Apparently a memo was sent to teachers asking that the book be removed from their classrooms until further decisions were made regarding its continued inclusion in the curriculum.  thttp://www.cps.edu/News/Announcements/Pages/3_15_2013_PR1.aspx  This action led to a series of protests and media attention which was initiated by teachers and students at Lane Tech High School.

I am a firm believer in students having access to any and all books.  I support and participate in programming with Teachers for Social Justice but this protest initiated at Lane really unnerved me.  And here is why.

My youngest son attended Lane Tech for his freshman and sophomore year(2009-2011).

During my son’s two years at Lane Tech he was arrested and taken out of school in handcuffs twice – the first time being his first week of attending a voluntary orientation called Freshman Connections.  In both cases my son was questioned while I was made to wait out of his sight, panicked – knowing he was as terrified as I was.  Both times he was released after several hours of interrogation.  In both cases, he had done absolutely nothing wrong. Needless to say these experiences were two of several things at school that sent him on a downward spiral leaving him depressed, anxious, and unable to get out of bed in the morning.  His grades started slipping which further exacerbated his unwillingness to attend school.  Our family came close to falling apart.

As personal as I would like to make this, ours is far from the only story.  In 2010, 27,566 youth 17 and under were arrested in Chicago.  Of those, 20,930 were African-American. 5,418 were Hispanic and 936 were Caucasian.  Of those 17 and under 5,574 of those arrests happened on school property.  You can see the full report at http://www.project-nia.org/chicago-youth-justice.php   Please do not delude yourself into thinking these arrests were for serious offenses such as bringing a gun into school.  I understand that it makes us feel safer to believe that these kids have done something terrible and deserve to be introduced to the system in this way.  But perhaps it’s time to stop kidding ourselves about who we’ve been told the bad guys are.

So two weeks ago while the Persepolis conflict made national news I wondered. Where were the students and teachers protesting after the choice was made to allow the police to arrest my son during school hours, place him in handcuffs and lead him out during a passing period? They apparently knew they wanted to question him for weeks.  Why did the school collude to do this at that moment?    Why did so many student’s ire get raised at having a BOOK possibly removed from their classroom but not when THOUSANDS of black and brown boys and girls are removed from their classrooms every year?  Where are the horrified editorials?  Where are the signs?  Because it would be awful if one student were deprived of receiving the best education they can at CPS.  Right?  And yet the truth is books, and classrooms and diplomas are being taken out of the hands of so very many students every year.  Many will drop out.  And having had their first experience with the police IN school many will likely be placed on that conveyor belt now referred to as the school to prison pipeline.

My son did almost  drop out.  He started ninth grade having tested into a selective enrollment school in honors classes.  When we finally made the decision to pull him from Lane we were in a very different place.  We were able to transfer him to an alternative setting where he had space to heal and regain his sense of self worth. Most importantly he was mentored by two men who volunteer their time many hours per week to help boys like my son. He has turned his negative experience into a rallying cry to ACT. One of the many actions he has taken is to design and lead a “Know Your Rights” curriculum for youth throughout the city.

(My son opening for Jonathon Kozol)

We all need to help him and the other people struggling to bring this issue further into everyone’s consciousness.  Educate yourself.  Help fund a project.  Support the youth working for change.  If it has happened to you or someone you know encourage them to tell their story.   Perhaps you will be inspired to make a sign and stop traffic to not allow one more child to be locked up. Check out the Project Nia website http://www.project-nia.org/home.php and facebook page for updates on more action steps you can participate in.

This is not just my family’s problem.  It is not just a Chicago problem.  It is a national crisis.

North Carolina already has a dubious distinction when it comes to court-involved youth. Only North Carolina and New York set the upper age of juvenile court jurisdiction at 15, the lowest in the country. This means that in both states once you reach 16 you are considered an adult for all criminal prosecutions regardless of the alleged crime. Only two states do this – NC and NY.

Also, in North Carolina 13, 14, 15 year-olds charged with felonies can be prosecuted as adults. Current law, however, requires that in most cases a transfer hearing take place in the juvenile court where the juvenile court judge decides if the case warrants criminal prosecution. This is known as a Discretionary Judicial Waiver. HB 217 proposes to take the discretion away from juvenile court judges and put it in the hands of prosecutors. This would lead to more and unnecessary transfers. Prosecutors are not impartial and they are not required to conduct transfer hearings in the juvenile courts. Also, while judges’ decision are appeal-able, prosecutors’ decisions are not.

We know from years of study that transfer, in general, doesn’t work. Prosecuting more youth as adults will not make North Carolina safer and will cost the state money that could be better spent on prevention and interventions that work. Giving prosecutors the discretion to transfer youth  is the wrong way for North Carolina to go. North Carolina needs to move forward, not backward, on developing meaningful juvenile justice reform.

Learn more about HB 217 and the fight against it here from the Campaign for Youth Justice.

The photo above was taken at the Civil Rights Memorial at the Southern Poverty Law Center. It was created by Maya Lin (the same woman who created the Vietnam Memorial Wall in D.C.) and features the biblical quote used by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. at the beginning of the Montgomery Bus Boycott and again in his I Have a Dream speech…”Until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a might stream.”

It’s clear that Dr. King was a man committed to justice. But I can’t think of a time when that included a call to punish those who committed heinous crimes against him or others involved in the movement. He certainly had ample opportunities to do so. There was no shortage of brutality in the beatings, lynchings, bombings and assassinations of his day that might have stirred a call to implement the “rule of law” for the perpetrators.

But take a look at the powerful words he spoke when four little black girls were killed at the bombing of a church in Birmingham, AL.

These children – unoffending, innocent, and beautiful – were the victims of one of the most vicious and tragic crimes ever perpetrated against humanity.

And yet they died nobly. They are the martyred heroines of a holy crusade for freedom and human dignity. And so this afternoon in a real sense they have something to say to each of us in their death. They have something to say to every minister of the gospel who has remained silent behind the safe security of stained-glass windows. They have something to say to every politician who has fed his constituents with the stale bread of hatred and the spoiled meat of racism. They have something to say to a federal government that has compromised with the undemocratic practices of southern Dixiecrats and the blatant hypocrisy of right-wing northern Republicans. They have something to say to every Negro who has passively accepted the evil system of segregation and who has stood on the sidelines in a mighty struggle for justice. They say to each of us, black and white alike, that we must substitute courage for caution. They say to us that we must be concerned not merely about who murdered them, but about the system, the way of life, the philosophy which produced the murderers. Their death says to us that we must work passionately and unrelentingly for the realization of the American dream.

For Dr. King, justice wasn’t simply about punishing the people directly responsible for planting that bomb. He paints the broadest possible brush in capturing those who are accountable for the death of the four little girls…ministers, politicians, government, and even African Americans who stood on the sidelines of the movement. As he said, justice was about dealing with the system, way of life, and philosophy that produced the murderers.

Here at St. Paul Youth Services we put a lot of emphasis on holding youth accountable and helping them learn from their mistakes. But we also know that is only a first step. The kind of justice Dr. King is talking about requires us to also work in the community to change the system, the way of life, the philosophy that puts these young people at risk in the first place.

Our vision statement imagines “a community that offers hope and opportunity for all youth.” It is in reaching for that goal that we come the closest to Dr. King’s dream of justice rolling down like waters.

Photo Courtesy of Forces For Sara
© 2012 Forces For Sara, All Rights Reserved

Sara Kruzan has spent more than half of her life in prison. At the age of 17, she was convicted of killing her ex pimp. Her sentence back then: life without parole. In 2011, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger commuted her sentence to 25 years to life. Sara is now 35 years old and hopes to rejoin society soon. This year, the court announced that Sara’s sentence was further reduced to 19 years to life.

Sara’s case is exemplary of the harsh punishment that teenagers can receive in the United States. It is cruel and unusual to condemn a juvenile offender to spend the rest of his or her life in prison. If you were a teenager sentenced to spend the rest of your life in prison, what would you do? If after ten years of incarceration you had exhausted all of your appeals, how would you feel? We abolished the death penalty for juveniles, yet we push them to commit suicide behind concrete walls and metal bar doors.

Sentencing a teen to spend more than half of his or her life behind bars is abominable. In Germany, for example, the maximum penalty for a youthful offender is fifteen years. One needs to consider that teens are much more likely than adults to be rehabilitated. We have young adults sitting in our prisons who have completely turned their lives around and who could contribute greatly to our society. Let’s give them a second chance. Let’s recognize that child sexual abuse and extreme violence led many of our society’s young members to commit crimes that they now deeply regret, and let’s not turn them into something and punish them as something that they’re not: adults.

To learn more about Sara, please visit www.facebook.com/forcesforsara

Many parents of juvenile offenders are often at a total loss – often confused and bewildered as to why a nation as wealthy as the United States is unable to effectively address this issue. As Prison Consultant, Steve Oberfest states, “As Prison Consultants, we’ve advised the parents of what lies ahead as their child is jostled away to an adult prison. There is likelihood that their child will be placed in solitary confinement. That detention can be psychologically harsh if he or she enters the system while high on drugs or alcohol.”

According to Prison Consultant, Doc Fuller, “Prison Coach’s statistics for drug or alcohol abuse for clients under 18 years of age is 100%. Drugs, such as marijuana, alcohol, prescription drugs, club drugs and other substances, all play a role in vehicular homicides and other crimes committed by the youth we consult in our practice. The parents of these youth are under the assumption that they will be designated to a juvenile detention center. As prison consultants, it is our job to help them understand that their child must first pass through the county jail if they are unable to post bail.”

Another issue that arises as a result of prolonged solitary confinement is its effect on the juvenile’s mental state.  Prison Consultant, Tyrone Jennings, PhD. has seen the trend of youth in county jails during the past 25 years and its effects on those placed in solitary confinement. “This was an issue during wars from the 1950’s thru 90’s, so why would it not hold true for teens who have not fully matured enough to handle day-to-day problems in an effective manner? These youth are coming to institutions high, drunk and totally perplexed at their environment.”

Both Fuller and Jennings understand that statistics do not exist for those placed in solitary confinement. They believe that 15 to 20 percent of youth are detained at least once in a single cell which is typically less than 6  X 9 feet.  Such an environment can be traumatic for a young person who is not used to being confined in a solitary state for a lengthy period of time.

The Prison Coach Speaking & Consulting team hopes that the existing and increasing number of prison consultants will in the end, be a valuable resource in every aspect of the criminal justice system, and on how it treats its youth. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, approximately 100,000 juveniles have been incarcerated in adult jails and prisons. With a majority being released from jail each year, we must ask ourselves “How are we going to deal with the youth that are coming out of adult prisons with a high incidence of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)?” That is if they make it out alive.

The article doesn’t state whether this kid has a prior record, but the idea that he may have screwed up his scholarship by getting arrested now implies that he had a clean slate before.  The criminal justice system is supposed to ensure that our community is safe and that people who break the law won’t do it again.  But, there’s no way to really ensure that people won’t break laws so you have to make decisions about how to utilize the resources of the justice system effectively to do the best you can to achieve public safety – kind of like a triage process.  If you waste resources on people that aren’t a threat to public safety, there are fewer resources available for the serious criminals.  That’s why we tell jurisdictions we work with that it’s not advisable to put first time minor offenders on probation (let alone in jail). If a probation officer has a caseload of 50 and some of those kids pose a real risk to public safety, do we really want them spending their time on those kids that just made a stupid mistake and probably won’t do it again?  I can tell you from talking to POs that unnecessarily high caseloads hurt their ability to pay attention to the kids that really need their attention.  It’s a waste of their time, a waste of county or state funds, and an unnecessary intrusion into the lives of troublemaking kids who may have made stupid decisions but probably won’t become lifelong criminals.

The idea is reminiscent of little caravans traveling to a place and students disembarking to serve a community for a short period of time. It’s a romantic, sweet idea. I took a bus to my location, so it wasn’t a real “caravan”, but it was an eye-opening experience nonetheless. 

I won’t deny, while I was excited to join the project and really hoped to do some good for a week, I had self-motivated reasons as well. My school requires a certain number of pro bono hours to graduate, and I wanted to tick off that graduation requirement. I have a ton of old high school and college friends in the DC area (where my project was) and I thought it would be fun to catch up and hang out with some old friends. 

I got my hours, and I got to see my friends, but I also walked away from my week in DC a little bit changed. 

For one week, I worked in a juvenile justice court system. What I saw was devastating and depressing. Little kids making mistakes that might define them for life, and being taken away by the system for the most minor to the most serious offenses. Kids being shackled when they are brought in. Juveniles pleading to their alleged charges without the court system ever getting to the merits of the case, based on risk-benefit analyses and the fear that they might be tried as adults with more severe sentences. Financially poor and struggling homes, with weak family support systems, or what juvenile courts deem “poor social factors.” Bad influences in neighborhoods, lack of parental support, extremely (shockingly) poor education prospects, with many of these so-called “juveniles” testing at grade levels many years below their age. Fearful, tearful parents begging for a second chance for their children. An overburdened docket and a spectrum in the quality and sympathy of the judges overhearing the cases. A lot of discretion given to judges to decide a kid’s fate based on his/her outsider’s view of the child’s “social factors.” Parents and children being absolutely bewildered and intimidated by an arcane, LONG, confusing legal system filled with procedure after procedure, paperwork after paperwork. 

To me, the juvenile justice system is a snapshot of of how society is failing our children. 

Listen, I’m not trying to say that the children who enter the juvenile justice system are all angels. It’s true that many of them have done some really terrible things. But here are some major problems with the system we have now:

There are bad crimes. And then there are crimes that literally should not be crimes, or should not be handled by the court system, but instead, handled by schools, families, communities. We have kids being found with $5 (suspected as stolen money) brought in and kept with alleged juvenile rapists and murderers. It’s overburdening the system, and needlessly traumatizing a lot of kids who made comparatively minor mistakes. 

Many of the consequences for minor crimes are shockingly severe, especially if the child has encountered the court system or social services before (even if their prior “offenses” were for nonviolent offenses–like possessing marijuana). 

I don’t believe that children are ever born bad. I think a combination of bad schools, poverty, lack of good mentors and influences, struggling single parents, bad neighborhoods and bad friends create this never ending soup of bad circumstances where children are pulled into making mistakes that they might not have made if they were just born in a different zip code or under different circumstances.

I’m not trying to insult the judges or even the court system. Many of these judges (hopefully all) have these kids’ best interests at heart, and are struggling to make the right decisions under very difficult circumstances and little information. But we, as a society, need to be nipping many many of these social problems in the bud before they even get to the point where a kid has to be hauled in front of a judge. In this area, we are failing miserably. Miserably. And there are kids who are suffering because of it. 

A lot of people would argue that these kids still have the choice to take a different route, the good/non-criminal route. No one forces them to hang around bad friends, or commit crimes. Of course. But in truth, they are children, impressionable children. How do you know that you may have behaved differently if you were in their shoes? I don’t think a severe juvenile justice system is the answer. I think multifaceted policies to make their lives better in schools and homes is the answer. 

Anyway, enough of my rant. My week there made me reflective, and very grateful for all the opportunities I’ve had in my own life. I really felt like flying home and hugging my mother when the week ended. 

I feel very fortunate for how my life has turned out and this post is just a gentle reminder that many of us should as well. If we were brought up in safe, stable environments…if we had attentive, loving parents… If we were brought up with a baseline amount of money… If we were given strong educational opportunities…then we should all be very grateful.

As a reflection, I haven’t been having the easiest semester. If anything, this semester is going worse for me health-wise compared to last semester, which I didn’t really think was possible. I think I have gone in to see the doctor at least 7 times in the last 3 months. But after my week in my caravan, my eyes have been opened to how much worse it gets out there in this world, where the deck can really be stacked against you even before you are born. 

So I’m re-committed to stop whining or feeling bad about my health or my life. I’m re-committing myself to developing sympathy and empathy for those who live a much harder life than I do. I’m re-committing myself to being a more patient daughter!!! I’m re-committing myself to my studies, because now I feel a greater moral responsibility to make good use of my educational opportunities, both for myself and for others. 

I’ve started looking into projects that I can do in New York for children. I’m not going to put a ton of pressure on myself to find something, but hopefully something appropriate will turn up. Sometimes I feel a bit bad about myself. I’m ambitious and hardworking, but also a little bit lazy and spoiled. I saw many professionals sacrificing good pay and luxurious lifestyles to wade into this messy system. There are many many individuals out there doing very noble, world/ life changing work for very little money. I admire them so much, and I admire the people i worked with during that week even more. They were all dedicated, professional, determined people. I don’t know if I have that same level of determination to change the world. I kind of like having financial security and comfort. I like the thought of making enough money to support my parents and myself and be comfortable. But hopefully even if I enter the corporate world, I can still bring some perspective with me, and keep a foot in this other world. That’s my hope anyway. 

Love, 

Zenpoppy

The study also found that, on average, a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcementhold leads to an extension of a person’s stay in jail by nearly 30 days when compared with a person without an immigration detainer.

Researchers also said that four in five people put on hold have never been convicted of a crime against a person in Washington state and a similar ratio had never been convicted of a felony. Another result was that immigration holds affect Latino communities acutely with more than a quarter of detainers being a Latino person.

The study, led by sociology professor Katherine Beckett, analyzed booking data from 2011. It was commissioned by the Northwest Defenders Association.

The study analyzes data from 2011, a year before the federal program known as Secure Communities went into effect in the county. The federal immigrant jail check program uses fingerprint analysis to identify illegal immigrants in county jails.

In King County, the use of fingerprints began in 2012. Immigration agents also comb jail rosters to look for people who were born abroad, among other monitoring techniques.

Secure Communities has been rolled out nationwide despite pushback from several states, counties and cities in the past couple of years.

Immigrant right groups say Secure Communities can discourage immigrants from reporting crimes and can lead to the deportation of people who haven’t been convicted of anything.

In Seattle, immigrant rights and domestic violence groups have lobbied King County executive Dow Constantine and the County Council to halt honoring a key component of the program. In February, Constantine wrote a letter to the council saying that he supports narrowing honoring detainers for serious crimes.

Other counties and cities — including New York City; San Francisco County in California and Cook County in Illinois — have announced that they will honor ICE detainers only if certain conditions are met. In California, Attorney General Kamala Harris said in December that Secure Communities remains a “flawed” program because nearly one-third of the people targeted by the requests there have never been convicted of a crime.

A U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokesman declined to comment.

In December, ICE further tweaked the guidelines for detainers, saying that ICE agents should ask for holds for people who have three or more prior misdemeanors. People with felony convictions and charges should also be held. ICE also has put drunken driving charges under its priority list.

Among other findings: about one-eighth of people under a detainer had not been charged with a crime prior to a transfer to ICE; for just over half of the people flagged by ICE, the most serious crime was a misdemeanor.

Municipalities can ask for federal reimbursement for costs of holding suspected illegal immigrants. In fiscal year 2012, King County got nearly $725,000, but reimbursement fluctuates and the budget has been slashed from $240 million to $70 million.

Beckett also said holds have a domino effect on the jail system. The holds shape decisions by prosecutors, judges and defendants. For example, a person may not post bail because they know they will be held by ICE, keeping them in custody longer. Or if the person knows deportation is a possibility, they delay seeking release to make arrangements with their families in preparation for removal.

“So it’s not that people are being held longer than the rules allow, but rather that their decisions about the criminal matter are affected by the presence of a detainer,” Beckett said.

– The Associated Press.

Proctor’s family plans to formally introduce the proposals to reform the country’s Young Offenders Act at a news conference on Wednesday.

Have you or someone you know been the victim of a young offender? The Province would like to hear from you and what you think about this plan. Please email tabtips@theprovince.com.

KIMBERLY’S LAW

Proposals to Reform the Young Offender System in British Columbia and Canada

1. THREAT ASSESSMENT PROTOCOLS

Schools must be safe and healthy places for students to learn and grow. Schools across Canada should implement threat assessment protocols to identify students (or others) who have made threats or engaged in threatening behaviour as witnessed by family, peers or educators. The goal of the protocol is to ensure the safety, well-being and security of all persons at schools and to prevent harm. Some local school boards have already developed threat assessment protocols and work in co-ordination with counselLing services, social workers and local law enforcement.  This should be regulated by Provincial Statute.

2.  MANDATORY COUNSELLING AND TREATMENT

Young persons are defined as 12-17 years of age in Provincial and Federal statutes. A goal should be to identify and administer troubled youth before they commit harm. Isolated, aggressive or problematic students (or dropouts), are often known to their peers, family or educators. Some advertise their “issues” on social media; others, through word of mouth, reputation and action. If such young persons are identified in a Threat Assessment Protocol then social workers or counsellors should determine a risk of harm and a treatment plan if necessary. Involuntary treatment should be mandated by the Provincial Court.

3. PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY

The primary source of information, control and responsibility for young persons remains with parents. Parents need to be held civily liable for the actions of their young persons subject to a “due-diligence” defence. The Parental Responsibility  Act, S;B.C. 2001, Chapter 45 provides limited civil action relief for victims of property-related crimes.  The Act should be amended to include civil relief for damages from injury to a person or loss of life. The compensation for such damages could be limited to a maximum amount of $25,000. Such financial penalty may deter otherwise uninvolved parents to take more control for the violent actions of their children or seek outside assistance.

4. TRANSFERS TO ADULT COURT

Transfers to adult court for violent young offenders who have been convicted of first- or second-degree murder are not automatic. A 16-year-old possesses sufficient maturity, responsibility and accountability for their actions. There should be automatic adult court transfers for young offenders aged 16 or older who are charged with first- or second-degree murder.

5. PUBLICATION OF YOUNG OFFENDER NAMES UPON GUILTY PLEA

The public is currently barred from knowing the names of young offenders until sentencing. Notwithstanding, the media is free to publicize the name of the victim including the details of the crime at any time in the process. “Innocent until proven guilty” only applies until guilt is determined or admitted. Once a young offender has pled guilty, his or her name should be made public.

6. TRUTH IN SENTENCING

Young persons sentenced as “adults” for first- or second-degree murder do not receive the same incarceration period as adults. The incarceration period or “life sentence” for an adult convicted of murder is 25 years but only 10 years for a young person. A life sentence for a young offender tried as an adult should be the same as an adult or the “adult sentencing” terminology needs to be abolished. The public should not be misled that a young person sentenced as an adult for murder will receive a 25-year adult sentence.

7.  INTERIM CUSTODY

Young persons who are charged with first- or second-degree murder under the Criminal Code should be detained in custody separate and apart from other young persons in the same facility. This will ensure that other young inmates are not exposed or traumatized by boastful details of the crimes committed by those charged with first- or second-degree murder.

Over the last eight years, while serving as Chief of the Juvenile Unit for the Defender Association of Philadelphia, Mr. Listenbee worked closely with IACP/OJJDP’s Improving Law Enforcement Responses to Youth Project, developing and delivering training resources for law enforcement to improve professional policies and practices that reduce juvenile crime, delinquency and victimization.  He has been central to IACP’s efforts in promoting better practices and policies that reduce the possibility of wrongful convictions of youth, false confessions, inadmissible evidence, and agency and officer liability.   In 2006, Mr. Listenbee broke new ground as a juvenile public defender by joining the law enforcement team for IACP which trained law enforcement practitioners nationwide on effective juvenile interview and interrogation techniques.

In 2011, Mr. Listenbee joined the advisory group for IACP’s Law Enforcement’s Leadership Role in the Advancement of Promising Practices in Juvenile Justice, a partnership with the MacArthur Foundation’s Models for Change Initiative. While serving on the advisory group, Mr. Listenbee has provided valuable guidance informing the IACP/MacArthur initiative, which seeks to increase the leadership role of state and local law enforcement executives to effectively address systemic juvenile justice issues as well as improve local responses to youthful offenders.

IACP welcomes Mr. Listenbee’s exceptional leadership and collaborative skills, his knowledge of law enforcement, criminal and juvenile justice systems and his dedication to preventing and responding to juvenile delinquency and victimization.

Read more about Mr. Listenbee’s appointment in the DOJ and White House announcements.

The majority of kids that are in juvenile corrections facilities around the country are there for non-violent offenses. In fact, 15% are in on either technical violations of probation (which means that they failed to comply with the terms of their probation but have not committed a new offense) or status offenses, which are offenses that would not be illegal for adults (e.g., truancy or running away from home). Another 20% are in for drug or public order offenses (such as disorderly conduct) and 29% are in on property offenses.  Only about one third of kids in correctional facilities committed a crime against a person and that is combining misdemeanors and felonies.  More than 10% of those person crimes were just simple assault or another person misdemeanor (could be something like harassment for making threats against a fellow student, etc.).  There are no sentencing guidelines for juveniles (except in Washington State) so judges have a LOT of discretion.  The point is that we’re not really talking about dangerous kids, it’s more about kids that piss us off.  Sure, they need to be held accountable and they need to learn that there are consequences to their actions, but there is a cost when incarceration is our go to answer for how to try and teach that lesson.

First of all, it’s not effective at reducing the likelihood that they’ll commit another crime in the future.  Actually it’s the opposite.  Every kid who is convicted in juvenile court is going to come back to the community at some point.  (So will most of those convicted in adult court, they’ll just come back later and much, much worse.)  Contrary to popular belief, research has shown that  prison is not an effective deterrent.  It may work for some people, but probably the same people who aren’t likely to commit a crime in the first place.  It’s also ineffective because it’s an artificial environment.  Kids may do great in a facility where they never have to make a choice for themselves and they aren’t faced with the challenging realities of their daily lives but what happens when they go right back to the environment they were in when they got in trouble in the first place?  Old habits die hard.  Finally, the exposure to other delinquent peers creates a negative learning environment.  Kids who have been to prison will tell you that it was in the facility where they really learned how to become a criminal.  And we actually do know about community-based interventions that are more effective.  So, it might make us feel better to lock kids up when they break the law, but it’s a huge waste of resources and actually hurts public safety in the long run.

But there’s also a human factor.  Dostoyevsky has written that society’s degree of civilization, or lack thereof, could be determined by its prisons.  If this is true, we are a highly uncivilized society.  Even when they’ve done something to hurt another person, these are still kids and they deserve to be treated humanely.  Tearing apart families, shackling kids, warehousing them in old, dilapidated buildings where they sleep on inch-thick mattresses and eat food you wouldn’t feed your dog is simply not something we should be okay with.  Click here or here for photos and stories from detention centers and correctional facilities around the country. Furthermore, these facilities have a terrible track record of violence and abuse.  The Department of Justice found that 1 in 12 youth in New York State facilities had been sexually assaulted.  Are we really going to accept this, especially when so many of the kids caught up  in the system are more troublemaker than gangbanger?  The reality is that all kids engage in delinquent behavior, and most grow out of it.  But certain youth, primarily poor youth of color, don’t get the benefit of the doubt from the authority figures in their lives and they end up in a vicious cycle of probation, probation violations, and placement in correctional facilities. Think about a time when you were young and stupid. Maybe you got caught and maybe you got in trouble.  But imagine if someone had said, “now that you’ve gotten in trouble, we’re going to watch you for 18 months and if, during that time, you are found to engage in recreational drug or alcohol use, you skip school or show up late, you disobey your parents, hang out with those trouble making friends, stay out after curfew, or get in trouble again, we’re going to lock you up.”  How quickly might you have been sent away?

I’ve gone on longer than I intended on this issue, but it’s frustrated to work with these systems and see the same stuff over and over again. Whether it’s Alabama, New York City, or Indiana it’s the same story: adults getting pissed off because the dumb kids won’t do what they’re told and not being creative enough to come up with a solution that doesn’t involve ripping them away from their families and warehousing them with other “bad” kids.  If anyone is interested in learning more about why this model doesn’t work, check out this publication from the Foundation I work for.

So now we’re back to Steubenville.  This is a tough one because these kids did hurt someone.  Also, these aren’t the typical “throwaway kids” that people are usually okay with sending to jail.  They are football players from middle class families with good grades and relatively promising futures.  And I think that was probably the reason that the case remained in the juvenile justice system.  For the record, I think that was the right decision, although I think all kids, not just the ones that look like “our kids” should get that consideration.  There’s a reason that we have separate systems of justice for juveniles and adults and that’s because kids are different.  They do not understand the consequences of their behavior in the same way.  Moreover, there’s hope for kids.  They are more susceptible to change than adults.  There’s really no reason to think that someone who commits a serious crime as a teenager can’t learn from his mistake and turn his life around.  I think that people generally agree with this, and you can tell because there have been drastic changes in the use of juvenile incarceration across the country, but you wouldn’t know it from the reactions to the Steubenville case.

Here’s an example of the typical reaction I’ve seen.  The author is responding to a post by another writer who compared the boys to Eddie Haskell from Leave it to Beaver. Aside from this, there are tons of comments on Facebook and in blogs I like to read that all follow the same line of thought: Why should we feel at all sorry for these boys? They are rapists, they knew what they were doing, and the only reason they cried at their sentencing was because they were scared about going to “juvie”, not because they felt remorse for the victim.  I even saw one blog post which implied that it was absurd for one of the boys’ defense attorneys to argue that his client should not have to register for life as a sex offender based on what we know about adolescent brain development.  Even though the blogger admitted that the research is valid and has influenced Supreme Court decisions, the implication was clear: “how ridiculous is this? The desperate lawyer is trying to say his client shouldn’t be held responsible because his brain isn’t full formed.”  Except the lawyer is absolutely right.  Here is a link to explain the research on adolescent brain development, which was the basis for Supreme Court decisions to eliminate execution of juveniles and limit the use of life without parole.

It’s clear that there are two major issues rising to the top. First, there is concern over blaming the victim. I think this is a valid concern that frequently comes up when the issue is rape, but the perception seems to be that if you give any consideration to the rights of the perpetrators, you’re simultaneously invalidating the girl’s victimization.  I don’t think that has to be true.  Secondly, there’s a lot of anger about these kids “getting off easy” because they were star football players and good students. That anger extends to anyone (such as CNN reporters) who expressed sympathy for boys, who “had such bright futures”.   The conversation concerns me both because of how far reaching it’s been (I mean how often are random people on Facebook talking about a disposition in juvenile court) and because of its vitriol. For me, it supports my suspicion that no matter how clear it is in some state law and even in policy that the JJ system is about rehabilitation, people will still want their pound of flesh.  And it’s not totally unreasonable.  Punishment is part of learning.  Parents use it, even if they would never treat their kids the way the JJ system does.  So, the question for me is: how can we ensure that people feel youth who harm others are held accountable for their behaviors without that always being defined by jail time?  It’s a pretty difficult question to answer  because sending people away for years, even decades, is considered normal.  When the public starts from a framework that one year in prison is getting a break, how can we really start a conversation about re-defining punishment?  It may not be possible but I don’t think we’re ever going to get control of our addiction to incarceration until we try.

Three to care for
Three to strive
Three to wander in the night.

Three makes six,
and six never sticks,
Back down by one,
Now we have to live.

Five on a dime,
Four on the floor,
Three on the streets,
Two don’t make it through.

Now it’s back to me.

Little, lonely, me.