ILNews

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.”•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It's a big fat black mark against the US that they radicalized a lot of these Afghan jihadis in the 80s to fight the soviets and then when they predictably got around to biting the hand that fed them, the US had to invade their homelands, install a bunch of corrupt drug kingpins and kleptocrats, take these guys and torture the hell out of them. Why for example did the US have to sodomize them? Dubya said "they hate us for our freedoms!" Here, try some of that freedom whether you like it or not!!! Now they got even more reasons to hate us-- lets just keep bombing the crap out of their populations, installing more puppet regimes, arming one faction against another, etc etc etc.... the US is becoming a monster. No wonder they hate us. Here's my modest recommendation. How about we follow "Just War" theory in the future. St Augustine had it right. How about we treat these obvious prisoners of war according to the Geneva convention instead of torturing them in sadistic and perverted ways.

  2. As usual, John is "spot-on." The subtle but poignant points he makes are numerous and warrant reflection by mediators and users. Oh but were it so simple.

  3. ACLU. Way to step up against the police state. I see a lot of things from the ACLU I don't like but this one is a gold star in its column.... instead of fighting it the authorities should apologize and back off.

  4. Duncan, It's called the RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION and in the old days people believed it did apply to contracts and employment. Then along came title vii.....that aside, I believe that I am free to work or not work for whomever I like regardless: I don't need a law to tell me I'm free. The day I really am compelled to ignore all the facts of social reality in my associations and I blithely go along with it, I'll be a slave of the state. That day is not today......... in the meantime this proposed bill would probably be violative of 18 usc sec 1981 that prohibits discrimination in contracts... a law violated regularly because who could ever really expect to enforce it along the millions of contracts made in the marketplace daily? Some of these so-called civil rights laws are unenforceable and unjust Utopian Social Engineering. Forcing people to love each other will never work.

  5. I am the father of a sweet little one-year-old named girl, who happens to have Down Syndrome. To anyone who reads this who may be considering the decision to terminate, please know that your child will absolutely light up your life as my daughter has the lives of everyone around her. There is no part of me that condones abortion of a child on the basis that he/she has or might have Down Syndrome. From an intellectual standpoint, however, I question the enforceability of this potential law. As it stands now, the bill reads in relevant part as follows: "A person may not intentionally perform or attempt to perform an abortion . . . if the person knows that the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion solely because the fetus has been diagnosed with Down syndrome or a potential diagnosis of Down syndrome." It includes similarly worded provisions abortion on "any other disability" or based on sex selection. It goes so far as to make the medical provider at least potentially liable for wrongful death. First, how does a medical provider "know" that "the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion SOLELY" because of anything? What if the woman says she just doesn't want the baby - not because of the diagnosis - she just doesn't want him/her? Further, how can the doctor be liable for wrongful death, when a Child Wrongful Death claim belongs to the parents? Is there any circumstance in which the mother's comparative fault will not exceed the doctor's alleged comparative fault, thereby barring the claim? If the State wants to discourage women from aborting their children because of a Down Syndrome diagnosis, I'm all for that. Purporting to ban it with an unenforceable law, however, is not the way to effectuate this policy.

ADVERTISEMENT