Juvenile Diversion: Can these programs be improved?
The current trends in juvenile crime and addiction appear to have skyrocketed and the capabilities of the diversion programs seem to be struggling to keep up. This is similar in many ways to the struggles law enforcement is having in prevention efforts with juveniles. Many of the relevant studies that were completed are outdated and do not carry current information on juvenile delinquency as it pertains to addiction and crime. Unfortunately, the U.S. is in the midst of an opioid epidemic where easy access to drugs can be found on social media, through social groups and in schools. I share this insight from 18 years of law enforcement experience and personal observations.
The purpose behind juvenile diversion is to provide an opportunity to move juvenile offenders away from formal judicial processes. Some of these programs are offered prior to entering the judicial process while others are offered following adjudication or an admission of guilt (2017) In the later portion of entering diversion these efforts are considered in lieu of detention or incarceration in hopes that diverting the juvenile to a program will assist in prevent further criminogenic behavior and deeper penetration in the juvenile justice system (2017).
In an article by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, they provided two relevant theoretical perspectives that can be utilized to justify the purpose of diversion. The first being “labeling theory, which contends that processing certain youths through the juvenile justice system may do more harm than good, because it inadvertently stigmatizes and ostracizes them for having committed relatively minor acts that may have been more appropriately handled outside the formal system” (2017). The second perspective is “differential association theory that suggests that system involved youths will adopt antisocial attitudes and behaviors from their delinquent peers. Exposure to and fraternization with more advanced delinquent youths and adults is thought to have a criminogenic effect that increases the probability of youths reoffending” (2017).
When taking these two perspectives into consideration it becomes imperative for the juvenile criminal justice system to continue to pursue prevention and early intervention through a variety of diversion programs. It is also important to understand that research is showing that the most cost-effective place to stop recidivism among juveniles is as early as possible (Youth.gov, 2000). A brief from the National Conference of State Legislature advises that it costs approximately $588.00 a day to keep a juvenile incarcerated where diversion programs typically cost $75.00 a day (Diversion in the Juvenile Justice System, n.d.). Cost cannot be the only driving factor, but if funding could be directed towards programs that work to prevent recidivism it would be more beneficial to everyone involved in the juvenile system.
When taking all of that into consideration, diversion is the obvious direction to take, but should the juvenile system take into account that youth are becoming more involved in dangerous behavior like auto theft and robbery. I believe diversion can still work with juveniles involved in more dangerous behavior to move them away from continued criminal behavior. A lot of this can start in the schools by providing programs like social competence, conflict resolution, violence prevention, social competence and mentoring programs to teach juveniles that their social dynamic does not define them (Youth.gov, 2000). Besides programs that can be provided in schools or for minor offenses I believe the diversion programs should include intensive programs for repeat offenders that are not a safety risk for the community. As an example, a juvenile who has been arrested multiple times for auto theft could be entered into an intensive program to work towards reducing future recidivism.
One issue that has been identified is the lack of consistency among diversion programs and that every state has a different approach to how diversion is utilized. This includes when diversion takes place, who decides eligibility of diversion, if services will be provided, if a juvenile must admit guilt before being admitted to a program and if sanctions can be imposed for failing to complete diversion (Foundation, 2020). Some argue that imposing sanctions for violated rules is counterproductive to the diversion process and results in a formal delinquency record (Foundation, 2020). I would argue that diversion needs to have consequences associated with failing a program. I don’t know if that means they receive the full punishment for the offense they committed or if it should increase the intensity of the program, they are a part of, but we cannot just expect them to complete a program without an incentive.
Equity is another issue that has come up regarding diversion. How does the diversion process ensure consistent equity among offenders selected for a program? In an article by the Annie E. Casey Foundation minorities are given diversion much less than their white counterparts (Foundation, 2020). There are policies in place that should maintain that equity, but due to the way diversion is decided by individual decision makers this disparity seems to be prevalent starting in the selection process (Foundation, 2020). This is one area having consistent regulations can assist in promoting racial equity. The offense should play a greater role in the juvenile system when it comes to diversion and more attention should be given to offenders and their individual needs. This could easily be accomplished by the use of assessments similar to what is used during entry into probation.
Ultimately, there is no argument that diversion has its purpose and can be a very effective tool, but improvement is needed in the selection and compliance processes. More effort should be placed on understanding a juvenile offender’s specific needs and the diversion program providing subjects that will help offenders succeed. I don’t know if there is a perfect answer, but diversion programs should include mental health assistance, and addiction treatment along with the current available programs. Diversion has to adjust to the current juvenile culture and find ways to not only succeed with juveniles who commit minor offenses, but also include the juveniles who have a more significant history as long as they do not present a risk to society. I firmly believe that no juvenile is completely lost to a life of crime and law enforcement, policy and law makers along with the judicial system can work together to save as many juveniles as possible.
Resources:
(2017, February). Diversion from Formal Juvenile Court Processing [Review of Diversion from Formal Juvenile Court Processing]. Https://Ojjdp.ojp.gov/. https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/model-programs-guide/literature-reviews/diversion_from_formal_juvenile_court_processing.pdf
Diversion in the Juvenile Justice System. (n.d.). Www.ncsl.org. https://www.ncsl.org/civil-and-criminal-justice/diversion-in-the-juvenile-justice-system
Foundation, T. A. E. C. (2020, October 23). What Is Juvenile Diversion? The Annie E. Casey Foundation. https://www.aecf.org/blog/what-is-juvenile-diversion#:~:text=Does%20juvenile%20diversion%20work%3F
Youth.gov. (2000). Prevention & Early Intervention | Youth.gov. Youth.gov. https://youth.gov/youth-topics/juvenile-justice/prevention-and-early-intervention