Poster #66 - Social Support within the Juvenile Justice System

• In Event: Poster Session 19

Abstract

More than 1.6 million cases a year in the United States are delinquency cases and 72,000 youth are incarcerated (Snyder & Sickmund, 2006; Sickmund, Sladky, Kang, & Puzzanchera, 2008). Adolescents who are incarcerated may share similar experiences; however, confinement may include different settings such as juvenile detention, residential treatment facilities, or jail. Each of these locations may offer varying levels of restrictions, rehabilitation, and therapy (Dmitrieva, Monahan, Cauffman, & Steinberg, 2012). The current study seeks to understand the effect of services, social climate, and social support youth experience while being detained in the juvenile justice facilities on reoffending using secondary data analysis. Specifically, the analyses tested whether 1) having supportive informal adult mentors within the facility is predictive of lower reoffending ; 2) facilities with better social climate (higher safety and lower peer problem behavior) will predict lower reoffending; 3) facilities with better services (greater availability of treatment services and post-release planning) will predict lower reoffending. these effects will remain after controlling for sex, time in the system, and type of facility (secure facility or residential treatment facility). As part of the Pathways to Desistance Study (Schubert, C. A., et al. (2004) participants (male N=1,171; female N=183; Mage=16.54; 42% African American, 34% Latino, 20% White, 4% other ethnicity) were interviewed every six months for 36 months, followed by four yearly assessments.
Multilevel modeling was used to evaluate changes in offending over age, as well as the effects facility experiences on subsequent offending. As can be seen in Table 1, participants on average experienced a decline in offending (b = -.14, p < .001), with girls having lower age 14 levels of offending (b = -.12, p < .001) and corresponding slower decline in offending over age (b = .02, p < .01). Spending a longer time in the facility predicted lower offending (b = -.0003, p < .001) and being placed in a secure facility vs residential treatment facility predicted higher offending (b = .02, p < .001). Contrary to our expectations, having supportive adults within the facility was not associated with offending (b = -.001, n.s.). In line with our expectations, facilities climate and services predicted reoffending. Youth spending time in safer facilities with fewer delinquent peers had lower reoffending (b = -.01, p < .001 for facility safety and b = .02, p < .001 for peer problem behavior). Similarly, youth who spent time in facilities with a wider selection of services and post-release planning services experienced lower reoffending (b = -.004, p < .01 for treatment availability and b = -.014, p < .001 for post-release planning services). Analyses will examine the supportive adults variable by differentiating between the relationships that are characterized by social vs instrumental support. The discussion section will focus on the implications of the study findings for juvenile justice policy.

Authors

• Rachel E Harr, University of Denver
  Presenting Author

• Kim-Chi Tran Pham, University of Denver

• Julia Dmitrieva, University of Denver