Alternative Treatments for Troubled Youth: The Case of Diversion from the Justice System PDF
Preview Alternative Treatments for Troubled Youth: The Case of Diversion from the Justice System
ALT ERNA TIVE TREATMENTS FOR TROUBLED YOUTH THE CASE OF DIVERSION FROM THE JUSTICE SYSTEM ALTERNATIVE TREATMENTS FOR TROUBLED YOUTH THE CASE OF DIVERSION FROM THE JUSTICE SYSTEM WILLIAM S. DAVIDSON II AND ROBIN REDNER Michigan Siale Ulliversity Easl Lansing, Miclll~~all RICHARD L. AMDUR University of Michigan Ann Arbor, Michigall AND CHRISTINA M. MITCHELL New York Univer5i~1 New York, New York LLC SPRINGER SCIENCE+BUSINESS MEDIA, Llbrary of Congress Cataloglng-in-Publlcatlon Data Alternative treatments for troubled youth the case of d,vers,on from the Justice system I Wlliiam S. Davidson ... [et al.l. p. cm. Includes blbliographical references. ISBN 978-1-4757-9144-0 ISBN 978-1-4757-9142-6 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-1-4757-9142-6 1. Juveni le del inquents--Rehabi 1 itation--United States. 2. Juvenile corrections--Unlted States. 3. Social work wlth Juvenile delinquents--United States. I. Davldson, William S. (William Sumner), 1947- HV9104.A77 1990 3S4,3'S'0973--dc20 89-71154 CIP © 1990 Springer Science+Business Media New York Originally published by Plenum Press, New York in 1990 Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1s t edition 1990 Ali rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retricval systcm, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording, or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher This book is dedicated to the memory of Michael James Robinson II PREFACE The purpose of this volume is to present the whole story of our research program on alternative interventions with delinquent youth. It is our goal to describe the development of an alternative intervention model, to examine its salient processes, to provide a test of its relative effective ness, and to give a description of its systemic impacts. The process described was based on the notion that improvement in our approaches to troubled youth lies in a systematic examination of the efficacy of innovative models. As the reader is probably aware, the history of inter ventions with troubled youth is more a record of failure than success. Thus, the search for alternatives is extremely critical. The book proceeds as a detailed research monograph. The first four chapters describe the historical and theoretical antecedents of the devel opment of the research program. Chapters 5 through 11 describe re search on the efficacy of alternative intervention approaches for delin quent youth, research on the impact on nonprofessional change agents, an attempt to integrate contemporary theoretical propositions about de linquency causation and the effects observed, and research examining the systemic consequences of providing innovative interventions to de linquent youth. The final chapter integrates the findings with contempo rary work and provides suggestions for future work. The number of people responsible for a research project of this complexity is large. The project described here spanned nearly a decade, involved over 400 youths and their families, and included nearly 100 staff members. Some particular contributions are important. The cooper ation and participation of the youths and their parents never ceased to amaze us. The program staff of the Center for Violence and Antisocial Behavior (the primary funders of this project) were extremely suppor tive. James Brieling and Saleem Shah were particularly instrumental. The intellectual stimulation of two of our mentors was particularly important. Without the support of Julian Rappaport and Edward Seid- vii Vlll PREFACE man, Davidson would never have begun this program of research. Lee Sechrest's impact on Redner's thinking concerning treatment strength and integrity influenced our conceptualizations and methods. The unparalleled courage of Judges Robert Drake, Donald Owens, and George Economy in allowing a group of social scientists to propose an alternative to their court, to implement an experimental design, and to provide us access to necessary records was remarkable. Without the support of Warren Ritter and Susan Boyd, Ingham County Juvenile Court Administrators, this project would not have been possible. The intake division staff included Michele Bauer, Beulah Pigeon, Amy Chemyz, John Dill, Susan Wright, John Cole, Dolly Singleton, Darryl Zwick, Fred Bareis, Elaine McMurtry, Gilda Bordeaux, Carol Whitworth, Sandy Venn, Jeff Venn, and JoAnn Kresky. The several hundred undergraduate students and community vol unteers all deserve our thanks. Many graduate students in the Ecological and Clinical Psychology Programs at Michigan State University played a key role. Most important, contributions were made by Ricki Kantrowitz, Martin Kushler, James Emshoff, Craig Blakely, Julia Parisian, Jeana Law rence, Cheryl Saylor, John McVeigh, John Jeppesen, Lynn Snellman, John Saul, and Deb Bybee. The administrative and clerical assistance of Rebecca Mulholland, Keitha Kasel, Mary Scott, and Lynae Wozniak was invaluable. We could not have proceeded without the willingness of the Department of Psychology at Michigan State University to support us throughout. Finally, our families and significant others tolerated our crazy work schedules in carrying out this project and completing its write-up. For this we are extremely thankful. CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 Historical Context. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1 Historical Context. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4 Houses of Refuge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4 Birth of the Juvenile Court. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5 Dissatisfaction with the "New" System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6 Summary ................................................... 7 CHAPTER 2 Major Theoretical Positions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9 Overview ................................................... 9 Theoretical Models. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10 Deterrence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 10 Individual Differences Models. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11 Environmental Differences. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 12 Symbolic Interactionism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 15 Summary .................................................. 15 CHAPTER 3 Empirical History of Treatment Efficacy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 17 The Need for Meta-Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 17 Methods of the Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 18 Domains to Be Covered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19 Coding Methods for the Meta-Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19 IX x CONTENTS Results of the Meta-Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 23 Descriptive Findings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 23 Investigator Characteristics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 23 Subject Characteristics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 25 Intervention Components. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 26 Methodological Characteristics ................... .' . . . . . . . .. 26 Effectiveness Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 27 Moderator Effects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 30 Discussion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 33 Summary Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 34 Intervention Effectiveness. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 34 Moderators. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 35 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 36 CHAPTER 4 Theories of Delinquency Intervention and Treatment Research Strategies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 39 Questions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 39 Intervention Strategies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 41 Youth Advocacy .......................................... 41 Behavioral Contracting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 42 Therapeutic Relationship. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 42 The Experimental Design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 42 Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 42 Research Questions for the Experimental Design . . . . . . . . . . .. 44 The Correlational Design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 44 Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 44 Methodological Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 45 Research Questions for the Correlational Design . . . . . . . . . . .. 46 Summary .................................................. 52 CHAPTER 5 Study I and Study II: Research Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 53 Study I. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 53 Referral and Selection of Juveniles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 53 Experimental Design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 55 Student Volunteers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 56 Conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 57 Measures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 66 CONTENTS xi Study II. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 74 Sample .................................................. 74 Conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 74 Measures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 76 CHAPTER 6 Study I: Intervention Process and Outcome Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 79 Intervention Process Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 79 Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 79 Equivalence of Groups. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 80 Integrity of Intervention Groups. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 81 Impact on Life Domains. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 87 Outcome Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 95 Official Delinquency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 96 Self-Report Delinquency. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 97 Relationship of Intervention, Life Domain, and Outcome ..... 97 Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 99 Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 99 Implications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 100 CHAPTER 7 Study II: Intervention Process and Outcome Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 103 Intervention Process Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 103 Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 103 Equivalence of Groups. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 104 Impact on Life Domains. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 112 Outcome Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 117 Official Delinquency. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 117 Self-Report Delinquency. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 118 Relationship of Intervention Activities, Life Domain Impact, and Outcome. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 119 Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 121 CHAPTER 8 Assessment of the Volunteers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 123 Study I .................................................. , 124 Method ................................................. 124 Results ................................................ , 127
The list of books you might like
