Youth Crime in Canada FINAL EXAM REVIEW PDF

FINAL EXAM REVIEW WEEK 5: FACTS ABOUT YOUTH CRIME MEASURING YOUTH CRIME - There is no single source of into that determines the number of youth who commit crimes in Canada BUT it might tell us race, age, gender etc - Estimates can be obtained using various methods...

FINAL EXAM REVIEW WEEK 5: FACTS ABOUT YOUTH CRIME MEASURING YOUTH CRIME - There is no single source of into that determines the number of youth who commit crimes in Canada BUT it might tell us race, age, gender etc - Estimates can be obtained using various methods - Self-reports - Official records of convictions - Victimization surveys - Each of these provide a slightly different picture and can be pieced together to draw connections - FUNNEL OF CRIME: - Top: - Larger numbers; the reality in which crime happens - Middle: - Crimes that are ACTUALLY reported; offenders who are charged or convicted - Bottom: - Smaller numbers; crimes that get SOLVED (sentenced to custody) - Official measures of juvenile crime include those by police, the courts and corrections agencies - Unofficial measures of juvenile crime include self-report and victim surveys and provide a more complete description of the true extent of juvenile crime PROBLEMS IN MEASUREMENT - Official measures: - A lot of cases aren’t serious enough to be counted so they don’t become apart of the statistic - Policies and protocols also affect what youth crime is counted  - Crime solving rates for murder - solve about 60% of those cases - Crime is not always reported TRENDS IN YOUTH CRIME - 37% of youth have engaged in crime in their lifetime (acts of violence, acts against property or selling drugs [reported out of Toronto]) - Boys (30%) were twice as likely as girls (15%) to have engaged in VIOLENT behaviour - VIOLENT BEHAVIOUR = robbery, acts of aggression, intentional injury using a weapon and cyberbullying used to harass others - Boys were more likely to engage in property crime (30% boys and 26% girls) - Uniform Crime Reporting Survey (UCR) → collects data on all criminal incidents known by or substantiated by police services - In 2010, 153,000 youth were accused of committing crimes - 42% were charged, 58% were dealt with by other means - 464,621 adults were charged compared to 153,000 youths - Youth Crime Severity Index (YCSI) → takes into account both the volume and the seriousness of youth crime - Each youth offence is assigned a weight (derived from average sentences handed down by courts) → the more serious of the average sentence, the higher the weight for that offence - Variability in youth crime rates across the country: Sask, Manitoba and the 3 territories have higher youth crime - Indigenous youth have not seen the same decrease in the number of youth in the justice system as non-Indigenous youth - Challenges youth face include: - Cyberbullying, social exclusion and mental health/addiction issues - Which can lead to: - Damaged relationships, poor school performance, problems with the law, reduced overall health - Risk factors must be considered within the context of social determinants of health: - Poverty, social exclusion, racism, unemployment, inadequate housing, community disorganization - All of these are prevalent in Indigenous communities → higher incidences of depression, anxiety and suicide - 2017-18 → 13% of youth received a custodial sentence - 25% receive custodial sentences in years preceding the YCJA - 2017-18 → 4 youth in custody per 10,000 people - 12% decrease from previous year - 29% decrease from 2012-13 - Highest rates of incarceration were in Manitoba, Sask, NWT, Nunavut - Trends for admission to custody for Indigenous youth have not declined  - 2017-18 → Indigenous youth made up about 8% of the Canadian population - 48% of admissions to custody - 39% on community supervision - An increase in correctional admissions from 26% to 43% - Disproportionately sentenced to probation - Indigenous youth are held in remand and for longer periods of time when compared to non-Indigenous youth WEEK 6: ROLE OF POLICE - Police have a lot of power early in the investigation - There is a lot of subjectivity → if they don’t like you then they are going to make your life very difficult - Most police work is reactive (they get a call and react) rather than proactive - When a crime is reported, police: - Gather information, identify the offender, choose a disposition, make a police report and then decide the mode used to compel court attendance - Diversion (extrajudicial measures): alternative to court proceedings that allows youth to resolve their charges without a criminal record ARREST - Arrest is the constraint of freedom (although there are restrictions) - Physically, by order, laying a charge, or laying information - Must have reasonable grounds or a warrant - If they see a kid and don’t like his face this is NOT reasonable grounds for arrest but if a judge signs the warrant then this gives them reasonable grounds for arrest - Allowed without a warrant if they believe the youth will commit another offence but this has to be justified - Arrest applies differently for youth: the parents have to be notified and they have the right to retain and instruct counsel (not parents) QUESTIONING - Statement = young person gives at custody or prior to arrest - Confession is not admissible if it is: - Not voluntary or obtained in a manner that infringed on rights - Issue of voluntariness is significant for youth: - Lack of sophistication to understand rights - Don’t understand the roles of professionals - More open to influence of authority figures - Youth are more likely to confess than adults (they are immature, they don’t understand what’s going on or they are nervous) - Enhanced procedural protections don’t always work due to:  - Reduced maturity and heightened vulnerability - Youth don’t generally understand their rights - Youth are less likely to assert their rights - Police tend to tailor the questioning to the appropriate age, understanding and background of youth - Most youth are willing to talk to police and don’t assert right to silence, even if advised - Other enhancements: - Mandatory videotaping of statements - Time limits on questioning youth - Ban on the use of police trickery - Use of expert evidence to explain adolescent brain development - Police training in the implications of interrogating youth - Requirement of non-waivable right to counsel - It would not impede the state’s legitimate interest in detection and investigation of criminals - Would allow that youth, prior to waiving rights are aware of what they’re entering into - Admissibility of statement is most often litigated at trial - Crown must establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the statement was voluntary - Voluntary statement = no threats, oppression or use of police force SEARCH - Cannot be used for ‘fishing’ → police have to have reasonable grounds to believe that there is something at a residence in order to search the place (and if they want to arrest someone they have to have a warrant) - This can be excusable for an individual that may be in danger, danger to the police and/or going to destroy evidence or flee - When a youth is in custody, you don’t need a warrant to search them (their bags must be searched at all times) - YCJA modifies search for youth: - For police protection - If the occupant has a ‘named substance’ on him/her - School officials are not subject to the same constraints as police - If they believe there is drugs in the school, they can get a dog and search the lockers without a warrant - Case law is contradictory regarding bedroom searches - If police show up at your parents house wanting to search your bedroom, they need a warrant or the youths permission → without this anything they find is inadmissible in court - Vice principals are not agents of the police  - Must consider: the credibility and specificity of information, age, gender of the student, search’s purpose, intrusiveness - It has to be justifiable - Locker searches are considered legal since they are less intrusive than searching a person - Officials often have keys and policies that lockers can legally be searched - Youth have fewer Charter rights when being questioned by school officials than by police - If police lead the search, youth have more rights SEIZURE * PARTS OF THE YCJA THAT REFER TO THE LIMITS OF ARREST AND QUESTIONING OF YOUNG PEOPLE S. 146 → statement is inadmissible unless before statement, youth was informed of: - The right to remain silent - Evidence can be used against him/her - Youth has the right to counsel and the right to parent/responsible adult in the room (different than adults) - Youth could also consult with counsel/parent before making the statement - Youth must be informed in a language that was appropriate to youth’s age and understanding - This section does not limit police, as long as the will of youth is not overborne and the statement is voluntary S.128 * EXTENT AND LIMITS OF SEARCH AND SEIZURE * WEEK 7: PRETRIAL DETENTION AND BAIL PRETRIAL - Crown holds the case and a judge who is not on the case and the defence lawyer meet together and talk about the issues in the case and who wants what outcome - Pretrial detention and custody is not to be used ‘as a substitute for appropriate child protection, mental health or other social measures’ - Prior to the YCJA, pre-trial was overused - There was 3 grounds to keeping someone in jail before trial 1. You believe they won’t show up for court 2. It is required for the protection of the public 3. To maintain public confidence in the justice system - 2012 amendments: - Made it easier to manage youth in the community where possible and detaining those who should be detained - Pretrial detention is used when:  - Youth is charged with a serious offences (adult 5+ year sentence) or a history of charges/findings of guilt - Youth would not appear in court if released - The benefit of public protection - Exceptional circumstances → conditions would not be sufficient for the young person - 53% of incarcerated youth are there on pre-trial detention BAIL (SPROT, 2015) - If an offender is refused bail, it is keeping them behind bars before they have been convicted - Release on Conditions: judge decides to release this person but there are usually a number of conditions attached to it (sometimes it can be hard for the youth to follow these conditions) - Conditions can be: - Curfew (if they are in a group home their more likely to follow this curfew but if they don’t then the group home can call their P.O. and the youth can go to jail for breaching the conditions) - Can be problematic because it’s ‘punishment before conviction’ since the person is still ‘legally innocent’ they’re just being released on conditions - This is punitive - Those with numerous conditions are likely to be charged with failure to comply with one of them - This creates more crime as it captures behaviours that are not criminal (truancy, curfew violations, disobeying parents) - In 2011-12 failure to comply was 16% of all youths charged → youths are filling the facilities wrongfully because they are getting charged with things that aren’t really crimes - Released youth can have 6-9 separate conditions → the conditions can be questionable in relation to the offence or grounds for detention - Conditions imposed to give ‘sureties’ (parents) more power over youth or change their lifestyle/rehabilitate - In the case of youth a surety is a parent but for adults it could be a friend or a boss - Sureties are problematic because it gives them more power over the youth’s life and it can be very controlled - Non-Association Clause: you cannot see or hangout with anyone: who could be charged with a similar offence, with a criminal record or who your mother does not approve of - 30-40% of youth receive conditions to attend a treatment program in hopes of being rehabilitated  - For minor offences, girls are more likely than boys to be required to attend treatment programs (46% v 22%) → this dates back to the JDA where girls were more likely to be charged with status offences - Treatment should not be imposed as a condition of bail release but it is all the time - 60% of youth who had 7 or more bail conditions and cases lasting more than 6 months - returned to court for failure to comply - In close to half these cases, the initial charge that triggered the bail hearing and conditions ended up being withdrawn but if they failed to comply with the conditions they are punished anyway - Youth are failing to comply because: - They don’t care to comply - Immaturity - Conditions are not manageable - YCJA created a presumption against pre-trial detention - Youth should not be kept in pre-trial detention unless: - They are charged with a violent crime, have a record of failed bail or special circumstances - S.29(1) of YCJA → courts prohibits bail for social welfare or mental health concerns - S.29(2) of YCJA → prohibited denial on secondary grounds (unless eligible for custody if convicted) - Has to consider what the youth did and what the possible sentence would be for that - 53% of incarcerated youth are on pre-trial detention (they are not guilty, they are legally innocent) - adults are 35% - They are not convicted of anything but locked up (youth might take plea deals because they are tired of being in pre-trial detention) EXTRAJUDICIAL MEASURES - The goal of diversion is labelling theory: let’s keep youth out of justice system to avoid them being labelled for the rest of their lives - They are faster, less costly (court processes are very expensive) and the community plays a role - Probation services get together with another organization that takes kids on that have to do with community service - When Ontario finally enacted diversion it was very restrictive: post-charge, narrow eligibility criteria, lowest used sanction) - Post-Charge: charge is put on hold and could be dropped - Context for increasing use of diversion: concern about youth crime increasing and there was a ‘get tough’ approach to youth crime on political platforms JUVENILE DELINQUENTS ACT (JDA) - The JDA had no provisions for dealing with diversion YOUNG OFFENDERS ACT (YOA) - First time, minor offences, no history offences only - Ontario did not want to implement the YOA - Research did not point to a huge body of research that was positive (not 100%) - Concern with net-widening and abuse of rights - Net-Widening: engulfing more people in the CJS as offenders that wouldn’t necessarily be - No EJM if you didn’t admit guilt (abusing their rights) YOUTH CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT (YCJA) - You could get EJM again even if you’ve already had it (big distinction between this and YOA) - Includes a lot of community based approaches → it is the umbrella - Sanctions, conferences, committees - S.4 creates a presumption of use for youth with no record and a minor offence - A youth who commits a serious offence with no record does not get EJM - EJM should be: - Informal, restorative and reparative - Encourage responsibility of youth - Engage families and communities - Police Screening: dealing with youth informally by giving a warning - Caution: more than a formal warning, administered by police or in letter - Warnings/cautions take into account: - Seriousness of offence - If the youth has a prior record - Attitude of youth (are they cocky or being polite/rude) - Views of the victim (are they afraid or understanding) - Pre/post-charge: provincial policy regulates referral (the process is straightforward) - Youth meets with agency (they have a referral from the Crown’s office), accepts responsibility, agrees to plan, parents notified - If youth says they did not do it at any time during the process, it has to be reevaluated - Parents word does not matter - Youth must: write an essay, do community work, make a donation to charity - Victims have a right to be informed about the process and are often invited to be involved in the process - Aboriginal Communities: many have EJM programs based on restorative ideals (going onto the land with them)  - Youth must accept moral responsibility for the act - Two year period of access to records of EJM when youth is convicted of another offence YOUTH JUSTICE COMMITTEES - Comprised of members from the community → lawyers, parents, business owners, citizens - They monitor and support the youth justice system - Administer alternative measures - They deal with larger questions - Advise government on how to improve the system based on finding out there are a lot of kids that are selling weed underage (commission a study to advise them) - Provide information to the public and coordinate system and deal with under 12s YOUTH JUSTICE CONFERENCES - Deal with individual cases - In Canada, they are based on traditional Aboriginal restorative justice practices - Take the victim and their family, take the offender and their family and meet to see if they can restore the hurt caused - Conference: a group of persons convened to give advice concerning a specific youth in trouble with the law - Including: - Sentencing circles, extrajudicial sanctions - Recommendations not binding to the court ARTICLE BY SPROT * WHERE ARE THE NUMBERS GOING * WHAT ARE THE THRESHOLD (BAIL CONSIDERATIONS) PRIMARY - Show up to court when required - Somebody is in a cell at the courthouse and they have to show up for court because they are forced (someone will bring them) SECONDARY - Danger of committing another offence - the public has to be protected - The person shows no remorse and has a history of committing crimes before TERTIARY - Administration of justice in disrepute if you are released, due to offence PROBLEMS REGARDING BAIL CONDITIONS - Historical concerns about the use of detention → focus on legal and extra-legal factors affecting court decisions to deny - Legal: prior record, do they have a history of offending, is the current offence serious or minor, have they violated bail in the past, do they have outstanding charges, not responding to correspondence; then bail will be denied  -Extra-Legal: living with parents, does the youth attend school, do they have a job; these are social situations that might affect why a judge would deny bail - Problematic because if bail is denied because of this reason then you’re using detention due to a social welfare reason which is not what the courts are supposed to be used for COMPARE AND CONTRAST OF EXTRAJUDICIAL MEASURES * - Intensive Rehabilitative Custody and Supervision (IRCS) - Conferences - Committees - Police Screening - Caution - Remand - Pre/post-charge - WEEK 8: YOUTH COURT AND SENTENCING GUEST LECTURE - YCJA: can be prosecuted at 12 for all the things you may have gotten a ‘slap on the wrist’ for in the past - Young people have rights that have to be protected - They have a voice, they have a right to retain counsel, right to personal security, right to plead not guilty, same Charter rights as anyone else, these rights have to be respected - Victims are not forgotten by the YCJA - Judicial Reprimand: judge having a meaningful conversation with the youth about getting on the right track - S.25 of YCJA = youth has the right to retain and instruct counsel without delay - Applies even when the Crown has decided not to pursue in a criminal court - 4. Application that says if legal aid is available and the youth has been denied the legal aid, you can get a judge’s order to compel legal aid to pay for lawyer services (important because adults don’t get this) - Retention period of records is based off of the severity of the crime but (I think) max two years - If you are charged at 17 and go to trial at 19, it stays on your record for 3-5 years after you finish the sentence - 19: spend 2 years on probation order it will stay on your record for 3-5 years following the completion of your probation - If you get a further conviction and it is within the retention period, it will cement the entry on your record for life - They are called entries not convictions  - 17 and 19 year old both charged on a drug charge → 17 year old could be probation and 19 year old would get 3 years - ~96% of matters in the criminal courts end with guilty please - There are pressures that are put on people to take the plea - Many adult clients don’t have access to bail - Disclosure: all the evidence police have against them - S.606 of CC - plea inquiry - Compels counsel to go through certain steps with the client - Judges are not bound by anything the counsel puts to them - If the youth admits guilt the court has to accept it - Sexual offender registry does not apply to youth - Overcharging is a major problem within the CJS YOUTH SENTENCING - Purpose: - To hold a young person accountable through just sanctions that ensure meaningful consequences for them and that promote rehabilitation and reintegration thereby contributing to long-term protection of the public - Must not be more than for an adult in similar circumstances - Should be similar to youth in similar cases - Be proportionate to the seriousness of the offence and degree of responsibility of youth - Be the least restrictive - Most likely to rehabilitate and reintegrate - Promote a sense of responsibility and acknowledge harm done - 2012 amendments made denunciation and deterrence the objective but not if they are disproportionate or inconsistent with other principles - Custody: - Only if youth has committed a violent offence - OR failed to comply with non-custodial sentences - Youth has committed a serious indictable offence and has a history of findings of guilt - ⅔ in a group home etc - ⅓ community service HOW THE YCJA INTRODUCED NEW SENTENCES (2003) - Custody supervision order – ⅔ custody + ⅓ in the community - IRCS – treatment for serious violent offenders suffering from a psychological disorder (has to be a diagnosis of a mental disorder, has to be a treatment made up by the court, has to be an appropriate program for the youth in need) - Deferred custody and supervision order – conditional sentence (not available for serious bodily harm cases)  - Intermittent Custody and Supervision Order – youth who wants to go to school and the judge doesn’t trust them, so they want the youth to come back every 6 months to check in - Intensive Support and Supervision Order – more than a probation order but involves seeing a probation officer, social worker or youth worker a lot more often (every couple of days) - Attendance Center Order – you’ve been convicted and plead guilty, there is a program that deals with the impact of the crime on the community and you have to attend - Reprimand – stern lecture/warning from judge INTENSIVE REHABILITATIVE CUSTODY AND SUPERVISION ORDER (IRCS) - Available to youth who commit a serious violent offence, suffers from a mental health and where an appropriate program is available - Enhanced diagnosis and treatment of youth with complex mental health issues (92% of cases) - Some benefits in reducing the likelihood of violence in the future - Most are improved after IRCS (4% deteriorated) - Given the complexity of cases, risk is often elevated following treatment with improvement in some areas - Part B cases = formal diagnoses and all goes according to the law - Part C cases = court doesn’t recognize the illness early enough or there’s no program for that person so that sentence might come a bit later - Part B cases are court ordered and Part C cases are ‘exceptional’ - 84% of IRCS cases from 5 jurisdictions — Ont (higher population compared to other provinces), Sask, Alberta, Manitoba (these provinces have a higher Indigenous population than the others) - Majority of cases are male and over half are Indigenous - All have highly complex needs → conduct disorder, substance abuse, ADHD, PTSD - Sentencing involved custodial and community sentencing components - Youth participate in a number of programs → on average they participate in 7 different therapeutic or training while in custody - When in the community the average is about 5 interventions - INCLUDING: vocational/life skills, psychological services, recreation therapy, educational assistance, addiction support and counselling - Has a probation officer following you around everywhere, they have engagements with your school and family, they know everything about you - These are reserved for very serious offences because they take a lot of time and intensive resources YCJA CHANGES FROM YOA  - Custody now includes a community supervision order (⅔ + ⅓) - Reprimand - stern lecture/warning from judge - IRCS sentence - for serious violent offenders GA INQUEST - GA was born in Russia, moved to Canada, switched between living with his mother and father → there was a lot of tension and disruption for a child that young which created personal instability - GA’s behaviour changed when he started highschool (he was about 14 → 3 years after the disruption) - GA reported: a daily use of marijuana, binge use of ecstasy - GA had mental health issues: missed a lot of school, missed curfew, disrespectful, making rude comments, excessive use of street drugs, acting out - GA was convicted of armed robbery, he would wear a disguise - GA was sentenced to 77 days open custody and 18 months probation - 2008: GA (16) was charged with assault causing bodily harm regarding his sister and got 2 YCJA sentences - She had injuries to her face, blood was splattered, she told police she was scared for her life - GA pled guilty but there was a s.34 assessment (psych assessment) to help figure out what the issues in this case were and how we can better meet them with intervention - Court considered NCR assessment after the s.34 results - S.34 assessment: mental health issues and severe substance abuse issues, he was a danger to himself and others - There was a mandatory inquest held over 3 weeks - 35 witnesses called - 49 exhibits filed - GA died on May 14, 2008 - (re-look at slides) YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH COURTS - Mental health courts were expanded following the GA inquest, to increase cooperation between the mental health system and the CJS - Aimed at youth in trouble with the law in some way related to mental health or addiction problems - 12-17 → youth in conflict with the law and have one or more of the following mental health problems: substance abuse, developmental needs or chronic behavioural problems - Therapeutic court: brings together mental health services and support for specifically targeted cases - They have to admit to the offence (more than pleading guilty)  - They have to be willing to participate in services to rehabilitate them - Specialized courts are mandated to deal with specific issues and have more and better resources to deal with those issues - Youth received active case management by youth mental health court (YMHC) worker till charges are resolved - Crowns office has to review all the referrals and make a decision on eligibility based on: mental health problems, substance abuse, reasons for referral, nature of offence, and see if the court has the resources to help with these things - YMHC worker is full time, assess every youth, makes recommendations, meets with counsel and Crown - Generates a treatment plan to be managed in the community, sentencing, community disposition - Youth moves quickly through this process, matches youth with successful community intervention, mental health issues relate only indirectly to offending behaviour - History of youth justice indicates a system that has moved away from interventionism and towards accountability - Problems: - Youth courts should not be seen as treatment resources → they are not allowed to impose treatment without permission - Net-widening, sanctions for non-compliance (punishing behaviour that could be coming from a psychiatric episode), risk to privacy - Court accepts that high numbers of youth with mental health needs will end up in court - Need to continue to question the need for such courts and address youth mental health problems before they commit offences - Mental health problems are higher amongst youth in the system - 90% of youth meet the minimal diagnostic criteria for at least one mental health disorder, 25% serious mental disorders - Mental health problems increase the likelihood of justice system involvement - Involvement in the system makes mental health difficulties work and also can create them - Intensive Support and Supervision Program (ISSP): allows youth mental health needs to be addressed - Process Evaluation: interviewing YMHC workers, judges, psychiatrists → Court promoted atmosphere of youth and family engagement, respect for youth - The goal of reducing recidivism was based on treatment of mental health needs - Crown and defence counsel are responsible for referring to youth to the YMHC  - Probation officers found mental health issues challenging: - Unpredictable nature of their behaviour which causes a lot of problems - Challenging for other youth in the facility, not just staff - Assessing the emotional level of fear or threat in the group at the time (there is leaders, followers, bullies in these groups) MENTAL HEALTH COURTS UNDER THE YCJA - Mental health issues receive more attention in the YCJA in relation to detention, dispositions, and assessments - In the YCJA, mental health appears to be considered in several different ways: - Attempt to balance a community force (community safety, public protection and accompanying connotations of risk) with a youth focus that; - Includes the protection of young people’s rights - Has an emphasis on rehabilitation and reintegration as key approaches for addressing offending behaviour - YOUTH LAWYERS * WEEK 9: METHODS OF INTERVENTION CORRECTIONS AND INTERVENTION - Costs: services vary – closed custody is more expensive than open, and the least expensive is probation - Closed: paying for staff, paying for security, paying for movement of goods - Most custodial sentences are for short term (less than one month), average sentence is 68 days closed, 66 days open - Secure custody is reserved for violent offences - (There is much variation around the country as to what violent is) HISTORICAL CONTEXT - Reformatories: place of intervention – education, vocational training, religious training - Industrial Schools: for ‘teaching’ and ‘training’ - Favoured over reformatories because: they were more family-like atmosphere of cottages, incentives for early release, greater participation of women - JDA: - “Best interests” of the child were paramount (focused on welfare and rehabilitation) - Sentences were indeterminate (youth could be held until 21 yrs old) - Questions raised of efficacy of intervention - A lot of places did not test recidivism so they didn’t know if the facility actually had an impact  - YOA: - Judges had to look at how they could justify a custodial sentence - Declaration of principle – balanced differing philosophies: 1. Crime prevention 2. Societal protection 3. Special needs and circumstances 4. Rehabilitation 5. Limited accountability (shorter sentences) 6. Youth rights under the law - Sentencing: - YOUTH TREATMENT - Risk/Needs/Responsivity Model: for assessing and treating offenders widely adopted in corrections - Offers an evidence-based approach for evaluating an individual’s risk to reoffend, by; - Identifying the specific factors (criminogenic needs) that must be addressed to reduce risk - While paying head to treatment modality (general responsivity) - Responsivity: how responsive or how open the individual is to what’s going on - Dealing with involuntary clients - Combat this resistance and open them to a program that they will respect - Individual characteristics such as cognitive ability, learning style and motivation that may impact the effectiveness of interventions (specific responsivity) - RNR model differs from psychological/psychiatric diagnostic framework - EXAMPLE: ADHD is a diagnosis associated with impulsivity, which is a criminogenic need - Successful intervention directs services at youth’s identified needs - Mental health needs are responsivity factors - which are important to target - Research indicates that there are gender specific criminogenic needs as intervention frameworks are less effective for girls than boys PROBLEMS WITH YOUTH TREATMENT - RNR model ignores gender and race - It is modelled on white males which is not culturally fair or accurate on gender - Mental health difficulties are present in a lot of the backgrounds of youth in the system but the system does not address them  - Mental health intervention is usually only brung in if it was very acute; having psychotic episode or self harming - What’s the level of risk, what are the criminogenic needs that have elevated this risk, and then how receptive is that kid going to be - This perspective pays little heed to mental health problems as predictors of recidivism, but are important to address in treatment because they have an impact on success of interventions targeting criminogenic need - Needs more nuance if it's going to be applied to kids in the CJS INTERVENTION - Examples: - Cognitive Behavioural Interventions: based on social learning theory – behaviours are learnt therefore you can learn new behaviours that are different and better - Aggression Replacement Training (ART): - Skill-streaming: taught other skills to deal with anger and aggression - Anger control training: learning how to control your anger - Moral reasoning training: rationalization - Substance abuse programs - Sex offender programs - Boot camps PROBLEMS WITH INTERVENTION - Efficacy: are the programs having an effect? - Some youth are isolated and cannot access services - Presumption that youth will be receptive and benefit from programs (they have to engage in them) - Can be hard to establish because the clients are involuntary - They usually do it because they have to, but they don’t benefit a lot since they are resisting the actual knowledge while doing it - Program issues: - Rehabilitation seen as punishment of vulnerable individuals - Assessment: ascertain strengths, weaknesses, and needs of youth - Pre-Sentence Report: prepared by a probation officer, contains plans youth has to change, assess aspects of the crime committed and youth’s background - Education: mandated by law, but many youth have problems in this area (so what happens is a lot of youth have individualized education plans for themselves) - Specialized, adapted classroom learning  - Counselling: youth follow a treatment or intervention plan, periodically updated (based on school, family, addressing the crime they committed, their thoughts) - Recreation: therapeutic aspect, allow youth to better structure their free time - Helps youth lean cooperative behaviour, improve communication skills, gain physical health benefits, psychological benefits WEEK 10, 11, 12: SOCIAL JUSTICE ISSUES OF DIFFERENT SPECIFIC POPULATIONS LGBTQ YOUTH PROBLEMS AT HOME - Most LGBTQ youth (in group homes/the system) have little, if any, ties to their birth family or home communities - Many parents or caretakers are initially upset, disappointed or angry with their child upon learning of his or her sexual orientation - Teens leaving care without established a trusting and sustainable relationship with a family are much more vulnerable to poverty, homelessness and victimization in young adulthood - Many run away, removed for behavioural reasons or relationship problems with peers and caretakers related to orientation or gender LBGTQ YOUTH PROBLEMS IN THE SYSTEM - LGBTQ youth get rejected because of their gender/identity - Largely overrepresented in child welfare system and YJ systems, but experiences are largely overlooked - Rejected when they come in the system by other kids, caregivers, social workers because they are ‘different’ - There is not a solid, well funded program for these kids - Youth often experience discrimination, maltreatment, isolation, instability - If you were ‘different’ or had a problem, you were stigmatized by the other youth and staff - This is a resilient population, they are more likely to age out of foster care - Not likely to go back home because of disruption in family relationships before going into the system - Homelessness and running away seem more willing to accept them than the system - Homeless shelters have seen it all, there is a less chance of judgement - Experience in system: - Often victims of harassment, violence, bullying, discrimination and abuse  - Harassment from peers, staff and caretakers (name calling, threats, rejection, placed in separate wings of the house to be isolated from members of the same sex) - Often blamed or disciplined for the maltreatment they experience - Many LGBTQ youth find the street to be safer and a more appropriate living environment - Caretakers sometimes try to ‘convert’ youth’s orientation and pressure them into conversion therapy - LGBTQ youth are not allowed the same privileges, rights and relationship that straight foster youth are often allowed - They may experience consequences for engaging in age appropriate consensual same-sex relationships - Permanency: process of establishing, maintaining and achieving permanency for youth in the child welfare system can be very difficult - LGBTQ youth are much less likely to be adopted or reunited with their parents - They are a lot more likely to be placed in care or group home setting GIRLS IN THE SYSTEM - In 2009, females accounted for about one-quarter of youth accused by police of having committed a CC offence - Rate of offending for female youth is still less than half of that of male youth (4,011 per 100,000 vs 9,700 per 100,000) - Women and girls commit fewer crimes than men - Male offenders tend to be involved in more violence - Males tend to be less mature and tend to get caught more often - Males are socialized differently - Male and female youth tend to commit similar types of crime: - Theft under $5000 - Common assault (level 1) → hair pulling, pushing, shoving - Administrations of justice violations (failure to comply, non association clauses) - Other CC violations → cybercrime, counselling to commit a crime - Intervention: - Needs of girls in terms of prevention, treatment and aftercare differ from boys → girls need to be addressed in a gender specific, culturally competent manner - Interventions that help adolescent girls learn how to manage their risk who might take advantage of them, underage drinking, drug use etc - Females are less likely to receive mental health treatment than males and more likely to abandon treatment  - Strong links between female delinquency and school failure, teen pregnancy and child bearing and later mental health problems DIFFERENT PATHWAYS TO DELINQUENCY - Barret et al (2015) 1. Girls diagnosed with a mental health disorder involving impulse control or aggression were 11 times more likely to commit a criminal offence (60%) 2. Placement with child protective services, girls housed with boys, no special needs services - Early disruptions in parent-child relationships have serious repercussions for females (death of a parent, divorce) - Removal from the home is highly problematic from what they are used to - Child maltreatment is likely to precipitate coercive behaviour on part of the child (child physically acting out towards other kids, internalizing it through self harm) - Strongest predictor of female recidivism was a history of drug use, particularly given the strong association between adolescent drug use and lack of parental control in the family - Lower age at first referral and lower severity of first offence are predictors of repeat offending - Most common status offence is truancy and that failure to comply with mandatory attendance orders will automatically result in a referral for contempt of court INDIGENOUS YOUTH - Indigenous: individuals who identify as First Nations, Metis, Inuit - Pretendians: people who claim they have Indigenous heritage and benefit from it through grants and other recognition and turns out to be a false identity for personal gain - Criminal behaviour is an expression of victimization and traumatization according to Aboriginal values - Indigenous youth crime is an outcome of historical policies and processes that have resulted in severe and entrenched trauma among generations of Indigenous peoples - Two key factors must be considered when understanding the criminalization of Indigenous youth 1. Shared experiences with Indigenous peoples in their relations with settlers 2. Intergenerational trauma, repercussions of which are still felt in daily lived experiences of Indigenous youth - Interventions must: - Incorporate elements that address poverty, racism and self-determination - Include family and community as part of the process  - Efforts must be: - Based on an understanding of Indigenous culture, values and justice - Situated against a backdrop against which socio-cultural issues are also addressed OVERREPRESENTATION IN THE SYSTEM - 2017-18: Indigenous youth (12-17) were 43% of admissions to correctional services in the nine reporting jurisdictions - Indigenous youth make up 48% of custody admissions and 39% of community admissions (probation, community service etc) BUT are 8% of the Canadian youth population - Female Indigenous youth are overrepresented compared to non-Indigenous counterparts and male counterparts - Indigenous youth are overrepresented in correctional admissions across the country - Disturbing number of Indigenous youth coming into conflict with the law despite certain ‘rights’ being constitutionally guaranteed - Proportion of Indigenous youth in custody has disproportionately increased - Indigenous youth make up over half of those admitted to remand custody and just under half of those admitted to sentence custody WHY ARE THEY OVERREPRESENTED IN THE SYSTEM - Trauma and victimization characterize Indigenous populations, yet observers point to noticeable lack of comprehensive data on Indigenous victimization - Link between victimization and criminalization which means that many victimized Indigenous youth are at risk of adopting criminal behaviours - Indigenous youth are overrepresented in admissions to custody - Indigenous youth, lacking a cohesive socio-cultural history, kids retreat to finding ‘worth’ where it is available - They try to find it where they can, lots of Indigenous youth gangs - Limited options available due to marginalization and disenfranchisement (disconnection from culture, family etc that can direct them to criminal behaviour) - Youth turn to criminal behaviour and gang involvement - Indigenous youth inherit the legacy of residential school experiences of previous generations, as well as the intergenerational trauma that is the legacy of colonization - Identity issues have implications for self-esteem - Intergenerational trauma is a common experience of Indigenous youth → contributes to higher rates of risk - Risk factors linked to criminal behaviour can also lead to the formation of gangs - Searching for identity is one of the underlying causes of gang association - Serves as a substitute family  - The promise of money - They serve as a course of identity, prestige and status - They offer protection and loyalty - Recruitment by family members; intergenerational gang involvement - Overrepresentation is rooted in the history of colonization - Indigenous people have been subjected to forced assimilation, discriminatory laws, policies and practices and cultural genocide RACIALIZED YOUTH * BLACK YOUTH - Akuko-Barfi et al (2023) - Explored experiences of Black youth and young adults (16-26 yrs) in GTA who have had previous contact with police (12-17 yrs) - Youth reported: - Youth-hood is not considered by police - Treated as wholly responsible for actions and reactions to CJS - Double bind - too young to navigate the system independently but held wholly responsible - process of ‘adultification’ - Racial disparities are overrepresented in CJS - Canadian population: - 3.5% identify as Black - 7-10% incarcerated in federal prisons are Black - 20% incarcerated in Ontario jails (2 years less a day) are Black but are less than 5% of the population - Black men and women are 5 and 3 times more likely to be incarcerated - Black men under 35 make up 7% of incarcerated individuals - Anti-black racism occurs early in the legal process (before sentencing, before incarceration → usually occurs at sentencing and arrest or first contact) - Especially through community policing, which requires police to patrol neighbourhoods as part of their everyday policing roles - Certain racialized communities don’t feel safe with community policing → they feel targeted because the police over-patrol those areas - Ontario Human Rights Commission (2020) found that treatment of Black people in the CJS was linked to systemic anti-Black bias in policing - Data from 2013-2017 showed that Black people from Ontario were 4-7 times more likely to be charged than others - They were overrepresented in all use of force cases and 70% of shooting deaths  - Given the overrepresentation of Black youth, police use diversion measures less for them (this can only be explained by anti-black racism) - Black youth are subject to ‘adultification’ → they are constructed as older, more mature and more responsible for actions than other youth which is why they are usually denied legal protection - Black youth have internalized an inferior view of themselves as ‘other’ which is created and embedded by whiteness - Criminalization of Black people through racial profiling and over-policing continues the sense of oppression felt through Canadian settler-colonial history - This enhances oppression, creates adultification and the sense of being targeted - Black youth came into contact with CJS at an early age and those experiences made them feel embarrassed, mistreated, abused, vulnerable (around elementary school age) - Many were mistreated and concerned for their safety → young girls did not feel safe around older, white, male officers - Diversion was never an option that was discussed with them - Black youth felt as though they were not treated in an age appropriate fashion - They were treated in a more punitive way than their peers - Faced open hostility and threats of violence from white officers - Girls’ ages were not considered (they were considered older) - They were treated as knowledgeable about the law - Youth were treated with the presumption of criminality due to race - Police see Black people as agitators rather than children worthy of protection - Many instances of unnecessary use of force against Black youth - Black male youth had more threats of physical violence and young Black girls were being sexualized and felt as if there was a strong power imbalance - Neither were viewed as children in need of protectors - they were viewed as criminals STREET INVOLVED YOUTH - 20% of homeless people in Canada for 13-24 years old - Many youth leave home due to adverse conditions, social exclusion and oppression - Homelessness is associated with poor nutrition, victimization, higher-risk substance abuse, limited access to health and social services - Many homeless youth use drugs (cannabis, stimulants, alcohol) - Most reported cannabis/drug use had harmful effects on mental health, finances and home/life relationships  - Most had severe consequences like withdrawal, housing, difficulty learning things - ⅓ reported having overdosed in their lifetime (fentanyl was the most common) VIDEOS