Study: Institutionalizing Youth in Not Effective

[DannyB II]

I dont know about studies,stats,symposiums or any of that anylitical shit. All I know about is me.
Wound up in psyciatric ward at 12,state school for boys at 13,foster care at 14,psyc ward at 15, straight at 15,detox at 19,jail at 20,detox at 21(x2) and again at 23. Outside of the medical need for detox,none of it did a godamn thing fo me but beat the fuck out of what miniscule amount of self esteem I had left.
   I cant see being locked up as positive,sorry. Some thing dont belong in a cage.

:shamrock:  :shamrock:
Kind da zeros right in on the problem and the solution. Yet we will go through a metal masturbation exercise trying to figure out the problem with no solution in site.
Some of you folks here are extremely educated in these fields or at least have knowledge what are some solutions for these children that can't stay in the homes do to their actions, their parents or the combination of both.
This is what I see on a continuous routine, not from a clinical or any type of treatment bases but from volunteering my time and being on 2 boards that deal with the homeless. Homeless families. Where the children have been neglected and children services is looking to place again for the upteenth time. I would love to have more options to suggest other then foster, group home, TC ....ect. Where do the children go that for all purposes have no parents that can take care of them or want to. They already feel like a animals, locking them up in these institutions because life is failing them seems most cruel.
Just a question??
Danny

[Whooter]

I can see where seamus is coming from.  After what he went through I don’t think he would advocate for anyone being sent to a anyplace that had four walls.  I don’t think I would either.  If there were more effective community based programs available to the public then the Therapeutic Boarding Schools  could be reserved exclusively for those children who were not helped by the local options.  This would help reduce the number of children being unnecessarily placed.

The struggle as I see it is how do they deal with these offenders (from the op link)?  There is no way that these kids can be helped on an outpatient basis.  The community would never allow it.  A local solution would have to include having these kids locked up 24/7 but to be close enough to family for them to be involved in family therapy.  So basically it would be the same as Therapeutic boarding schools only closer to home so that families without the means to travel could participate.

This is the solution that the state of Illinois came up with and so far seems to be very effective.



...

[Anne Bonney]

A juvenile justice study relevant to incarcerating youth in programs. Long-term study with more than 1300 youth.

Auntie Em

http://www.modelsforchange.net/reform-progress/57

New Data on Sanctions and Services Supports the Use of Non-Institutional Alternatives
Mar 9, 2010, LaWanda Johnson

Does placing youth who commit offenses in expensive, out-of-home placements improve their chances of not reoffending? New preliminary data from the Pathways to Desistance study reported by the MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Adolescent Development and Juvenile Justice suggests that, compared with probation, the answer may be “no” –even for youth who commit serious and sometimes violent offenses.

The data found that institutional placement – which includes both correctional and residential treatment facilities - appears to have no advantage over community-based services in addressing delinquency. For youth involved in ‘low-level’ offending, institutional placement raised their level of future offending by a statistically significant amount.  The study also found that most youth with serious felony offenses ceased to re-offend after their contact with the system, regardless of the intervention.  

“We see a lot of variability in these [youth], which means there are a lot of places for successful interventions and a lot of places where we can promote positive changes,” said University of Pittsburgh Professor Ed Mulvey, the Principal Investigator of the study.  “But as long as we continue to create policies that say once a kid commits a certain kind of crime that they are on the road to adult criminality, that’s just a bad assumption from the start.”

The Pathways to Desistance study is a multi-site collaborative project which followed 1,354 juvenile offenders for seven years after their conviction. The research is the most intense look to date at the results of sanctions and services provided to youth who have committed serious offenses. Dr. Mulvey believes it can be used to dispel the commonly held beliefs that these youth are destined for a life of serious criminal offending.

“This study underscores the importance of taking into account individual and developmental differences—that adolescents change, they grow out of these behaviors that got them into trouble, and can turn their lives around.  Youths who have committed serious offenses are not all the same, and not all headed for the same life of adult crime,” said Laurie Garduque, Director of Juvenile Justice for the MacArthur Foundation’s Program on Human and Community Development.

State advocates say the research supports many of their current reform efforts, and believe the study will help juvenile justice leaders steer systems struggling with conditions in juvenile institutions and help policymakers better manage dwindling public safety budgets towards better, more effective choices.

“We have been too heavy-handed with our use of out-of-home, institutional placements for youth,” stated Sarah Bryer, director of the National Juvenile Justice Network. “These findings support discontinuing the use of these types of placements in most cases, and provide political coverage to legislators who want to solve budget problems and help kids. They can be ‘tough on crime’ by supporting community-based alternatives.”

Reducing out of home placements: saving money and reducing re-offending in Illinois

States participating in the Models for Change Initiative have prioritized “right-sizing” their juvenile justice systems with innovative practices that have led to thousands of youth being diverted from out-of-home and institutional placements.  This has had significant cost-saving benefits, and has contributed to reductions in recidivism.

Since 2005, Illinois has been decreasing the number of youth committed to its state facilities by providing fiscal incentives that encourage communities to treat and rehabilitate their youth in community-based settings. Through Redeploy Illinois, a program supported by Models for Change grantees, Illinois youth who have committed serious offenses - that would have otherwise landed them in one of the state’s juvenile facilities—have been diverted to programs in their home communities where they receive help, guidance and supervision. After years of being a successful pilot program, legislation enacted in January 2010 made it a permanent program and permitted all of the state's 102 counties to apply for Redeploy Illinois services.

Tailoring interventions: assessment helps direct expensive interventions where most appropriate

In line with one of the Pathways report’s key findings – that there is no “typical” justice-involved youth -- other Models for Change states have been adopting risk/needs assessment tools to help determine the risk level and criminogenic needs of youth who offend. One such tool, the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY), is being used by probation officers and court officials in Louisiana to guide out-of-home placement decisions in hopes that use of these placements are restricted to those at highest risk for serious re-offending. According to Dr. Gina Vincent, co-director of the National Youth Screening and Assessment Project, tools like the SAVRY are needed to decrease subjectivity and increase the likelihood of successful community supervision and service delivery. She is conducting a study which examines if probation officers and court official are using SAVRY to its full advantage in Louisiana and to determine if this leads to lower placement and recidivism rates. She is conducting the same study in Pennsylvania using a similar tool, the Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI).

“The SAVRY and YLS/CMI are not just risk assessment tools; the tools help probation officers to make objective decisions based on the research that we know about youthful re-offending. It is the quintessential example of translating research into practice,” says Dr. Vincent. “Research indicates that human judgment is not a good indicator of who is really at-risk of serious re-offending. This tool enhances one’s ability to tell who’s most likely to reoffend, who will need the most intensive level of intervention, and which types of services are most likely to decrease one’s chances of re-offending.”

Pathways research highlights need for more innovation

Several states and jurisdictions have already begun rethinking how they handle juvenile offenders, including New York City, which recently announced plans to merge the city’s Department of Juvenile Justice into its child welfare agency in hopes of having a more therapeutic approach toward delinquency that will send fewer youth to institutional placements. Campaign for Youth Justice executive director, Liz Ryan, believes more states should follow suit.

“Why are states continuing to invest millions in a strategy that simply doesn’t work?” said Ryan.  “This study underscores the reasons why these large juvenile correctional institutions should be closed.  It’s an abysmal failure, it’s a poor investment and it’s a waste of taxpayers’ dollars. Furthermore, it harms kids.  States can and should do better.”

Funded in part by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Pathways study, which includes more than 24,000 interviews, covers a wide range of topics including psychological development, mental health, behavior, attitudes, family and community context, and relationship. The study has produced several briefs on serious adolescent offenders intended to provide policymakers and practitioners with analyses to help in the development of a more rational, effective and developmentally appropriate juvenile justice system. For more information on Pathways to Desistance, please write to the project coordinator, Carol Schubert, at schubertca@upmc.edu.