Los Angeles County: Incarcerated Teenagers
Unless a problem directly affects a person, they will never take any interest in it. The thing with juvenile delinquency is that it is a small problem that has long-term effects on society. If people were to view juvenile crime as their issue and realize that it not only affects the future of their community, but it is currently affecting their wallets, it is likely that they would take more interest in the topic. Juvenile delinquency is an issue that has been around for centuries and the fact that it is not being properly dealt with is risking the future of today’s society. By being placed in juvenile detention centers, juveniles immediately have the idea implanted in their developing minds that they are criminals rather than being offered programs to transform them into better citizens. The incarceration of children to juvenile detention centers increases the chances of creating and implanting more criminals into our communities. The fact that a teenager as young as sixteen years old can have a criminal record is a problem and develops economic problems for communities and mental instability for the juveniles. If the state of California funds more juvenile rehabilitation programs instead of detention centers, the crime rates will not only decrease but it will be a benefit for California communities and its inhabitants. Some people may believe that certain juveniles can be too dangerous and should be incarcerated, but rehabilitation programs have been seen as the most effective for juveniles, thus the Los Angeles County Probation Department should establish funding for rehabilitation programs and away from incarceration enters.
Mental Illness in Juvenile Delinquents
Many youths who are labeled as juvenile delinquents often suffer from mental illnesses at the time that they commit their crimes. In the United States, one in every 33 children and one in eight adolescents are affected by depression and the occurrence of depression among juvenile offenders is significantly higher than among other young people. The probability of a juvenile offender suffering from a mental illness is significantly higher than that of the average young person. This increases the chances of many juvenile delinquents facing the hardship of a mental illness and committing a crime because of it, which leads to their imprisonment and being locked up in a hostile environment without proper mental health support making it more probable for their mental illness to worsen. Juvenile incarceration also has a negative effect on the well-being of an adolescent and puts a hiccup on their mental and social development and their future earnings. Incarceration during adolescence interrupts human and social accumulation at a critical point in their lives leading to lesser earnings and greater criminal activity. This bump in a child’s development plays a strong factor in decreasing their probability by 13% in receiving their high school diploma and increasing their probability by 22% to end up in prison as adults. Professor Doyle emphasizes the fact that “More generally, interventions during childhood are thought to have greater impacts compared to interventions for young adults” this leads to the fact that younger delinquents have a higher probability in turning their life around than adults. The quicker a teenager is helped, the higher chances they have in restoring themselves.
Incarceration Statistics in California
California has managed to lower the number of teenagers that are incarcerated in juvenile detention centers, but the teens that are still implemented into the juvenile detention centers continue committing crimes once they are released. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation released a document titled “2016 Juvenile Justice Outcome Evaluation Report: Examination of Youth Released from the Division of Juvenile Justice in the Fiscal Year 2011‐12” on February 2017 which is a report that outlines the demographics of juvenile delinquents and statistics on the outcome of those teens once released from Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ). The teens incarcerated for a longer period appear to have higher recidivism rates than the youths who were locked up for a shorter amount of time. This highlights the fact that the longer that these children spend confined in these spaces, the more likely they are to return back to the correctional centers once they are released. A common pattern is found throughout the entire report where crimes committed by juveniles has definitely decreased but recidivism rates increased every year that a teen was in confinement. Meaning that, if a teen is detained for one year they are the demographic that is least likely to commit a crime once released from their sentence, whereas a teen who has been confined for three years is most likely to commit a crime and fall back into the Division of Juvenile Justice.
Economic Factors in the Juvenile Justice System
It is absurd that the Los Angeles County spends more than $233,000 a year per youth to hold them in detention centers”. For every youth in a detention center, the department receives that amount of funding towards their department. This is the amount of funding that was needed when there was a peak of 2,000 youths in the 1990s and as of 2012, juvenile arrests have declined by 30% which brings up the question of why there is so much money for a department that – as of 2016 – only housed roughly 600 juveniles. All the money being spent on a juvenile’s incarceration could be going towards their recovery. According to Supervisor Sheila Kuehl (a civil service staff who performs the duties for the County departments), “she had been unaware of the high costs and wouldn't object to spending so much more taxpayer money on the camps and halls than other jurisdictions do if it helped to turn around troubled young people.” Yet, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors has objected in terminating three juvenile halls and 18 camps. Taxpayer money is going towards a department that is improperly distributing their money towards an ineffective system- juvenile detention centers.
Solution for the Troubled Juveniles
Offering rehabilitation programs would be the most effective route while also being the least expensive option in decreasing crime rates within youth. The amount of money it costs to build new facilities is around $100,000 per cell and operating costs typically exceed $60,000 per cell. Community rehabilitation programs such as drug treatment, counseling, and services that make sure individuals get to school or work on time add up to about “$15,000 and often costs less than $5,000 per year”. The California state bill SB 81 also states that block grants would provide an average of $130,000 per youth to be placed in community-based programs rather than being incarcerated. This turns out to be a much cheaper alternative in dealing with juveniles. An example of a program like this is the Soledad Enrichment Action Program (SEA) that is currently on Mayor Eric Garcetti’s policy agenda and funding list. The Soledad Enrichment Action Program is a gang reduction intervention program that is offered to adolescents who are past gang members or current gang members who wish to rehabilitate themselves. SEA falls under the Mayor’s Office Gang Reduction and Youth Development Office (GRYD Office) which was established in 2007 with the goal of establishing gang prevention and intervention programs throughout the Los Angeles area. Daniel Arroyo is one out of many members that has shared the positive impact SEA has had on their life and how it was their turning point in becoming better people and influenced them to attend college.
Society’s Position on the Juvenile Justice System
Concerned citizens may argue that imprisoning youth is the best solution, but it is the least effective solution and most expensive. If youth are rehabilitated and helped to be set up on the right path as quickly as possible after committing a crime, they are more likely to become a well-performing citizen in their community rather than likely to commit a crime once again after being released from imprisonment. Children who are locked up end up learning new ways to perform more well-thought-out crimes than the ones they were originally incarcerated for. According to the Justice Policy, “Aside from the direct costs of incarcerating juveniles – such as the funds required for operating detention facilities – taxpayers pay in the long term as well in the form of lost future earnings, lost tax revenue, and other ripple effects.” This means that, in the long run, taxpayers will end up paying more for incarcerating juveniles rather than have put all of that money into a positive motion in helping teens better themselves and help them avoid confinement, thus lessening the crime rates. The Justice Policy Institute also recommends improving educational opportunities within juvenile prisons but also looking into policy reforms that could end up helping youth stay away from correctional facilities in the first place which could end up saving the country “somewhere between $8 billion and $21 billion annually.” While people can be concerned that violent teens are being let loose through rehabilitation programs and kind of left off the hook to face consequences for their violent actions, it is a fact that “particularly as 62 percent of the young people in confinement in 2011 had committed nonviolent offenses”. The most common nonviolent crimes committed by youth are theft, tagging on public property, and drug and alcohol-related crimes which are minor criminal acts that can be changed through rehabilitation but worsened and enhanced with incarceration.
References
- Aizer, A., & Doyle, J., Jr. (2013). Juvenile Incarceration, Human Capital and Future Crime: Evidence from Randomly-Assigned Judges (pp. 1-45, Rep.). Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
- Allen, D., S., & Grassel, K. (2017, February 17). 2016 Juvenile Justice Outcome Evaluation Report Examination of Youth Released from the Division of Juvenile Justice in Fiscal Year 2011‐12. Retrieved March 31, 2017
- Sneed, T. (2015, January 09). What Youth Incarceration Costs Taxpayers. Retrieved March 31, 2017 Sentencing Guidelines Commission. Recidivism of Juvenile Offenders Fiscal Year 2007. March 31, 2017.
- Sneed, T. (2015, January 09). What Youth Incarceration Costs Taxpayers. Retrieved March 31, 2017
- Therolf, G. (2016, February 23). L.A. County spends more than $233,000 a year to hold each youth in juvenile lockup. Retrieved March 31, 2017
