The School-to-Prison Pipeline
The school-to-prison pipeline, often decried by reformers of the juvenile justice system, refers to the relatively new phenomenon of police officers in educational spaces. School Resource Officers, or SROs, are members of local law enforcement assigned to work in a particular school— their job is to protect students from danger, from inside or outside the school building. Reformers and researchers postulate that the presence of armed law enforcement officials can increase the likelihood of students’ arrests at school, causing needlessly high rates of entrance into the juvenile justice system. The pipeline is created by zero-tolerance policies: with SROs able to arrest students in school, more and more minor infractions are turned over to law enforcement rather than to administrators and teachers.
Since their inception, the number of School Resource Officers has skyrocketed— in 2018, over 42% of American public schools employed at least one SRO1 This increase is due in large part to the prevalence of school shootings, though SROs are tasked with much more than preventing violence at school. Resource Officers are often asked to participate in student misconduct meetings, intervene in physical or verbal fights and sometimes mete out punishment themselves. Because of these many functions, some critics argue that regular SRO presence can cause higher levels of in-school arrests.
Research is mixed on SRO effectiveness at preventing danger to students; however, a recent study from the University of Florida demonstrates that an officer’s presence at school does increase the odds of student referral to law enforcement, both for major and minor offenses. These researchers show that SROs often become involved in small disputes—across the country, students have been arrested for talking back to a teacher, mistakenly bringing a knife from a camping trip to school and yelling at another student. These offenses, once handled by administrators, are now more likely to lead to SRO referral, causing higher rates of arrest in schools. In North Carolina, the number of school-based referrals has increased by 10% in only five years; similarly, high increases are seen in other states, and a substantial amount of these referrals are comprised of low-level offenses.
Studies show that arrested students, particularly those who attend juvenile court and are found guilty, are more likely to have mental health problems, lack employment in the future and return to prison as adults. In fact, in a study of students who were incarcerated as a youth, high school graduation rates were 13% lower and future criminality was 23% higher than those who were not incarcerated.2 The school-to-prison pipeline is so problematic—and a focus of so many juvenile justice reformers—because high levels of juvenile incarceration can cause high levels of adult incarceration, future economic stress, and even health complications.
Juvenile Probation
Every year, judges issue more than half a million probation sentences to youth in the juvenile justice system.4 The most common sentence for young people who are found delinquent in court, the look of probation can vary greatly between states, jurisdictions and even individual cases. Though the basic structure of probation remains recognizable nationwide—a judge issues a list of rules that a young person must follow and assigns a probation officer to regularly check in on compliance—the requirements imposed on youth can differ based on the magnitude of the delinquency, the rules of the state and the discretion of judges. Probation can include the juvenile making payments to the victim or victims, completing community service hours or strictly complying with curfew hours. Sometimes, judges will order the revocation of a driver’s license, forbid contact between co-defendants or “inappropriate friends” and require officer permission for the youth to change employment or residence. Regardless of the specific regulations laid down by a judge, probation is a punishment meant to deter future criminality by stripping juvenile freedom for a time—looking closer at probation and other forms of deterrence, though, leads to questions about the efficacy of this system.
While probation is less disruptive than placing youth in out-of-home detention centers, the sentence, and all its regulations can push young people deeper in the juvenile justice system without offering support or incentives for positive behavior change. For many young people, probation can be confusing—with over thirty different rules in some jurisdictions, keeping track of probation conditions can be difficult. But an accidental violation of any regulation can lead to more punishment and more involvement in the juvenile justice system, even ending in eventual incarceration. Particularly for low-risk youth, probation can be dangerous—in a study of Ohio teenagers that scored as low-risk for recidivism, those placed on probation were 50% more likely than their peers to re-offend.
Recent child psychology research demonstrates that youth respond better to positive rewards for good behavior than to punishment for misbehaving; reformers often emphasize the use of diversion programs, like skill building, counseling and promoting positive growth, over probation as usual. Less invasive treatments than supervision and punishment can help youth think about their personal maturity, growth, and development rather than merely avoiding the consequences of probation. What’s more, diversion tactics—even including verbal reprimands as sentences rather than higher punishments— are a cost-effective alternative to probation, a system that costs taxpayers an estimated $2 billion per year. By investing in programs that focus on personal growth and positive behavioral changes— investments that have paid off in states like Connecticut, where recidivism rates among juveniles have dropped significantly—probation systems can become an effective rehabilitation program rather than rote punishment.
Alternatives to Incarceration
In light of new research pointing to the ineffectiveness and even danger of incarcerating juveniles, increasing numbers of state and local law enforcement offices are introducing new, community-based programs as alternatives to detention. Many
One of these evidence-based, in-home alternatives to detention is Multisystemic Therapy (MST), a juvenile intervention that keeps youth with their families while engaging schools, friends and communities in the treatment process. MST focuses on positive, prosocial development rather than punishment, providing a host of treatment services for both the family and the juvenile. Tailored to the individual needs of the youth, MST offers substance abuse therapy for both youth and caretakers, marital therapy, financial management planning, educational support and a suite of other treatments to engage all aspects of a juvenile’s life. At the close of treatment, 91% of MST youth live at home rather than in detention centers or other out-of-home care—86% of youth are in school or working, and 87% have not been rearrested. By providing comprehensive, individualized treatment within a young person’s home, MST’s research-based model avoids ineffective rote punishment and focuses on helping youth develop healthy relationships and important life skills. With a new era of focus on positive juvenile growth and development, alternatives to incarceration like Multisystemic Therapy can be important and effective diversion treatments for at-risk youth in the juvenile justice system.
A Juvenile's Right to Counsel
There are many reasons that a juvenile might waive their right to an attorney. Most often, a juvenile does so with the belief that it will speed up the process so that they can be released and go back home. What these juveniles do not realize, however, is that they are far more likely to return to the system after being involved with it just once. Juveniles who must attend their initial detention hearing without counsel are more likely to be sentenced to being held pending trial. Further research has shown that these juveniles are not only far more likely to be found guilty than juveniles that aren’t held, but they are also far more likely to be sentenced to serve time in a detention facility.
Funding Juvenile Justice Reform Programs
The MST approach to putting juvenile offenders on the right path has been shown to be extremely effective in terms of its success rate, decrease in crime and keeping down costs. The question becomes how can communities and organizations pay for MST programs? Here are four steps that should be considered:
-
Assess whether your community needs an MST program.
-
Determine what funding is available.
-
Set up sustainable funding that will be in place for years.
-
Focus on long-term strategies.
Video- Juvenile Justice Department Implements MST
Click here to watch this video about how the Department of Juvenile Justice is implementing MST as a new family therapy in Charlottesville, Virginia. Probation officials are looking to MST to help reduce youth violence and recidivism.