If you're young, have a disability, and happen to end
up in the juvenile justice system, most likely your disability will go
unnoticed and unaddressed, and your chance of leading a productive life
will rapidly disappear.
Disability law and juvenile justice
As Congress debates the reauthorization of the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, these abysmal odds
can be raised. Up to 20 percent of the estimated 100,000 youth in
incarceration have serious mental disorders, 20 to 50 percent have
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, 12 percent are mentally
retarded, and 30 percent or more have specific learning disabilities.
IDEA entitles these youth, like all youth with disabilities, to receive
an education in regular classrooms and to receive disability-related
services.
Many young people in the juvenile justice system might
never have landed there had their disabilities and related needs been
addressed. Others would not languish in the system for as long as they
do if they received services.
Properly treated and educated, almost all would
experience greater success after leaving it. But all too frequently, the juvenile justice system
provides little to nothing to help these young people with their
disabilities.
One problem may be resource shortages. Under the
original IDEA legislation, the federal government was to provide 40
percent of the costs of disability-related services. In practice, that
goal, never mandated by law, remains only partially met: the actual
contribution has never topped 20 percent.
But insufficient funding is not the only factor at
play. Many practitioners — judges, prosecutors, defense counsel, and
detention and correctional staff — know little to nothing about
disability law or the needs of youth with disabilities. Few states
screen and assess young offenders. And school records documenting
disabilities and individual education plans rarely follow youth into the
justice system. It's hard to fix a problem when you don't know it
exists.
It's even harder when you have little if any free
time. Justice practitioners are trained and paid to process cases and
monitor and supervise youth. Their already crowded schedule leaves
little room to take on additional responsibilities.
Add to these problems a reluctance among justice
systems, schools, and child welfare and social service agencies to
cooperate, and it's no wonder that young people drift from schools to
prison and back without ever having their disability-related needs
addressed. These institutional barriers could become insurmountable if
Congress embraces proposals to make it easier for schools to remove or
expel youth with disciplinary problems.
Recent research shows that these problems can be
surmounted and makes the punishment-focused "get tough" priorities of
the past decade seem shortsighted.
What should be done? First, juvenile justice
practitioners must be educated about the unique needs of youths with
disabilities. Greater understanding of what kids are up against and
which treatments work best is essential if we are to prevent these youth
from spending their lives bouncing in and out of the juvenile justice
system.
Diagnosis, treatment, and counseling for youth in the
justice system should be upgraded and expanded. For that, better
assessment instruments must be developed to pinpoint disabilities and
allow practitioners to work with schools to use existing education or
service plans.
For detained and incarcerated youths, best practices
such as individualized cognitive-behavioral interventions that target
each youth's specific needs and capacities should be implemented.
However, such efforts can't succeed without greater cooperation and
collaboration among juvenile justice systems, schools, and welfare and
social service agencies, and the involvement of families.
Finally, a federal commission should be tasked with
developing a strategy to help states and local jurisdictions address the
needs of youth with disabilities in the juvenile justice system.
Throwing money at the problem simply will not work without a coherent
"road map."
The juvenile justice system was created to help youth
make a successful transition into adulthood, while IDEA was premised on
the idea that having a disability should not amount to a life sentence.
Congress should debate the renewal of IDEA with these practical, humane
ends and compatible goals in mind.
These views are those of the authors and should not be
attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees or its funders.
By Daniel P. Mears and Laudan Y. Aron
23 May 2003
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20030522-064316-9243r.htm
home
|