|
 |
Court News Ohio
Youth Diversions
For young people in trouble, Ohio courts offer constructive
alternatives to the juvenile and criminal justice systems with a blend
of education, accountability, support, and problem-solving.
By Kathleen Maloney
July 25, 2019
About 15 percent of teens have shared a sexually explicit text message,
image, or video electronically – known as sexting – and 27 percent have
received them, a 2018 study found. Under child pornography laws in many
states, juveniles can be convicted for creating, disseminating, or
viewing such materials, even when they take and share an image of
themselves.
State legislatures have grappled with whether, and how, to distinguish
sexting by youth from the exploitation of minors through child
pornography. In Ohio, a child pornography conviction for a juvenile of
a certain age could lead to designation as a sex offender, which
carries weighty consequences, such as required registration with
authorities at least every year. It has left juvenile courts in the
state sorting out what to do with young people caught in these
predicaments.
At the Mahoning County Juvenile Court, staff thought youth and parents
needed a better understanding of these laws. They started calling
schools to set up visits with students to talk about the risks,
including the legal ones, of sexting.
“The laws make juveniles sexual predators if they are involved in
sexting,” said Judge Theresa Dellick. “We needed to do something to
educate our youth to keep them out of court.”
In September 2015, the efforts were formalized into the court’s Cyber
and Relational Diversion Program (C.A.R.D.), a partnership with the
county prosecutor’s office that focuses on proactively informing youth
about the personal and legal consequences of sexting, as well as
cyber-bullying and sexual harassment.
C.A.R.D. was one of several initiatives recognized by the Ohio Supreme
Court in the last year for diverting juveniles from the courts and into
programs that try to address the array of issues in a child’s life that
may steer them toward trouble. Because juvenile courts focus on
rehabilitation rather than punishment and detention, “diversion”
programs are key. With diversion programs, which tend to deal with
youth involved in lesser offenses such as trespassing, shoplifting,
unruliness, and truancy, courts direct youth away from the formal
juvenile justice system and toward alternative options.
The five-week Mahoning County program, designated by the Supreme Court
as a “promising practice,” requires the involvement of both the youth,
ages 12 to 17, and the parents. It relies on referrals, which arrive
from many corners, including law enforcement, counselors, teachers, and
parents. Judge Dellick said evidence indicates that intervention with
these issues in early adolescence is critical and parents must be
involved to ensure long-lasting behavioral changes for the child and
the family.
The weekly sessions in C.A.R.D. cover:
Education about types of bullying, sexual harassment, and appropriate and inappropriate behavior
Steps to take when bullying, sexting, and sexual harassment happens
Possible charges against a juvenile and the child’s parents for the actions
Potential legal consequences, such as probation or ankle monitors at the lesser end
Descriptions of healthy relationships, and the importance of self-esteem and self-worth.
When parents and students first hear about the ramifications of these
behaviors, a hush often descends across the room, Judge Dellick said.
Then, there typically are a lot of questions and requests for advice.
Since 2015, more than 100 youths have completed the C.A.R.D. program.
Only two juveniles were charged for their actions, Judge Dellick notes.
Court staff continues to visit schools, educating about 750 students
annually, she said.
Diversion Favored for Juveniles
Diverting youth from the juvenile and criminal justice systems isn’t
new. In 1967, a presidential commission called for alternatives to
court for juvenile offenders. Ohio adopted a rule for juvenile court
proceedings (Juv.R. 9), effective in 1972, that states, “In all
appropriate cases formal court action should be avoided and other
community resources utilized to ameliorate situations brought to the
attention of the court.”
Today, Ohio’s juvenile courts implement an assortment of diversion
programs for youth. And they continue to gather information about what
works and what doesn’t and to innovate, developing new strategies with
the knowledge gained over the years.
Judges Sandra Stabile Harwood and Samuel Bluedorn of the Trumbull
County Common Pleas Court have developed several programs for youth in
its family court division, and four earned recent accolades from the
Supreme Court. Court administrator Stacy Ziska said the court’s
diversion department screens all youth to identify those eligible for
any of the court’s programs. During their interactions, staff noticed
that girls in contact with the court have some unique needs. To provide
a safe space for them to have a voice and feel heard, the court formed
Girls Circle in 2013, Ziska said.
The support group, which follows curriculum from the national nonprofit
One Circle Foundation, addresses issues girls face, such as body image,
voicing feelings, female friendship, and healthy sexuality. Ziska said
setting life goals and learning about positive relationships are
central components.
The Girls Circle focus on defining and establishing healthy
relationships resonated with Judge Stabile Harwood, who joined the
family court the year the initiative began. During her four terms as a
state legislator, Judge Stabile Harwood worked on a teen
dating-violence bill and found that many girls didn’t understand what a
healthy relationship looked like, she said.
“The Girls Circle program has been able to provide an environment for
the girls to feel confident to express their thoughts in a
judgement-free zone,” Judge Stabile Harwood said.
The benefits of the approach are borne out by research. Studies have
shown that the gender-specific model not only reduces recidivism,
alcohol use, and self-harm, but also improves body image and
self-reliance and increases social connections and commitment to school.
Girls Circle participants in Trumbull County – four to six girls in
each group – meet for eight to 10 sessions, usually once a month.
Projects, such as designing journal covers or crafting blankets to
donate to others, foster an environment that facilitates conversations,
Ziska notes.
Among the feedback, girls report that they learn they aren’t alone in
the situations they encounter, Ziska said. Of the 60 girls who have
participated to date, only four were adjudicated for a new offense
within six months after completing the program, according to court
records. This year, the court adopted a program from the same
foundation for boys.
Family Focus Essential to Success in Many Cases
The Trumbull County court staff also works with families, not just
individual juveniles. The court identifies youths whose family dynamics
may play a role in their behavioral struggles and offers family
counseling. The counseling sessions take place in the family’s home or
their community, rather than within the formal setting of the
courthouse.
“Our Multi-Systemic Therapy Program is the first time capturing a lot
of parents who never learned the tools to address issues any
differently,” Judge Stabile Harwood said. “It engages the whole family.”
Other courts dealing with juveniles in trouble find it essential to
involve family members in substantive ways as well. The Coshocton
County Probate and Juvenile Court’s youth diversion program, overseen
by Judge Van Blanchard II, is multi-layered and starts with a course
called “Nurturing Parent.”
Court administrator Doug Schonauer said the two-week, four-hour course,
based on a national curriculum designed in part to reduce delinquency,
is geared toward improving parent-and-child communication with a focus
on teen issues and brain development.
The family signs a contract to participate in the court’s voluntary
diversion program, which also incorporates drug and alcohol screenings,
homework and school attendance requirements, and eight hours of
community service, said Schonauer. For community service, participants
may assist churches or local nonprofits, or assist at one of the
county’s well-known events, such as the Chocolate Extravaganza or Taste
of Coshocton. Mentioning the kids’ enthusiasm sampling foods at the
Taste event that they’ve never had before, Schonauer said these
activities are the first exposure some of them have to cultural events.
The court is particularly observant, though, of how youths in the program adjust to school expectations.
“Education is our barometer,” Schonauer said. “We relate school success to overall success.”
While highly engaged youth and families might complete their contract
in about 90 days, the program more typically is completed in five or
six months, he said. Once finished, the court notifies the juvenile
that the legal complaint won’t be filed with the court, no court
hearing will occur, and the youth will have no record.
The Coshocton County Juvenile Court, and numerous juvenile courts
statewide, collect data about the number of youths participating in
these types of programs, along with youth demographics, types of
offenses, sources of referrals, and outcomes. The data can help to
secure funding from the Ohio Department of Youth Services RECLAIM
initiative (Reasoned and Equitable Community and Local Alternatives to
the Incarceration of Minors). Last month, about 30 juveniles took part
in the Coshocton County court’s diversion program, Schonauer said.
Designing Diversion Based on Each Youth’s Circumstances
Years ago, the diversion program for juveniles in Delaware County
Juvenile Court was roughly 90 days across the board, regardless of the
mistake or offense, said Eddie Parker, diversion coordinator. Parker,
who started working at the court in 2000 and has assisted with juvenile
diversion efforts for the last 10 years, thought the one-size-fits-all
approach lacked evidence for its effectiveness. Inspired by courts in
Michigan and Alaska, he wanted to try creative solutions tailored to
each child.
“How can we be a change agent for these kids?” he asked.
In one case, a 17-year-old caught with other teens drinking at a party
arrived in the diversion program. Parker did a risk assessment, which
came back low, indicating that “this was not a problem kid,” he said.
A Pew Charitable Trust report about juvenile incarceration incorporates
a 2005 study of Ohio’s RECLAIM program, which found that low- and
moderate-risk juveniles held in facilities were at least twice as
likely to reoffend as youths under supervision or in community programs.
But, Parker recalls, the youth was “despondent” because her father
recently died. When the school was informed the student had been
drinking illegally, it suspended her from the sports team she loved.
Parker put her in the court’s “fast-track diversion,” which lasts
approximately 30 days.
After conducting a thorough interview, he determined that her family’s
regard was important to her, so he had her write a letter about the
negative effects of her actions on them. He also thought it was
essential for her to find another activity she felt passionate about,
given that she couldn’t play on her team. She chose to volunteer at a
pet shelter. In Parker’s opinion, random community-service tasks don’t
motivate youth to change, so he made sure her work was tied to
something she cared about. A few years later, the young woman graduated
second in her class at Ohio State University.
At the other end of the spectrum are juveniles who require more
intensive approaches. Parker worked with a teen who had a $200-per-week
drug habit and was holding drug parties at his house during the
frequent times his parents were out of town. But the youth was
functional – going to school and working.
After determining the teen was at high risk for continuing to get into
trouble and likely landing in court, Parker identified consequences
that would be significant to this youth. Coordinating with the parents,
Parker took the teen’s cell phone and his driver’s license and placed
him under house arrest until he tested clean of the drugs. The young
man and Parker also agreed on a unique type of restitution to his
parents, taking money that he would’ve used to buy drugs and paying it
to his parents, Parker notes. The idea was to place a higher value on
his parents than the drugs. It worked. Parker said the parents later
sent him a letter saying they have a different kid who talks and
listens to them.
The Delaware County court, led by juvenile/probate Judge David
Hejmanowski, touts an impressive record of success. More than 98
percent of the 132 youths in the diversion program in 2018 successfully
completed their requirements, Parker reports. It was one of seven that
received the Supreme Court’s highest distinction as an evidence-based
practice.
“I want to get to the root of the problem,” he explains. “And doing it
the right way is cost-efficient. It doesn’t burden the courts. It just
makes great sense.”
“In Delaware County, we are particularly proud of several innovative
practices that we believe improve outcomes for youth,” Judge
Hejmanowski said. “Diversion gives young men and women to opportunity
to demonstrate to the court that their minor offenses were anathema to
their character, rather than reflective of it. Through diversion they
can learn from their mistakes; participate in education, counseling,
and treatment; complete community service; and maintain a clean record.”
Courts Work toward Constructive Outcomes
Heading west to the Madison County Juvenile Court, Judge Christopher
Brown and diversion coordinator Alyssa Edley run a program called
I.M.P.A.C.T., Imagine Making Positive Accountable Changes Together.
Started in January 2017, the initiative is centered on family
conferences with Edley that encompass counseling, volunteering, and
education. Court records show I.M.P.A.C.T. helped 108 kids and 91
families in its first two years.
These examples illustrate a few of the concerted diversion efforts by
juvenile courts across the state. It’s a challenging endeavor at times
for courts because of their stretched resources and deep reliance on
their community partners in these programs. However, the courts aspire
to help as many youths as possible avoid acquiring a court record that
might taint the rest of their childhood, and even their adult lives.
They also hope to empower juveniles to come to terms with their
personal and family challenges and to re-direct themselves to a more
productive path.
“Now they’re aware of resources and know who and where to ask for
help,” Coshocton’s Shonauer explains. “Anything we can do to have them
leave in a better place than they came in is a positive.”
|
|
|
|
