The “Learning Disabilities-to-Prison” Pipeline: Evidence From the Add Health National Longitudinal Study

Abstract

Young people with learning disabilities, and in particular those of color, are significantly more at risk for having school difficulties, delinquency, and incarceration. The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health) data were used to investigate how learning disabilities, school experiences, gender, and race impacted delinquency and criminal activity and incarceration—looking at a learning disabilities-to-prison link. Structural equation modeling was used to analyze the relationship between measured variables and latent constructs, comparing those young people with learning disabilities and those without. It was found that these pathways are quite complicated to discern; reflecting the current knowledge of this “learning disabilities pipeline” hypothesis. For young people with learning disabilities compared to young people without learning disabilities, juvenile delinquency was more likely if the young person was male or Hispanic; criminal activities were more likely for Black children and for those delinquent or incarcerated as a juvenile; and females were less likely to be incarcerated as an adult, but school dropouts, Black children, and those incarcerated as a juvenile were more likely. Implications are set forth, as well as recommendations to stakeholders.

Examining Trauma and Crime by Gender and Sexual Orientation among Youth: Findings from the Add Health National Longitudinal Study

“…The impact of trauma experiences is often multi-layered and the harshest impact is when these traumas occurs over time—typically not a one- or two-time event, but comorbidly. Similarly, delinquency and crime outcomes are the result of many factors including the impact of home life, school, peers, and neighborhoods (Mallett & Tedor, 2019). Which is why this study included a large number of variables trying to figure out the inter-relationships by asking whether trauma is significantly and positively but indirectly related to juvenile and adulthood crime/incarceration and if gay and bisexual youth are more likely than heterosexual youth to experience trauma during childhood and if this trauma explains differences in delinquency and crime/incarceration across sexual orientation.…”

“…Family supports can include earlier identification of parents who struggle with accepting their child’s sexual identity and providing mental health supports and violence prevention interventions. Schools can continue to expand bullying prevention efforts which have shown improvements over the past decade through classroom curriculum changes, LGBTQ alliance organizations, and positive behavioral approaches to school management that has drastically decreased school suspensions and expulsions (Mallett & Tedor, 2019; Toomey et al, 2011). While state policymakers and local law enforcement efforts can amend discriminatory drug and consensual sex laws that disproportionately target LGBTQ community members and people of color.…”

“…Many of these experiences are intertwined for LGBTQ individuals as they develop from children to young adults, making comorbidity of difficulties more of the norm (Howell, 2009). It is this cumulative impact over time of experiences like bullying and assault victimization, troubled home lives and abusive family members, growing up in poverty, school difficulties including suspension and expulsion, falling behind in learning, and dropping out of school, that gravely increase the risk for LGBTQ youth to be involved with the juvenile and criminal court systems (Mallett & Tedor, 2019).…”

“…These disparities among students is exacerbated by school districts use of zero tolerance approaches to school management and discipline, an approach now debunked as a failed way to make schools safer and to improve academic outcomes (Mallett & Tedor 2019). An early study using the Add Health longitudinal study data found that LGB youth were between 1.25 and three times more likely to experience harsh discipline outcomes—school expulsion, police stops, juvenile arrests/convictions, and adult arrests/convictions—compared to their heterosexual peers.…”

Practitioners’ perspectives on family-based intervention for illicit drug-using adolescents in Taiwan: a qualitative study

“…First of all, the characteristics of targeted families make them hard to reach and even harder to work with. These family environments are characterized as high risk which makes the adolescent a so-called crossover youth, meaning young people who are involved with both the juvenile courts and the child welfare system [ 43 ]. Many scholars have summarized the parental risk factors which are associated with an adolescent’s substance use, such as experience and attitudes to illicit substances, poor parenting, domestic violence, and lack of socialization for development [ 44 – 46 ].…”