1 / 42

Problem?

The Power of Collaboration: How a Jurisdiction Reduced School Arrests National Juvenile Justice Network Annual Forum Washington, D.C. July 27, 2011 Judge Brian Huff Jefferson County Family Court Birmingham, Alabama. Problem?.

claire-odom
Télécharger la présentation

Problem?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Power of Collaboration: How a Jurisdiction Reduced School Arrests National Juvenile Justice NetworkAnnual ForumWashington, D.C. July 27, 2011Judge Brian HuffJefferson County Family CourtBirmingham, Alabama

  2. Problem? United States has the highest rate of incarceration of any country on earth. Too many children being referred to the juvenile justice system. Most children are being referred for minor misdemeanor offenses. Most children being referred are African American.

  3. Reform Begins at Intake • Jefferson County Family Court Intake Initiatives include: • Children in Need of Supervision Policy • Diversion through Counsel and Advise • The School Offense Protocol Intake Detention Probation

  4. Importance of Diversion Court can’t be all things to all people Limited resources should be focused on kids who warrant court involvement Research has shown that court involvement can do more harm than good Resources can be provided outside of court (but the court should strive to coordinate resources)

  5. Juvenile Justice Reform is Philosophy OLD PHILOSOPHY NEW PHILOSOPHY Court as a resource “identifier” Court as a referral source Court as a Collaborator • Court as a “savior” • Probation • Supervision • Counseling • Incarceration

  6. Zero Tolerance EQUALSZero Intelligence

  7. DEFINITION “A philosophy or policy that mandates the application of pre-determined consequences, most often severe and punitive in nature, that are intended to be applied regardless of the seriousness of behavior, mitigating circumstances, or situational context.” Skiba et al. 2006

  8. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT • 80’s War on Drugs • Later applied to combat pollution, trespassing, sexual trespassing, & sexual harrassment • Attributed to “Broken Windows” theory of crime (Kelling, George & Coles, 1997) • School Systems begin adopting in early 90’s • Suspensions nearly doubled from 1.7 million in 74 to 3.1 million in 01. • Assumes that removal of disruptive students deters others from similar conduct while enhancing classroom

  9. EFFECTS OF ZERO TOLERANCE • Suspension rates have increased • School Code violations result in court referrals • Increase in police on school campus • Increase in suspensions and referrals has significantly increased racial & ethnic disparities • Drop-out rates increase • Juvenile crime increases

  10. SCHOOL CONNECTEDNESS • School connectedness is a strong protective factor against delinquency. US Surgeon General. (2001). Youth Violence: A Report of the Surgeon General. • School connectedness is linked to lower levels of substance abuse, violence, suicide attempts, pregnancy, & emotional distress. Journal of School Health 72 (4). • OSS of elementary & middle school students contributes to drop-out rates. Predictors of Suspension & Negative School Outcomes: A Longitudinal Investigation (2003)

  11. Research shows a strong link between court referrals and dropout rates • A student arrested in high school is twice as likely to drop out • A student who appears in court during high school is four times as likely to drop out Sweeten, Gary, Who Will Graduate? Disruption of High School Education by Arrest and Court Involvement. 24.4, Justice Quarterly, 462-480 (December 2006).

  12. Birmingham educated only 25% of the county’s public school students, but accounted for 83% of school referrals in 2007-2008 SCHOOL REFERRALS TO JEFFERSON COUNTY FAMILY COURT, 2007-08 SCHOOL YEAR 10 additional school systems Jefferson County Birmingham 83%

  13. Birmingham students referred to family court in 2007/08 – by offense

  14. Birmingham students referred to family court in 2007/08 – by offense

  15. Added to the disproportionate minority contact with the juvenile justice system…… The Birmingham system educates only 25% of students in the county, but produces more than 66% of school referrals to Family Court 99% of students arrested in the Birmingham schools are African American

  16. Racial Disparities in Detention

  17. Solicit media support Meet with the media at regular intervals. Foster good relations. Provide reliable data. Work with the media on continued messaging.

  18. Form Your Team Jefferson County Family Court Birmingham City Schools Jefferson County District Attorney Birmingham Police Department NAACP Southern Poverty Law Center Department of Human Resources

  19. MULTI-INTEGRATED SYSTEM THEORY INPUTS Education INPUTS INPUTS Law Enforcement Social Services OUTPUTS Mental Health INPUTS

  20. Admitted that we had been doing something wrong…

  21. Trying to fit in Dating Short attention span Identity Some adult responsibilities Independence/Dependence Moody Withdrawn New emotions Normal Adolescence 21

  22. “Our” Kids Broken families Dysfunctional families Drug/alcohol abuse in families Criminal behavior “normal” in their families Learning disabilities Mental health issues Abuse victims

  23. Decide which “offenses” to include. Affray (fighting) Disorderly conduct Harassment Assault 3 (no weapon) Menacing (no weapon) Criminal Trespass 3 Theft 3

  24. Build Consensus If “Columbine” happens in my jurisdiction, I want the police at the school protecting the children and not at the family court over a school yard fight.

  25. Honig v. Doe We think it clear, however, that Congress very much meant to strip school systems of the unilateral authority they had traditionally employed to exclude disabled students, particularly emotionally disturbed students, from school. In so doing, Congress did not leave school administrators powerless to deal with dangerous students; it did, however, deny school officials their former right to “self-help,” and directed that in the future the removal of disabled students could be accomplished only with the permission of the parents or, as a last resort, the courts.. at 323–24. Justice Brennan

  26. The Case of Chris L.Morgan v. Chris L., 927 F. Supp. 267 (E.D. Tenn. 1994), aff ’d, 106 F.3d 401 (6th Cir. 1997), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1271 (1997). • Middle School Student • ADHD • School’s Failure to work IEP • Juvenile Complaint Referral • Due Process Hearing • Litigation

  27. Federal District Court The court relied in part on a Tennessee IDEA due process opinion that ordered a school system “to do everything it can” to dismiss a juvenile court petition.

  28. U.S. Court of Appeals The court stated that, “pursuant to the IDEA’s procedural safeguards . . . the school system must adopt its own plan and institute an M-team meeting before initiating a juvenile court petition for this purpose.”

  29. THE SCHOOL

  30. Decide which “offenses” to include. Affray (fighting) Disorderly conduct Harassment Assault 3 (no weapon) Menacing (no weapon) Criminal Trespass 3 Theft 3

  31. Decide upon a better way of discipline. First “offense” – warning/written citation Second “offense” – Attend “School Offense Workshop Referral to court

  32. SRO’s after periodic reviews requested a “Level” box to reflect the use of their discretion to issue another warning or referral in lieu of the next step. SRO’s also requested the discretion to make a variety of referral, or take other action

  33. Get it in writing!

  34. Birmingham educates only 25% of the county’s public school students, but now accounts for 66% of school referrals SCHOOL REFERRALS TO JEFFERSON COUNTY FAMILY COURT, 2009-10 SCHOOL YEAR 10 additional school systems Jefferson County Birmingham 66%

  35. Discussion alone produced a big drop in referrals, but a written document is critical for sustained results. COURT REFERRALS FROM BHAM SCHOOLS, BY SEMESTER

  36. Despite a 50% drop from 2007-08 to 2008-09, misdemeanors and violations still accounted for more than 90% of arrests

  37. The average detention population is down 72%

  38. Commitments to Juvenile Prison are down by 73% DYS ADMISSIONS FROM JEFFERSON COUNTY, 2003-2009

  39. Replication Tips: the negotiation process • Knowledge and data = Power • Be prepared to counter horror stories with data • Choose reps carefully • Nodding and smiling is not enough • Consider engaging an independent facilitator • Media can be a blessing and a curse • Set timelines and stick to them

  40. It takes more than a meeting to build a collaborative • Raise awareness – share numbers, legal background, research • Share stories – not just about statistics! • Listen to your partners and consider their interests and motivations – be flexible with messaging • Set goals and timelines for the group’s work • Frame the issues carefully and repeat constantly

  41. Replication Tips: Implementation • Don’t assume the protocol will enforce itself – appoint a watchdog • Be deliberate and explicit about how each leader will get the word out to staff • Training • Back it up with policy – what will the court do if a referral comes in that violates the protocol? • Invite the community/the media to hold the collaborative accountable for results

  42. For more information:Brian HuffPresiding JudgeJefferson County Family Court205.325.5538huffb@jccal.org

More Related