1 / 8

Prevention and Intervention Programs for At Risk Youth

Prevention and Intervention Programs for At Risk Youth. Juliana Gonzales Psychology/Human Development CHHS 302. Professional interest. Future profession goal  MSW At risk youth Foster care adolescents Juvenile Halls or Prevention Programs. Critical Situation.

verdad
Download Presentation

Prevention and Intervention Programs for At Risk Youth

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Prevention and Intervention Programs for At Risk Youth Juliana Gonzales Psychology/Human Development CHHS 302

  2. Professional interest • Future profession goal  MSW • At risk youth • Foster care adolescents • Juvenile Halls or Prevention Programs

  3. Critical Situation • Growing number of incarcerated youth • Growing population in prisons • Correction vs. Rehabilitation ( Intervention vs. Prevention)

  4. Rhetorical timing • Economic Crisis • More money for correction than for rehabilitation – Correction/person ( approx. $240) – Rehabilitation/group

  5. They Say • Underdeveloped pre-frontal cortex >>>risky behavior->substance use -> delinquent activity (Krebs, 2010) • 1970’s and onward change in justice system, proposition 184 in 1994 ( Stahlkopf, 2010) • Juvenile incarceration is expensive and high rates of recidivism (over 50%) (Justice Policy Institute, 2009) • “2007 an estimated 2.18 million juveniles were arrested… 15% of the arrests in the US.” ( Diamond, 2011)

  6. Community Connection • Community members – support rehabilitation type programs • Department of corrections –rethink the corrections vs rehabilitation services • Statewide representatives –fund more rehab and prevention programs

  7. References • Diamond, B., Morris, R., & Caudill, J. (2011). Sustaining families, dissuading crime: The effectiveness of a family preservation program with male delinquents. Journal of Criminal Justice, 39(4), 338-43. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2011.03.005 • Krebs, C., Lattimore, P., Cowell,A. Graham, P. (2010) "Evaluating the Juvenile Breaking the Cycle Program's impact on recidivism." Journal of Criminal Justice 38, 109-117.doi:10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2010.02.008 • Stahlkopf, C., et. al., Testing Incapacitation Theory: Youth Crime and Incarceration in California. Crime & Delinquency v. 56 no. 2 (April 2010) p. 253-68 •  Turner, S., & Fain, T. (2006). Accomplishments in Juvenile Probation in California Over the Last Decade. Federal Probation, 70(1), 63-69. Retrieved from EBSCOhost. • Justice Policy Institute, 2009 Justice Policy Institute (2009). The costs of confinement: Why good juvenile justice policies make good fiscal sense. Washington, D.C.: Author. Retrieved from http://www.justicepolicy.org/images/upload/09_05_REP_CostsOfConfinement_JJ_PS.pdf.

  8. COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS? THANK YOU

More Related