From foster care to juvenile justice: Exploring characteristics of youth in three cities

Cutuli, J. J.; Goerge, Robert M.; Coulton, Claudia J.; Schretzman, Maryanne; Crampton, David; Charvat, Benjamin J.; Lalich, Nina; Raithel, Jessica; Gacitua, Cristobal; Lee, Eun Lye

doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.06.001

Cited by 51 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While differences in exposure to any of physical, emotional and sexual abuse and neglect were not apparent between crossover children with and without neurodisability, this is somewhat anticipated since all of the children in the study sample had protective services involvement. The finding of earlier protective notifications, substantiations and care entry for crossover children with neurodisability appears to conflict with other research findings which suggest that later entry into out-of-home care, and entry into care for behavioral reasons, are each risk factors for criminal convictions among child protection-involved youth (Cho et al 2019 ; Baskin and Sommers 2011 ; Cutuli et al 2016 ). However, the present findings contrast crossover children with and without neurodisability only; future research should compare the protective services involvement of crossover children with neurodisability, and other maltreated children with neurodisability, to ascertain any differences in their characteristics and pathways.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

“…Care system-related risks for justice involvement include any placement in out-of-home care (Malvaso et al 2017b ), and specific placement in residential care or “group home” settings (Cutuli et al 2016 ; Ryan et al 2008 ). Given that children entering residential care typically experience complex challenges prior to residing in these settings, ongoing debate exists as to the relative impact of past adversity (e.g., childhood maltreatment), and placement-related factors (e.g., staffing) in explaining these outcomes (Cutuli et al 2016 ; Shaw 2014 ). Care placement instability, entry into care for behavioral reasons (as opposed to maltreatment), and older age at care entry each increase the risk of youth justice contact (Baskin and Sommers 2011 ; Goodkind et al 2013 ; Ryan 2012 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Neurodisability among Children at the Nexus of the Child Welfare and Youth Justice System

Baidawi

2020

J Youth Adolescence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although neurodisability features significantly across child welfare and youth justice cohorts, little research investigates neurodisability among crossover children with dual systems involvement. This study examined differences in childhood adversity, child protection involvement, and offending among crossover children by neurodisability status. Data were from a sample of 300 children (68% male, 31% female, 1% transgender; mean age = 16.2 years, range 10-21) who were charged and appeared in three Australian children's courts, and who also had statutory child protection involvement in the study jurisdiction. The results indicated that nearly one-half of crossover children had a neurodisability (48%) and this group experienced greater cumulative maltreatment and adversity, earlier out-of-home care entry and offending onset, more caregiver relinquishment and residential care placement, and a greater volume of charges. While substantial differences between specific neurodisabilities were evident, crossover children with any neurodisability had greater odds of having charges related to criminal damage and motor vehicle theft, however they were no more likely to have violent charges relative to other crossover children. The study's findings demonstrated that the prevalence of neurodisability, and child welfare system responses to this phenomenon, contributes to several offending-related trends observed among crossover children.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neurodisability among Children at the Nexus of the Child Welfare and Youth Justice System

Baidawi

2020

J Youth Adolescence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Risk factor profiles of youth that have experienced child welfare intervention are more concerning than similar youth who never have been placed in care (Corrado et al, 2011;Cutuli et al, 2016). It is possible that one of these risk factors that are disproportionately found among foster care youth aggravates the negative effects of foster care placement or it may be demonstrated that foster care placement is unrelated to offending in the absence of these other risk factors (Yang et al, 2017).…”

Section: Risk Factor Candidates For Moderating the Foster Care-offendmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is the Foster Care-Crime Relationship a Consequence of Exposure? Examining Potential Moderating Factors

Yang

McCuish

Corrado

2020

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Youth who are dually involved in both foster care and criminal justice systems represent a small minority of individuals with multi-problem risk profiles. Prior research has found that foster care youth are disproportionately more likely to be chronic offenders in both adolescence and emerging adulthood. However, the nature of this relationship remains theoretically underexplored and empirically underexamined, especially with respect to risk factors that may moderate the relationship. Using data from the Incarcerated Serious and Violent Young Offender Study, the criminal offending trajectories of 678 incarcerated youth were examined. A history of foster care predicted membership in a high rate chronic offending trajectory. This relationship was not moderated by parental maltreatment, negative self-identity, involvement in gang activity, or substance use versatility. Findings suggested a greater need for ongoing support for foster care youth during their transition to adulthood, regardless of their exposure to a range of other negative life circumstances.

show abstract

“…2. Research suggests that, among youth in foster care, Black youth have higher rates of juvenile justice system involvement than white youth (Cutuli et al 2016). However, it is unclear whether associations between placement or placement characteristics with juvenile incarceration vary by race (Malvaso, Delfabbro, and Day 2016;Barth et al 2020).…”

Section: Declaration Of Conflicting Interestsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Foster Care, Permanency, and Risk of Prison Entry

Font

Berger

Slepicka

et al. 2021

Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: (1) Examine associations of foster care exit type (e.g., reunification with birth family, adoption, guardianship/permanent relative placement, or emancipation from care) with risk of entry into state prison; (2) Examine racial disparities in those associations. Method: With data on over 10,000 Wisconsin youth who entered foster care in mid- to late-childhood, we present imprisonment rates in young adulthood by race, sex, and foster care exit type. Proportional hazards models with a robust set of covariates compared prison entry rates among the most common exit types—reunification, aging out, and guardianship/permanent relative placement. Results: Nearly 13 percent of the sample experienced imprisonment in young adulthood. Compared with emancipated youth, hazard of imprisonment was 1.58–1.96 times higher among reunified youth. Differences were largely unexplained by observed individual, family, or foster care characteristics. Imprisonment rates were similar for emancipated youth and youth exiting to guardianship/permanent relative placement. Hazard of imprisonment for reunified Black youth was twice that of reunified white youth, but racial differences in prison entry were statistically non-significant among emancipated youth. Conclusion: Efforts to reduce incarceration risk for all youth in foster care are needed. Reunified youth may benefit from services and supports currently provided primarily to emancipated youth.

show abstract

From foster care to juvenile justice: Exploring characteristics of youth in three cities

Cited by 51 publications

References 50 publications

Neurodisability among Children at the Nexus of the Child Welfare and Youth Justice System

Neurodisability among Children at the Nexus of the Child Welfare and Youth Justice System

Is the Foster Care-Crime Relationship a Consequence of Exposure? Examining Potential Moderating Factors

Foster Care, Permanency, and Risk of Prison Entry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About