Search

Behavioral health needs in justice-involved adolescents are an increasing concern, as it has been estimated that two-thirds of youths in the juvenile justice system now meet the criteria for one or more psychological disorders. This article describes the application of the Sequential Intercept Model (SIM), developed to describe five "points of interception" from standard prosecution into rehabilitation-oriented alternatives for adults (Munetz & Griffin, 2006), to juvenile justice. The five SIM intercepts are: (1) first contact with law enforcement or emergency services; (2) initial hearings and detention following arrest; (3) jails and courts (including problem-solving courts); (4) re-entry from jails, prisons and forensic hospitals; and (5) community corrections and community support, including probation and parole. Modifying the SIM for application with justice-involved adolescents, this article describes three examples of interventions at different intercepts: Intercept 1 (the Philadelphia Police School Diversion Program), Intercept 3 (problem-solving courts for juveniles), and Intercept 5 (juvenile probation). Relevant research evidence for each example is reviewed, and the further application of this model to juveniles is described. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research over the past four decades on decision-making in the juvenile justice system has frequently shown evidence of racial and ethnic disparity when it comes to processing minority youths. To identify and address racial disparities in the juvenile justice system, the US Department of Justice’s Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention requires that all states and territories track juvenile justice processing at nine decision points, such as referral to court, secure detention, and transfer to adult court. While those decision points are viewed as a useful starting point, disparities have been noted in other aspects of the juvenile justice system, including the utilization of mental health and substance abuse services among juveniles. The purpose of this article is to review 20 years of research literature (from 1995 through 2014) examining referrals to mental health and substance abuse services from within the juvenile justice system. The current research attempts to answer the question, ‘Are there racial disparities in the decisions to refer youths to mental health and substance abuse services from within the juvenile justice system?’ Twenty-six articles met inclusion criteria into this review, and the majority found at least some race effects in the decision to refer youths. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Objectives. We examined the provision of behavioral health services to youths detained in Indiana between 2008 and 2012 and the impact of services on recidivism. Method. We obtained information about behavioral health needs, behavioral health treatment received, and recidivism within 12 months after release for 8363 adolescents (aged 12-18 years; 79.4% male). We conducted survival analyses to determine whether behavioral health services significantly affected time to recidivating. Results. Approximately 19.1% of youths had positive mental health screens, and 25.3% of all youths recidivated within 12 months after release. Of youths with positive screens, 29.2% saw a mental health clinician, 16.1% received behavioral health services during detention, and 30.0% received referrals for postdetention services. Survival analyses showed that being male, Black, and younger, and having higher scores on the substance use or irritability subscales of the screen predicted shorter time to recidivism. Receiving a behavior precaution, behavioral health services in detention, or an assessment in the community also predicted shorter time to recidivating. Conclusions. Findings support previous research showing that behavioral health problems are related to recidivism and that Black males are disproportionately rearrested after detention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: All 50 states and the District of Columbia have legal mechanisms to try juveniles as adults in criminal court. This study examined the prevalence of psychiatric disorders among youths transferred to adult criminal court and youths processed in the juvenile court. Methods: Participants were a stratified random sample of 1,829 youths, ten to 18 years of age, who were arrested and detained in Chicago. Data from version 2.3 of the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children are presented for 1,715 youths, 13 to 18 years of age, including 1,440 youths processed in juvenile court and 275 youths processed in adult criminal court. Results: Males, African Americans, Hispanics, and older youths had greater odds of being processed in adult criminal court than females, non-Hispanic whites, and younger youths, even after the analyses controlled for felony-level violent crime. Among youths processed in adult criminal court, 68% had at least one psychiatric disorder and 43% had two or more types of disorders. Prevalence rates and the number of comorbid types of disorders were not significantly different between youths processed in adult criminal court and those processed in juvenile court. Among youths processed in adult criminal court, those sentenced to prison had significantly greater odds than those receiving a less severe sentence of having a disruptive behavior disorder, a substance use disorder, or comorbid affective and anxiety disorders. Conclusions: Community and correctional systems must be prepared to provide psychiatric services to youths transferred to adult criminal court and especially to youths sentenced to prison. When developing and implementing services, psychiatric service providers must also consider the disproportionate representation of individuals from racial-ethnic minority groups in the transfer process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BSTRACT [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Provides an overview of what is known about the prevalence, diagnosis and effective treatment of mood disorders among youths in the U.S., particularly among juvenile offenders. Discussion of the problems that arise for the delivery of treatment services; Relationship between mood disorders and disruptive or delinquent behaviors; Importance of proper diagnosis and treatment of mood disorders; Constitutional right of juvenile detainees to receive mental health treatment.

The article explores how behavioral health screening for young people is addressed by the juvenile justice system in the United States. Concern has arisen over how few young people in the U.S. juvenile justice system with behavioral disorders receive treatment despite the fact that they comprise more than half of the youth in the system. The perspectives of local, state and federal justice officials regarding the issue are presented. INSET: IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE.

Philosophically, juvenile justice incorporates the need to assess offender needs and provide appropriate services to them. Yet the extent to which juvenile justice systems currently identify and service mental health needs is questionable. Furthermore, it is unclear whether certain types of offenders are more or less likely to receive services based on individual and case characteristics. In this study these issues were examined by using juvenile cases processed in an East Coast state between 1992 and 1994. Findings from this study show that mental health placements are used rarely relative to other court outcomes (i.e., dismissal, probation, or other types of placements), and gender and race significantly influence whether an offender receives this type of placement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Effective systems of care for youth with emotional disorders require shared values among stakeholders toward a variety of mental health issues. Juvenile courts represent one stakeholder group whose values can affect the delivery of services to young offenders with or at risk of emotional disturbances. This research uses statewide data from Tennessee to assess the mental health orientation (MHO) of juvenile courts, their use of treatment options for offenders, and whether MHO influences the treatment referral decision. Results show that courts have a positive MHO, but this subjective orientation does not correspond to higher treatment referral rates. Moreover, service referrals are at a considerably lower rate than estimates of need for this population of youth would predict. While positive MHO suggests a basis for nurturing the shared vision required for effective systems of care, other factors must be considered to account for courts' underutilization of treatment options for juvenile offenders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the position paper "Meeting the Mental Health Needs of Youth in Juvenile Justice," published by the International Society of Psychiatric Nursing (ISPN) and the Association of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing (ACAPN). The paper traces the mental health needs of youth in detention and the shortcomings of the system. It supports the screening and assessment guidelines forwarded by the U.S. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention and the American Academy of Child Psychiatry. It also stresses the importance of outcome data from the model treatment programs for benchmarking and lobbying around funding and public attitude change. The role of Psychiatric Mental Health nurses in juvenile justice is also addressed in the paper.

The article focuses on the stance of the National Juvenile Detention Association (NJDA) on the issue of using juvenile detention facilities for juvenile delinquents with severe mental health in the U.S. It cites that juvenile detention facilities are compelled to detain youth with severe mental health issues due to the lack of available appropriate community resources. The NJDA advocates the placement of juvenile offenders with mental health issues in appropriate therapeutic environment.

The article investigates the financial problems surrounding the mental health care for juvenile offenders in the U.S. The juvenile prison system in the U.S. is estimated to have 60,000 young offenders, some of which are having mental health problems. An analysis conducted by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality showed that mental illnesses are the costliest disorder in the country between 1996 and 2006. Mental health treatment was also reported to have increased to nearly 58 billion U.S. dollars.