Episode 13: Juvenile Justice – Past, Present, & Future

November 19, 2019

Juvenile justice and the treatment of children who come in conflict with the law has been making national and local news. How best do we work with these children to serve both the children and the communities they live in? In this episode, we explore some of the historical perspectives of juvenile justice, different models for addressing youth in crisis, youth incarceration, and incarceration alternatives. We also discuss how modern science about youth brain development is influencing juvenile law and policy and the critical factors that help produce positive outcomes for youth in crisis. Our guests are Professor Christopher Northrop, Jill Ward, and Jonathan Ruterbories from the Maine Center for Juvenile Policy and Law and the Juvenile Justice Clinic at the University of Maine School of Law.

Also available on:

 

Notes

 
Episode Notes

Juvenile justice and the treatment of children who come in conflict with the law has been making national and local news. How best do we work with these children to serve both the children and the communities they live in? In this episode, we explore some of the historical perspectives of juvenile justice, different models for addressing youth in crisis, youth incarceration, and incarceration alternatives. We also discuss how modern science about youth brain development is influencing juvenile law and policy and the critical factors that help produce positive outcomes for youth in crisis. Our guests include Professor Christopher Northrop, Jill Ward, and Jonathan Ruterbories from the Maine Center for Juvenile Policy and Law and the Juvenile Justice Clinic at the University of Maine School of Law.

Christopher Northrop is a clinical professor at the University of Maine School of Law, where he launched their Juvenile Justice Clinic in 2006. Prior to joining Maine Law, Professor Northrop spent many years in private practice concentrating on juvenile defense and juvenile justice policy work. He has been involved with the National Juvenile Defense Center (NJDC) since its inception, and has served as a consultant for NJDC assessments of statewide juvenile defender systems throughout the country, including the 2019 assessments of Kansas and New Hampshire. Chris is one of the founders of the New England Juvenile Defender Center and a member of the NJDC’s Senior Leadership Council.

Jill Ward leads the Maine Center for Juvenile Policy and Law (MCJPAL) at the University of Maine School of Law which works with clinic students, faculty and system stakeholders to advance policies and practices to reduce harm and to increase positive outcomes for current and former system-involved Maine youth. She is currently serving as one of three co-chairs of a statewide juvenile justice task force looking a broad system reform. Additionally, Jill works with national organizations on juvenile justice reform, including the Youth First Initiative and the Campaign for Youth Justice. Prior to returning to Maine in 2007, Jill served as the first Policy Director for the Girl Scouts of the USA and Director of Juvenile Justice and Youth Development at the Children’s Defense Fund in Washington D.C., where she co-chaired the National Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Coalition. She also has more than 7 years Capitol Hill experience serving as a legislative aide to former U.S. Senators George Mitchell and Paul Sarbanes. Jill is a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania and the Georgetown University Law Center.

Jonathan Ruterbories is a second-year law student and President of the Maine Juvenile Law Society at the University of Maine School of Law. Prior to attending Maine Law, Jonathan attended Saint Louis University in St. Louis, Missouri where he first became interested in issues of juvenile policy after working with system involved youth. He currently works as a volunteer at Long Creek Youth Development Center focused on improving reintegration outcomes for incarcerated youth and will be serving as the Cushman D. Anthony Fellow at Maine Law’s Juvenile Justice Clinic this upcoming summer. In this role, he will be working on juvenile policy projects and carrying a caseload consisting mostly of juvenile clients under the guidance of Professor Northrop.

***

Connect with Us

Website: umainecenter.org/greatergood

Twitter: @greatergoodpod

Produced by the University of Maine Graduate and Professional Center, with help from WMPG

Episode Guests

Christopher Northrop is a clinical professor at the University of Maine School of Law, where he launched their Juvenile Justice Clinic in 2006. Prior to joining Maine Law, Professor Northrop spent many years in private practice concentrating on juvenile defense and juvenile justice policy work. He has been involved with the National Juvenile Defense Center (NJDC) since its inception, and has served as a consultant for NJDC assessments of statewide juvenile defender systems throughout the country, including the 2019 assessments of Kansas and New Hampshire. Chris is one of the founders of the New England Juvenile Defender Center and a member of the NJDC’s Senior Leadership Council.

Jill Ward leads the Maine Center for Juvenile Policy and Law (MCJPAL) at the University of Maine School of Law which works with clinic students, faculty and system stakeholders to advance policies and practices to reduce harm and to increase positive outcomes for current and former system-involved Maine youth. She is currently serving as one of three co-chairs of a statewide juvenile justice task force looking a broad system reform. Additionally, Jill works with national organizations on juvenile justice reform, including the Youth First Initiative and the Campaign for Youth Justice. Prior to returning to Maine in 2007, Jill served as the first Policy Director for the Girl Scouts of the USA and Director of Juvenile Justice and Youth Development at the Children’s Defense Fund in Washington D.C., where she co-chaired the National Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Coalition. She also has more than 7 years Capitol Hill experience serving as a legislative aide to former U.S. Senators George Mitchell and Paul Sarbanes. Jill is a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania and the Georgetown University Law Center.

Jonathan Ruterbories is a second-year law student and President of the Maine Juvenile Law Society at the University of Maine School of Law. Prior to attending Maine Law, Jonathan attended Saint Louis University in St. Louis, Missouri where he first became interested in issues of juvenile policy after working with system involved youth. He currently works as a volunteer at Long Creek Youth Development Center focused on improving reintegration outcomes for incarcerated youth and will be serving as the Cushman D. Anthony Fellow at Maine Law’s Juvenile Justice Clinic this upcoming summer. In this role, he will be working on juvenile policy projects and carrying a caseload consisting mostly of juvenile clients under the guidance of Professor Northrop.

Disclaimer

The information provided in this podcast by the University of Maine System, acting through the University of Maine Graduate and Professional Center, (the University) is for general educational and informational purposes only. The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the author(s) and speaker(s) and do not represent the official policy or position of the University. Assumptions made in the analysis are not reflective of the position of any entity other than the author(s) and speaker(s) – and, since the author(s), speaker(s) and listeners are critically-thinking human beings, these views are always subject to change, revision, and rethinking at any time. All information in the podcast is provided in good faith, however the University makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, regarding the accuracy, adequacy, validity, reliability, availability or completeness of any information in the podcast and will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in the information in this podcast or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its broadcast or use. It is the listener’s responsibility to verify their own facts. Your use of the podcast and your reliance on any information in the podcast is solely at your own risk. The podcast does not contain nor is it intended to contain any legal advice. Any legal information provided is only for general informational and educational purposes, and is not a substitute for legal advice. Accordingly, before taking any actions based upon such information, the University encourages you to consult with an appropriate legal professional or licensed attorney.

Transcript

​This transcript has been lightly edited for clarity.

***

The Greater Good: Episode 13

Carrie: Welcome to the Greater Good: a podcast devoted to exploring complex and emerging issues in law, business and policy. I’m your host Carrie Wilshusen, Associate Dean for Admissions at the University of Maine School of Law.

Carrie: Juvenile Justice, and the treatment of children who come in conflict with the law has been making national and local news. How best do we work with these children to serve both the children and the communities they live in? Today we’ll hear one perspective from experts from Maine Law’s, Juvenile Justice Clinic, and the Maine Center for Juvenile Policy and Law at Maine Law. It’s my great pleasure to welcome today professor Chris Northrup, who is a clinical professor at Maine law, Jill Ward, who leads our Maine Center for Juvenile Policy and Law at Maine Law. And John Ruterbories, who is a second year student at Maine Law and who has been working with professor Northrup in the clinic. Welcome all of you. Uh, to begin with, I wanted to find out how each of you got interested in involved in this area of work. Chris, do you wanna lead off?

Chris: Sure. I think what really drew me to this work was it combines two things that I truly love and one is working directly with youth and the other is criminal defense work. After college, I was a residential counselor for a number of years and so I was living with youth who are involved in the system and I would go to court with them and I was always drawn to the ability that their defense attorneys had to make significant positive shifts in their life. At law school, I concentrated on criminal defense and working towards being a public defender in the adult world. But after spending a few years representing adults, I had an opportunity to represent a youth. And I discovered that was, that was my love. That was my passion and I’ve been pursuing it ever since.

Jill: I got involved in this work a little bit by accident. Um, I started my career in Washington D C working in the United States Congress for a couple of US senators, including Senator George Mitchell, who used to be the majority leader from, uh, from our home state of Maine. Um, and was very much engaged in public policy work generally and focused in on children’s issues and had the opportunity after my time working on the Hill to work for the children’s defense fund where I, um, led the policy department there on youth development and juvenile justice. And I think the sort of defining moment for me in that work was visiting the DC jail and seeing 16 and 17 year olds incarcerated there and feeling sort of very deeply the injustice and the, um, the wrongness of the way we were treating these young people if we really wanted to work with them and rehabilitate them and, and get them right on the right path. And so I think that’s solidified my interest in understanding how we were treating these young people and how we were working with them and my passion for continuing to sort of pursue those questions. And you also have a law degree, right? I do, I do. I managed in the middle of working in Congress and working for the children’s defense fund to get a law degree at night. So I was a very busy person for many years. It’s wonderful things, John.

John: Well, I also fell into this in the juvenile justice world kind of by accident. Um, I also love working with youth and grew up, I sort of discovered that passion in high school and sort of had this inkling to work with youth at some point, um, down the road in my life. And so, uh, once I got to college in St Louis university, I got involved with that program and an organization that provided wraparound services for a system involved youth in specifically previously incarcerated youth. And that was sort of by accident, uh, but that’s sort of fostered this love and working with youth involved in, uh, multiple systems. And so through that experience I had interaction with youth involved in a lot of systems, saw the way that these systems were failing these kids. Um, and decided that sort of sparked my passion to being changed, which led to law school.

John: Which brought me back here to Maine. Um, and then ever since then I’ve sort of been supporting and helping and doing work for the juvenile justice clinic with professor Northrup and, um, policy work with Jill to sort of, um, accomplish that goal of effecting change. So let’s talk a little bit about who are these children that get involved with the system that, that we’re talking about today. John, do you want to start? Sure. So the system involved children, at least in my experience, sort of that boots on the ground approach mentoring at Long Creek, um, and working with specifically system involved youth in Maine are kids just like any other kids in our community they’re, they don’t fit one single narrative. They are kids that don’t have one single story or one single background, but they are kids who have been failed by systems that are supposed to be set up to help them, whether that’s public school systems, whether those are mental state funded, mental health systems that are inadequate or any other sort of larger system. These kids are kids from communities all over this state, kids of from various cultures, different backgrounds, um, with very different lived experiences that just were failed by the systems that were supposed to be there to protect them and help them. Um, and they fell so far to end up at a facility like Long Creek. Thanks. And Chris, you’ve been working with these kids for many years. You

Carrie: could talk a little bit about some of the children you’ve been involved with.

Chris: Well, picking up on what John said, it’s, it’s very interesting to me that the feeders for the delinquency system really are children’s homes, they’re children’s schools and they’re children’s behavioral and treatment programs that most of the youth that I come in contact with, that, that’s where their initial police contact comes from. Is, is something that happened in school or happen, happened in their homes. The, these aren’t kids who are downtown getting in trouble at three o’clock on a, on a Saturday morning. These are kids who are having problems in places that are supposed to be healthy and comfortable and not a cause of, of disruption.

Carrie: So if you could lay a groundwork for our listeners a little bit about how the, the juvenile justice system works in Maine. Like how, how does the system engage with these children that get in trouble with the law?

Carrie: They do, um, some things very well and they do some things I think less well when there’s police contact, a report will go to a juvenile community correction officer, Maine’s version of juvenile probation and the JCC CO’s do I think a very good job diverting children from the system and they will meet with the youth, they will meet with the use of parents and as long as the prosecutor is okay with it, they will do informal adjustments, which means that there is nothing official ever filed in court. They’ll work with the kid and the family for three to six months, have them do a little community service, perhaps a restorative program. And that will be the end of it. And so that’s a, a very good result. And I think over half the police contact cases go that route. The other half wind up for whatever reason being petitioned and coming into the court system. And I think those youth get a very different outcome.

Carrie: So if they have to go into the court system, is it, are they dealt with the same way that adults are dealt with in the court system?

Chris: It’s, it’s interesting because there are two sets of laws, but there’s one set of charges. So the criminal code works for adults and for youth, they have the same crimes, but the results are very different. In the adult world, there are specific ranges of sentences depending on the crime and and so the lesser crimes have much lesser sentences. The more serious crimes have much longer and more more serious consequences. But in the juvenile system and the delinquency world, you can get the most serious consequence for the least serious criminal activity. And it’s wonderful. On the other end where you have a child who, who does something that is very serious as far as the criminal code is concerned, there can be lesser consequences, but it’s very dangerous when you have a child who gets in fights at school or causes criminal mischief and then doesn’t have the ability to follow a probation condition or conditions of release. They can wind up incarcerated for really minimal criminal behavior.

Jill: So why is there a separate set of laws for juveniles? Um, well there’s a separate juvenile code because the purposes of the code are different for kids than they are for adults. There is a rehabilitative restorative purpose when you’re it, when it comes to responding to juvenile criminal behavior. So, um, whereas I think the adult system focuses on punishment and holding accountability in that way with juveniles, the goal is to keep them at home, to try to get them back on track. There’s, um, th that has been the history of Maine’s law. That has been the history of other state codes. I mean, each juvenile code is different in each state, but the central purpose was established in the late 18 hundreds around having a separate system and a separate purpose for dealing with juveniles who come in conflict with the law. And so has that idea changed around juveniles?

Jill: Has that been evolving at all over time? It has. I mean most recently you see in the Supreme court cases talking about adolescent development that children are not adults, that they are amenable to rehabilitation. I think you’ve seen it play out and become more sophisticated in its analysis, in supporting decisions around how we respond, especially to serious, um, harmful behavior that juveniles engage in, that they still are different. They are still developing, their brain isn’t fully formed and the lies recognizing this more and more in how we respond to those young people and lining that up with the rehabilitative purposes of juvenile code. And much of that’s been fed by science, a lot of hard science that supports what we’ve always known as adults, that kids are different intuitively. Yes. Have the research. Now we have the research and it’s very clear in the Supreme court acknowledges the research.

Jill: That’s correct. So you’ve been working nationally, Jill, on these issues. Can you talk a little bit about the trends nationally and how we’re treating children? Yeah, I mean, I think the Supreme court cases are just one example. I think if you look at what’s been going on in state legislatures, you’ve seen movements towards raising the age of uh, juvenile criminal liability to higher and higher age ranges. There was in the 1990s this now debunked theory of the juvenile super predator that was going to come and these teenagers were going to come and wreak havoc on us all that never actually happened. But States got scared and their legislatures enacted lots of very regressive laws that tried kids as young as 14 as adults for a range of crimes, lots of really negative trends in that way. And I think with the onset of the brain research and a more sophisticated understanding of what we were dealing with, and the fact that juvenile crime continued to decline, the opposite happened.

Jill: Like, um, there were not these really big scary kids wreaking havoc in our communities. There were just kids with needs. Um, so States have now that pendulum has begun to swing back. And so the age of criminal, um, juvenile jurisdiction has been rising in States. There have been trends to invest in community based alternatives, use incarceration and residential placements less again, recognizing the kids do better in non non carceral environments. And so if we’re really trying to meet the goals of the juvenile code, we need to be responding to these things differently. So I think you are seeing nationally a movement away from treating kids like adults in many respects, both in the kind of, um, responses we have to them and in what we do with them as far as pulling them out of the home or incarcerating them. Can you tell us some of the models nationally that are, that are being trotted out that are working?

Jill: Yeah, I mean historically there’s been, um, listeners may be familiar with wraparound, which is, which is a model where you, um, wrap the services around the young person that they need to help them get back on track. Um, some of the newer models have incorporated the importance of that one adult that sort of sticks with the young person, especially if their home environment is not stable or their school environment is not stable. So it’s a combination of wrapping services around a young person with a mentor who really is there 24/7 to help them navigate whether it’s, you know, challenges at school, whether it’s making sure they show up for their mental health treatments, like whatever it is. Um, family counseling that person’s sticking with that kid is proving to be a really great model. And youth advocate programs is a national, um, organization that delivers this program and now I think 26 States and is just coming to Maine this year.

Jill: So we’re very excited to have them providing services here in the state. One other model is the credible messenger model where formerly incarcerated adults are trained to serve as mentors and advocates for these young people and help them get the services they need. What we’re finding is when you invest in the communities these kids come from and you invest in the human capital of people who have lived experience and you connect those things together, you get much better outcomes. And when you have better outcomes for kids, you have better public safety. You know, it’s sort of better all the way around. You’re nodding, John, do you have something to add?

John: Yeah, well I think, you know, just to speak to the effectiveness of specifically the wraparound services I, that was sort of something that was, I saw as a very, something that didn’t exist when I first started volunteering at Long Creek. I, as I mentioned, I came from a wraparound model in St Louis, that was a very effective and it was sort of a first of its kind there, um, working the juvenile justice system in the St Louis area. And so when I came to Maine and sort of, um, started mentoring at Long Creek and, and volunteering there, that was sort of a goal I had was to sort of provide those wraparound services and sort of try and show how effective at least to that facility and to others how effective those that wraparound model can be. And I think, um, with the, the few kids that have been able to, to mentor from long Creek, um, and now in the community, I think it’s just only speaking to the effectiveness of those programs, whether, and that includes being on 24/7 providing emotional support when needed, providing transportation when needing, um, breaking down barriers to give them access to other things that may help them succeed, whether that’s in community college or other things.

John: And I could go on and on. But uh, one thing that I’m really happy about is the addition of YAP to Maine Youth Advocate Programs that Jill just talked about. That is something that I’m really excited about cause I’ve seen firsthand that it can work and I was implementing it or trying to at least on a one on one basis. But now having that structure and man I think could really, really, really offer a lot of chances for success for system involved youth in Maine. 

Carrie:

Wonderful. So Jill has been talking about the national trends. Chris, how are we doing in Maine? 

Chris: It’s mixed.I think if you look back to 20 years ago when all of the science around adolescent brain development was beginning to be recognized and valued, Maine was ahead of the curve. We, we did a very nice job not binding youth over into adult court. So we were not taking 14 year olds and having them stand trial and get sentences as an adult. But we’ve fallen behind a little bit, especially in the the age treatment. While lots of other States are starting not only to raise the age but to put in a minimum age of when children should be subject to delinquency systems. That that’s something that a number of States have done. And Maine hasn’t. So an eight year old can get charged and I’ve represented eight and nine and 10 year olds in the delinquency system and in many States that is no longer allowed. I think we still do a very good job of of keeping those under 18 in our juvenile system. But you’re starting to see States like Vermont and and other places put the range out to 19 and 20 and 21 year old based um, this science. I’m hoping that that Maine will be open to that.

Carrie: Can you talk about that science a little bit based on this science you said, so what, what’s the science saying?

Chris: So the, this science again goes back probably 25 years where it really became much harder sciences as you mentioned, we’ve always known parents always know that, that children are different. Adults always know the children are different now through advances in MRI technology, they’ve been able to do, you know, they’ve been, they’ve studied a generation of youth and they’ve been able to track the brain development of, of children and young adults. And it’s become very clear that even when you’re 18, 19 and 20 year old, you’re just not thinking like a mature adult. You’re much more subject peer influence. You’re much more subject to, you know, kind of spur of the moment thrill seeking behavior. You are just wired differently at 20 than you are at 30 and also at the mercy of what you’re born into the world like you come into, you don’t have control over your environment either.

Chris: Absolutely not. The one thing that I think Maine has done a very good job with is we have narrowed the number of youth that come into the court system that are subject to the delinquency system. I talked a little bit earlier about the informal adjustments and how over 50% of the cases that start as police contact never come to court. That has been wonderful and it has really made a difference since the youth aren’t getting into court. They’re also not getting into Long Creek. They’re not getting on probation. They’re not getting records that will haunt them into their adult lives. And, and so that’s been a very positive thing that Maine has done.

Jill: As Chris says, Maine has done a lot of things really well, but I think we’ve been a little stagnant over this last decade or so in making additional progress. Um, we’ve done really well with diversion. We’ve done really well with some of the responses. What we have not done very well is provide the range of alternatives to incarceration for kids who can’t be different. I was going to ask that because it seems like the resources, right? I mean it may be that people want to do the right thing by children, but they have limited resources to do that. Yes. And we hear this from judges all of the time. I don’t know that don’t necessarily want to send a kid to long Creek, but don’t have the confidence that another placement or an alternative that helps sustain those young people in their communities is actually going to work.

Jill: And so, or exists or exists. That’s right. So it’s both. It’s both. And it’s, they need to exist. And the judges need to have confidence in the programs because they have their obligation to, you know, maintaining public safety. But again, I think, you know, if we look at what’s been happening in the population that is in Long Creek, even though it’s very small, it’s less than 60 kids now of detained kids who are awaiting adjudication pretrial and kids who are committed. What you find is number of them have very acute mental health needs. They are presenting with um, educational disabilities and challenges. And so you’ve got more complex kids in some cases as far as what their needs are that are ending up in Long Creek because the other systems have, we, as we discussed earlier, have failed them and Long Creek tries to meet those needs. But in a setting like that is not therapeutic. It’s not rehabilitative. You’re not going to get the same kind of results. And we know that from the, again going back to that adolescent brain research that shows you need these prosocial influences, you need good peer involvement with these young people and you need them to take some agency and be able to make choices for them to grow and mature normally. And those things don’t happen while maintaining a connection to the community that you hopefully will return to. That’s exactly right because they will all return. 

Carrie:

So let’s talk about the rural issues in Maine, um, that that becomes a problem because our youth detention center is in Southern Maine. Do you want to talk about that? 

Chris:

It’s a significant issue. There are youth that come from Presque Isle and Caribou and are taken so far away from their families so far away from their community so far away from their education connections. They are stripped of all the positive things in their lives and they wind up in, in Long Creek and you just can’t rebuild that. And I think Maine needs to address this. We need to think about how we can take youth that a court or a system may feel need to have secure confinement without stripping all of the positive things in their life and, and leaving them with, with no connections. And it’s challenging.

Jill: Yeah. And I think one of the places we can start to do that is to look at some aspects of the juvenile code that have not kept up with, I think the research and what the best practices indicate. Chris mentioned one with establishing a minimum age of when you can actually arrest a kid and engage them in the juvenile system. Um, uh, 12 is 12 to 14 are the ranges that States are starting to adopt based on the research, um, to keep the 8, 9, 10 year olds out of the criminal justice system. I think the code also has a provision, um, that requires a mandatory, when you’re commitment to long Creek, when kids are committed and most of the research says past six months of any kind of secure confinement, you get very strong diminishing returns as far as outcomes with respect to those kids. So the longer you lock them up the more, the deeper hole you dig for them to, to get out of the more trauma you incur, the longer they’re away from their community. And some of these other positive pro-social influences that are so important for kids. So I think there are some places that Maine can really look to, to modernize and bring up to speed. It’s juvenile code that actually reflect what the research says about the kind of outcomes we all want. John, what are you seeing on the ground?

John: Well, I just to sort of speak to two points, the first going towards the rural issue, I think that that is a significant, as Chris said in this state, a lot of the youth that I’ve worked with and sort of this mentoring capacity, there are you know, well not a significant number because the number of um, incarcerated children is decreasing. But there are a good number of children who, uh, are from Northern parts of the state. And oftentimes, you know, some of the strongest connections they have are if not to direct family members like a mom or dad or brother. And sister are to quasi brothers and sisters or people that have been have supported them throughout their development. And oftentimes those connections are found in their community. And in that place where they grew up in the place where they walk to the convenience store and saw Joe who looked after them every day or gave them food when they needed it.

John: And as we remove them from that community and bring them down towards a population center like Portland, um, to serve, to be detained or to be committed, we’re taking that very strong support away from them. And I think that’s something that really does need to be addressed and is something that I, in a mentoring capacity have really had to combat because I can never replace Joe or I can never replace mom and dad. It’s just, I as no matter how hard I try, there’s a significant portion of their life that they spent with this other person that I can’t replace. And so I think for me that’s been a significant challenge that I’ve faced is trying to give credence to that person and recognize the value there. But also being realistic in that they can’t visit them every weekend. They can’t call them all the time.

John: And so I think that’s, that’s just speaks to how much the rural nature of this state, um, and the lack of services in rural communities really is only further contributing to the problems with the juvenile justice system. But also speaking to Joe’s point earlier on, um, the lack of the, where Maine sort of lags behind and providing resources for kids in their communities. I think, I like to think of the mentoring role as sort of a walk with role. You’re walking side by side with the child as they leave Long Creek or as they, um, are trying to reintegrate or reenter the community in which they were removed from. And so when you’re walking alongside someone like that one, one of the things that you really want to try and do is point them to services that they want or point them to support groups that they need or point them, you know, even if it’s just a basketball league, right.

John: Point them to something that they really want to do. And when I look at the landscape in regards to what’s available and to do my job, to walk with and support and point that youth to those services that they want or they need it’s bare. There are a lot of services that are popping up all over the state, but that landscape is still very bare. And making that transition for youth back into the communities in which they were removed, removed from very, very difficult. And actually if I could pick up on one other thing that the Jill mentioned, that’s a very disturbing statistic

Chris: Maine, it’s about commitments and the way commitments are done in Maine is almost every youth who gets committed to Long Creek gets what’s called an indeterminate commitment to a certain age, which means if things go really well, they might be able to get out in 9 or 10 or 11 months. But if things don’t go well, they will be in for at least a year according to statute, but are often in for much more than that, sometimes two years, sometimes three years. And if you look at the length of commitment in Maine, it has been a steady increase and youth who used to get out in under a year are now spending two and three years committed in Long Creek and the reintegration is so much harder and the traumatization is so much greater. It is very upsetting and, and something that we have to fix.

Carrie: Join us next time as we continue our conversation on Juvenile Justice.

Love this episode of The Greater Good? Please rate, review and subscribe to the podcast. As a new podcast, ratings and reviews are critical to our success. We’d also appreciate your feedback to ensure we are bringing you quality content and conversation. If you’d like to learn more about our guests, access show notes and find additional resources, visit https://umainecenter.org/greatergood. Thank you.

The information provided in this podcast by the University of Maine System acting through the University of Maine Graduate and Professional Center is for general educational and informational purposes only. The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the authors and speakers and do not represent the official policy or position of the university.