By Steven Olson and Kat M. Anderson

On September 26, 2019, the Roundtable on the Promotion of Health Equity of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine held a workshop in Flagstaff, Arizona, on the impact that juvenile justice system involvement has on the health and well-being of adolescents, families, and communities of color. The roundtable has a unique role as a convener of the nation’s experts in health disparities and health equity. It works to promote health equity and the elimination of health disparities by increasing the visibility and understanding of inequities in health and health care among racial and ethnic populations; examining research, policy, and community-centered programs; and catalyzing the emergence of new leaders, partners, and stakeholders. The Arizona workshop was the last in a series of three centered on the intersection of health equity with the criminal justice system. The first, held in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, focused on incarceration as a structural determinant of health (NASEM, 2019). The second, held in Washington, DC, examined interactions between race, ethnicity, and drug control laws and policies and the criminal justice system (NASEM, 2022). The Arizona workshop featured panels of nationally and locally recognized experts in justice and health, along with a luncheon session featuring young adults speaking about their experiences in the justice system. As Julie Baldwin, director of the Center for Health Equity Research at Northern Arizona University and chair of the workshop planning committee, said during the workshop’s opening session, “We see this as a critical launching point for dialogue and action around this topic, both locally and nationally.”2 The workshop was sponsored by the Aetna Foundation, the Arizona Biomedical Research Centre, the California Wellness Foundation, The Colorado Trust, the Health Resources and Services Administration, the Hogg Foundation, Merck & Co., Inc., the Moore Foundation, the NARBHA Institute, Northern Arizona University Center for Health Equity Research, and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs’ Office of Health Equity.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. The Impact of Juvenile Justice System Involvement on the Health and Well-Being of Youth, Families, and Communities of Color: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

By Human Rights for Kids

This report details the results of a study on the prevalence of Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) and childhood trauma among people incarcerated in Maryland state prisons for crimes they committed as children. While the number of children detained in the juvenile justice system has sharply declined over the past two decades, this promising trend leaves out a troubling fact: Children are still prosecuted in the adult criminal justice system in every state in the country. In Maryland, more children are charged as adults per capita than in any other state save Alabama. And Maryland ranks in the top five states for the percentage of its prison population that has been incarcerated since childhood. To complete this report, researchers mailed ACE surveys to 882 people in Maryland who were incarcerated in adult prisons since childhood; 124 individuals responded. These responses indicated an average ACE score of 6.38 out of 10, and nearly 70% of respondents reported experiencing six or more ACEs prior to their incarceration. The most common ACEs identified in the responses were parental separation, household substance abuse, emotional and physical abuse and the incarceration of a household member.

Washington, DC: Human Rights for Kids, 2024. 34p.

By Caitlin Cavanagh

Adolescents are developmentally distinct from adults in ways that merit a tailored response to juvenile crime. Normative adolescent brain development is associated with increases in risk taking, which may include criminal behavior. Juvenile delinquency peaks during the adolescent years and declines in concert with psychosocial maturation. However, current U.S. approaches to juvenile justice are misaligned with youth's developmental needs and may undermine the very psychosocial development necessary for youth to transition out of crime and lead healthy adult lives. In this article, I discuss empirically supported and efficacious responses to juvenile crime in the United States, as well as opportunities for further developmental reform of the juvenile justice system. Developmentally appropriate responses to juvenile crime prioritize community-based corrections and engage youth's social context in the rehabilitative process. The juvenile justice system shares the responsibility to prepare youth to live fulfilling, productive adult lives; that responsibility can be achieved by partnering with developmental scientists to inform juvenile justice practice and policy.

Child Development Perspectives, Volume 16, Issue 3 Sept. 2022 pages 125-187

By Heather Hunt and Gene Nichol

To better understand the role of poverty in shaping outcomes in North Carolina’s juvenile justice system, the authors conducted interviews and surveyed attorneys, social workers, scholars and youth advocates. This report summarizes those findings, highlighting the challenges faced by poor youth and their families.

Key Findings:

One in five North Carolina youth under the age of 18, and about one in three Black and Latinx youth, are poor. Juvenile courts in North Carolina can order a youth to pay a fine or restitution, and are statutorily authorized to assess a range of fees against parents, including fees for a court-appointed attorney, community service, evaluation and treatment, and probation.Attorney fees were the most common fees mentioned in the survey and interviews, although assessment can vary widely across the state. Other common fees include electronic monitoring and restitution.Youth charged as adults are subject to the full range of court costs, fines and fees faced by all adult criminal defendants. In addition to court-ordered fees and costs, involvement in the juvenile system imposes more indirect costs such as transportation and time. All survey respondents identified the time commitment required by a delinquency case as a serious hardship for poor families, and almost all (91 percent) answered that parents were unable to get time off from work.Over a third of survey participants estimated that their most recent or typical client had to travel more than 10 miles from home to the courthouse.Housing instability, can upend a juvenile case when amenities like phone or internet service are not available and a parent cannot be reached. Because of the juvenile system’s emphasis on meeting the needs of the child through services, parents without the resources to corral services in the early stages of a case are at a deep disadvantage.Financial status can impact access to, and the availability of, court-ordered treatment programs. All children in delinquency cases in North Carolina are entitled to a court-appointed attorney, but the quality of representation provided can depend on geography. Parents who are unable to comply with court orders risk criminal contempt which is punishable with a fine up to $500 and/or imprisonment, plus the additional court costs and fees that may be assessed.

North Carolina Poverty Research Fund, 2921, 34p.