reforming juvenile justice: a developmental approach presentation to the coordinating council for...
TRANSCRIPT
Reforming Juvenile Justice: A Developmental
Approach
Presentation to the Coordinating Council for Juvenile Justice
and Delinquency Prevention
Robert L. JohnsonEdward P. Mulvey
Gladys Carrion
July 26, 2013 1
National Academy of Sciences
• Chartered by Congress in 1863• Purpose: To advise the
government and the nation on critical national issues through objective, scientific, and evidence-based research and analysis
Designed to be independent, balanced, and objective; Not an agency of the federal government. 2
Committee Process
• Scholarship and stature of Academies’ members• Ability to get the very best to serve pro bono,
ensuring the breadth and balance of interdisciplinary committee composition
• Quality assurance and control procedures, including a strict peer review process
• Written reports (source of “formal advice”) based on evidence and rigorous analysis, ensuring independence and objectivity
3
Assessing Juvenile Justice Committee Charge and Composition
• To assess the implications of advances in behavioral and neuroscience research for the field of juvenile justice and the implications of such knowledge for juvenile justice reform.
Committee Members:
• 6 from the social sciences• 2 physicians• 3 practitioners• Director of state children’s services• Director of state juvenile corrections• Juvenile court judge
• 2 with law/public policy expertise• 1 neuroscientist 4
Committee Members
• Robert L. Johnson (Chair), UMDNJ - New Jersey Medical School • Richard J. Bonnie (Vice Chair, IOM), University of Virginia • Carl C. Bell, Community Mental Health Council, Inc. • Lawrence D. Bobo (NAS), Harvard University • Jeffrey A. Butts, John Jay College of Criminal Justice • Gladys Carrion, New York State Office of Children & Family Service • B.J. Casey, Weill Medical College of Cornell University • Kenneth A. Dodge, Duke University • Sandra A. Graham, University of California, Los Angeles • Ernestine Gray, Orleans Parish, Louisiana • Edward P. Mulvey, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine • Robert Plotnick, University of Washington • Elizabeth S. Scott, Columbia University • Terence P. Thornberry, University of Maryland • Cherie Townsend, Texas Youth Commission
5
Summary of “Reforming Juvenile Justice: A Developmental Approach”
The Neuroscience
7
“Pruning”
Image adapted from Gogtay N, et al. Dynamic mapping of human cortical development during childhood through early adulthood. PNAS 2004;101(21): 8174 - 79, Fig. 3; downloaded from www.brainfacts.org
8
“Different parts at different times”
9
Behavioral ScienceBehavioral Science
10
Findings• Adolescents differ from adults and/or children in
three important ways: self-regulation in emotionally charged contextsheightened sensitivity to contextual influencesless ability to make judgments that require future orientation
• Cognitive tendencies are associated with biological immaturity of the brain and with an imbalance among developing brain systems
11
Figure 4 from Steinberg, L. (2013). The influence of neuroscience on U.S. Supreme Court decisions involving adolescents’ criminal culpability. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14, 513-518
12
Capacity + Environment = Developmental Path• Holds for both adolescence and early adulthood
• Positive adolescent development related to:
Parent or parent figure
Positive peers
Opportunities for decision making/critical thinking
• Juvenile justice interventions are responsible for creating positive development as well as ensuring public safety
• Being held accountable for wrongdoing and accepting responsibility in a process perceived as fair promotes healthy moral development and legal socialization
• Conversely, being held accountable and punished in a process perceived as unfair can reinforce social disaffection and antisocial behavior 13
“Incorrigibility is inconsistent with youth.”
- Miller majority opinion
14
Goals of the System
• Promoting Accountability
• Ensuring Fairness
• Preventing Re-offending
15
RecommendationsAdoption of a developmental approach to youth programs, policies and practices within DOJ/OJJDP, across the federal government, and when working with state, local and tribal partners in the field.
• Create multi-stakeholder task forces
• Strengthen the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
• Promote research
• Improve data 16
CHALLENGES TO REFORMING JUVENILE JUSTICE ON THE GROUND
FEDERAL ROLE
• LEADERSHIP• GUIDANCE• SUPPORT• RESOURCES
FEDERAL ROLE
• LEADERSHIP• GUIDANCE• SUPPORT• RESOURCES
WHAT TO DO?WHAT WORKS?HOW TO DO IT?EFFECTIVE INTERVENTIONS?RESEARCH
17
• FRONT DOOR TO JUVENILE JUSTICE IS INCREASINGLY THE CHILD WELFARE SYSTEM
• JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM OF LAST RESORT; INABILITY TO ACCESS OTHER SYSTEM SUPPORTS
MENTAL HEALTH SUBSTANCE ABUSE EDUCATION DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES HOUSING
HOUSING
• FRONT DOOR TO JUVENILE JUSTICE IS INCREASINGLY THE CHILD WELFARE SYSTEM
• JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM OF LAST RESORT; INABILITY TO ACCESS OTHER SYSTEM SUPPORTS
MENTAL HEALTH SUBSTANCE ABUSE EDUCATION DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES HOUSING
HOUSING
REQUIRES COLLABORATION AND SHARED OWNERSHIP OF THE JUSTICE INVOLVED CHILDREN
18
Success at Reforming Juvenile Justice Requires Many Partners
LOOKING FORWARD
•
• STRONGER FEDERAL VOICE
• INCENTIVIZE WHAT WORKS
• SUPPORT AND PROMOTE THE RESEARCH
•
• STRONGER FEDERAL VOICE
• INCENTIVIZE WHAT WORKS
• SUPPORT AND PROMOTE THE RESEARCH
DOING WHAT DOESN’T WORK IS EXPENSIVE 19
