New group aims to prevent many from enetering juvenile justice system

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Ten to 15 years ago, a school yard fight usually led to after-school detention or a couple of Saturdays spent in the classroom. But as zero tolerance policies have grown and as children are treated more and more as adults, the reaction to normal young peoples’ behavior has become harsher and, in many instances, is paving the way to prison.

 A number of federal and state agencies along with nonprofit organizations are working to help regain the youths’ footing after they stumble into trouble. Now, a new nonprofit has been formed with a focus on preventing children and teenagers from entering the juvenile justice system.

nonprofit03-15col.jpg Attorneys Deborah Agard, left, and JauNae Hanger serve as vice chair and chair of the Children’s Policy and Law Initiative board of directors.(IL Photo/ Dave Stafford)

The Children’s Policy and Law Initiative is bringing together lawyers, social workers and child advocates from around the state to work on changing the policies and laws that some feel are too punitive and criminalizing children. Leaders of the new group want to put a variety of stakeholders at the same table to do the research and determine the best practices and then push schools and the Indiana Legislature toward reform.

 JauNae Hanger, civil rights attorney in Indianapolis, is one of the founders of CPLI and is currently serving as chair of the board of directors. She explained the organization does not want to prevent all kids from going into the juvenile justice system because some deserve to be there. However, CPLI believes too many young people are entering the system and more are at risk of entering.

 “We’re not trying to change the world,” she said. “We’re realistic, but over time, you can make a big impact.”

 Members of CPLI worked for the better part of a year to get their new nonprofit in place and ready to introduce itself. The organization held a reception in mid-December which attracted an estimated 70 individuals, and Hanger has plans to contact and meet other groups to forge alliances and work on common goals.

 In addition, CPLI is also looking for funding sources to make itself sustainable and, eventually, to be able to hire administrative staff.

A pipeline to jail

One main entrance to the juvenile justice system is school. Suspensions and expulsions have replaced detention, and offenses on school grounds are often leading to arrests of children and incarceration. Minority and special needs students are impacted disproportionally by school discipline policies in Indiana and throughout the country.

 As an example of the punishment overreaching the infraction, Carole Craig, Greater Indianapolis NAACP education co-chair and CPLI board member, pointed to a recent incident involving four minority youths.

 During the summer, an Indianapolis high school was undergoing some renovation and the four teenagers wandered inside through an unlocked door and played basketball in the gym. School officials subsequently charged the four with trespassing and suspended one for the entire fall semester and the other three for nine weeks. Craig and her colleagues at the NAACP intervened and were able to get all the youngsters reinstated.

The belief that such harsh treatment creates a better climate in the schools is, in fact, a myth, Craig said. Having more than 30 years of tenure as a middle school science teacher and school principal, she maintains children, regardless of their ethnicity, socioeconomic standing and even their home life, are all capable of learning and meeting high expectations.

 Instead, schools are relying on suspensions and expulsions for mostly minor offenses which puts students either home alone or wandering the streets and disengages them from education. Multiple suspensions have been shown to increase the likelihood of contact with the juvenile justice system, creating the school-to-prison pipeline.

 “We have lost our perspective on this issue,” Hanger said. “We wouldn’t go around arresting adults for innocent acts. Why are we arresting our children?”

 The issue of the school-to-prison pipeline stepped into the national spotlight in December when the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Human Rights held the first-ever congressional hearing on the topic. No one from CPLI testified, but the organization is focusing on the pipeline problem because this is how many juveniles are entering the jails.

CPLI members emphasize many agencies, including the Indiana Department of Correction, and other nonprofits are working with teens and building programs to help the youngsters in the justice system get on the right path to being a productive adult. Yet, CPLI sees a gap in the effort in that no single statewide organization is focused on changing policy.

 “We’re not sitting here saying the system is broken,” said Indianapolis attorney and vice chair of the CPLI board Deborah Agard. “There are a lot of positive changes, but the momentum needs to pick up and make things happen sooner.”

 Policy changes difficult

The CPLI wants to be an independent voice that takes a step back to look at the entire picture then builds consensus and makes recommendations to the General Assembly for changes in laws and polices.

 “When we talk about reforming the juvenile justice system, we’ve got to be realistic,” Hanger said. “It’s going to take awhile. We can’t force reform on people. We’ve got to bring people along.”

 While innovative programs are being implemented in certain parts of the state, there are few comprehensive statewide policies and efforts to prevent the criminalization of children. This, in turn, creates a system of justice by geographical jurisdiction which can become at risk if the people committed to such changes are replaced or retire.

 A key to making statewide change is follow-through. CPLI emphasizes it must evaluate any laws passed to ensure they are yielding the intended results. And, as the history of House Enrolled Act 1193 illustrates, evaluation must be done to ensure the new laws are being implemented and keep all interested parties aware of any progress or setbacks.

This particular bill created a work group charged with making recommendations concerning law enforcement, school policing and youth.

 The Indiana State Bar Association had been heavily involved in HEA 1193 and many were elated when it passed and was signed into law. However, the group never met and, Hanger said, the law was repealed during the 2012 session.

 As required by the law, the Indiana Supreme Court made its appointments to the work group as did the Indiana attorney general and the Legislature, but the governor did not. Gov. Mitch Daniels never appointed the chair and so, the group never convened and no recommendations came forth.

 “Is the lesson we can’t do it in this state?” Hanger asked. “No, but I think the lesson is we have to be a little bit more organized.”•


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I think the cops are doing a great job locking up criminals. The Murder rates in the inner cities are skyrocketing and you think that too any people are being incarcerated. Maybe we need to lock up more of them. We have the ACLU, BLM, NAACP, Civil right Division of the DOJ, the innocent Project etc. We have court system with an appeal process that can go on for years, with attorneys supplied by the government. I'm confused as to how that translates into the idea that the defendants are not being represented properly. Maybe the attorneys need to do more Pro-Bono work

  2. We do not have 10% of our population (which would mean about 32 million) incarcerated. It's closer to 2%.

  3. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  4. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  5. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.