Reducing recidivism among court-referred juveniles in the justice system

Reducing Recidivism Among Juveniles

Research topic and its importance

This study focuses on modern juveniles, aka court-referred youth, within the justice system. An individual who engages in illegal or proscribed activities, banned by federal, state, and/or local codes, is defined as a juvenile delinquent (Granville, 2007). The matrix of authorities involved in the juvenile correction system include the Department of Juvenile Corrections, the police, probation, prosecutor, court, and detention (Nissen, 2006). From a historical perspective, the intent of the juvenile justice system has been to prefer rehabilitation vs. punitive measures such as incarceration (Granville, 2007). This general consensus is founded upon the premise that juvenile offenders, as individuals lacking adult cognitive development and understanding, are not wholly responsible for their illegal actions (Binder, 1988).

B. Paper Overview

The topic of the paper revolves around the efforts required to reduce the levels of recidivism amongst Juveniles. The paper thus tackles the topic by dividing the paper into different sections. The first section is introduction which introduces the research topic and why the topic is important; provides an overview of the paper; provides a review of the literature; and states the research problem. The second section then tackles with methods where we describe the nature of the study; discuss how the study was conducted; describe the choice of organization; and the selection of stakeholder. The third section, results, highlights the findings of the research; whether the research results confirm hypothesis or research question; and whether or not they caused us to modify or reject the hypothesis or research question. The final section focuses on discussion and includes a thorough analysis and interpretation of the study's results; reasons for the findings; meanings of the findings mean; and general conclusions.

Work of community agencies with court-referred youth

Both psychological and criminal justice fields of study are the predominant source of the analysis of juvenile corrections to date. Juvenile justice corrections are approached from two potentially antithetical directions, rehabilitative vs. sanction-based (Lipsey & Cullen, 2007). Rehabilitation programs focus on instilling lasting behavioral changes through training in methods to subvert negative behaviors, assisting juveniles with development of social skills, and facilitation of personal growth. In contrast, reduction of recidivism via sanction-based programs utilizes fear of consequences and aversive programs (Steinberg, 2009).

Among the general population of juveniles, there are certain predictors of those likely to indulge in criminal behavior. Predictors of repeated offenses, offense severity and judicial disposition (incarceration, diversion, or prosecution) were studied by Barrett, Katsiyannis, and Zhang (2010). Correlating factors include (1) adverse family experiences, (2) age at first arrest, (3) drug use, and (4) ethnicity.

Adverse Family Experiences: Recidivism is associated with family experiences that are less than positive. The social characteristics and patterns of both the family and the child may be predictors of delinquency (Lipsey & Derzon, 1998). There is a four-fold higher likelihood that foster care experience will result in early delinquency relative to those children with stable home environments. Early-onset of delinquency is twice as likely to occur when a family member has been convicted of a felony. Farrington et al. (2001) found that 43% of all arrests came from only 8% of families in a three-generation study. Future violent behavior has also been associated with childhood abuse, whether neglect, physical abuse, sexual abuse, or emotional abuse (Hoeve et al., 2009).

Age at First Arrest and Ethnicity: First, there is a clear correlation between age at first arrest and recidivism. The rate of recidivism is also impacted, and/or predicted, by ethnicity. As reported by Dalun et al. (2011), data for the year 2006 revealed a higher proportion of African-Americans involved in juvenile crimes. As many as 31% of property crimes and 51% of violent crimes were committed by African-American youths, who represent only 17% of the total population of juveniles (Snyder, 2008). While African-American juveniles were only 38% of juveniles in custody, the total minority offenders reported by Snyder and Sickmund (2006) was 61% of incarcerated juveniles.

Drug Use: There is a strong correlation between juvenile recidivism and drug use, as shown by Niarhos and Routh (1992), who studied court and assessment records for 234 juvenile males. Their data indicated that recidivism significantly correlated with drug use, and could be used as a predictor for recidivism. As reported by the Office of Applied Studies (2003), comparative rates of drug use for juvenile delinquents is three-fold greater than that of the total juvenile population, and it is generally the case that non-delinquent youths are less involve in drug use than delinquent youths (Dembo, Wareham, & Schmeidler, 2007). Recidivism rates are higher for juveniles with a history of drug use as compared with juveniles who do not use drugs; early use of substances also is correlated with a greater involvement in chronic illegal behavior and more severe offenses (Belenko, 2006).

Reduction of crime can be impacted by both family- and community-based programs. Self-improvement programs, focused upon both the families and the juvenile have a clear effect. Early intervention and support have been shown to be key elements, with a primary focus on youth who are at risk and their families. Optimal outcomes occur when both youths and families participate in a program having long-term planning and goals, although these programs are insufficient to provide a wholly problem-free adolescence. Through provision of positive channels for activities, community- and family-based programs deter crime in the local community. Outreach programs for youthful offenders are likely to decrease recidivism. Even programs providing minimal help can be useful for juveniles who lack job skills, lack jobs, and have not even finished high school. Without assistance they are at immediate high risk of recidivism the instant they are freed from incarceration (Barnes, n.d).

Nugent and Paddock (1996) evaluated juvenile offenders who had been through the traditional legal system vs. those who were involved in a system of mediation. Their data revealed that for 100 juveniles, mediation resulted in lowered rates of recidivism. As shown by Nugent and Paddock, the recidivism rate for individuals who participated in mediation was 20% within the first year, in comparison with 35% for those juveniles going through the conventional court system. Family structure has been shown to relate to recidivism rates as well. Umbriet (1994) noted in a comparative study of juveniles who had gone through mediation, that mediation had a significant impact. He evaluated two groups of juvenile delinquents, comparing 903 different offenders. This group consisted of 15% female youth and 85% male youth, to evaluate recidivism rates when mediation was involved. Umbriet (1994) concluded that mediation resulted in fewer subsequent crimes than for juveniles who had not participated in mediation.

D. Research Problem

The focus of this work is to address Latina/o juvenile delinquents and the progress achieved with a program of psycho-education. An illustration for community service providers is provided by this work, as an example of publication and program evaluation; this also directly addresses a lack in the literature in the field. This inquiry addresses the effectiveness of a focused life-skills psycho-educational system on juvenile recidivism. In particular, a lower rate of recidivism is hypothesized to occur for youth completing a counseling program at a university-operated community center than for matched juveniles participating in probationary programs in the community.

Methods

A. Nature of the Study

This study is exploratory in nature, at least in part due to the inability to fully control for variables that were extraneous. To some extent, research on juvenile populations is limited. This may occur due to the following factors: (a) difficulty in measuring recidivism; (b) failure of judges and associated authorities to support such research; (c) statistical control issues; and (d) inability to access data for those whose records are controlled not only because they are minors but also because they have been adjudicated (doubly protected population). Because the juvenile population is transient, it is difficult to track; as well recidivism is not a normally distributed variable. While there are obvious weaknesses in the study, its focus on accountability, efficacy, and counseling outcomes is an important approach to evaluation of counseling effects on recidivism. This research presents evidential support for counseling and its utility in treatment of youth to prevent or at least deter recidivism (Lancaster et al., 2011).

B. How the study was conducted

A court-referred university community center counseling program was used as the selection source for 120 youth participants for this study. It was not feasible to obtain a control group that was randomly assigned because this study gathered data ex post facto. The control group, 120 juveniles, had previously participated in probationary programs that were community-based, but distinct from the university counseling center.

C. Choice of organization

These individuals were selected from justice database of juveniles from the identical court system and geographic area, including the same six judges. To evaluate the difference between control and treatment groups with respect to recidivism, a post-test-only control group design was used. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention recommend analysis of recidivism only up to two years from the original registered offense. Their recommendation was used for this study, in order to address concerns related to the use of recidivism as an outcome variable. The use of a control group that was derived from the same court and geographical systems provided some regulation of inherent differences that may arise in evaluation of juvenile recidivism rates. Because the research design was quasi-experimental, it was not possible to empirically establish conditions of treatment for the control group (Lancaster et al., 2011).

D. Selection of stakeholder (control group)

Demographic characteristics of the treatment group had been utilized to select members of the control group, essentially using non-probability sampling. Variables used for matching included status of first offense, sex, ethnicity, and age. In general, the first offense was either felonious (assault and/or property damage), or a misdemeanor (theft less than $1,000, truancy, running away from home). The counseling program focused on life skills in a psycho-educational group for the treatment group juveniles. Weekly sessions had embedded acquisition and training related to pro-social behaviors, thus denoting it as 'life skills oriented' (Kadish et al., 2001). Life skills addressed included: substance abuse, identifying feelings, building self-esteem, healthy coping skills, healthy communication, triggers for anger, emotional triggers in general, familial patterns, and stress management. During intake, informal and formal assessment addressed client need, in order to appropriately address the topics for counseling (Lancaster et al., 2011).

Results

A. Findings

Comparison of the control and treatment groups revealed recidivism rates that were statistically significant. During the 24-month period of data collection, 60% of the treatment group (those youth who received counseling) had no instances of re-offense. In those cases where juveniles did re-offend and had received counseling, 20% of the treatment group, half of the re-offendees acted within the first three months of treatment. Thus, if the juveniles passed a three-month marker without re-offense, they were generally unlikely to re-offend within two years after program completion. After three months, only one fifth of the treatment group re-offended, whereas 54% of the control group juveniles reoffended; 42% of the control group re-offenses occurred within one year. The work of Dimitrov (2009) revealed that when standardized residuals have an absolute value greater than 2.0, these data are major contributors towards statistical significance.

B. Research confirms hypothesis

A clear-cut pattern of behavioral differences was observed between the recidivism rates of the control and treatment groups, even though these data did not display standardized residuals that were major contributors. This is however, not surprising, given the quasi-experimental limits and moderate-to-small size of the effect. The life-skills counseling program offered to juveniles in the treatment group, as contrasted with the absence of treatment for the control group, did result in demonstrable differences.

C. Possible modification in hypothesis

While juveniles in the control group were likely to re-offend anywhere from six to 24 months after their initial acts, the treatment group adolescents were less likely to re-offend within a24-month period, and less likely to re-offend within three months (Lancaster et al., 2011).

Discussion

A. Analysis and Interpretation

Counseling services had a significant impact on the re-offensive rate for Latina/o court-referred youths. Community-based intervention was successful in preventing re-offense for 60% of the treatment group. The life-skills treatment program lasted for seven weeks. Those clients who succeeded in not re-offending for three-months were more likely to continue without recidivism. While there are some who discount counseling as effective (Thomason, 2010), these data are promising in terms of demonstrating that counseling services have an impact on decreasing recidivism among juveniles. It is possible that a life-skills oriented psycho-educational program could be efficacious in decreasing the rate of recidivism for juveniles, in particular given that there was no service referral for the control group. Juveniles whose criminal offenses were misdemeanors or status offenses are likely to fare well in community-based counseling addressing life-skills. This may correlate with the treatment group identities. The efficacy of this treatment protocol on juveniles charged with more serious offenses should be evaluated. As well, regulation of treatment for control groups would also benefit future research (Lancaster et al., 2011).

B. Reasons for the findings

The design of this study was a particular strength, in spite of limitations inherent in quasi-experimental research. Status of first offense, sex, and age were generally equivalent in preliminary analyses. Those court-referred youth who underwent a life-skills community-based counseling program displayed a decrease in rates of recidivism. In contrast, those juveniles who did not receive counseling services did not show a comparative decrease in recidivism. This provides clear evidence that life-skills-based counseling program was effective. Among the youth studied, 87% were minorities, which also supports the utility of this program for minority groups (Lancaster et al., 2011).

C. Meanings or interpretations of the findings

Group counseling services in community- or school-based programs are often relied upon by counselors (Balkin & Leddick, 2005; Corey & Corey, 2006). Youth intervention programs and life skill programs can be used as part of a guidance curriculum. The seven-week program design is one that could readily be implemented within existing curricula and programs. The brevity of its nature permits ease in presentation of a recurring program that would involve new participants. This intervention is thus not only beneficial, but likely to be cost-effective, given the relatively short time-duration of the life-skills community-based counseling approach. Evidence-based data are provided in this study, the design of which is appropriate to model control of extraneous variables. Using this model, with support from the juvenile legal system, may readily provide decreases in recidivism that can be implemented easily as well as demonstrated to stakeholders. One must consider the need for a program evaluator as well as the role of the counselor as both a specialist in intervention and prevention of recidivism, particularly given the requirements of accountability (Erford, 2008).

D. Conclusions from findings

Evaluation and reporting of results by community counseling programs is necessary for construction of a wholly satisfactory and effective model of appropriate counseling for juvenile offenders. The need for further research is clearly imperative given that counseling programs have not to date had consistent results in reduction of recidivism. Future goals are to incorporate a qualitative component into programmatic evaluation processes, and thus to refine the programs and services. Focus on, and enhancement of those factors within the counseling program that clients found to be most helpful may assist in redefining current program approaches.