Michael J. Leiber, Ph.d. Virginia Commonwealth University mjleiber@vcu

Minority Youth Over Minority Youth Over Representation in the Representation in the

Juvenile Justice System: Juvenile Justice System: An Overview of the An Overview of the

Issue and Federal and Issue and Federal and State ResponsesState Responses

Michael J. Leiber, Ph.d.Michael J. Leiber, Ph.d.Virginia Commonwealth UniversityVirginia Commonwealth University

[email protected]@vcu.eduPresented at the Youth Violence Prevention Presented at the Youth Violence Prevention

Conference – University of Missouri-St. LouisConference – University of Missouri-St. LouisApril 8, 2010April 8, 2010

BackgroundBackground

• In 1989, the disproportionate In 1989, the disproportionate minority confinement mandate minority confinement mandate (DMC) was passed as part of the (DMC) was passed as part of the reauthorization of the Juvenile reauthorization of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJDP) Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-(JJDP) Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-415, section 223[a][23].415, section 223[a][23].


• States receiving funds from the States receiving funds from the federal government are to develop a federal government are to develop a comprehensive approach to the comprehensive approach to the disproportionate minority youth disproportionate minority youth presence in the juvenile justice presence in the juvenile justice system system

- Formula Grant Funds- Formula Grant Funds


• In 2002, the DMC mandate was amended as In 2002, the DMC mandate was amended as part of the reauthorization of the JJDP Act:part of the reauthorization of the JJDP Act:

““address address juvenile delinquency prevention juvenile delinquency prevention efforts and system improvement effortsefforts and system improvement efforts designed to reduce, without establishing or designed to reduce, without establishing or requiring numerical standards or quotas, requiring numerical standards or quotas, the disproportionate number of juvenile the disproportionate number of juvenile members of minority groups, who members of minority groups, who come into come into contact with the juvenile justice system.contact with the juvenile justice system.””

• Changed from confinement to contactChanged from confinement to contact

DMC - HistoryDMC - History

The purpose of the DMC Core The purpose of the DMC Core Requirement remains the same: Requirement remains the same: to to ensure equal and fair treatment for ensure equal and fair treatment for every youth in the juvenile justice every youth in the juvenile justice system, regardless of race and system, regardless of race and ethnicity.ethnicity.

DMC mandateDMC mandate


Interrelated and Ongoing StagesInterrelated and Ongoing Stages

Identification – extent of presenceIdentification – extent of presence

Assessment – search for causes/ Assessment – search for causes/ contributing factors contributing factors

Interventions – reduce DMCInterventions – reduce DMC

Evaluation – see if interventions Evaluation – see if interventions workingworking

Monitoring – assess over timeMonitoring – assess over time

Extent of PresenceExtent of Presence

• Nation wideFrom 2002 to 2004, African Americans were: 16% of youth. 28% of juvenile arrests. 30% of referrals to juvenile court. 37% of the detained population.

34% of youth formally processed by the juvenile court.30% of adjudicated youth.35% of youth judicially waived to criminal court.38% of youth in residential placement.58% of youth admitted to state adult prison.

Latest stats - 2005Latest stats - 2005

• See Table 1See Table 1

DMC assessment phaseDMC assessment phase

• The purpose of conducting an assessment study is to provide policy makers and system practitioners with precise information upon which interventions can be developed and implemented to reduce DMC

• A search for causes, contributing factors to DMC

DMC DMC

To understand DMC – Differential offending minorities commit more crime and

more serious crimeTracy – some studies that find evidence of

bias, discover minorities commit more

crime

DMC DMC

• Arrests suggest race differences in Arrests suggest race differences in delinquent behavior or differential delinquent behavior or differential offending; however,offending; however,

problems with arrests- police problems with arrests- police deployment deployment patterns, race profiling, patterns, race profiling, biased biased decision-making, data decision-making, data itselfitself

DMC BACKGROUNDDMC BACKGROUND

Additionally,Additionally, some self-report survey data indicate few some self-report survey data indicate few

race differences in the commission of race differences in the commission of delinquency delinquency

(e.g., (e.g., Piquero & Brame, 2008).

Or Huizinga and colleagues (2007) found that Or Huizinga and colleagues (2007) found that the extent of self-report differential offending the extent of self-report differential offending did not solely account for differences in did not solely account for differences in police referrals to juvenile court police referrals to juvenile court


• Second explanation for DMC, selection bias

This is where the system focus comes into play


Bias has many forms Direct = intentional, overt, conscious

Subtle = unintentional, indirect, unconscious –

tied to legitimate factors but racially

tainted, just as harmful, disadvantaged

DMCDMC

Subtle = unintentional, indirect – tied to legitimate and Subtle = unintentional, indirect – tied to legitimate and extralegal factors extralegal factors

e.g., assessments about family – Pope and e.g., assessments about family – Pope and Feyerherm Feyerherm

secure secure detention – Leiber and Foxdetention – Leiber and Fox

Assessment studies need to be conducted with this in Assessment studies need to be conducted with this in mindmind

DMC - Other Examples of DMC - Other Examples of Subtle BiasSubtle Bias

• Bridges and Steen’s (1998) analysis of Bridges and Steen’s (1998) analysis of pre-disposition reports written by pre-disposition reports written by juvenile probation officers provides juvenile probation officers provides powerful evidence of racial stereotypes powerful evidence of racial stereotypes and their influence on recommendations and their influence on recommendations at disposition. In these accounts, race at disposition. In these accounts, race was correlated with attributions about was correlated with attributions about the causes of crime and to perceptions the causes of crime and to perceptions of the risk of re-offending and harsher of the risk of re-offending and harsher dispositions. dispositions.


• That is, probation officers more often attributed That is, probation officers more often attributed offending among whites to external and alterable offending among whites to external and alterable causes (e.g., delinquent peers, problems at causes (e.g., delinquent peers, problems at school), while crimes committed by African school), while crimes committed by African American youth were more often attributed to American youth were more often attributed to internal and enduring character traits (e.g., internal and enduring character traits (e.g., aggressiveness, lack of remorse). aggressiveness, lack of remorse).

• These causal attributions corroborated beliefs These causal attributions corroborated beliefs that minority offenders are more dangerous than that minority offenders are more dangerous than whites, which in turn provided the basis for more whites, which in turn provided the basis for more punitive recommendations (see also, Steen et al. punitive recommendations (see also, Steen et al. 2005).2005).


• Graham and Lowery (2004) also Graham and Lowery (2004) also found attributions about the causes found attributions about the causes of crime to be linked to racial of crime to be linked to racial disparities in punishment responses disparities in punishment responses among juvenile court probation among juvenile court probation officers and police officers. officers and police officers.

DMC assessmentDMC assessment

Studies of Juvenile Justice System• Pope and Feyerherm (1993)• Pope and colleagues (2003)• Bishop (2005)• Engen and colleagues (2005)• Pope and Leiber (2005)Conclude – most studies find evidence of overt

and subtle bias even after considering influence of legal and extralegal factors


• Appears Both Differential Offending Appears Both Differential Offending and Selection Bias play a role in and Selection Bias play a role in DMCDMC


• If differential offending as a reason for DMC

Interventions focus on crime prevention: family dysfunction

drugs negative peer influences,

associations lack of quality education lack of access to meaningful

employment


If bias accounts for DMCExample Solutions: structure decision making at

detention and intake (race neutral) cultural sensitivity training advocates diversity in hiring education

DMC DMC

• Recently, Bishop (2005), Kempf-Leonard Recently, Bishop (2005), Kempf-Leonard (2007) and Piquero (2008)(2007) and Piquero (2008)

have argued that there is a need to have argued that there is a need to examine factors that may be linked to examine factors that may be linked to both differential offending and selection both differential offending and selection biasbias

e.g., impoverished communities, e.g., impoverished communities, heavy emphasis on crime control, high heavy emphasis on crime control, high crime rates, etc.crime rates, etc.


Evaluations/MonitoringEvaluations/Monitoring

Overall, there are onlyOverall, there are only a few interventions that a few interventions that have been evaluated (e.g., have been evaluated (e.g., detention detention diversion advocacy program or DDAP, diversion advocacy program or DDAP, Alternatives for Youth’s Advocacy initiative or Alternatives for Youth’s Advocacy initiative or AFY, detention reform in Multnomah county) AFY, detention reform in Multnomah county)

These have shown some success at reducing These have shown some success at reducing DMC. DMC.


• Given that twenty years have passed Given that twenty years have passed since the passage of the DMC since the passage of the DMC mandate, this is a significant mandate, this is a significant limitation since limitation since there are relatively there are relatively few known evaluations of strategies few known evaluations of strategies created and implemented to reduce created and implemented to reduce minority overrepresentation.minority overrepresentation.


Success or Failure?Success or Failure?

On one side of the continuum,On one side of the continuum,

Tracy (2005; 2002) views as a Tracy (2005; 2002) views as a failure, wrongfailure, wrong

focus, should be on crime focus, should be on crime preventionprevention


Another view but seen as failure:Another view but seen as failure:

Bell and Ridolfi (2008) of the W. Bell and Ridolfi (2008) of the W. Haywood Burns Institute critique of Haywood Burns Institute critique of the DMC mandate centers on the lack the DMC mandate centers on the lack of benchmarks and the failure to of benchmarks and the failure to change procedures that result in bias change procedures that result in bias and minority youth overrepresentation and minority youth overrepresentation in the juvenile justice system in the juvenile justice system


Leiber and Rodriguez are in the middle of these 2 Leiber and Rodriguez are in the middle of these 2 views - views -

some problems, some room for improvementsome problems, some room for improvement

but also see advancesbut also see advances

not a zero sum situation. Bringing about change not a zero sum situation. Bringing about change within organizations is often slow, complex and within organizations is often slow, complex and evolutionary. It is a process involving forward evolutionary. It is a process involving forward movement, backward movement, and at times, movement, backward movement, and at times, no movement. no movement.

DMC mandate DMC mandate

Michael J. Leiber, Ph.d. Virginia Commonwealth University mjleiber@vcu

Documents

Transcript of Michael J. Leiber, Ph.d. Virginia Commonwealth University mjleiber@vcu