Prosecuting Youth: Thoughts?

theycallmelinz

This is going to be super long. I'll try to summarize with a TL;DR at the end!

Many of you know that I'm a therapist that gets referrals through court, so most of the kids I see are court-ordered to get treatment (I have like 4 kids that I see just because we got along well and they wanted to keep me as opposed to transferring to regular outpatient). I see kids who are considered 'status offenders,' they're guilty of offenses like being truant from school, running away from home, or what's called 'ungovernable behavior' which means behaviors like being defiant/destructive but not committing any acts that are necessarily deemed a crime, per say. The issue with my job is that about half of the kids I see are really out of control. Their parents can't manage their behaviors at all, many of the kids are even physically aggressive with their parents, etc. Usually, truancy is the LEAST of these kids' problems. It's a really sad situation, and I have my own theories about parenting and how some of the behavioral stuff could be prevented or dealt with, but that's another story. Also, since this is court ordered treatment, I have a HUGE no-show rate(ironic). If I schedule 20 sessions in a week, I may see 7-10 kids, so these families aren't getting the treatment that they really need.

In Alabama, you can't place a juvenile (someone under 18) in a locked facility for more than 72 hours every 6 months, unless they've been charged with and found guilty of a dangerous crime or a felony. Even then, most of them get probation the first time and none of them are put in a facility like detention or sent to a boot camp until they've racked up multiple offenses. Also, if the child is not a current delinquent in the system, if police are called to the home/find the kid doing something like shoplifting, they do a report and then nothing happens. No charges filed, nothing. Sometimes a place of business will pursue charges in a case like shoplifting, but many of them in my experience don't bother with it because the kids usually aren't stealing huge values of stuff. 

Since these families first meet me at court, I get lumped in with court officials and I'm the one the parents call when the kids have done something crazy. And I'm the one who has to break the news to the parents that there is nothing the law can do to help the parents out, and if the parents put their hands on their children, CPS will take the kids away.

With all this in mind, I have several cases that are pretty troubling. Most involve kids who regularly are defiant to their parents, often are threatening and/or violent, and some have even tested positive for substances. 

My question is should we do more, as a society, to prosecute kids? I know that you never know(even as a therapist) what all goes on in someone's home and that I'm only getting one side of the story, but sometimes I feel like if the law could actually DO something with the kids I see, we could prevent further crimes. I also know that many of these kids would be in much different situations if there had been intervention earlier in their lives, but at this point, what do we do? What do you guys think? 

TL;DR: Should kids be locked up for committing crimes? Or is there another alternative?

ETA: Although no personal information was shared, I did edit some of the original post to be more vague.

flutteringinfl

That's such a hard question, and one I feel 100% unqualified to answer. I guess for me, I'd want to know what the results would be, realistically, of sending them to jail. Do the studies show a good amount of them are rehabilitated, or are they more likely to commit more crimes, or something in between? I think I'd want to do what I can to prevent them from staying in the criminal justice system when they reach adulthood.

So I don't think we should be locking up kids for nonviolent crimes UNLESS there are studies that show they benefit from it. And if they don't, and there's no alternatives, well, I don't think it's a secret that the American prison system is broken, so I think then the issue becomes less about the kids and more about fixing the system.

theycallmelinz

flutteringinftmyers said:

That's such a hard question, and one I feel 100% unqualified to answer. I guess for me, I'd want to know what the results would be, realistically, of sending them to jail. Do the studies show a good amount of them are rehabilitated, or are they more likely to commit more crimes, or something in between? I think I'd want to do what I can to prevent them from staying in the criminal justice system when they reach adulthood.

So I don't think we should be locking up kids for nonviolent crimes UNLESS there are studies that show they benefit from it. And if they don't, and there's no alternatives, well, I don't think it's a secret that the American prison system is broken, so I think then the issue becomes less about the kids and more about fixing the system.

First bolded: I completely agree. All the time at court, between cases, we are always saying if we just had SOMEWHERE to place these kids-not jail, that we could teach them structure, and how to make goals and give them something to work for, then I think we could make a real difference. 

To the second bolded: As it was explained to me, that's the reason that we don't lock up kids with non-violent crimes. Also, because you don't want a kid who is only missing school to be in detention with kids who have been convicted of burglary with a weapon, etc. I think the ultimate issue is the system. How do we educate parents before they become parents, how do we give adequate consequences for offenses in general? I don't even know how we can enforce consequences that don't involve someone being locked up.

flutteringinfl

theycallmelinz said:

flutteringinftmyers said:

That's such a hard question, and one I feel 100% unqualified to answer. I guess for me, I'd want to know what the results would be, realistically, of sending them to jail. Do the studies show a good amount of them are rehabilitated, or are they more likely to commit more crimes, or something in between? I think I'd want to do what I can to prevent them from staying in the criminal justice system when they reach adulthood.

So I don't think we should be locking up kids for nonviolent crimes UNLESS there are studies that show they benefit from it. And if they don't, and there's no alternatives, well, I don't think it's a secret that the American prison system is broken, so I think then the issue becomes less about the kids and more about fixing the system.

First bolded: I completely agree. All the time at court, between cases, we are always saying if we just had SOMEWHERE to place these kids-not jail, that we could teach them structure, and how to make goals and give them something to work for, then I think we could make a real difference. 

To the second bolded: As it was explained to me, that's the reason that we don't lock up kids with non-violent crimes. Also, because you don't want a kid who is only missing school to be in detention with kids who have been convicted of burglary with a weapon, etc. I think the ultimate issue is the system. How do we educate parents before they become parents, how do we give adequate consequences for offenses in general? I don't even know how we can enforce consequences that don't involve someone being locked up.

Maybe something like job corps? I know that's not an enforcement system but it might be a good alternative to jail.

AprilH81

I don't think jail is a good place for non-violent crimes because they tend to leave jail/prison/juvy a more hardened criminal than the entered.

I would like to see how some sort of boarding school/military school system would work for the kids who appear to need some discipline and tough love.  

My theory (not a parent, not law enforcement) is that a lot of this misbehavior comes from not having parents in the picture, or if they are in the picture just not giving a shit what the kid(s) is doing until it is too late and the parents don't know what to do.

theycallmelinz

AprilH81 said:

I don't think jail is a good place for non-violent crimes because they tend to leave jail/prison/juvy a more hardened criminal than the entered.

I would like to see how some sort of boarding school/military school system would work for the kids who appear to need some discipline and tough love.  

My theory (not a parent, not law enforcement) is that a lot of this misbehavior comes from not having parents in the picture, or if they are in the picture just not giving a shit what the kid(s) is doing until it is too late and the parents don't know what to do.

I agree with this as well. So many of these behaviors could be nipped when the kids are 2 years old, not 13-16 and threatening their parents. And then the problem is some of my kids who didn't have a very good upbringing are now getting pregnant as teens and I know the cycle is just going to continue.

AprilH81

theycallmelinz said:

AprilH81 said:

I don't think jail is a good place for non-violent crimes because they tend to leave jail/prison/juvy a more hardened criminal than the entered.

I would like to see how some sort of boarding school/military school system would work for the kids who appear to need some discipline and tough love.  

My theory (not a parent, not law enforcement) is that a lot of this misbehavior comes from not having parents in the picture, or if they are in the picture just not giving a shit what the kid(s) is doing until it is too late and the parents don't know what to do.

I agree with this as well. So many of these behaviors could be nipped when the kids are 2 years old, not 13-16 and threatening their parents. And then the problem is some of my kids who didn't have a very good upbringing are now getting pregnant as teens and I know the cycle is just going to continue.

And (again, my opinion) it is compounding the problem when grandparents or extended family is stepping in to raise the kids because the grandparents* may not have the energy (older, possibly sicker) to do the tough love and the kids don't respect ANY authority once they get to that point.  They have built up this hardened shell that not much can get through.

*obviously not true in all situations, there are amazing grandparents out there who step up with their kids can't/wont.

Fran1985

Not to be "that person" but this seems like pretty specific case information you are putting up here- is this public information? As a therapist do you have rules on what you can and can't share privately? To answer your question its a really tough situation- Im not sure that more prosecution is the answer but hopefully intervention of a different kind could happen.

theycallmelinz

Fran1985 said:

Not to be "that person" but this seems like pretty specific case information you are putting up here- is this public information? As a therapist do you have rules on what you can and can't share privately? To answer your question its a really tough situation- Im not sure that more prosecution is the answer but hopefully intervention of a different kind could happen.

I do have rules on client information, but as specific as the above may seem, it's really not. I've got about 30 different kids in similar situations. I could be talking about any number of people in my area, which is unfortunate. As long as I don't share any identifiable info, I'm good. Thank you for pointing that out though, because that is important. 

ETA: I edited the OP, just in case

STARMOON44

I think prosecuting children is morally aborhant and practically useless. I am genuinely shocked that someone who has taken on a career helping children at risk would view locking more of them up as a good thing. As far as I am aware, it is extremely rare for forced detention to have a positive impact on anyone and everytime it has been tried with children on a large scale it has resulted in massive cruelty and abuse. I absolutely believe we need more mental health resources and at a younger age, and that would include increasing the number of pediatric psychology beds available, but prosecuting children for being unruly? No. Absolutely not.

ETA: particularly considering Alabama's history of running it's prisons as slave plantations well into the 20th century, no, Alabama. No. You haven't earned the right to lock up more kids. And most states have similarly troubling prison issues although Alabama really is a shining beacon of awful on this.

hellosweetie1015

This is a thing I've been thinking about for YEARS. My mom works on the other side, but with the same court system generally as you: she's the juvenile court clerk in my county, also in Alabama. Something she sees is dependency cases - where the kids are taken, either by CPS or by family intervention or what have you - often come back as delinquency cases, where the kid has gone and done something like steal a car.

My thought is that - if there were some level of help to the kids and the intervening guardians, or to the fosters the kids go to, things could change. That wouldn't help ALL the kids, because sometimes guardianship doesn't go through juvenile, and sometimes kids refuse to be helped, but I think it could possibly make a dent, even if it's only a little bitty one.

hellosweetie1015

STARMOON44 said:

I think prosecuting children is morally aborhant and practically useless. I am genuinely shocked that someone who has taken on a career helping children at risk would view locking more of them up as a good thing. As far as I am aware, it is extremely rare for forced detention to have a positive impact on anyone and everytime it has been tried with children on a large scale it has resulted in massive cruelty and abuse. I absolutely believe we need more mental health resources and at a younger age, and that would include increasing the number of pediatric psychology beds available, but prosecuting children for being unruly? No. Absolutely not.

ETA: particularly considering Alabama's history of running it's prisons as slave plantations well into the 20th century, no, Alabama. No. You haven't earned the right to lock up more kids. And most states have similarly troubling prison issues although Alabama really is a shining beacon of awful on this.

I DID NOT read this as her asking to lock up more kids. I read this as her wishing there were an option for her kids to actually HELP them. Locking them up isn't the solution, and I KNOW Linz knows that. Her tl;dr didn't summarize well. She wants to find a way for the law to help the kids, not just throw them in a prison forever and ever.

STARMOON44

Ok, well, sure. But her question wasn't "how do we help troubled teens?" It was "My question is should we do more, as a society, to prosecute kids?" And her summary is "should we lock up more kids?"

I answered those. And frankly words have meanings. And people who want to help kids should understand the power of thoughtlessly chosen words.

hellosweetie1015

STARMOON44 said:

Ok, well, sure. But her question wasn't "how do we help troubled teens?" It was "My question is should we do more, as a society, to prosecute kids?" And her summary is "should we lock up more kids?"

I answered those. And frankly words have meanings. And people who want to help kids should understand the power of thoughtlessly chosen words.

I think that prosecution of kids is not mutually inclusive of locking kids up. If a kid steals something, should he be given a slap on the wrist and sent on their merry way? How do they learn that way? Locking them up does not have to be the end result of prosecuting a theft. There are other sentences that do not end in jail time.

And I did say her summary was poor and failed desperately to get her actual point across. But if you're not going to read the whole thing before commenting in a way that I, as an Alabama resident and as a person who wants DESPERATELY to improve this state in the future, since I cannot change its deplorable past, took as extremely offensive, I'd rather you not comment just on the poorly worded summary at all. I'm not telling you how to comment - I'm asking you to read more thoroughly before bashing my home.

flutteringinfl

Yeah, prosecuting children definitely does not mean we lock them in jail and throw away the key. I think everyone needs to be held accountable for their actions, including children, but that doesn't mean that we can't do more to more effectively and appropriately deal with children who commit crimes in such a way that they are treated fairly, humanely, and are less likely to commit more crimes in the future. We absolutely need to do more. The tough question is what can we do and how can we do it.

ETA: I also don't think that children and adults should be punished the same way for the same crimes.

STARMOON44

I read very thoroughly, thanks. I read her words. You are precisely telling me how to comment and I'd rather you not.

I'm sorry you find an accurate statement about Alabama's history extremely offensive.

hellosweetie1015

STARMOON44 said:

I read very thoroughly, thanks. I read her words. You are precisely telling me how to comment and I'd rather you not.

I'm sorry you find an accurate statement about Alabama's history extremely offensive.

It is an accurate HISTORICAL statement. It is accurate about yesterday. What I find offensive is the fact that you place Alabama's past in a discussion about its tomorrow, which helps to perpetuate views that Alabama will never be anything but the smelly asscrack of this country.

I'm sorry you feel I was telling you how to comment. I only asked that you read more thoroughly, because your first post didn't seem like you had, as you said nothing about prosecution and everything about locking kids up, which had to do only with the summary.

ashley8918

hellosweetie1015 said:

I read very thoroughly, thanks. I read her words. You are precisely telling me how to comment and I'd rather you not. I'm sorry you find an accurate statement about Alabama's history extremely offensive.

It is an accurate HISTORICAL statement. It is accurate about yesterday. What I find offensive is the fact that you place Alabama's past in a discussion about its tomorrow, which helps to perpetuate views that Alabama will never be anything but the smelly asscrack of this country. I'm sorry you feel I was telling you how to comment. I only asked that you read more thoroughly, because your first post didn't seem like you had, as you said nothing about prosecution and everything about locking kids up, which had to do only with the summary.

I realize that this wasn't intended to be funny, but it really cracked me the fuck up,

FWIW, I have no negative perceptions of Alabama in particular. 

ashley8918

Also sort of misplaced due to the serious nature of this topic, but I cant help picturing this every time I read this thread title: 

bride2b71614

I used to work for the juvenile justice system. The question of whether or not a juvenile should be sentenced for extended periods of time is a difficult one to answer. The original intent of the juvenile justice system was to take a less punitive stance and to rehabilitate juvenile delinquents into society. At the same time, the court is relied on heavily to adjudicate and sometimes placements are the only way a parent can afford mental health care for their child. It's god awful that children have to suffer at the decision of a judge (there are no juries in juvenile court), especially if the child's circumstances are not taken into account. It's also equally terrible that mental health care is not accessible to many of these kids, and that they have to go through a court system to obtain services.

Roper v Simmons was a case brought before the supreme court as to whether or not a child should be sentenced to life. The scary thing was that Simmons committed the murder full well knowing what he was doing, and thought he was "safe" because he was a juvenile. The decision was that if a child commits a homicide they will be sentenced as adults and that its up to the state's discression as to whether or not the child would receive the death penalty. Often times if a juvenile is being tried as an adult, the court will take several things into account such as is the child culpable? Are they older or younger than their chronological age? All these factors are examined in an adult court, but arent always taken into consideration in juvenile court.

Overall I think that you have to take everything on a case by case basis. We need to step away from the punitive based placements and focus more on prevention and provision of accessible mental health care providers.

theycallmelinz

Sorry to post this then peace out! I worked supppper late last night and died when I got home.

Yes I did a pretty terrible job at summarizing. My intention wasn't to ask, "Should kids be locked up more easily?" I really was trying to have a discussion on thoughts about options for helping kids. I think my summary was due to the fact that I'd spent all day in court the previous day hearing everyone say, "We should just lock them up!!" - which I disagree with. 

Nothing breaks my heart more than seeing a child in handcuffs. I don't care what he/she did. I hate it, and I'm thankful that I've only witnessed this 2-3 times, although I know it does happen. 

I talk with FI all the time about this and we both discuss how maybe I should look into grant-writing and try to get funding for a place like I mentioned above, some type of structured environment for the kids to show them that people care, and that they are capable. I'm just not sure how to go about making that happen or what the proper channels are. As far as Alabama, as a state, we do have some serious funding issues. Mental Health is being cut left and right, and most of our jails and prisons are at double-capacity. I just don't know how we change these things. 

ETA: Just went back and read what all I said in the OP. That tl;dr was in pretty poor taste and I apologize for the message it sent. However, I'm going to leave it that way just so when people look at this they aren't wondering what we're talking about. 

hellosweetie1015

Education. Beyond throwing low SES kids into shitty schools and hoping they survive until graduation day (like Anniston High, which a few years ago was nearly shut down for its abysmal graduation and passing rates, among other things, if memory serves); I mean giving them a fucking snowball's chance to better themselves, even if all it means is just getting them out from under the poverty line. And putting more value into helping the people who are most likely to end up in a prison. That doesn't happen here nearly as much as it should. And I think most states have this struggle too, but Alabama - being a generally poor state - does struggle with this very hard. At the moment, I see Alabama as very REactive - putting all their eggs into the responding to crime basket. If we, collectively, try to be PROactive and put more of our eggs into the prevention basket, I think it could be better. But again - I think that could be said in a lot of places, it's just highlighted here because of the generally higher amount of low-income households who do lack the education and potential for socioeconomic mobility that other, wealthier states sometimes have to offer.

I cannot imagine doing what you do. Seriously. I don't even work a lot with the JU division, but what little I do just breaks my heart.

larrygaga

I think some people of all ages can be rehabilitated. I also think there are others who are an extreme danger and there is no real hope for them.

I think our country should try it's hardest anyway, especially with kids. Locking people in prison only serves as an easy solution to get people out of the way and to get revenge.

I have never really been the victim of a crime that would put someone in prison, though, so I'm sure my mind would change if I or my loved ones would be hurt. I would probably want them miserable forever. And I know the majority of people think this way when they are a victim.