How to Use This Site
Better results for kids and families through research-informed policy

Root Causes: Juvenile Detention

Why is this Trend Important?

Juvenile detention harms youth.  Inadequate and inhumane conditions in juvenile detention facilities seriously damage young people. Those who experience detention have higher rates of attempted suicide and psychiatric disorders, high recidivism rates and are more likely to engage in adult criminal behavior. [i]   Reducing the use of juvenile detention improves public safety and increases the likelihood that youth will avoid adult criminal behavior. [ii]

What Do We Know About This Trend?

  • Detention use varies across the states. Juvenile detention rates have declined nationally since 1999.

    • Most youth are detained for non-violent offenses. Many youth are detained because of status offenses, violations of court orders related to status offenses and probation violations. The largest group of youth in detention is held for property and public order offenses, non-violent crimes. Six out of 7 of youth detained for drug charges are held for possession, not sale or distribution. [iii] 
    • Minorities are disproportionately represented in detention facilities.  Minority youth are two-thirds of the detention/correctional population but are only one-third of the national general youth population. [iv]

    What are the Forces and Influences at Work?

    • Decline in arrests. The United States saw a decrease in juvenile crime, including arrests for violent crimes, person and property crimes from 1999 through 2003. [v] 
    •  Residual effects of “super-predator” fears.  Media reports of violent crimes committed by juveniles in the 1990s fueled public outcry.  Resulting laws developed in response to public perception continue to drive the juvenile justice system.
    • Youth in the adult criminal justice system.  More transfers of juvenile offenders to the adult criminal justice system reduce juvenile detentions.
    • Systemic problems.  Overwhelmed courts, lack of community resources, lack of alternatives to detention, ineffective legal assistance and poor risk assessment capacity result in the overuse of detention.
    • Disparate treatment of minorities.  Disparities in the treatment of minorities lead to disproportionate representation throughout the juvenile justice system. 

    [i] Holman, B. and  Ziedenberg, J. The Dangers of Detention: The Impact of Incarcerating Youth in Detention and Other Secure Facilities . Washington, DC: Justice Policy Institute.
    [ii] Shelden, R.G.. “Detention diversion advocacy: An evaluation,” Juvenile Justice Bulletin, September 1999. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
    [iii] Census of Juveniles in Residential Placement (CJRP) Databook .
    [v] Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention  Statistical Briefing Book , December 13, 2007.
    Money

    Gauging the Human and Financial Costs. Detention harms youth and overwhelms state and local budgets. Over 20 years, one detention bed costs between $1.25 million and $1.5 million. [i]

    [i] American Youth Policy Forum, “Less Cost, More Safety,” 2001.

    Info

    Using Comprehensive Strategies Results in Reductions. In Virginia, admissions to juvenile facilities dropped 50 percent between 1997 and 2007 due to the following factors: change in admissions criteria, fewer intakes, focus on alternatives, wider use of graduated sanctions,and use of a standardized risk assessment instrument. [i]

    [i] Report on the offender population forecasts, FY 2008 to FY 2013, Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the Secretary of Public Safety, October 15, 2007.

    Attention

    Too Often Neglected. A serious deficiency in most states is the lack of attention to juvenile reentry.

    States

    Successful Detention Reform. The New Jersey Office of the Child Advocate report on juvenile detention outlines “the need for county and state leaders to capitalize on the success of detention center reforms that have resulted in fewer youth being confined in county detention centers through creative, cost-neutral strategies and by streamlining and redirecting existing resources”.