Search results

Despite the existence of minimum age laws for juvenile justice jurisdiction in 18 US states, California has no explicit law that protects children (i.e. youth less than 12 years old) from being processed in the juvenile justice system. In the absence of a minimum age law, California lags behind other states and international practice and standards. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

In this policy brief, academics across the University of California campuses examine current evidence, theory, and policy related to the minimum age of juvenile justice jurisdiction.

Existing evidence suggests that children lack the cognitive maturity to comprehend or benefit from formal juvenile justice processing, and diverting children from the system altogether is likely to be more beneficial for the child and for public safety.

Based on current evidence and theory, the authors argue that minimum age legislation that protects children from contact with the juvenile justice system and treats them as children in need of services and support, rather than as delinquents or criminals, is an important policy goal for California and for other national and international jurisdictions lacking a minimum age law.

California has no law specifying a minimum age for juvenile justice jurisdiction, meaning that young children of any age can be processed in the juvenile justice system. This policy brief provides a rationale for a minimum age law in California and other states and jurisdictions without one.

The available research on specialized interventions for youth experiencing commercial sexual exploitation almost exclusively focuses on the impact and efficacy related to cisgender girls, despite the inclusion of youth who identify as transgender in these programs. This paper aims to present a case study on the experience of a transgender adolescent girl who experienced commercial sexual exploitation and provides a narrative of the multifarious challenges she faced while involved in institutional systems of care.

This paper conducted an in-depth case review of all records on “Jade,” a white adolescent transgender girl who experienced commercial sexual exploitation, from a specialty court program in the juvenile justice system between 2012 and 2016. Her experiences throughout childhood exemplify many of the unique challenges that transgender girls and young women with histories of exploitation or trafficking may encounter within service delivery and socioecological systems. This paper applied concepts adapted from the gender minority stress theoretical model to understand how minority gender identity can shape the experiences and outcomes of the youth impacted by commercial sexual exploitation.

Jade’s narrative underscores the interplay of gender-based sexual violence, heteronormative structural barriers, transphobia and their intersectional impact on her experience while receiving specialized care. The intersectional hardships she experienced likely contributed to adverse biopsychosocial outcomes, including high rates of medical and behavioral health diagnoses and expectations of further rejection.

This paper highlights the extraordinary challenges and barriers faced by an often under-recognized and overlooked subset of the youth impacted by commercial sexual exploitation, who may receive services that do not account for their unique needs related to gender expression and identity. This paper exemplifies how internalized stigma along with expectations of further rejection and victimization have implications for clinical and multidisciplinary intervention settings. Jade’s case underscores the need for improved access to supportive services for youth with minority gender identities, including peer community-building opportunities. Finally, this paper identifies a critical gap in US legislation and social policy. This gap contributes to the structural harms faced by transgender and gender-nonconforming youth receiving services during or following experiences of commercial sexual exploitation.

Although incarceration may have life-long negative health effects, little is known about associations between child incarceration and subsequent adult health outcomes. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

The authors analyzed data from 14,689 adult participants in the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health) to compare adult health outcomes among those first incarcerated between 7 and 13 years of age (child incarceration); first incarcerated at>or=14 years of age; and never incarcerated.

Compared to the other two groups, those with a history of child incarceration were disproportionately black or Hispanic, male, and from lower socio-economic strata. Additionally, individuals incarcerated as children had worse adult health outcomes, including general health, functional limitations (climbing stairs), depressive symptoms, and suicidality, than those first incarcerated at older ages or never incarcerated.

Despite the limitations of the secondary database analysis, these findings suggest that incarcerated children are an especially medically vulnerable population.

Programs and policies that address these medically vulnerable children’s health needs through comprehensive health and social services in place of, during, and/or after incarceration are needed.

Meeting these unmet health and social service needs offers an important opportunity to achieve necessary health care and justice reform for children.

No prior studies have examined the longitudinal relationship between child incarceration and adult health outcomes.