Blog: Juvenile Treatment Drug Court

Last fall, youth in the Juvenile Recovery Court in Clark County, WA, got a chance to tell their stories on film. Six participants received training in "digital storytelling" and, with the help of court staff, and a prevention specialist, they turned their 250-word personal stories into powerful video presentations. Their efforts were given great coverage in the Dec. 27, 2010 issue of The Columbian. 
Below is a joint interview with the three people who made this amazing project happen for these youth: Bradley Finegood, LMHC (at left, above), who coordinates Clark County's Superior Court therapeutic specialty courts; Angela Zahas, a county prevention specialist (far right, above); and Anna Lookingbill, the Juvenile Recovery Court's resource coordinator (see middle, above). 
 
 
Q: What is digital storytelling? How is it different from making a video?
 
Anna:  There's two layers to digital storytelling. The first is the technical component, such as learning the software. (We used low-cost or free software, such as a free audio program called Audacity, and Microsoft's photo editing program.)
 
But there's also a pretty significant component around, "What's the story you want to tell?" How do you tell it in a way that has emotional impact on people? 
 
So when you teach it, it’s a layered thing – there's a technical piece, plus storytelling.
 
Brad: It was a small initial investment that will continue to pay dividends. Once Angela was trained on digital storytelling, it could be replicated. We could train others at a low cost – outside of human capital – for what could be an extremely powerful project. There's no fees we have to pay, no manuals we have to buy – so it just made a lot of sense. It's a long-term buy-in to people’s recovery.
 
On a side note, the kids who went through this started out extremely closed, but they opened up, smiled, they shared – so that’s something priceless when you talk about youth from the juvenile justice side of it. 

Research has shown that punishment alone is not the most effective way to to help a young person change his or her behavior -- the primary goal of juvenile drug courts, and, indeed, juvenile probation generally. Instead, a combination of punishment, or sanctions, with incentives, is most effective.
But if you want to act on this information, you're likely to have a number of questions. Here's just a few of the questions that commonly arise:

1. Is there a ready-made list of sanctions and incentives we could use?
2. Should we start out giving a strong sanction to get the offender’s attention, or should we build up to that?
3. Are we coddling offenders by giving them incentives?
4. Does it matter how long you wait after the behavior is detected to give a sanction or incentive?

And that's just the beginning.  To help you make sense of the options -- and to give you several lists of ideas for your own graduated sanctions and incentives grid -- I'm posting a number of resources here.
From NCJFCJ (and shared with permission):

• "Making Sense of Incentives and Sanctions in Working with the Substance Abusing Offender," by Susan Yeres, Ed.D., Betty Gurnell, M.Ed., Meg Holmberg, MSW. (This excellent guide is where I got the four questions above -- download it to see eight more common questions, and  answers to all 12.)
• Need ideas for incentives and sanctions? Then try the NCJFCJ's "laundry list." 
• How can you afford to pay for incentives? What if the teen doesn't react the way we thought he or she would? You can find answers to these and other questions in the NCJFCJ's frequently asked questions document.

If your team is working on implementing incentives and sanctions together, you'll probably want these as well, also from the NCJFCJ:

How many juvenile drug courts are there in the United States?  The Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT) at the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Admininstration (SAMHSA) wants to know by March 17, 2011.
Here's the announcement -- please note that you do not need to be a CSAT grantee to qualify or participate:

We are writing to request your help with an important data inquiry. In order to enhance SAMHSA/CSAT’s programmatic and advocacy efforts concerning adolescent substance abuse treatment and recovery, we are seeking to update our knowledge concerning the number of juvenile drug courts in the United States.
 
To help us close this knowledge gap, we are asking all of our current JTDC grantees to reply to this email with a listing of any juvenile drug courts that you and your organization are aware of. Please complete and return the attached template with your reply.
 
The term “juvenile drug court” means a specially designed court calendar or docket within a juvenile court to which youth having problems with alcohol and/or other drugs are referred; a separate or special jurisdiction court is neither necessary nor encouraged. The juvenile drug court judge maintains close oversight of each case, and both leads and works as a member of a team that comprises representatives from treatment, juvenile justice, social services, school and vocational training programs, law enforcement, probation, the prosecution and the defense.
 
Please complete the attached document and send your replies to (adlist@jbsinternational.com) no later than March 17, 2011. Thank you in advance for any assistance with this important inquiry that you and your agency can provide!

(Hat tip to Christa Myers.)

As of the mid-2000s, the research on the effectiveness of juvenile drug courts was unclear. Now, that's starting to change. In coming weeks, I'll post about new research from John Roman at the Urban Institute about what works and how juvenile drug courts should adjust their practices to be more effective.
 
Juvenile Drug Courts - How Do They Compare to Outpatient Treatment?

Today, I want to share with you a new quasi-experimental study I saw mentioned at JMATE 2010 that compares 1,120 youth in juvenile drug courts in multiple jurisdictions with 1,120 youth not in juvenile drug court, but who particiated in adolescent outpatient treatment. The goal was to see how the two groups differed in terms of services and in their treatment outcomes.
Bottom line? Juvenile drug courts appeared to do a better job (compared to treatment alone) of helping youth reduce symptoms of their emotional problems and cut their substance use, as measured six months post-intake. (This doesn't mean, of course, that every teen who needs drug or alcohol treatment should be in juvenile drug court--!) In general, youth in juvenile drug courts received -- unsurprisingly -- more family services, more wrap-around support, more urine tests, and more supervision.

What were our top three stories for 2010? You can pick from stories on juvenile justice reform ... juvenile drug courts ... adolescent substance abuse treatment ... positive youth development ... family engagement ... or the juvenile justice system in general? 
What was most useful to you? What was the most intriguing?  What did you pass on to your colleagues? 
You can pick from any story we published here on the blog in 2010.  But just to make it easy, I've listed 20 stories below that I'd expect to  be on everyone's top-stories list.  If you don't find your favorite below -- and I had to leave out a heck of a lot of good stuff -- feel free to vote for it anyway. 
(By the way, they stories below are not listed in any particular order.)

Consider this for a moment: 

What should recovery-oriented care for adolescents with substance abuse issues or co-occurring mental health issues look like? 

Have that picture firmly in your mind? Okay, good. Does it change if the youth in question are in the juvenile justice system? If so, how? 
I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.
To aid you in your thinking, I'm attaching a copy of the report from a 2008 meeting sponsored by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). The report is titled, "Designing a Recovery-Oriented Care Model for Adolescents and Transition Age Youth with Substance Use or Co-Occurring Mental Health Disorders." Check out pp. 36-39 for themes from the meeting, along with specific recommendations. 
Just in case it's useful, you may also want to review this "Working Definition of Recovery." The actual definition's quite brief, but this two-page handout also includes guiding principles and elements of systems of care. Also, check out this report from the Coalition for Juvenile Justice called "Positive Youth Justice: Framing Justice Interventions Using the Concepts of Positive Youth Development." It offers insights about the benefits of using positive youth development to help youth contribute to community life.
Feel free to leave me a comment below.

Last year, we posted about a hugely important study by the Center for Court Innovation. In it, young people reported that they did not receive a clear explanation of the juvenile justice system when they entered. Nor did they -- or their parents and guardians -- learn how their actions affected what happens in juvenile court. 
Our Reclaiming Futures site in Orange/Chatham Counties, North Carolina is trying to change this and created the video above for parents/guardians of youth entering juvenile court. Congratulations!  (They're also working on a handbook for youth; I'll share it when it's available.)
Has your jurisdiction done something similar? Leave a comment or drop me an email and we'll be glad to post it!

The Department of Justice's ongoing work to integrate juvenile drug courts and the Reclaiming Futures model was highlighted by U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder when he addressed the opening session of a conference held by the National Association of Drug Court Professionals (NADCP) on June 3, 2010. If you click on the video above, you'll see he speaks briefly about the administration's overall efforts to draw on innovative approaches to adolescent substance abuse around 14:40.
In the same segment, he indicates that three more juvenile drug court awards will be made this fall jointly with the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT) at the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) -- and he also mentions that a summit on adolescent recovery is planned for this fall. Looking forward to that! 

On Monday, April 19th 2010, Nassau County’s Family Court Deputy County Attorney’s Office was advised that the county was restructuring the department. Our Juvenile Treatment Court prosecutors, Gregg Roth and Arianne Reyer, were advised their services were no longer needed as of Friday, April 30th. Arianne was later given a temporary reprieve, but Gregg is gone.
This move was devastating to the treatment court and to the Reclaiming Futures initiative here, which had built a cohesive working group over the last three years. Just as when I was younger and my brother left home for the military, it had never occurred to me that anyone would ever leave our team. I am left feeling abandoned and alone with Gregg’s departure, just like I did when my brother went off to the Army. Our Nassau County Juvenile Treatment Court/Reclaiming Futures Change Team is family, and one of us is no longer here.