Juvenile Mental Health Court: Rationale and Protocols

Under the sponsorship of the judiciary, the Santa Clara County, California Juvenile Court, in partnership with the Juvenile Mental Health Department and a technical assistance agency (SOLOMON), has pioneered a Juvenile Mental Health Court for seriously mentally ill children who have become involved in the criminal justice system. The judiciary, probation department, district attorney, public defender, county counsel, and service providers have collectively embarked upon the implementation of a modern approach to mental health diagnosis, triage, and treatment services for youth and families who come in contact with the justice system as a result of the combination of serious mental illness and juvenile delinquency. This article presents the court's rationale and protocols.     

The Juvenile Drug Court Judge and Lawyer: Four Common Mistakes in Treating Drug Court Adolescents

This article will present information gleaned from anecdotal experience of existing juvenile drug treatment courts regarding several common mistakes often made by those new to the drug court. The mistakes discussed include: 1) Believing the work and role responsibilities in a traditional juvenile court will not change significantly when entering a juvenile drug court; 2) Citing the elimination of drug and alcohol use as a final outcome goal when developing the mission statement for a juvenile drug court; 3) Believing that a juvenile drug court ensures accountability by keeping a close eye on participants and setting immediate consequences for any break in program rules; 4) Using vicarious learning to “teach a lesson”–making an example of an individual participant who has broken program rules in front of the large group. The goal of this article is not only to raise caution to these pitfalls, but also to help incoming judges and lawyers become aware of the changes that working in a juvenile drug court will demand.     

The Changing Role of the Youth Court Judge

The last century has witnessed the creation of a number of strategies regarding youth justice and the young offender. With each change in policy has come a redefinition of the role of the youth court judge. This article discusses the traditional role of the judge, the unique role of the youth court judge, and how history has and is likely to continue to define and influence this role.     

Recidivism and Psychiatric Symptom Outcomes in a Juvenile Mental Health Court

Few researchers have examined outcomes in Juvenile Mental Health Courts. Recidivism rates were assessed among 108 predominantly African American (95.3%) youth. Ages ranged from 12 to 18 (M = 15.85, SD = 1.45). Substantially fewer re‐convictions, along with re‐arrests, were exhibited among the treatment group (n = 54) compared to the control group (n = 54) after one year of participation or probation supervision. Psychiatric symptomatology among 21 youth was assessed pre‐ and post‐ intervention using the Comprehensive Behavior Rating Scales‐Self Report. Cohen's d effect sizes indicated substantial reductions in mental health symptoms (.33 ≥ d ≤ .88). Results are consistent with the previous studies of problem‐solving court efficacy.     

Mental Health Court Outcomes: A Comparison of Re-Arrest and Re-Arrest Severity Between Mental Health Court and Traditional Court Participants

Mental health courts have been proliferating across the country since their establishment in the late 1990's. Although numerous advocates have proclaimed their merit, only few empirical studies have evaluated their outcomes. This paper evaluates the effect of one mental health court on criminal justice outcomes by examining arrests and offense severity from one year before to one year after entry into the court, and by comparing mental health court participants to comparable traditional criminal court defendants on these measures. Multivariate models support the prediction that mental health courts reduce the number of new arrests and the severity of such re-arrests among mentally ill offenders. Similar analysis of mental health court completers and non-completers supports the prediction that a "full dose" of mental health treatment and court monitoring produce even fewer re-arrests.     

Juvenile Court Context and Detention Decisions: Reconsidering the Role of Race,Ethnicity, and Community Characteristics in Juvenile Court Processes

The relationship between race/ethnicity, community dynamics, and juvenile court processes has long been established. Prior research has relied on city‐ or county‐level measures of community characteristics (e.g., racial composition, poverty) to examine how racial groups are processed within juvenile courts. To date, no study has utilized finer scale measures of geographic areas to examine how characteristics of juveniles’ communities impact court decisions. By utilizing official juvenile court data from a city in the southwest, this study draws upon attribution theory to examine how economic and crime community‐level measures directly and indirectly influence detention outcomes. Findings reveal that the effect of race and ethnicity in detention outcomes varies across communities, and the effect of ethnicity in detention decisions is mediated by economic community‐level measures. The theoretical and policy implications of the study findings are discussed.     

中国“例制”构建中的法院角色和法官作用

我国案例指导制度中的法院角色和法官作用有着鲜明的特色,案件审理阶段法院和办案法官往往并没有参与案例指导的意识,而是在案件裁判后由审判庭之外的综合部门通过遴选的方式确定典型案例,经编辑后报审判委员会研究讨论,再逐级报最高人民法院确定并发布。指导性案例的产生不是按照管辖制度自然地"涌现",而是被人为地"发现",这一点明显不同于国外的做法。相比较,"涌现"方式符合司法经济原则和司法规律,而"发现"方式充满人为因素,成本高而效率相对较低。案例指导制度不应被管辖制度"牵着鼻子走",而应当通过变更管辖制度,与司法规律相适应。     

Reduction in Recidivism in a Juvenile Mental Health Court: A Pre‐ and Post‐Treatment Outcome Study

A review of an evaluation of the Court for the Individualized Treatment of Adolescents (a prototype Juvenile Mental Health Court in Santa Clara, California) is presented along with admission criteria. Participant demographics are described. McNemar Test and Paired T Test results show that study participants committed violent, aggressive, and property crimes in significantly lower numbers in the 23 months following court admission than in the 18 months preceding court admission, despite escalating patterns of antisocial behavior prior to court involvement. The importance of developing multidisciplinary models to address moderately severe offenders with serious mental illness is discussed.     

Screening the Mental Health Needs of Youths in Juvenile Detention

There is an increasing number of juveniles coming into the justice system with a variety of mental health and substance abuse concerns. While the actual number of youths with mental health disorders in the juvenile justice system has been difficult to determine, it is estimated to be substantially higher than it is for youths in the general population. In addition, researchers have estimated that a high number of these juveniles experience co‐morbid mental health disorders. The purpose of this study was to examine the number of youths who present symptoms of a mental health disorder at intake into a juvenile detention center in the Midwest. Two hundred‐four youths were assessed with the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument‐Second Version (MAYSI‐2; Grisso & Barnum, 2000), a mental health screening instrument. At least 68% of the youths identified symptoms of a mental health disorder at intake. Given the significant number of youths who identified symptoms of a mental health disorder at intake into detention, the need to provide mental health services for juvenile detainees should not be ignored.