomas J. Dishion

Index ... 587

120 121 122 123 124

125 126

127 128 129 130 131 132

133 134 135

136 137 138 139

140 141 142

143 144

145 146 147

148 149 150 151 152

153

xi

Uncorrected Proof

John Abulu, MD Kings County Hospital Center, SUNY Downstate College of Medicine, Brooklyn, NY, USA

Jean A. Adnopoz, MPH Child Study Center, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA

Lynsay Ayer, BA National Crime Victims Research & Treatment Center, Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA

Kathleen M.B. Balestracci, MSW, PhD Child Study Center, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA

Baptiste Barbot, PhD Child Study Center, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA

David E. Barrett, PhD Clemson University, Clemson, SC, USA Angela Moreland Begle, PhD National Crime Victims Research

& Treatment Center, Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA

Jeanne Bereiter, MD Child & Adolescent Division, Department of Psychiatry, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA Susan Bouregy, PhD, CIP Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA Paul Boxer, PhD Department of Psychology, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ, USA

Patricia Chamberlain, PhD Oregon Social Learning Center, Eugene, OR, USA

Center for Research to Practice, Eugene, OR, USA John Chapman, PsyD Court Support Services Division, State of Connecticut Judicial Branch, Wethersfield, CT, USA

Debra R. Chen, MA The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA Mary Alice Conroy, PhD, ABPP Psychological Services Center, Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX, USA

155 156

157 158

159 160 161

162 163

164 165

166

167 168 169

170 171

172

173 174

175 176 177

178 179

180

181

182

Uncorrected Proof

Carla Kmett Danielson, PhD National Crime Victims Research

& Treatment Center, Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA

Sara Debus-Sherrill George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA

David DeMatteo, JD, PhD Department of Psychology, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Thomas J. Dishion, PhD Child and Family Center, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, USA

Lenore Engel, MD Kings County Hospital Center, SUNY Downstate College of Medicine, Brooklyn, NY, USA

Sarah W. Feldstein Ewing, PhD The Mind Research Network, Albuquerque, NM, USA

Alan I. Feldberg, PhD Abraxas Firesetter Programs, South Mountain, PA, USA

Julian D. Ford, PhD Department of Psychiatry, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT, USA

Sandy Gibson, PhD Graduate School of Social Service, Fordham University, New York, NY, USA

Sara E. Goldstein, PhD Department of Family and Child Studies, Montclair State University, Montclair, NJ, USA

Elena L. Grigorenko, PhD Child Study Center, Department of Psychology, and Epidemiology & Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA Nancy G. Guerra, EdD Professor of Psychology, Associate Dean for Research Office of the Dean, Newark, DE, USA

Hilary Hahn, MPH, EdM Yale Child Study Center, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA

Rochelle F. Hanson, PhD National Crime Victims Research & Treatment Center, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences,

Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA

Kirk Heilbrun, PhD Department of Psychology, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Robert D. Hoge, PhD Department of Psychology, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada

Scott R. Hunter, PhD School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA

Wesley G. Jennings, PhD Department of Criminology, College of Behavioral and Community Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA

Antonis Katsiyannis, EdD Clemson University, Clemson, SC, USA

183 184 185

186

187 188

189 190

191 192

193 194

195 196

197 198

199 200

201 202

203 204

205 206

207 208

209 210 211

212 213

214 215

216 217

218 219 220

221

Uncorrected Proof

Kimberly Kempf-Leonard, PhD Department of Criminology & Criminal Justice, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL, USA

Hyoun Kim, PhD Oregon Social Learning Center, Eugene, OR, USA John H. Lemmon, MSW, PhD Criminal Justice Department, Shippensburg University, Shippensburg, PA, USA

Peter E. Leone, PhD Department of Special Education, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA

Leslie D. Leve, PhD Oregon Social Learning Center, Eugene, OR, USA Center for Research to Practice, Eugene, OR, USA

Donna Macomber, MA Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA Steven Marans, PhD Yale Child Study Center, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA

Tina Maschi, PhD, LCSW, ACSW Graduate School of Social Service, Fordham University, New York, NY, USA

Sandra B. McPherson, PhD, ABPP Fielding Graduate University, Santa Barbara, CA, USA

Hilary K. Mead, PhD The Mind Research Network, Albuquerque, NM, USA

J. Mitchell Miller, PhD Department of Criminal Justice, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA Cynthia Morgan-D’Atrio, PhD Insight Educational Center, Metairie, LA, USA

Keith Morgen, PhD Graduate School of Social Service, Fordham University, New York, NY, USA

Candace A. Mulcahy, PhD Binghamton University, Binghamton, NY, USA

David Mullen, MD Child & Adolescent Division, Department of Psychiatry, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA Roumen N. Nikolov, MD Kings County Hospital Center, SUNY Downstate College of Medicine, Brooklyn, NY, USA Areen O’Mary, MSW Graduate School of Social Service, Fordham University, New York, NY, USA

Jan M. Risser, PhD University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston, TX, USA

William L. Risser, MD, PhD Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas-Houston Medical School, Houston, TX, USA Randall T. Salekin, PhD The University of Alabama,

Tuscaloosa, AL, USA

222 223

224

225 226

227 228

229 230

231

232 233

234 235

236 237

238 239

240 241

242 243

244 245

246 247

248 249

250 251

252 253

254 255

256 257

258

259

Uncorrected Proof

Charles L. Scott, MD Division of Psychiatry and the Law,

Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA, USA

Daniel S. Shaw, PhD University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA Dana Shoenberg, JD Center for Children’s Law and Policy, Washington, DC, USA

Jeffrey J. Shook, JD, MSW, PhD School of Social Work, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

Jay P. Singh, PhD University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Dana K. Smith, PhD Oregon Social Learning Center, Eugene, OR, USA Shirley M. Smith, BS The Mind Research Network,

Albuquerque, NM, USA

Department of Psychology, The University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA

Deborah Smolover, JD Yale Child Study Center, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA

Matthew Soulier, MD Division of Psychiatry and the Law,

Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA, USA

Matt Stimmel, MA Graduate School of Social Service, Fordham University, New York, NY, USA

Faye S. Taxman, PhD George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA Susan M. Taylor, BA SMT Associates, LLC, Ponchatoula, LA, USA Christopher J. Trentacosta, PhD Department of Psychology, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA

Carolyn A. Watson George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA Kirk R. Williams, PhD Professor and Chair, Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA Angela R. Wood, PhD, LCSW, C-CATODSW, CCS

Mental Health Services, Florida Parishes Human Services Authority, Hammond, LA, USA

Ralph J. Wood, PhD, CHES, FASHA Department of Kinesiology and Health Studies, Southeastern Louisiana University,

Hammond, LA, USA

Joseph L. Woolston, MD Child Study Center, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA

Dalun Zhang, PhD Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA

260 261 262

263

264 265

266 267

268

269

270 271 272 273

274 275

276 277 278

279 280

281

282

283 284 285

286

287 288

289 290 291

292 293 294

295 296

297

xv

Uncorrected Proof

16PF-Q3 Sixteen-Personality-Factor-Questionnaire 5-HTT Serotonin transporter gene

5HTT Serotonin protein

AAPL American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law ACA American Correctional Association

ACE The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Adverse Childhood Experiences

ACE Autonomy, collaboration and evocation A-con Conduct disorders

ADA Americans with Disability Act ADHD Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder AIDS Acquired immune deficiency syndrome ALI American Law Institute

AMA American Medical Association ANOVA Analysis of variance

ANS Autonomic nervous system

APA American Psychological Association APA American Psychiatric Association APS Adolescent Psychopathology Scale AQ Aggression Questionnaire

AR Androgen receptor gene—a gene that codes for the protein that functions as a steroid hormone-activated transcription factor ART Aggression replacement training

ASBI The Adolescent Sexual Behavior Inventory

ASEBA Achenbach system of empirically based assessment A-sch School problems

A-trt Negative treatment indicators

ATSA Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers ( ) AUC Area under the curve

BART Becoming a Responsible Teen

BASC-2 Behavior assessment system for children–second edition BBBSA Big Brothers/Big Sisters of America

BHP Behavioral Health Partnership BMX Bicycle motocross

BPS Biopsychosocial model

299 300 301

302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327

328

329

330

331

332

333

Uncorrected Proof

BRIEF Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function

BV Bacterial vaginosis

CAFAS Child and Adolescent Functional Assessment Scale CAI Computer-assisted instruction

CAT Children’s Apperception Test CBCL Child Behavior Checklist

CBITS Cognitive behavioral intervention for trauma in schools CBITS Cognitive behavioral intervention for traumatized students

CBM Curriculum-based measurement

CBT Cognitive behavior therapy

CBT-RP Cognitive behavioral therapy-relapse prevention

CC Court Clinic Model

CD Conduct disorder

CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CD-CP Child Development-Community Policing CDI Children’s Depression Inventory

CFTSI The Child and Family Traumatic Stress Intervention CGS Connecticut General Statute

CHRM2 Muscarinic acetylcholine receptor M

gene CJCA Council of Juvenile Correctional Administrators

CMH Community mental health

COGA Collaborative study on the genetics of alcoholism COMT Catechol-O-methyl transferase

Connors CBRS Connors Comprehensive Behavior Rating Scales CPI-Sc California Psychological Inventory

CSBCL-2nd Child Sexual Behavior Checklist CSBI-III Child Sexual Behavior Inventory-III

CSSD Court Support Services Division of the Superior Court of Connecticut

CST Competency to stand trial

CT State of Connecticut

DA Dopamine protein

DAT1 (SLC6A3) Dopamine transporter gene

DbH Dopamine beta-hydroxylase

DCF Department of Children and Families DHHS Department of Health and Human Services DIBELS Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills DICA-IV Diagnostic Interview for Children and Adolescents-IV

DISC Version 2.3

DISC Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children

DISC-IV Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children, Version IV DJJ Department of Juvenile Justice

DMC Disproportionate minority contact

DNA Deoxyribonucleic acid

DOR Diagnostic odds ratio

DRD

Dopamine different receptors (5)

[AU1]

[AU2]

334 335

336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364

365

366

367

368

369

370

371

372

373

374

375

376

377

378

379

Uncorrected Proof

DSM Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, different versions

DUI Driving under the influence

DV-HVI Domestic Violence Home Visit Intervention

EARL-20B and EARL-21G

EARS Express empathy, amplify ambivalence, roll with resistance, and support self-efficacy

E/BD Emotional/behavioral disorder EBFT Ecologically based family therapy EBPs Evidence-based practices

EBT Evidence-based treatment

EC Emotions course

ED Emergency Department

ED or EBD Emotional disturbance

EDJJ National Center on Education, Disability, and Juvenile Justice EEG Electroencephalogram

EIA Enzyme immunoassay, also known as ELISA EKG Electrocardiograph

ELISA Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, also known as EIA ERASOR Estimate of risk of adolescent sexual offense recidivism

ES Effects size

ESTs Empirically supported interventions FAPE Free Appropriate Public Education FBA Functional behavioral assessment FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation FBT Family behavior therapy

FCU Family check-up

FDA Food and Drug Administration

FERPA Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act FFT Functional family therapy

FMHA Forensic mental health assessment fMRI Functional magnetic resonance imaging

FN False negatives

FP False positives

GABA Gamma (g)-aminobutyric acid

GABRA2 Gamma-aminobutyric acid receptor subunit alpha-2 GED General Education Diploma

GBMI Guilty but mentally ill GGI Guided group interaction

GNRH Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists GPA Grade point average

HIPAA Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act HIT How I Think Questionnaire

HIV Human immunodeficiency virus HPV Human papilloma virus

380 381 382 383 384

385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401

402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413

414 415 416 417 418 419 420

421

422

423

424

Uncorrected Proof

HRCT Heart Rate Coherence Training

HSV Herpes simplex virus

IAP Intensive Aftercare Program

ICPS Individual cognitive problem solving IDEA Individuals with Disabilities Act

IDEIA The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004

IEP Individualized Education Program

IEPs Individualized Education Programs

IICAPS Intensive In-Home Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Service

IGT Interactional group therapy

IQ Intelligence quotient

IRB Institutional Review Boards

IY Incredible years

JD Juvenile diversion

JD + ST JD plus skills training

JD + MEN JD plus mentoring

JDAI Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative JFRC Juvenile Residential Facility Census

JJDP Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act JJDPA Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act JLWOP Juveniles to life without the opportunity for parole

JSO Juvenile sex offender

JSOs Juveniles charged with sex offenses

JSOAP-II Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol II

JUMP Juvenile Mentoring Program

KABC-II Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, second edition

K-BIT-2 Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test, second edition K-SADS-PL PTSD traumatic events component of the semi-

structured clinical interview for PTSD

KTEA-II Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, second edition

LD Learning disabilities

LSI Level of Service Inventory

LSI-R Level of Service Inventory—Revised

LWOP Life sentences without the opportunity for parole

Ma Hypomania

MacCAT-CA MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool–Criminal Adjudication

MACI Millon Adolescent Clinical Inventory MAC-R MacAndrews Alcoholism Scale Revised

MAJCC Massachusetts Alliance of Juvenile Court Clinics MANCOVA Multivariate analysis of covariance

MAOA and MAOB Monoamine oxidase A and B

[AU3]

[AU4]

425 426

427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439

440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451

452 453 454 455 456 457 458

459 460 461 462

463

464

465

466

467

468

469

470

Uncorrected Proof

MAPI Millon Adolescent Personality Inventory MASC Multidimensional Anxiety Scale for Children MAYSI–2 Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument–version 2 MAYSI-2 TE Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument-2 “traumatic

experiences”

MDFT Multidimensional family therapy

MDI-C Multiscore Depression Inventory for Children MHA-TP Microhemagglutination-treponema pallidum test MI Motivational interviewing

MMD Mild and/or moderate mental disabilities MMPI Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory

MMPI-A Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory—Adolescent

MPH Methylphenidate

MSE Mental status examination MSM Men who have sex with men

MST Multisystem therapy

MST Multisystemic therapy

MTA Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with ADHD MTFC Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care

MTFC-A Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care—Adolescents MTO Moving to opportunity

NAATs Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests

NASP National Association of School Psychologists NCCEV National Center for Children Exposed to Violence NCCHC National Commission on Correctional Health Care NCJFCJ National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges NCJTP National Criminal Justice Treatment Practices Survey NCLB, 2001 No Child Left Behind Act

NCMHJJ National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice NCTSN National Child Traumatic Stress Network

NEO-FFI NEO-Five Factor Inventory NFP Nurse-Family Partnership

NICHD National Institute of Child and Human Development NIDA National Institute on Drug Abuse

NIH National Institutes of Health NIMH National Institute of Mental Health

NREPP Registry of Evidence-based Program and Practices NSA National Survey of Adolescents

OARS Client-centered counseling skills ODD Oppositional defiant disorder

OJJDP Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention OMHRC Oregon Youth Mental Health Referral Checklist OROS Osmotic-controlled release oral delivery system OVC Office for Victims of Crime

Pa Paranoia

PAI-A Personality Assessment Inventory-Adolescent

[AU5]

[AU6]

[AU7]

471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491

492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508

509 510 511 512 513 514

515

516

Uncorrected Proof

Pap Papanicolaou

PCIT Parent–child interaction therapy PCL:YV Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version

Pd Psychopathic deviate

PDD Pervasive developmental disorders PDR Parent Daily Report checklist

PENS Psychological Ethics and National Security PHDCN Project on Human Development in Chicago

Neighborhoods

PID Pelvic inflammatory disease

PINS/CHINS Person or child in need of supervision

PIRLS Progress in International Reading Literacy Study PISA Program for International Student Assessment

PKC Protein kinases, C

PP Private Practitioner Model PPC Positive peer culture

PPV and NPV Positive and negative predictive values PRKCG Protein kinase C gamma type

PTE Potentially traumatic events PTSD Posttraumatic stress disorder PTSD-RI UCLA PTSD Reaction Index PYC Project Youth Connect

RADS-2 Reynolds Adolescent Depression Scale—Second Edition RC-MAS Revised Manifest Anxiety Scale

RCT Randomized controlled trial

RCT Randomized placebo-controlled trials RCTs Randomized controlled trials

ROC Receiver operating characteristic

RPR Rapid plasma reagin

RRFT Risk reduction through family therapy RSTI Risk-Sophistication-Treatment Inventory

RT Relaxation training

SAMHSA Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

SASSI-3 Substance Abuse Subtle Screening Inventory, third edition SAVRY Structural Assessment of Violence Risk for Youth

SB-5 Stanford–Binet Intelligence Scales—Fifth Edition SCDJJ South Carolina Department of Juvenile Justice SCIP Social-cognitive information-processing SED Serious emotional disturbance

SGFP Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists SiHLE Sistas Informing, Healing, Living and Empowering SIR Statistical Information on Recidivism Scale SLC6 Solute Carrier Family 6

SLD Specific Learning Disabilities SNP Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms

SORNA Sexual Offender Registration and Notification Act of 2006

[AU8]

[AU9]

517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538

539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548

549

550

551

552

553

554

555

556

557

558

559

560

561

562

563

Uncorrected Proof

SPEP Standardized Program Evaluation Protocol SES Socioeconomic status

SPARCS is a group intervention that was designed to address the needs of adolescents who have experienced chronic trauma, may still be living with ongoing stress, and are experiencing problems in several areas of functioning

SPI Student Press Initiative

SPJ Structured professional judgment SS Seeking safety therapy

SSIS Social Skills Improvement System SSRI Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor STD Sexually transmitted diseases STIs Sexually transmitted infections STRP Short Tandem Repeat Polymorphisms SUD Substance use disorder

SUQ Service Utilization Questionnaire SVJ Serious and violent juvenile offenders

SVORI Serious and Violent Offender Reentry Initiative SYRF Survey of Youth in Residential Facilities

TARGET © Trauma Affect Regulation: Guide for Education and Therapy

TAT Thematic Apperception Test TB Pulmonary tuberculosis TCAs Tricyclic antidepressants

TD Tardive dyskinesia

TEs Traumatic events

TESI Traumatic Events Screening Instrument TESI Traumatic Experiences Screening Instrument TFAPb2 Transcription factor AP-2 beta

TF-CBT Trauma focused cognitive behavior therapy TF-CBT Trauma-focused cognitive-behavioral therapy

TF-CBTWeb is a free Web-based training program for clinicians holding a master’s degree or higher

TN True negatives

TP True positives

TRAAY Treatment recommendations for the use of antipsychotics for aggressive youth

TSCC Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children

TSC-CPTS Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children—Posttraumatic Stress Symptoms

TST Trauma Systems Therapy

TST-SA Traumatic stress and abusing substances WASI Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence WBR Weekly Behavior Report

WIAT Wechsler Individual Achievement Test WIC Women, infants, and children

WISC-IV Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fourth Edition

[AU10]

[AU11]

564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582

583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605

606

607

608

609

610

Uncorrected Proof

WJ-ACH Woodcock Johnson Tests of Achievement Revised WJ-III/3, WJ-R Woodcock–Johnson Test of Educational Achievement,

Third Edition or Revised

WSIPP Washington State Institute for Public Policy

YLS/CMI Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory

611 612 613 614

615

Uncorrected Proof

Author Queries

Chapter No.: FM

Queries Details Required Author’s Response

AU1 Both “Cognitive behavioral intervention for trauma in schools” and “Cognitive behavioral intervention for traumatized students” are given as the expansion for the acronym “CBITS.” Please check.

AU2 Please provide definitions for the terms “DISC Version 2.3 and EARL-20B and EARL-21G”.

AU3 Please check and confirm if the term “IEPs” can be removed from the list since

“IEP” is already listed.

AU4 Please note that the term “JSOAP-II: Juvenile Sex Offender Assessment Protocol”

has been repeated twice and it has been deleted.

AU5 The term “MST” is same for both definitions “Multisystem therapy and Multi- systemic therapy”. Please check.

AU6 Please check the term “NREPP” for the definition “Registry of Evidence-based Program and Practices”.

AU7 Please check the term “OARS” for the definition “Client-Centered Counseling Skills”.

AU8 Please check if “RCT” should be the abbreviation for the definition “Randomized placebo-controlled trials.”

AU9 Please check and confirm if “RCTs” can be deleted since the term “RCT” and its corresponding definition have been given earlier.

AU10 The term “TESI” is same for both the definitions “Traumatic Events Screening Instrument and Traumatic Experiences Screening Instrument”. Please check.

AU11 Note that there are two definitions for the term “TF-CBT”. Please clarify.

1

Uncorrected Proof

E.L. Grigorenko (ed.), Handbook of Juvenile Forensic Psychology and Psychiatry, DOI 10.1007/978-1-4614-0905-2_1, © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

1

This handbook offers insights and guidance illuminating the many points at which the prac- tice of mental health and the juvenile justice system intersect today. It comes at a promising time. Juvenile justice officials increasingly under- stand the critical role that mental health services play in rehabilitating the youth in their care. At the same time, juvenile justice reformers seek ways to connect youth to the behavioral health services they need without having courts become the primary means for youth to access care.

Budget pressures are forcing states to be more careful about how they spend their juvenile jus- tice funds, and communities are searching for ways to keep youth in programs closer to home rather than relying on expensive, sometimes less effective out-of-home placements for youth far from their families and other supports. Mental health care providers play critical roles in these public policy dialogues, while also fulfilling essential evaluation and treatment functions in the community, through the courts, and in locked settings. The authors brought together in this publication have produced rich resources that can inform both policy and practice.

This introduction offers a bird’s-eye view of some of the mental health-related challenges fac- ing juvenile justice policy makers and advocates.

These issues form the landscape that treatment providers must navigate when working with youth and their families, and they also demon- strate the importance of mental health profes- sionals’ involvement in the discourse about how to serve court-involved youth most effectively.

Youth involved in the juvenile justice system bring with them experiences and characteristics shaped by a common theme: most have been failed by one or more adults or systems meant to protect and serve them. As many authors in Part V of this handbook acknowledge, youths’ histories of exposure to trauma and related PTSD are sig- nificant and often overlooked problems in juvenile justice. Antonis Katsiyannis and David Barrett in their chapter on offenders with disabilities discuss how the unmet needs of youth with educational disabilities contribute to their disproportionate representation among the juvenile justice popula- tion. In addition, youth with child welfare histo- ries represent between 9 and 29% of youth in the juvenile justice system (Smith and Thornberry 1995), and as much as 42% of youth in probation placement (Halemba et al. 2004). Youth who have experienced foster care are more likely to recidi- vate and end up deeper in the system as well (Alltucker et al. 2006 cited in Chap. 33). John Chapman observes that a “driving factor” contrib- uting to the appearance of youth with mental health needs in the juvenile justice system is fami- lies’ inability to access mental health care in their communities. Thus, juvenile justice officials must find ways to help youth with a host of needs that other systems before them have failed to meet.

D. Shoenberg, JD ( * )

Center for Children’s Law and Policy, 1701 K Street, NW, Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20006, USA e-mail: dshoenberg@cclp.org

Introduction

Dana Shoenberg

1

2

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

Uncorrected Proof

Mitigating the Harmful Qualities of Correctional Environments

As policy makers have come to acknowledge the prevalence of youth with mental health disorders and trauma histories in the juvenile justice sys- tem, they have begun to grapple with how and where to serve them effectively. Anyone who has spent much time in a locked juvenile justice facil- ity recognizes that youth detention centers and correctional facilities (or “training schools”) are among the least equipped places to meet the men- tal health needs of youth. In fact, punitive cor- rectional environments, complete with their hardware, isolation, and displacement of youth from their families and schools, often exacerbate symptoms and are poor environments in which to try to establish a therapeutic relationship. One- third of detained youth identified with depression developed their symptoms during their incarcera- tion (Kashani et al. 1980), and preventing youth suicide is an ongoing concern in juvenile justice facilities (Hayes 2004). Detention of youth is not only the most significant factor increasing the odds of recidivism (Benda and Tollet 1999), but it also increases the probability that youth will end up deeper in the system, even when controlling for severity of the youth’s offense (Florida Office of State Courts Administrator 2003). Lenore Engel and her colleagues point out the important role that psychiatrists play in protecting youth at imminent risk of self-harm or with disabling and dangerous symptoms of major psychiatric disor- der. Such youth should be treated in psychiatric settings rather than in detention or secure place- ment, and psychiatrists must be advocates for moving youth to appropriate treatment settings when juvenile facilities cannot provide for their safety and well-being.

In both detention and post-adjudication secure placement, mental health providers frequently encounter punitive and decidedly antitherapeutic practices among custody personnel. In many places, custody staff curse at youth and otherwise demean them. Often direct care staff lack training to help them understand the needs of youth in their care and see their roles more as security

guards than youth development specialists.

Facilities that lack structured programming, effective behavior management systems, and solid staff training often rely on harmful punitive practices, such as isolation and physical and mechanical restraint, in order to control behaviors they do not understand or cannot manage. Mental health professionals are often asked to visit youth in isolation, and even sometimes when they are restrained, to check on their well-being and to ensure timely response to mental health crises.

These are challenging environments in which to provide effective mental health care, but mental health professionals can play key roles in mitigat- ing punitive environments in detention and place- ment facilities. Faye Taxman and her colleagues provide a stark assessment of the limited rehabili- tative and therapeutic services provided in most placement facilities in their chapter examining services for youth in closed settings, finding that most fail to deliver evidence-based practices or treatments likely to improve the life prospects of youth. Meanwhile, Angela Wood and her col- leagues describe the developments in correctional practice in more hopeful terms, outlining training approaches that can bring the respectful, thera- peutic engagement strategies of motivational interviewing techniques to correctional settings.

It is clear that programming in out-of-home place- ment facilities needs to catch up to the strides in research and program development that have occurred in community settings.

Mental health professionals working in cor- rectional settings have opportunities to help cus- tody staff understand more about the youth in their care. Custody staff training programs often fail to include key topics, including adolescent development, differing responses of kids with mental illness to strict rules and directions, effec- tive strategies for working with youth with men- tal illness, the harms that excessive isolation and restraint can cause, understanding youth with developmental disabilities, trauma-informed care, and other behavioral health concepts.

Mental health professionals can play key roles in educating custody personnel, both formally and informally, about these topics, but they must spend time where the youth live and seek out

65 66

67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

Uncorrected Proof

conversations with custody staff in order to maximize these opportunities.

In many facilities, service contracts leave men- tal health, education, and other professionals working in separate silos. Facilities are more likely to serve youth effectively when staff from various disciplines collaborate to create behavior management and intervention plans for youth with special needs. Professionals governed by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA 1996), the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA 1974), and other confi- dentiality protections must remain mindful of their legal responsibilities, but can still find ways to share limited, helpful information to coordinate and improve services to youth and their families.

Interdisciplinary case planning and follow-up are surprisingly absent from many youth detention and correctional facilities, but can help establish common goals for behavior management and treatment of residents with special needs, and are recommended practice (National Commission on Correctional Health Care 2004). Where profes- sionals believe that it would be valuable to share information protected by confidentiality laws, agencies can develop information-sharing agree- ments and consents (Wiig et al. 2008). Agencies must, of course, be ever mindful that what looks to one agency like helpful flow of information to better serve youth may look more like excessive sharing of protected information to others (Soler and Breglio 2010). In their chapter about education for youth in correctional settings, Candace Mulcahy and Peter Leone reinforce the need for collaboration and effective communication among educators, custodial personnel, and mental health professionals—collaboration that is critical when tailoring individual interventions and supports and planning for youth reentry into the community.

In addition, informal discussions with individ- ual staff in order to help them understand the challenges presented by youth in their care are opportunities for mental health professionals to educate their colleagues, and can take place without revealing confidential information.

Furthermore, mental health professionals can play important roles in after-incident reviews to help custodial staff and others understand, analyze,

and work to resolve the circumstances that may have led to a youth’s violent, self-harming, or oth- erwise disruptive behavior. Those in positions to negotiate mental health contracts and staffing plans should not overlook these extra responsi- bilities of formal and informal staff education and collaborative planning along with screening, assessment, direct treatment, and crisis interven- tion functions when estimating staff capacity and cost. They should also provide for adequate staff- ing to work with youth on their substance abuse problems. As Sarah Feldstein and her colleagues point out in their chapter on serving dually diag- nosed youth, there is a significant gap between the needs of dually diagnosed youth and the resources and treatment available through juvenile justice programs today. In many facilities, we see little if any attempt to address substance abuse needs of youth unless the facility specializes in drug treat- ment. The functions described above should be considered integral to the work of mental health providers in detention and correctional settings, and are invaluable to help mitigate the harsh reali- ties of many facilities.

Preventing Juvenile Justice from Becoming the De Facto Mental Health System for At-Risk Youth

A critical question policy makers face is just how comprehensive mental health treatment should be in pre-adjudication detention centers, where the main function is to hold youth safely pending adjudication (Migdole and Robbins 2007). As a general matter, federal law requires that juvenile justice facilities meet youths’ mental health needs and keep them safe from harm in accordance with accepted professional judgment, practice, or stan- dards (Youngberg v. Romeo 1982; Estelle v. Gamble 1976; Bowring v. Godwin 1977). Individual state laws provide additional mandates as well. In recent U. S. Department of Justice investigations and liti- gation about conditions in state and local juvenile detention facilities, agencies have been required to provide mental health services in the following areas: suicide risk assessment and response

159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206

207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230

231 232 233

234

235

236

237

238

239

240

241

242

243

244

245

246

247

248

249

250

Uncorrected Proof

(Marion County Agreement 2008), screening, assessment, treatment plans and services (Maryland Agreement 2007), response to crisis, coordination with other staff to meet youths’ needs, medication management, tracking lab results, counseling to ameliorate target symptoms of identified mental illness, and collaboration with other staff to develop behavior modification plans and care for suicidal youth (Los Angeles County Agreement 2004). Recent private litigation has included simi- lar requirements as well as reentry planning (Jerry M. v. District of Columbia 2007).

Many authors in this handbook cite data from detention centers reporting rates of youth who meet the criteria for a mental health disorder as high as 70% (see, e.g., Teplin et al. 2002). While not all youth who could be diagnosed with a dis- order need treatment, given these reported rates of youth who could be diagnosed with a mental health disorder, one might conclude that juvenile detention centers should be the locations for the most sophisticated and comprehensive treatment available. After all, there is a clear need among the population and the opportunity to provide significant care while youth are “captive audi- ences” required to be there. However, if deten- tion-based services exceed what is available in the community, judges and court staff seeking to help youth may be more likely to incarcerate them in order to get them the help they need, sometimes regardless of the youth’s actual risk to the community. Striking the balance between ensuring that the juvenile justice system does not become a “portal to care” and meeting the mental health needs of incarcerated youth is challenging.

For detailed guidance about appropriate mental health care in a detention setting, readers may find useful the standards developed by the Annie E. Casey Foundation to guide jurisdictions wish- ing to assess their detention facility conditions, Detention Facility Self-Assessment: A Practice Guide to Juvenile Detention Reform (Annie E.

Casey Foundation 2006). As Tom Grisso has noted in his insightful piece on the progress and perils of the juvenile justice and mental health movement, the obvious long-range solution is to improve community mental health services for youth and in the short term to be wary of

innovations that may draw youth into the juvenile justice system for care (Grisso 2007). And as John Chapman explains in his chapter on court clinics, courts can support community-based ser- vice development by referring youth for assess- ment and treatment in the community rather than in detention where possible.

Protecting Youth from Self-Incrimination

Despite strict legal requirements of confidential- ity in most circumstances, many jurisdictions have not taken adequate steps to protect the infor- mation shared in therapeutic relationships. Some states have found ways to protect youths’ treat- ment records from becoming evidence in their delinquency or criminal proceedings. However, in most states, the risk that information shared with psychologists, psychiatrists, and others may be used against them in delinquency and criminal proceedings compromises the pretrial relation- ship between mental health service providers and their clients in court and detention settings (Rosado and Shah 2007). Mental health profes- sionals in states without protections from self- incrimination in mental health treatment must navigate their responsibility to provide care, the desire to protect the trusting relationships they work to establish with clients, and the prospect that they could be called as witnesses. In walking this tightrope, some choose to limit their record- keeping in hope that their subpoenaed files may not be appealing to prosecutors, or they avoid topics that could lead to self-incrimination in their conversations with clients.

Mental health professionals and others should place a high priority on promoting legislative change to allow effective pre-adjudication screen- ing, assessment, and supportive care without the risk that the information will wind up in court.

Given that some youth wait months or years for court proceedings to conclude, especially those charged in adult criminal court, youth should be able to develop effective therapeutic relationships free from the worry of undesirable exposure of

251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298

299 300 301 302 303 304 305

306 307

308

309

310

311

312

313

314

315

316

317

318

319

320

321

322

323

324

325

326

327

328

329

330

331

332

333

334

335

336

337

338

339

340

341

342

Uncorrected Proof

their thoughts and shared experiences. Mental health practitioners have the opportunity to share their concerns about the way the lack of self- incrimination protections compromises their work, and can bring together representatives across disciplines to work toward change in their individual states.

Movement Toward Community-Based Care

Ideally, youth with psychiatric disorders would have their needs met outside of locked correc- tional environments. Some communities are beginning to build solid continuums of alterna- tives to detention and secure placement, and to divert youth with mental health needs from the juvenile justice system altogether. Promising work is occurring to help law enforcement offi- cials identify youth with mental health needs and refer them for care (National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice 2009). Other commu- nities have focused on helping schools provide on-site mental health services or behavior inter- ventions to keep school-based misconduct from resulting in arrest (National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice 2009; Leech 2009).

Some communities are finding ways to divert youth to mental health care after arrest but before they are formally processed in the courts (National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice 2009). Jean Adnopoz and her colleagues in their chapter describe the Intensive In-Home Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Service (IICAPS) treatment model, which Connecticut courts are using as a preferred in-home mental health inter- vention for delinquent youth with mental health needs and those at risk of out-of-home placement or hospitalization.

National statistics indicate that jurisdictions are recognizing the value of community-based services. Out-of-home placements have declined over the past few years from a high of 109,000 in 2000 to below 81,000 in the latest data set from 2008 (Sickmund 2010). A touchstone of this change is the increased investment many com-

munities are making in community-based, evi- dence-based practices, such as Multisystemic Therapy, Functional Family Therapy, and Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care, which Paul Boxer and Sara Goldstein describe in their chapter on best practices in treating juvenile offenders.

“Evidence-based” has become the watchword for funding priorities, but not everyone under- stands the term in the same way, as Nancy Guerra and Kirk Williams discuss in their chapter on evidence-based practices. Some are just looking for “proven effective” programs or programs with some measurable amount of success, while others find anything less than the rigorous require- ments of random assignment of youth to experi- mental and control groups, sustained effect and replicability—the hallmarks of the Blueprints for Violence Prevention programs—to be insuffi- cient (Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence 2010). As several authors in this hand- book point out, while the name-brand Blueprints programs provide a package of services, individ- ual strategies identified as effective by Lipsey and colleagues may be incorporated in programs that have not themselves been rigorously tested (Lipsey et al. 2000). There is still much to be learned to determine programs’ effectiveness for particular populations, such as girls or members of individual racial and ethnic groups who may respond differently to in-home vs. out-of-home interventions.

Advocates have begun to lay out the argu- ments for legislators, agency directors, and others to understand how beneficial and cost-effective these services can be so that they can invest in productive forms of care and restructure state funding systems to incentivize keeping kids close to home (Justice Policy Institute 2009). Mental health professionals can be important contribu- tors to decisions juvenile justice agencies and courts make about where, how, and for whom to establish new programs to serve youth effectively, and they must be at the forefront of developing new programs that can be studied and become

“evidence-based.”

The shift that has begun to emerge toward more community-based and evidence-based care

343 344 345 346 347 348 349

350 351

352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386

387

388

389

390

391

392

393

394

395

396

397

398

399

400

401

402

403

404

405

406

407

408

409

410

411

412

413

414

415

416

417

418

419

420

421

422

423

424

425

426

427

428

429

430

431

432

433

434

Uncorrected Proof

has been supported and fuelled by some signifi- cant juvenile justice reform initiatives over the past several years. The Annie E. Casey Foundation’s Juvenile Detention Alternatives Initiative (JDAI) has grown from a handful of pilot sites in 1992 to over 125 sites in 30 states and the District of Columbia. The initiative brings together collaboratives of juvenile justice stake- holders, mostly at the county or parish level, to gather and analyze data about their incarcerated youth populations and implement policy, practice, and other changes to reduce reliance on secure confinement while improving public safety and reducing racial and ethnic disparities. JDAI has recently begun to move toward statewide applica- tions (Annie E. Casey Foundation 2011). Since 2005, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation’s Models for Change Initiative has worked with leaders in states that have initiated juvenile justice reforms and that are likely to influence national reform. The Models for Change Action Networks in Juvenile Indigent Defense, Disproportionate Minority Contact, and Mental Health/Juvenile Justice have created peer learning networks and served as laboratories for innova- tion. States involved in the Mental Health/Juvenile Justice Action Network have developed new diversion strategies, develop training for juvenile justice personnel on mental health related issues, and improved involvement of youths’ families in mental health and juvenile justice programs (John and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation 2011).

Through both of these initiatives, and with the help of federal funding, some communities have begun to make strides in reducing racial and eth- nic disparities at various points where youth have contact with the juvenile justice system. As Kimberly Kempf-Leonard notes in her chapter discussing race and sex disparity in juvenile jus- tice processing, the juvenile justice system cre- ates a “cumulative minority disadvantage.” Youth of color receive harsher dispositions than white youth, even for similar offenses, and the overrep- resentation of youth of color in the system grows greater at each progression deeper into the system (National Council on Crime and Delinquency 2007). In 1988, the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA) first

required states to “address” disproportionate minority confinement (JJDPA 1988), and then made it a condition of federal funding in 1992 (JJDPA 1992). In 2002, Congress required that states address disproportionality at all contact points with the juvenile justice system (JJDPA 2002). Despite the imprecise wording of this requirement, some communities have advanced beyond studying and writing reports about the problem to finding real solutions. These jurisdic- tions develop strategies that target their individual points of overrepresentation of youth of color and the myriad factors that can cause disparities, often reducing the numbers of youth of color securely detained or placed (Szanyi 2008–2011).

The diverse stakeholder groups that have been the driving forces behind racial and ethnic dis- parities reduction work and the JDAI and Models for Change initiatives more broadly have, in the best cases, involved representation from the men- tal health community. Mental health profession- als who wish to contribute to broadscale systems reform in their communities would do well to seek out existing collaboratives in their commu- nities or spearhead new initiatives to promote data-driven reforms.

Valuing and Involving Families

Juvenile justice professionals have come to appreciate the central role that families must play in their children’s rehabilitation. Families often feel shut out of decision making about their chil- dren and their needs, and demonization of par- ents by some juvenile justice officials can lead to a lack of trust and communication. Juvenile jus- tice agencies committed to the core value of meaningful family involvement have begun to foster growth of youth-family team decision making for case planning, expansion of opportu- nities for families to visit their children in secure facilities, increased promotion of cultural compe- tence, and improved information and records sharing with parents and guardians about their children’s care. Pennsylvania has engaged in statewide efforts to involve families more fully in

435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482

483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508

509

510

511

512

513

514

515

516

517

518

519

520

521

522

523

524

525

526