J4F Congressional Testimony
J4F Congressional Testimony
Submitted to HearING ON ENDING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE
December 5, 2012
Senator Dick Durbin
Room 226
Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C.
Re: Hearing on Ending the School-to-Prison Pipeline Congressional Testimony
To Whom It May Concern:
The following testimony is submitted on behalf of Justice for Families (J4F), a national alliance of local organizations working to end the nation’s youth incarceration epidemic. In furtherance of its national report, Families Unlocking Futures: Solutions to the Crisis in Juvenile Justice, Justice for Families, its twelve local partners, and its research partner, the DataCenter, surveyed more than 1,000 parents and family members of system-involved youth from 20 cities spread across nine states and conducted 24 focus groups of 152 youth, parents, and family members from twelve cities across nine states, among other research.
In focus groups and surveys, families described how the rapid growth of the prison system, ‘zero-tolerance’ school discipline policies, and aggressive police tactics coupled with the decline of social services and public education have wreaked havoc on their predominantly low-income communities of color. In this context, rather than being a deterrent, school disciplinary systems and juvenile justice systems have functioned as a principal feeder into our nation’s vast prison system.
The parents and families of court-involved and incarcerated youth love their children and are hardworking individuals with deep ties to, and concern for, their communities. Yet, more often than not, “tough-on-crime” rhetoric and uninformed stereotypes about youth and their families have governed the policies of schools and juvenile justice systems. In Families Unlocking Futures: Solutions to the Crisis in Juvenile Justice, families challenge those misperceptions. J4F was founded and is run by parents and families who have experienced “the system” directly with our own children, and who are taking the lead to change it. The following reflects a brief summary of the findings of the Families Unlocking Futures Report. The full report is available at www.justice4families.org.
FAMILIES UNLOCKING FUTURES SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The Present: The Problem
•Nearly one in three families surveyed reported that their child’s first arrest took place at school.
•Ninety-one percent of family respondents said that courts should involve families more in decisions on what happens to a child found delinquent/guilty.
•Yet, more than eight in ten family members surveyed reported that they were never asked by a judge what should happen to their child. Once cases were called, families described court hearings as proceeding quickly with no time to understand what was going on or provide input.
•Just 18 percent of families reported that professionals in the youth justice system (judges, probation officers, public defenders, facility staff, and others) were either “helpful” or “very helpful” during the court process.
•Eighty-six percent of family members surveyed said they would like to be more involved in their children’s treatment while they were confined in a youth prison or other residential placement.
•Three out of four survey participants reported facing serious impediments to visiting their children and over half said that it was difficult to contact staff at the facility to ask how their child was doing, or get information about their child’s progress and/or safety.
•Only 32 percent of parents and families surveyed reported discussing release plans with juvenile justice system personnel prior to their child’s release.
•Sixty-nine percent of families surveyed said it was either “difficult” or “very difficult” to get their child back in school post-release.
•Though measures of recidivism vary across states, roughly 70-80 percent of youth released from youth prisons are rearrested in two to three years.
The costs associated with a young person’s involvement in the justice system weigh heavily on families of modest means.
•More than half of family members who took part in the Justice for Families survey reported that their households live on less than $25,000 per year.
•One in three families said they have had to choose between paying for basic necessities like food and making court related payments.
•One in five families reported having to take out a loan to make court related payments.
•Two out of three parents surveyed reported that they have had to take time off from work without pay to support their family member as a result of their involvement with the system.
•More than one in three families indicated that the cost of phone calls was prohibitive, and kept them from having contact with their loved one.
The Future: Family-Driven Solutions
Families surveyed indicated ways youth justice system officials might be more responsive to families during the court process and while youth are in youth or adult prisons:
•Give families more timely notification of court dates (87 percent);
•Hold court appearances when it is easier for families to attend hearings (85 percent);
•Support families’ transportation to court (84 percent) and residential placements (81 percent);
•Discontinue taking away visits for misconduct in the facility (76 percent);
•Eliminate burdensome fees and fines that hurt working families
•Maintain a staffed hotline or call center for families who have questions about visitation (92 percent);
•Notify families of expected release dates to allow them sufficient time to prepare (93 percent);
•Locate facilities/programs closer to family residences (91 percent);
•Have more visitation opportunities (91 percent) and fewer limits on who can visit (83 percent).
In addition to ending practices that exclude families, youth justice systems should proactively create opportunities for families to participate in the redesign of these systems.
•Schools and youth justice systems should work to ensure that parents and families play a central role in all decisions that impact their children.
•Schools and youth justice systems should work with community-based organizations to provide peer support to families.
•Across the country, school discipline and youth justice policy needs to be thoroughly reexamined and families must be involved. An overwhelming 92 percent of families surveyed stated that families should be engaged in local, state, and federal policy discussions regarding how juvenile justice systems work and the kinds of programs that are made available. Yet, just 27 percent reported they had ever been part of such discussions.
When asked how judges could assign better options for youth, surveyed families pointed to the need for
•job opportunities (91 percent)
•educational opportunities (86 percent)
•mentorship opportunities (84 percent)
•mental health programs (77 percent)
•community-based services that keep kids in the home (75 percent).
In addition to the recommendations above, J4F supports the recommendations outlined in the Dignity in Schools letter.
A rethinking of school discipline and youth justice systems based on the recognition of the deep strengths and reconciliatory values held by communities is desperately needed. Nearly half of families J4F surveyed have either personally survived a crime or have a family member who has. Nevertheless, surveyed families who have a crime survivor in their family were actually more likely to support alternatives to incarceration and detention. Families understand the need for community safety but also see the way youth are treated in school discipline and juvenile justice systems as part of the problem.
In these systems, when critical decisions are being made about how a young person is treated, families are outright excluded, disregarded, or not provided the information and tools necessary to actively participate in proceedings dominated by legalese and jargon. Most of the youth at-risk of becoming engaged in the school-to-prison pipeline come from families that face extreme financial vulnerability. While these families struggle to meet basic needs, they also find it increasingly difficult to access and afford positive recreational and educational opportunities for their children. If they have the misfortune of encountering school disciplinary and juvenile justice systems, they’ll face exclusionary policies that: (1) create and deepen economic instability; (2) discriminate against families that deviate from the nuclear family norm; and (3) reinforce the incorrect assumption that their families are apathetic or worse, that they are part of the problem.
Meanwhile, a vast research base shows that: (1) zero tolerance policies do not enhance school safety (2) locking children up in adult and adult-like prisons and jails puts them at grave risk, increases their chances of being violently abused and locked up again, and ultimately decreases the safety of communities; (3) families are crucial to youth success; and (4) family-centered youth programs work. Yet these solutions are too often ignored because families do not have a seat at the table and are too often assumed to be the problem.
The recommendations outlined above offer a path toward building youth and family leadership into the design of school discipline and youth justice systems. Ultimately, much of the vast trove of resources currently geared toward failing ‘zero-tolerance’ policy implementation in schools and in incarceration should be re-directed toward investment in social goods and opportunities within communities. Through justice reinvestment, tapping into the resiliency of communities harmed by decades of failed tough-on-crime policies, we can end the school-to-prison pipeline and enhance genuine public safety.
For citations, J4F’s full suite of policy recommendations and descriptions of promising justice reinvestment approaches, please download Families Unlocking Futures available at www.justice4families.org.
With Appreciation,
/S/ GRACE BAUER ZACHARY NORRIS
Grace Bauer and Zachary Norris
Co-Directors, Justice for Families