On Monday, the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy released at new report that looks at the U.S. policy, now unique in all the world, of sending kids under the age of 18 to prison for life without any possibility that they might one day redeem themselves—the LWOP kids, Life Without Parole.
If you think I have continued to come back to this issue, you are right. And don’t expect it to end here. Moreover the LWOP issue is only a part of the juvenile justice issues we should be examining—an indicator. The real matter at hand is how we charge, adjudicate and sentence our nation’s young in general.
In all other areas of life, as a nation and as a culture, we wisely realize that kids are not ready to make adult decisions. We won’t let them drink, vote, have sex with adults, go to war, or enter into contracts. But we increasingly believe that, in the single realm of criminal justice, if a violent crime is involved, juveniles should be held to the same legal standard as an adult.
It doesn’t seem to matter than every single study and every shred of empirical evidence tells us that this policy is deeply flawed.
For the report click here.
And here’s a clip from the report’s abstract:
….[the authors] discuss the well-established principle that youth are different from adults, and explain how this principle is reinforced by adolescent brain development research. The authors address and dismiss arguments that harsh sentencing is necessary to protect public safety, as well as highlight troubling racial disparities and inconsistent sentencing application. In addition, they describe how such sentencing functions to undermine the United States’s moral standing, given that the United States is the only country in the world to sentence offenders under the age of eighteen to life without parole. Finally, the Issue Brief concludes with Ms. Kent and Ms. Colgan proposing an alternative to the practice of sentencing youth to life in prison without the possibility of parole
All this makes me think of Dennis Danziger’s student John Rodriguez. I don’t yet know for sure what Rodriguez did or didn’t do. I do know, from what Danziger and his wife have told me that John Rodriguez is an otherwise good kid with lots of potential. Whatever foolish and dangerous thing he did on the night in question, it resulted—thankfully—in no lasting injuries to anyone. Yet if the DA has his way, John swill pend the next 25 years behind bars.. If he did the full term, John would get out of prison when he is 43. And what kind of potential would he have then?
Last month, Newsweek’s Ellis Close wrote an excellent essay pertaining to the issue–=and in particular a report issued in New York about the abuses in that state’s juvenile justice system.
It is worth looking at here. Here is how it begins:
One day, treatment of young people who run afoul of the law may be guided by logic rather than politics, prejudice, and uninformed passion. That was the implicit message of a report delivered to New York Gov. David Paterson last month, just in time for Christmas. The report, from the governor’s task force on reforming criminal justice, came on the heels of a U.S. Justice Department investigation that found New York’s juvenile penal system to be tragically mismanaged.
Youngsters in custody were routinely assaulted by staffers. Beatings were so severe that teeth were knocked out, bones were broken, and some kids were rendered unconscious. The assaults were sometimes sparked by infractions no more serious than laughing or stealing a cookie. The incarceration and the primitive methods accompanying it came at a substantial cost: $210,000 a year per child. Wouldn’t it make more sense, task-force members reasoned, to reserve incarceration for those who posed a threat to public safety? For youngsters who are not deemed dangerous, other methods seem more reasonable. “The state should treat and rehabilitate them, not hurt and harden them,” wrote the task force.
Close points out that the state of Missouri has spent years pioneering a saner, more effective system for juveniles. Would that California would do the same.
IN OTHER NEWS that is not in the least encouraging, a California man—who the psych eval shrink suggested has poor impulse control due to his bi-polar disorder—stole a $2.99 package of shredded cheese and tried to snatch a woman’s wallet, and was sentenced to 7 years 8 months in prison. The man, who has a string of burglary convictions from 30 years ago, and has spent decades behind bars, was initially set to get 25-to-life under Three Strikes, but the psych eval managed to derail that madness.
AND ABOUT THOSE REHABILITATIVE PRISON PROGRAMS that, once completed, under the new law aimed at reducing California’s prison population, will allow some California prisoners up to six-weeks of their sentences. Only one problem, those who actually work in the programs, say that those same programs are being slashed to nothing in the state’s rush to budget cut.
GAY, YOUNG & HOMELESS – Though all homelessness is troubling, the problem’s disproportionate effect on LGBT young people is especially worrisome writes Lisa Gillespie in this article on the topic.
The outer edge of violence that youngsters are willing to go to these days were pretty much not heard of or even imagined when I was growing up. There’s plenty of blame to throw around as to the causes but since people on this site who look at the world a lot like you do Celeste, agree that people come out of prison worse than when they went in what would be the possible advantage to society to allow certain young people who have committed the worst of crimes to have the chance to act out again?
C: In all other areas of life, as a nation and as a culture, we wisely realize that kids are not ready to make adult decisions. We won’t let them drink, vote, have sex with adults, go to war, or enter into contracts.
I’ll go along with ending life without parole for kids once it’s recognized that kids under twenty-one aren’t ready for other important decisions and should not have voting privileges.
wow, surefire. that looks like a real question. I’m going to try and give you a real answer.
The first way to look at things is statistically. We can take a look at recidivism factors – age, education level, past history, psych evaluations, etc. and use that information as the basis of setting the rules for who gets out and when. This approach is probably best for the safety of the community. Unfortunately, it isn’t very concerned with justice and violates the spirit if not the letter (I don’t know enough to say) of the bill of rights.
The other approach is justice based. We take each individual and evaluate the severity of his crime (“let the punishment fit the crime!”), his remorse, capacity for change and, most controversially, his culpability at the time of his actions. This approach looks most carefully at what is the just punishment of the accused. It’s the more “fair” approach, but it’s not as concerned w/ public safety.
My opinion is that we conflate these approaches all the time. We pretend they are the same when they are not. You might be right to say that we’d probably be safer if a 14-year old who nearly killed another kid with a bat stayed in jail forever. But Celeste would also be right to say that isn’t a just approach to dealing with that individual kid. It’s tough to balance these things. We are, however, much better off when we acknowledge both concerns have merit. And that since there are going to be compromises and that people will be getting out eventually we are way better off if we prepare them to reenter society as best we can. That conclusion is one we should share.
Just an individual, non scientific observation on my part Celeste, but doesn’t it seem that the level of mental illness, including sociopathic behavior, has risen at a rate much greater than in previous generations?
Is it due to an abundance of crack baby’s growing to adulthood, kids growing up in a more violent society, a severe national philosophy of dog eat dog, a government that for various reasons treats the underclass like subhumans that deserve no attention unless it’s a punitive judicial one.
An example is the LA County Probation Dept (largest in the country or world), where the obvious and prevalent attitude is one where the client is despised and put on the pay no mind list. Where civil servants by and large are only concerned with their retirement benefits and the cost of a new BMW or homes in Corona or Canyon Country?
Sometimes I look around at all the mentally ill on the street, the depravity, and the take a number and wait attitude of the civil servants who are paid to serve these people, and wonder what we can do to fix this broken system.
Then I read articles like your post about the Care Givers, Foster Parents, Juvenile Probation officers and caretakers, abusing and beating the shit out of these troubled mentally ill kids, and envision an even bleaker future for us all.
What’s the solution going to be?
Like I asked Mavis, what would be the possible advantage to society to allow certain young people who have committed the worst of crimes to have the chance to act out again? The Task Force Celeste wrote about said..”Wouldn’t it make more sense, task-force members reasoned, to reserve incarceration for those who posed a threat to public safety? For youngsters who are not deemed dangerous, other methods seem more reasonable. “The state should treat and rehabilitate them, not hurt and harden them,†wrote the task force”. I’m saying the exact same thing unless the same youngster has been treated over and over again and stilll isn’t getting the message. Fuck him, spend the money on someone who learns after a mistake.
I didn’t see you list any advantage Mavis. Studies show that kids learn the behavior they exhibit throughout their life at a pretty young age. In these times there are much more resources for them to learn how to handle any conflicts they have by the use of violence. Parents, in my opinion have it tougher now than when I was growing up, way tougher.
In my childhood if I was out on the street and misbehaving, or any of my friends as well, any parent could discipline us to straighten out our behavior. Trust me, it was almost always needed and it worked. The whole neighborhood knew each other and were of a like mind. Parents kept order, it was one of their jobs.
Try that today and see how quick a lawsuit gets thrown. Sometimes due to their own negligence, and sometimes due to the amount of time it takes for a parent or parents to just make ends meet, their children are raised by pc’s, tv’s, video games and I Phones. Anyone whose surprised by the level of violence we see in some juvenile offenders today hasn’t been paying a whole lot of attention to what’s going on.
As for Celeste and her constant wink and a nod to people who might pull a gun and cap a round as long as they don’t hurt someone, or ride off with older gangsters as if not knowing what they might end up doing and end up looking at time when they shoot someone for being in the wrong area (or even right one), well I think the criminal justice system has a duty to protect society from people with such poor impulse control they act in that type of manner.
To blame it on mental illness, that gets faked day in and day out by people trying to avoid responsibility for their violent actions, or an uncaring system or to lash out at government workers like all of them are corrupt are the words of a dunce.
Faked mental illness? Well it’s obvious here that not all mental illness is faked, the obsessive lock em up and throw aways the key rantings of of WLA’s own house psycho SF is empirical proof of that.
C: GAY, YOUNG & HOMELESS
I bet there are pretty good odds that they were once only young and homeless before being “befriended.”
Having worked as a psych counselor I guess I have some insight on the issue Don. Maybe you should take a class in reading retention before you post bs about what I said.
———–
The Task Force Celeste wrote about said..â€Wouldn’t it make more sense, task-force members reasoned, to reserve incarceration for those who posed a threat to public safety? For youngsters who are not deemed dangerous, other methods seem more reasonable. “The state should treat and rehabilitate them, not hurt and harden them,†wrote the task forceâ€. I’m saying the exact same thing unless the same youngster has been treated over and over again and still isn’t getting the message.
———-
Wear that dunce hat proudly Don. You and Rob Thomas apparently share the same brain.
One problem with the far left crazies like Don and Rob is they’ll lie about what posters, they disagree with, have said and is sitting on a board like this for everyone to see.
Real smart guys.
“Having worked as a psych counselor I guess I have some insight on the issue Don”
A psych counselor! Holy shit! Were you one of those psych counselors that’s paid to talk people out of jumping, but then claim “they all jump anyway” ?
Give us a couple of your infamous anecdotes, please!
I was in fact a hostage negotiator Donnie, my last 5 years, but it was on an on-call basis as I had other duties as well. Worked in a locked down psych facility when I retired until other opportunities came up. You should read up on some of the things I post instead of jumping off the deep end every day, you might learn a thing or two.
You couldn’t have been anything else SF, your negotiating skills have been on constant display here for us all to admire.
At least you didn’t argue the fact you lied which is s.o.p. with guys that have no game, good for you Donnie.