How Can the UK Correctional Institutions Help Young Criminals - Literature review Example

The impact of alization of the juvenile delinquent within any juvenile correctional The debate on the efficacy of juvenile detention centres goes a long way back. Juvenile delinquency has a broad spectrum of causes, ranging from socio-economic factors, parents level of education, physical or emotional abuse and to extent genetics. So, designing a system of correction is a highly challenging task. The purpose of this literature review is to scan research published over the last two decades and draw an accurate portrait of juvenile correction institutions. Once problematic areas that need improvement are identified, proposals could be made to redeem the situation. Literature Review: Luisa Dillner reports in her 1992 paper for the British Medical Journal that young offenders are more prone to suicidal tendencies than the control group. The report was based on the internal records of the Young Offender Institution in Feltham, United Kingdom and draws conclusions from statistics found therein. The institute housed 500 prisoners in remand and 304 convicted ones. All inmates were below the age of 21. In a span of ten months, between August-1991 and June-1992, four inmates hung themselves. Where to place the blame? The following facts might give the answer (Dillner, 1992). The remand prisoners were forced to spend more than 80 % of their time inside the cell. New entrants to the facility found it difficult to socialize due to bullying by the older inmates. Most prisoners were in a state of "anxiety and vulnerability" due to the alien nature of their dwelling and their separation from family members. The techniques used by the Feltham staff to control and restrain these juvenile offenders were deemed extremely harsh. On top of all this the inmate health care system was found to be inefficient. The prison staffs were found to be lack morale and motivation to perform their duties. So, the suicides of 4 of these prisoners are attributable to conditions existing within the confines of the facility (Dillner, 1992). Sadly, the above case was not a one-off. They represent the general state of correctional institutions across Britain. A report released by a reliable human rights group Helsinki Watch supports this assertion. Overall, correction centres in Britain were found to be inadequate in providing its inhabitants with necessary support. Of course, this was the state of affairs in 1992. How much progress has been made ever since? We shall find out. Teenagers addicted to alcohol were involved in more number of violent offences in comparison with their non-drinking peers. This was the conclusion drawn by Hazel Cookson, in her 1992 research article for the British Journal of Criminology. Interestingly, a correlation was also found between teens who were alcoholic were to exhibit aggressive and rude behaviour even when they are sober. Clearly, there is a relation between alcoholism and violence. This had always been true with the adults, but it is now confirmed that under aged alcoholics dont fare any different. A sample of more than six hundred young male offenders was surveyed for this research. Of this 600 odd, more than 25% admitted that they were under the influence of alcohol at the time the offence was committed. 16% said they were addicted to alcohol but were sober during the time of the offence. Being a big sample, the chances of results being inaccurate are greatly reduced. Hence, both the assertions of this study are backed by sound facts (Cookson, 1992). In the author’s own words, “A significant association was found between drinking at the time of the current offence and offences of a violent nature. A significant association was also found between violent current offences and the consumption of excessive amounts of spirits. Drunkenness was found to be related to large and excessive consumption of beer, cider, or lager. Habitual drunkenness was associated with self-reports of all types of delinquency” (Cookson, 1992). A relevant question at this juncture would be "Did the alcoholics, having left the correction canter and integrated into society, go back to alcohol?" We dont know. There have not been comprehensive study results in this area. More research is clearly required. Nevertheless, this study clearly establishes the validity of its thesis. Previous studies in this area have given inconsistent and at times opposing results. Another important deviant behaviour attached with delinquency is promiscuous and risky sexual activity during their stay in the detention centre. Teenage boys in correction facilities were more sexually active. They also tend to use condoms irregularly. No wonder then, that rates of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) were significantly higher than other groups of their age. This is one area where the correction facilities abjectly failed to meet their objective. The last thing parents of delinquent youth want is the see their son or daughter in a worse mental and physical state than before. The detention centre management is rightly blamed for this state of decadence. But it has to be remembered that any opportunity for social interaction in the correctional can also be an opportunity for sexual experience. Correctional programmes will not work without an atmosphere of camaraderie and a sense of belonging. Hence, the solution lies in balancing between these two necessities. Admonishments and physical restraints have obviously failed to improve the inmates wellbeing. Properly educating the youth about the risks attached with their sexual behaviour is the only way to go about resolving this issue (Gretchen, et. al., 1994). Research proves that no concrete measure is implemented in many correctional centres toward stopping these risky behaviour patterns. This aspect of juvenile correction facilities is well studied. Research reports were to be found as early as 1994, when the dangers of AIDS endemic were little known, both to the authorities and the general public. As mentioned before, the results of these extensive studies were disappointing to say the least. In the Alabama detention centre, the boys were found to carry Chlamydia infection, gonorrhoea, syphilis and others. More than two thirds of them admitted to having homosexual encounters with their fellow inmates, willingly or unwillingly. More shockingly, one in four of them have had more than twenty partners till then. And two in five of them do not use condoms during intercourse. Ten percent of the inmates were already reported to carry one or more Sexually Transmitted Diseases. Yet, no effort had been made by the authorities in segregating the infected boys to separate cells. These facts go to show the depth of incompetence that pervades state run detention centres. In this regard, institutionalization of juvenile delinquents had proved disadvantageous to them (Gretchen, et. al., 1994). The above study was of a generic nature and was conducted on a relatively small sample. The research carried out by Patricia Sweeny in the May of 1995 is a more comprehensive one and concentrates on HIV infections alone. The results of this study are concurrent with the results of the previous study. Blood tests were performed on a pool of 79,802 teenagers attending various medical clinics, including those groups confined in correctional facilities. The pool was drawn from 24 different cities from all parts of America. [40] The infection rate was 0.3% in correctional facilities, 0.1% greater than the rest of the sample pool. Considering that these numbers pertain to the year 1995, when the research was conducted, the 0.1% difference is statistically significant (Sweeny, et, al., 1995). Here we have another proof of the lack of effectiveness that is associated with juvenile detention centres. Sweeny’s results are supported by a similar research done three years later. If the correction centres have failed in curbing the spread of STDs under their management, can they be effective in other areas of behavioural correction? The answer is probably in the negative. A strong connection is found between sexual abuse and physical abuse among incarcerated youth. Survey data were gathered from 62 girls and 334 boys that were incarcerated in a correctional facility in Nevada (Mason, et. al., 1998). (This study was done just three years after the STD studies discussed above. So, figures can be correlated between the two studies.) Nearly 50% of the boys reported suffering physical abuse in the past. 10% of them suffered sexual abuse. Among the girls, the numbers are significantly higher. 73% of the girls reported having been physically abused and 68.3% of them reported a history of sexual abuse. Further, the authors assert: “The analyses indicated that females who reported a history of sexual abuse had an earlier mean age of first intercourse than those who reported no sexual abuse. In addition, male and female respondents with a history of physical and/or sexual abuse reported using no method of contraception as compared to youth with no history of abuse.” (Mason, et. al., 1998) These teenagers started being sexually active earlier than the control group. They are also more prone to unsafe sexual practices. These numbers reveal an important fact - that abusive behaviour is a cyclical phenomenon which gets passed from one generation to the next in a vicious cycle. This fact also throws open a debate on the culpability of these youth in the first place. Most of the inmates are at the receiving end of the abuse themselves. To follow a restrictive and taxing code of behaviour in a correctional is like adding insult to injury. Hence a radical upheaval of the framework within which youth justice functions is needed. But unfortunately, scholarly literature on this subject since the time of the above research does not reflect this paradigmatic shift in policy making (Mason, et. al., 1998). It is not known if the poor quality of correction centres is a result of inadequate policies or incompetent implementation of those policies. But some noticeable efforts are being made from the turn of the millennium to redeem this situation. A comprehensive perinatal and paediatric action plan was prepared by the Regional Perinatal Consortium of Monmouth and Ocean Counties Inc. The proposal was reviewed by the New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services. The officials of the department came to the conclusion that the proposed plans were sound and feasible (Mason, et. al., 1998). One of the programs, called "Alternatives to Violence" was a monthly get-together of counsellors and incarcerated youth. The responses so far have been positive. In some cases they have exceeded expectations. The success of this program is attributable to the cordial and informal atmosphere in which the sessions were conducted. This encourages the youth to participate in the scheduled activities. Their enthusiasm is recognized and respected. Pregnant teenagers are educated on some essential parenting skills in some of these sessions, so that the vicious cycle of abuse, neglect and violence is broken down. So, it is not all gloom and doom as far as juvenile detention institutes go. There have been some success stories, like the "Alternatives to Violence" program, that were meticulously implemented by the institute staff. It seems however, that these successes are the exception rather than the rule (Greene, et. al., 1999). The other area covered by these programs is health. Charting plans for teenagers is never easy. Each inmate in a correctional institute will be at a different stage of physical and emotional development. As adolescents experience rapid physical and emotional changes during this period. On top of this, these adolescents were subject to various health risks in these centres. While health programs have been implemented in many correction centres, the results were not as impressive as some of the education programs. Greene makes this valid observation: “Once inside the correctional system, the youths health and health educational needs could easily be ignored. The adolescent experiences a myriad of physical and psychosocial changes during this rapid period of growth and development. To complicate matters further, the incarcerated juvenile is at more of an increased risk for health problems than his or her peers (Thompson & Farrow, 1993). This situation presents itself as a unique opportunity for nurses and public health professionals; with the help of the youth themselves, programs can be designed to meet their specific and desired needs. Their unique risk-taking and suboptimal social behaviours provide the antecedents to allow the youth to be the expert consultants in these educational and health promotion designs.” (Greene, et. al., 1999) Jerry Tyler, Ray Darville and Kathi Stalnaker undertook a study in 2001 on the diversity and effectiveness of programs followed in different correctional institutions. Some of their findings were startling. The number of juvenile detention centres has been growing at an alarming rate. The effectiveness of any correctional is a direct measure of the effectiveness of the correction and prevention programs that it implements. Prior to 1987 only four correction programs existed in the United States. This number had risen to 46 by 1993. Presently, there are more than hundred programs in implementation. Is this a good sign or a bad sign? Well, we have to dig deeper into the statistics so as to make a judgement. It costs 93 dollars of tax-payer money per day per inmate for implementing these programs. This figure is of course the average. Across the American landscape, the cost per inmate per day ranged from 65 dollars to 120 dollars. The 65 dollar figure was obtained from a correctional in the underdeveloped state of Alabama, whereas the 120 dollar figure was deduced from the records of an institute in Washington - a more advanced state. So, the disparity in the affluence of a given state is a factor in determining the effectiveness of the programs offered. Disparities are also a result of the differing nature of programs. When the effect per dollar spent is calculated (not effectiveness per se), the results are not impressive. For instance, 63% to 74% of adolescents that have completed a program recede to their former patterns of criminal behaviour. Thirteen percent of these teenagers were convicted for crimes committed during their adulthood (Tyler, et. al., 2001). From the literature review done so far (ranging from years 1991 to 2001), it is obvious that a majority of correctional facilities across the United States are either under-functioning or producing results contrary to the stated objective. If this is the condition in the most advanced country in the world, what are we to expect from the less advanced ones? The research team of Tyler, Darnille and Stalnaker did not stop at presenting the then state of institutions, but were also able to identify the causes for these failings. Some of them are as follows: 1. The minimum age requirement for admission into the correctional houses has come down significantly. When this happens, 11 and 12 year olds (who were in their early puberty) are grouped together with older teens, which tend to be physically stronger and more prone to aggressive behaviour. So, bullying and harassment becomes inevitable. 2. Even after years of scholarly exposition into the inefficacy of authoritarian/militaristic schooling, juvenile detention centres were found to follow militaristic patterns in their attempt to discipline the youth. 3. The intake of juveniles into the programs is either too small a group or too large. This has had a detrimental effect in curbing recidivism rates. 4. The staff to inmate ratio is too small for these programs. Due to this inmates get inadequate personal attention. 5. Most correction programs are short-term based and one-off. It is very optimistic to assume that a few days of corrective education will have life-long impacts. 6. Adolescents tend to perform better activities that they choose of their own volition. Obviously, no one willingly participates in correction programs. Hence, the whole exercise starts with this disadvantage. In effect, correctional facilities for juvenile delinquents were found to make little significant impact on the participants subsequent behaviour. It is even claimed that these militaristic disciplining exercises are an excuse for the underlying "abusive" inclinations of the institute staff (Tyler, et. al., 2001). The authors summarize the overall situation thus: “Insufficient data exist to make definitive judgments as to effectiveness, but a survey of the literature shows that they are considerably less effective than the public believes. The original idea for adult boot camps incorporated goals of a cost-efficient alternative to incarceration and reduction in recidivism. Juvenile boot camps usually are more costly than most other traditional options, and with rare exceptions recidivism rates are extremely disappointing. Boot camps could prove to be a valuable tool in juvenile justice, but stricter assessment and evaluation methods as well as better aftercare are needed before these politically appealing programs constitute an effective method of diminishing juvenile delinquency. (Tyler, et. al., 2001)” STDs are not the only threat for the health of inmates. While some of the conditions they suffer from in the correctional institute may have had its origin in the days prior to incarceration, their health conditions dont get any better during their stay at the institute. Some of the common ailments were directly attributable to parental style, socio-economic background, psychotic mental disorders and physical/sexual abuse. There is no direct cause-effect relationship between these factors and the acquired conditions. It only explains the propensity of any young individual to develop detrimental health conditions (AAP Committee, 2001). The question that concerns this literature review is whether institutionalization "helps" in fighting/preventing ailments in inmates. American Academy of Paediatrics: Committee on Adolescence issued its findings on April 2001. The committee’s findings were based on comprehensive collection of latest study results available to them. Some key statistics from their report follows: Overall, 60% of the boys and 35% of the girls were treated for injuries acquired during the period of incarceration (These injuries were independent of pre-existing propensities and conditions). A significant 20% of the injuries afflicted on boys were the direct consequences of "tussles and fights" amongst the inmates. Nine percent of these injuries are as a result of self-mutilation due to psychiatric causes (AAP Committee, 2001). Suicides rates of inmates during institutionalization are higher than the corresponding statistic for the control group. Suicide attempts too were higher in institutions. For example, “The high rate of mental health disorders among juveniles is associated with a high rate of suicide and suicide attempts during incarceration. The risk of suicide is especially great for youths detained in adult jails or lockups and for youths with a history of psychiatric illnesses. A 1984 survey on health services for juveniles found that approximately 16% of facilities reported at least 1 death during the preceding 5 years and that approximately 67% of those deaths were suicides (AAP Committee, 2001).” Other common medical problems included "contagious diseases, somatic complaints, menstrual disorders, and skin problems". Hence institutes fail on all counts when it comes to preventing or alleviating health problems of juveniles during their period of confinement. The committee made a set of recommendations (these were later circulated to all correctional facilities) at the end of their report. A review of these recommendations is warranted here, as it would help us find what progress has been made since 2001 by reviewing recently published research. Some of the recommendations are: 1. All correctional institutions have to strictly follow the health care guidelines set by the Federal commission. These are the Guidelines for Health Supervision III. The centres should especially focus on "immunization status, developmental and psychosocial issues, and establishing a medical home before release." 2. Additionally, all the incarcerated children and adolescents should receive a complete set of preventive paediatric and adolescent health care all through the period of incarceration. 3. Testing for STDs such as gonorrhoea, trachoma should be conducted in regular intervals for all inmates in addition to general physical and dental checkups. Gynaecologic examinations should be made mandatory for all girls. 4. For pregnant teenage girls, proper prenatal services should be provided. They must also be educated about the detrimental effects of tobacco, alcohol, etc on the growing foetus. The girls must be given lessons on basic parenting skills. 5. For those adolescents addicted to narcotic and other illegal drugs, cessation programs must be offered. This program will include psychological counselling as well as medical approaches to cessation from drugs. 6. It should be mandatory to adopt and follow the "National Commission on Correctional Health Cares Standards for Health Services in Juvenile Detention and Confinement Facilities" (AAP Committee, 2001). These recommendations were made by American authorities in an American context. But, since they deal with universal requisites, they are applicable to juvenile correction institutions in any part of the world. James Balsamo of the National Environmental Health Association inspected various correctional facilities in December 2004. His assessments were published in the Journal of Environmental Health the same month. Since this scholarly literature is quite recent, it will reveal if the recommendations proposed in previous years were implemented or not. Balsamo pays special attention to the health and hygiene aspects of detention centres. These are some of his observations: "The toilet is like a utility infielder in baseball in that it can be used for many purposes. In addition to using it as a variant of a refrigerator, inmates may use it as a sort of washing machine. Why would they forgo the privilege of sending their clothes and bedding to a jail or prison laundry and wash their clothes in the toilet? To us, the health hazard is obvious, but in a correctional facility the obvious doesnt rule the day (Balsamo, 2004)" Improper plumbing systems were used as a communication/transit channel. For example, when one toilet is flushed with the "package", it pops up in the toilet of another cell downstream. Through this mode of transportation, messages, illegal drugs, small weapons like razor blades, etc., were known to be distributed. Some other less offensive "packages" include crumpled pages of magazines, cigarette packets, etc. Such activities had become so rampant and commonplace in correctional facilities, that it induced the framing of special legislations. Some of the more imaginative inmates are known to prepare "spud juice" (a low-quality alcoholic concoction). First they get hold of a stray container. Potato peelings, fruit peels, etc are then allowed to ferment in the container. Also known as Jailhouse alcohol, they are not safe for consumption. Many cases of "spud juice" poisoning have been reported. Inmates were also known to use the cardboard cylinder of a toilet-paper roll as a rudimentary oven or stove. It does not stop there. These juvenile delinquents had constructed a universe of their own. Lengthy sheets of toilet paper are rolled tightly so as to form a wicker or a lighter. Known to the inmates as "shank", they are used to light up cigarettes, etc. While the ingenuity and creativity in these "innovations" are admirable from a scientific point of view, they can find no place in youth correction institutes. Balsamo makes this succinct conclusion: "Situations that affect health and safety in correctional facilities may exist by accident, as the result of inferior products that cannot hold up to abuse by inmates, or as a result of vandalism by inmates. Because privacy is a scarce commodity in prisons and jails, excessive hoarding of large quantities of combustible materials and makeshift curtains may create fire hazards, .... Because of the universal hatred of prison food, inmates go to any length to store and cook food in their cells, thus creating insect and rodent harbourages, unsanitary storage practices, and dangerous cooking practices (Balsamo, 2004)". A relatively new development in juvenile delinquency prevention is the concept of "legal socialization". Legal socialization is the "process through which individuals acquire attitudes and beliefs about the law, legal authorities, and legal institutions" (Piquero, et. al., 2005). This is achieved through interaction sessions between juveniles and officials from courts, law enforcement and other legal agencies. An individuals abidance to law is directly related to their attitude toward the legitimacy of law and other legal institutions. The process of legal socialization is especially important during the years of adolescence as they are the formative period when individuals "form an adult-like understanding of society and its institutions". During this period, the influence of parents and schools starts to wane and individual experiences of law and legality in different social situations make stronger impressions. Legal socialization of adolescents is particularly relevant because for the first 10-12 years of a childs existence its only exposure to authority figures is the school and the home. Piquero notes: “The process of legal socialization should be particularly salient during adolescence, since this is the developmental period during which individuals are beginning to form an adult-like understanding of society and its institutions, and when they venture outside the closed systems of family and schools to experience laws and rules in a variety of social contexts where rule enforcement is more integrated with the adult world. In childhood, their experiences are limited to interactions with a small circle of authorities, such as school officials or store security guards, whose power is real, but whose formal legal status is ambiguous. More typically, whatever exposure children have had to law has been vicarious through family, friends or neighbours. But in contrast to children, adolescents experiences with these new social and legal contexts should have more powerful influences in shaping notions of fairness and the moral underpinnings of law.” (Piquero, et. al., 2005) Children who were unfortunate to be born into dysfunctional family systems get a distorted understanding of human relationships. Legal socialization is essentially an attempt to bring a child out of the closet of familial experience and educating it on acceptable and unacceptable behaviour in the public sphere. In other words, exposing them to "the notions of fairness and moral underpinnings of law" (Piquero, et. al., 2005). It is understood that these ideas of fairness and morality of the legal system that takes shape during adolescence affects their subsequent behaviour. It is all the more imperative that correctional institutions incorporate "Legal socialization" modules in their programmes. The question relevant to this literature review is "How do correctional units fare in helping juvenile legal socialization?” Studies conducted on samples of juvenile offenders during their period of incarceration as well as the period following it throws light on some interesting facts. The two basic measures used to evaluate the level of legal socialization were "legitimacy" and "legal cynicism". The notions of legal cynicism and legitimacy are factors determining the overall development of individual identity, beliefs and attitudes. They also influence individual perceptions about authority and authority figures. Hence, a measure of these dimensions is quite appropriate in the study valuations (Piquero, et. al., 2005). Research published by Alex Piquero and his team in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology reveals what we have come to expect from correctional institutions. They conclude that programs initiated by correctional institutions do not result in any significant improvement in the legal socialization of juveniles. Of course, this conclusion was arrived by making a comparison with samples from the general population. This conclusion could imply two things. First, those conventional avenues such as parents, guardians and school authorities are ineffective in their roles. Or that, juvenile correction programs do not show results proportionate to the funding that goes into these programs. Either way, the results are disappointing. With study after study declaring correctional facilities to be inadequate, it would be very tempting to place the blame on the management of these institutes. But the truth is, this is a systemic failure. The institute management is just one player in the group. The pivotal role is played by policy makers and legislators. To cite an example, "aftercare" has long been identified as important for sustained improvement in juvenile delinquents. As detention periods tend to be too small to make any significant impact on inmates behaviour, aftercare efforts assume special importance. Many public opinion polls across the United States support the extension of Medicaid services to cover aftercare costs of juvenile delinquents. But a database search on how far this public sentiment is reflected in domestic policies shows a disconnect (Gupta, et. al., 2005). Correction programs in and of themselves constitutes only one section of a comprehensive rehabilitation plan. Two key reasons could be cited: Firstly, most of the adolescents not only suffer from acute medical conditions but also chronic ones. The chronic ones include substance addiction as long term psychiatric illnesses. Secondly, with as many as 88,000 adolescents being released from correction centres every year, the necessity for continuing treatment when they re-enter regular community life is high. But presently, care is abruptly stopped when the adolescents leave the centre. Ideally, they should be offered community services. Medical professionals, such as paediatricians and primary care doctors can play a crucial role in bringing these essential services to the youth (Gupta, et. al., 2005). A majority of incarcerated youth were found to be suffering from chronic illnesses that require constant medical care. A study conducted by Washington State correctional facilities found that juveniles confined to correctional institutes for long periods of time tend to suffer from more chronic medical ailments when compared to juveniles who spent only a short amount of time. Some of the common chronic problems were related to dental, dermatological and respiratory faculties. 10.8% of teenage inmates were using illegal drugs at the time of the findings. More alarmingly, nearly 70% of male juveniles in long-term confinement suffer from mental disorders of various degrees. The corresponding figure for female inmates is even higher. So clearly, long-term juvenile confinement centres dont fare any better in redeeming the status of the youth. This is compounded by the fact that "continuing-care-after-release" is minimal to non-existent. Urgent action is needed at this point to restore correctional facilities with their functionality. Otherwise, the costs could be high: “In addition to the ethical argument that all children with chronic illness are deserving of care, any delay in receiving treatment after release may not only lead to increased morbidity and mortality but also may contribute to public health and legal problems such as increased spread of infection, continuation of antisocial behaviour, higher health care use, and commitment of repeat offences (criminal recidivism). Moreover, ignoring this problem may have dire consequences for the next generation of children.” (Gupta, et. al., 2005) In an article published in the Sociology Review, John Pitts analyzes the recent policies toward youth justice in the United Kingdom. The following were some of salient points from the article: The policies have added more offences for which adolescents could be imprisoned. The lengths of sentences have increased, with a maximum sentence of 15 years for grave offences. The role of Youth Courts was redefined to meet the changing nature of juvenile offences. The minimum age at which a juvenile could be incarcerated was also lowered. Pitts adds further, “This growing institutionalisation of children and young people since the early 1990s has worsened the existing problems of management and control in the institutions. From their introduction in the mid-1990s, Secure Training Centres (STCs) have been dogged by violent disturbances and allegations of heavy-handedness by staff in their attempts to contain and restrain the 12 to 15-year-old inmates.” (Pitts, 2005) It is by not clear whether the growing incarceration of children and young people across the globe echoes either public opinion or, indeed, government intentions. The present scenario is full of contradictory measures, characterised by political ambivalence and an apparent inability to devise a coherent and effective programme whereby the government might meet its national and international commitments (Pitts, 2005). Instead, it shows a determination to impose draconian penalties upon juveniles. Calling for tougher custodial penalties for particular categories of young offenders is not going to alleviate present mess. References: Tyler, J., Darville, R., & Stalnaker, K. (July 2001). Juvenile boot camps: a descriptive analysis of program diversity and effectiveness, The Social Science Journal, 38, 3. p.445.  Health care for children and adolescents in the juvenile correctional care system, (American Academy Of Pediatrics: Committee on Adolescence). April 2001 v107 i4 p799(5)Pediatrics, 107, 4. p.799(5). Geraghty, T F (Wntr 2004), Securing Our Childrens Future: New Approaches to Juvenile Justice and Youth Violence, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 94, 2. p.481(16).  Gupta, R A, Kelleher, K J, Pajer, K., Stevens, J., & Cuellar, A. (April 2005). Delinquent youth in corrections: medicaid and re-entry into the community. Pediatrics, 115, 4. p.1077(7).  Cookson, H. M., (Summer 1992). Alcohol use and offence type in young offenders. British Journal of Criminology, 32, n3. p.352-360.  Dillner, L. (June 6, 1992), Young offenders prone to suicide, British Medical Journal, 304, n6840. p.1462(1). Pattison, B. (Summer 1998). Minority youth in juvenile correctional facilities: cultural differences and the right to treatment. Law & Inequality: A Journal of Theory and Practice, 16, n2. p.573-599. Mason, W. A., Zimmerman, L., & Evans, W. (Oct 1998). Sexual and physical abuse among incarcerated youth: implications for sexual behaviour, contraceptive use, and teenage pregnancy. Child Abuse and Neglect, 22, n10. p.987(9). Greene, E., Lucarelli, P., & Shocksnider, J., (May 1999), Health Promotion and Education in Youth Correctional Facilities,  Pediatric Nursing, 25, 3. p.312. Clark, J N, Van Eck, R N, King, A., Glusman, B., McCain-Williams, A., Van Eck, S., & Beech, F. (Sept-Oct 2000),  HIV/AIDS education among incarcerated youth. Journal of Criminal Justice, 28, 5. p.415(19). Cloud, G. A., Oh, M. K., Wallace, L S, Reynolds, J., Sturdevant, M., & Feinstein, R A (May-June 1994), Sexual behaviour and sexually transmitted diseases among male adolescents in detention, Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 21, n3. p.127(6). Sweeny, P., Lindegren, M. L., Buehler, J W, Onorato, I M, & Janssen, R S (May 1995). Teenagers at risk of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 infection: results from seroprevalence surveys in the United States. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 149, n5. p.521(8). Pitts, J. (Feb 2005). New labour, the media and youth justice: why is there so much anxiety about young people and crime? Are recent policy approaches to youth justice really the answer? This article looks at what lies behind current approaches to youth crime and their effect, Sociology Review, 14, 3. p.8(3). Balsamo, J J (Dec 2004), Inspecting correctional facilities: an introduction, Journal of Environmental Health, 67, 5. p.4(2). Piquero, A R, Fagan, J., Mulvey, E P, Steinberg, L., & Odgers, C L (Fall 2005), Developmental trajectories of legal socialization among serious adolescent offenders, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 96, 1. p.267(32). Read More