Charleston Seeking Causes & Fixes in Black Youth Killings

A recent article, How to stop cycle of gun violence entangling Charleston-area black youths?, by Andrew Knapp and Melissa Boughton laments a recent spike in violence committed by and toward black youths in the Charleston area. Several possible causes and strategies were offered by various people from the community. Thankfully, our level of gun violence is not as high as Chicago’s, but a study of their violence can provide clues to help us “figure out why” this occurs. Linda Teplin, Ph.D. and colleagues (2005) studied 1829 delinquent youths in Chicago for 7 years. By the end of the period, 65 of the youth died with approximately 90% of those being by homicide. Of those who were killed by homicide, nearly all of them were by gunshots, and nearly 97% had sold drugs. Without knowing the specific histories of those in Charleston, awareness of local trends lends credence to the theory that the “why” is, similar to Chicago, because drugs and guns are a dangerous mix.

Understanding why is only the first part of addressing the problem. You have to choose the most effective strategy to change it. Margaret Barber, director of the state Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) and former DJJ Director William Byars should be commended for moving the department away from its reliance on incarceration. Juvenile incarceration has been shown to actually increase the likelihood of future crimes, thus it was shown to have negative cost effectiveness when rated by the Washington State Institute for Public Policy, a non-partisan research group created to identify the most effective policies and strategies. It is certain that this move toward more community based programs has had a positive impact on the outcomes that have been achieved and noted in the recent article.

Despite the progress and move toward more effective practice, there is still a need for improvement to make the area safer. There has been tremendous progress in recent years in the development of effective practices for juvenile delinquency. There are several programs that have been found to be quite effective in curbing juvenile crime in study after study. Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development is an organization at the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence (CSPV), at the University of Colorado Boulder and funded by the Annie E. Casey Foundation. Blueprints provides a registry of evidence-based programs for youth violence based on very strict criteria of evidence. To date they have evaluated more than 1,300 programs with less than 5% of them meeting the standards for inclusion on their lists of model and promising programs. When considering next steps to address youth violence, Blueprints should serve as the starting point in identifying programs that have the most chance of being effective.

The aforementioned Washington State Institute for Public Policy is another crucial source of information. As stated, they have studied the cost effectiveness of many programs with some being “in the red” due to the likelihood for increased offending, some still in use today. Additionally, they have identified several programs that are shown to be quite cost effective in that they would most likely reduce the cost to taxpayers due to their effectiveness. Not surprisingly, the most cost-effective programs on this list are the same ones identified by Blueprints.

Such changes are often avoided based on the cost of transitions. In evaluating next steps, we need to look beyond the immediate because this is a long-term challenge. To share one example of many, in 2004, Florida began a shift to evidence based practices from their previous services. An independent evaluation by the Justice Research Center showed significant improvements in outcomes at a cost savings. As of 2013, these programs saved Florida taxpayers $170 million while dramatically decreasing recidivism rates. Many other states across the country as well as national governments around the world have made similar shifts and achieved similar results. The question is not if we can afford to implement the most effective programs, but can we afford not to.

The Department of Juvenile Justice should be credited for recognizing the need for change and for taking concrete steps to improve services. As a next step, we should consult known resources for answers on what works and follow the examples of other states that have done so and reduced crime and costs. With resources being scarce, we need to evaluate how we can be the most cost-effective while reaching the goals of the community. The great thing is that the answers are already known.

Patrick M. Duffy, Jr., Psy.D.

Clinical Psychologist

www.drpatrickmduffy.com

Author of Parenting Your Delinquent, Defiant, of Out-of-Control Teen

Good Kid with the Wrong Crowd?



Decades of research tells us that a teen's behavior is heavily influenced by multiple influences in their environment. The various influences work together through their reciprocal effects to create an environment that either supports or sustains a teen's behavior. Certainly, the presence of different people will lead to different behaviors. For example, a child may behave differently around their peers than they might around their grandmother or a pastor. The aforementioned influence of friends is one parents need to strongly consider and assess.

Parents often report that their child was "a good kid until he started hanging out with the wrong crowd." While some may balk at this explanation, the research on delinquency clearly supports it.

The most direct predictor of delinquent behavior, other than prior history, is delinquent peers (Dishion et al. 1996; Prinstein and Dodge 2008) who encourage the behavior through their favorable attitudes and express approval. Kids tend to operate in groups of friends and do things together. If your child is hanging around with kids committing offenses or using drugs, they’re likely to do the same. If your child associates with kids who are playing sports or working on computers, they are likely not stealing, getting high, or beating people up. If a group hangs out in front of a store, drinks, and harasses others, it makes sense that it would be more effective to remove your child from that situation rather than trying to explain that nice kids do not do such things.

 

Intervening in the peer group can be a challenge, but if you are concerned about your child's behavior, this is an important challenge to accept. If you do not know where your child goes and with whom, it is much more likely that they can be found with delinquent kids. Lack of monitoring allows kids to have unsupervised time with other unsupervised kids, which provides opportunities for delinquent behavior.

 

It is crucial that you assess your child's friends for the influence the likely bring. You must also identify where your child and friends congregate and their activities at each location. Additionally, once you have a clear understanding, you must create expectations around peer associations and approved locations. Such tasks are clearly more of a challenge than can be adequately covered in a blog post. However, it is important that parents of teens with significant behavior understand that their concerns about their child's peer group is well-founded and that their influence is subject to parental control with careful planning.

 

For more information, check out Duffy’s new book, Parenting Your Delinquent, Defiant, or Out-of-Control Teen: How to Help Your Teen Stay in School and Out of Trouble Using an Innovative Multisystemic Approach.

 

1. Dishion, T.J., Spracklen, K.M, Andrews, D.W. & Patterson, G.R. (1996). Deviancy Training in Male Adolescent Friendships. Behavior Therapy, 27(3), 373-390.

 2. Prinstein, M.J. & Dodge, K.A. (2008) Current Issues In Peer Influence Research. In Understanding Peer Influence in Children and Adolescents, edited by Prinstein, M.J. & Dodge, K.A. New York, New York: The Guilford Press.

Treating Substance Abuse Without Substance Abuse Treatment

Many of the juveniles referred for services come with a package of delinquent behaviors that typically includes substance abuse of some sort. If substance use is not a referral behavior, it often contributes to the other referral behaviors. Research tells us that the same elements that predict other delinquent behaviors also predict juvenile subatnce abuse. Specifically, we know that  associating with other juvenile delinquents is a direct predictor of delinquent behavior, whether that behavior is stealing, fighting or substance abuse. We also know that there are factors in the family and the school that, when not working well, are predictive of the aformentioned peer association.

From a treatment perspective, if we are able to work with the elements of the ecology to be more effective, family and school, then we can expect to see some changes in the peer association. By doing so, we reduce the probability that the youth will be stealing and fighting if we remove them from that social setting. By doing so, we also reduce the probability of substance abuse because the same relationships were supporting the substance abuse that were supporting the other behavior. Substance abuse is frequently considered a "superbehavior" that requires extraordinary measures, but the research on the causes and correlates  of juvenile substance abuse tell us otherwise.

I worked with a child that I'll call Jeff. Jeff was referred for services for a package of delinquent behaviors that had resulted in his being placed on juvenile probation. The probation officer was clear that the main concern was Jeff's stealing. We knew that Jeff was using drugs as a result of urine screens but the level of theft was significant and needed to be controlled quickly, so that was our primary focus initially.

The bulk of the work centered around helping Jeff's mother, with support of family and friends, to be more effective in monitoring where he was and with whom he was associating. She also set firm limits on where he was allowed to go and with whom he could associate. In addition, she worked very hard to improve her discipline strategies. After a period of a few weeks, Jeff's mother was much more effective in controlling his whereabouts and peer asscociations. His probation officer was pleased that the theft seemed to have stopped and there had been no further complaints from local stores.

Following the reduction in the stealing, Jeff's probation officer administered a urine screen, and Jeff's test was negative for substance use. Continued random screens revealed the same result. How did this happen with no direct intervention on the substance abuse? Jeff's mother was successful in removing the influences that promoted or maintained the stealing behavior, and those were the same influences that sustained the substance abuse. If Jeff's rate of theft had not been so acute, the substance abuse may have warranted the referral itself, but that behavior was brought under control as a by-product of the focus on the stealing. This is because the same challenges in the family that were predicting the delinquent peer association and the the stealing, were having the same effect for substance abuse. Jeff's mother was able to address the behavior without sending him to an institution and without the high costs associated with such treatments. She was also able to do so without ongoing, time-consuming efforts that would actually prevent him from becoming involved with prosocial activities. In addition, the changes are more likely to last because the agent of change was a parent with improved awareness and skills that will always be present versus an intervention that ends on the discharge date.

Orange County Curfew Sweep Shows Parents' Help is Needed

A few days ago, police in Orange County, California conducted a sweep and picked up youths who were on the streets after the county's curfew without an adult. This sweep was focused on areas where criminal activity is high. and is an attempt to prevent youths from making decisions that lead them to criminal behavior.

While I commend the police for protecting the community, they need the help from parents and the community to be able to have any realistic chance of curtailing juvenile crime. First of all, they are only able to catch kids a fraction of the time offenses may be committed. If you consider the number of times people drive over the speed limit compared to the number of times they get caught, the lesson about effectiveness is clear. The more effective effort would be for parents to have a punishment at home for each time a child was out past curfew, their curfew or the legal curfew. If people received a ticket for each time their car crossed over the speed limit, they would stop speeding.

A second point is that there is no reason to believe that crime can not be commited by juveniles prior to the established curfew. They may make it home by curfew, but could have stolen, sold drugs, or commited any number of offenses prior to the curfew. It is noteworthy that the youths picked up in Orange County were in high crime areas. A big predictor of juvenile crime is the association with delinquent peers. These youths were clearly not under any meaningful supervision, as evidenced by their being out beyond curfew, and were in high crime areas. It's clear that they were not associating with kids intent on following the law. If we were successful in having these youths in their homes by the curfew, we still have no idea what they were doing until that time. It is extremely important that families understand where their kids are going, with whom they associate, and what they are doing.

This sweep is an example of a significant police effort, but it also shows that police are not able to accomplish the goals on their own. Many youths are arrested several times, which is the police role, before committing a significant crime. Parents are the most powerful forces in their child's lives. If the police could accomplish it alone, they would have done so by now. Parents can do the job, but many need help. They may have their own challenges that serve as barriers, may not be experienced in the necessary skills, may need practical or emotional support etc.There are evidence-based practices that can provide the training and support. The research community has proven it as has the service community. If we support such programs, parents, youths, communities, and police will appreciate it.

ADHD Diagnosis Warrants Scrutiny

As professionals prepare for the new DSM-V, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Dr. Winston Chung, a psychiatrist with Sutter Pacific Medical Foundation, appropriately labeled his concerns with the criteria for ADHD. ADHD is a disroder characterized by symptoms of inattention and hyperactivity. ADHD has been diagnosed when a person exhibits six of nine possible behaviors, but the DSM-V will reduce that to a threshhold of five. This presence of a package of behaviors may be enough to yield the diagnosis without consideration of the context of the behavior which may explain it and lead to a different approach than medication. The new standards will increase the probability of such a diagnosis and the likelihood of a prescription for stimulants where it could be avoided.

I worked with a case involving an eight-year-old boy who had been referred due to impulsive behavior in school. The referral indicated that he was never in his seat, never completed assignements, did not follow instructions and was generally disruptive in class. In order to fully understand the behavior, I requested to observe the class; I was very curious to see how the child's behavior could be as disruptive as described.

When I observed the class, I did notice that the child was out of their seat and not following directions as described, but I also saw that everyone in the class was behaving the same way. The students in this class were literally walking around the rooom, stepping over desks and generally using the classroom as a playground; it may have been a safety risk to be seated in the class. I was unsure of why they singled out this one child - perhaps they didn't.

In this case, which is admittedly an obvious one, the context of the behavior explained it more than a disorder, or at least made it difficult to diagnose under those conditions. Rather than pursue a medical intervention, the parents requested a change in classrooms and we worked to develop parenting skills to help them administer discipline at home and to coordinate with school.

As stated previously, this is an obvious example, but children's behavior is often maintained by elements of their ecology that include influences at school, parenting strategies, peer influence etc. It's important to understand the sequences of behavior and the contexts that maintain behavior in order to diagnose it well and treat is as safely and effectively as possible. This is increasingly important as the diagnostic criteria are weakened.

Utah Referee Case - Sports/Jobs Not Always the Answer for Delinquent Teens

I have spoken before about the fact that the two direct predictors of delinquent behavior are past offenses and associating with delinquent peers. In attempts to remove some of that peer influence, therapists and families often work to involve kids in prosocial activities, and they should. However, not all activities are created equal.

The recent case of the soccer referee in Utah who was killed when he was punched by a player reminded me of a caution I give to therapists and families. In the Utah case, there was a history of violence in the soccer league toward officials in the form of player violence and fan fury. In such situations, the soccer team and the fans may support violent behavior and negate the effort to remove the child from such an influence.

In other cases, it's very common for parents and therapists to push for a child to be employed, a seemingly good choice. However, there may be other kids employed at the same place who are also getting into trouble and use breaks at work as a time to use drugs.

I don't want to suggest that sports are bad or that employment is bad. I am suggesting that if your child has a history of getting into trouble, you may not want to accept at face value that the new activity is a step in the right direction. I have had clients say they wanted a job and found out that their friends all worked at the same place, and the manager sold drugs. Just as you should diligently assess your child's friends, you must also assess the new activity. Are the kids on the team violent or is that prevalent in the league? Who are the child's coworkers? What do they do on breaks or when they take out the trash at work? Each of these questions may require you to go and investiage, take names, ask about people, watch what's going on and make your assessment.

If you are trying to get a child involved in a prosocial activity; that's great. I only offer these words of caution so that your tremendous effort yields the result you want for you and your family.

Vandalism in Joshua Tree

I just read an editorial in the Press-Telegram in Long Beach, California about vandalism in Joshua Tree National Park. Vandalism is a seemingly senseless crime that can take any number of forms from completely destroying property to simply writing a name on something; no matter the extent, the property owner feels violated and is often faced with expensive and time-consuming repairs (if possible). In the case of Joshua Tree National Park, we are all the victims since the park is a national treasure for us all to visit.

Vandalism, like most crimes that juveniles commit, is often done in a group setting. If your child is involved in vandalism you should be concerned about what else they may be doing. Vandalism often comes with a package of other behaviors like substance use, stealing or any number of other problem behaviors.

If a child is committing such acts, a few things come to mind immediately. First, it tells us that they were probably spending time with people that promote property destruction. It also reveals that they were unsupervised at the time or were supervised by someone that isn't promoting responsible behavior. It is often the case that the vandals were not concerned about facing any type of punishment either because they did not think they would be caught or because they have learned to expect a response from their parents and/or law enforcement that they do not find very concerning.

It is not within your power as a parent to determine how the legal process will respond, but you can address your own response, which could help avoid legal consequences in the future. If you are in this situation, it is crucial for you to do some investigation of the peer relationship and set some limits on those. You must also figure out the gaps in supervision and develop a strategy to monitor those times. Finally, you must consider how you respond to an offense when you catch it. This sounds like a lot of work, and it is, but a child that's vandalizing property may be getting into more significant trouble, or danger, or at least be on that path.

If you are aware that your child has damaged property, address it now before the problems become larger and more serious. If you are concerned about your child's friends or where they spend time, you should address that as well; hopefully, before they become a vandal.