Disproportionate Minority Confinement is a term used to refer to the unequal representation of non-white persons confined in correctional centers and detention facilities. In simple terms, it is the overrepresentation of youth and adults from the minority races, mainly the Black African- Americans and the Latinos in Juvenile detentions, correctional facilities, and prisons. The term is coined in the context where the proportion of persons of color, in juvenile custodies, correction facilities, and even others in adult jails exceeds the presentation of the entire group in the general population. For example, in 2018, the Black African-American juvenile detainees accounted for only 17 percent of the total American population (Spinney, Cohen, Feyerherm, Stephenson, Yeide, & Shreve, 2018) . However, in the same year, the African-American youth accounted for 30 percent of the total population of minors detained in American juvenile detentions, correction facilities, and in adult prisons. In general, Disproportionate minority confinement is a common problem in America and other western countries as the proportion of youth of color in juvenile detentions, correction facilities, and even in adult prisons and jails are higher than their representation in the overall population.
Addressing Disproportionate Minority Confinement
In the United States of America, law amendments have been done to the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJDP) Act of 1974. The States that participated in the amended laws were required to address the disproportionate confinement of the minority of juveniles in secure facilities (Pub.L.93-415,42 u.s.c.5601 et seq) (Feinstein, 2015). The provisions specifically required the states to make plans to assess the level of such confinement and to implement strategies to minimize unfair Disproportionate Minority Confinement. The action led to a significant reduction in the disproportionate minority representation, which had existed for long. The JJDP Act defined Disproportionate minority confinement as "the proportion of juveniles detained or confined in secure detention facilities, secure correctional facilities, jails, and lockups who are members of minority groups and exceeds the proportion of such groups represented in the general population."
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The JJDP Act also highlighted that minority overrepresentation is often a product of actions that occur at earlier points in the Juvenile Justice System, well before secure placements. The main intention of the Act was mainly to provide regulations and requirements that would encourage states to address Disproportionate minority confinement. Through the Act, responsibilities for addressing disproportionate minority confinement were assigned to the state justice system (Frase & Hester, 2015) . Such efforts include determining the lead organization, the appointment of a coordinator, and making an adequate allocation of resources for both implementation and development of structures that would lead to a fair representation of the youth of color in the in American juvenile detentions, correction facilities, and in adult prisons.
In the process of determining an optimal lead organization, it essential to first address Disproportionate Minority Confinement by assigning one agency the lead responsibility to coordinate the assessment of the problem. The agency should also have the responsibility of designing interventions and the implementation of the initiatives. A lead agency chosen to address Disproportionate Minority Confinement should ensure that there is organizational support for local programs. It should also ensure that there is participation by other juvenile justice agencies and other youth-related agencies in the initiative (Sullivan, Mueller, Gann, Spiegel, & McManus, 2016) . Furthermore, an analytical rigor in identifying factors that contribute to Disproportionate Minority Confinement should be done. The lead organizations or agencies should also collect data required for assessment and submit the collected data to the relevant authority.
A model developed by Feyerherm was used in the disentanglement of the effects of ethnicity and race on the development of juvenile system decision-making. The model emphasized the major decision points that are common to virtually all the juvenile systems (Frase & Hester, 2015) . One of the decisions depicted was resolving the case by informal probation, custody transfer, or by formal probation (Feinstein, 2015) . Informal probation included mandated activities for non-adjudicated youths and diversion programs. Formal probation is designed to mediate juveniles who have not been assigned to confinement or detention but do have appointed officers by the court. In such a case, the court also defines the responsibilities, for instance, frequency of urinalysis and contact type. Other ends include the decision to arrest a juvenile, the decision to remove juveniles from the current living arrangements during the court proceeding, and the decision to file a formal petition or remand a juvenile to his or her parents without going to court.
The amendments made to the JJDP Act in 1992 aimed at protecting youths and ensured future funding would be tied eligibly to state compliance. America has had numerous efforts to address Disproportionate Minority Confinement in the past decade. Most recent data available has indicated that in 2017, minority youths constituted 34 percent of the juvenile population in the U.S. but represented 62 percent of detained juveniles and 67 percent of those that committed to secure correctional facilities ( Dawson-Edwards, Tewksbury & Nelson, 2020 ). In 2017, 7400, youths younger than 18 years were admitted to adult prisons, and three out of four of these youths were from a minority group ( Dawson-Edwards, Tewksbury & Nelson, 2020 ). Studies have shown over representation of Hispanic youths' arrest cases, and that decisions have been linked to some states ( Dawson-Edwards, Tewksbury and Nelson, 2020 ). In 2016-17, the number of African Youth accounted for 15 percent of the national juvenile population. The figure was only a 26 percent representation of arrested juveniles, 45 percent of the detained, and 40 percent of those in residential places (Dawson-Edwards, Tewksbury & Nelson, 2020) .
The minority youths account for one-third of the U.S. juvenile population that comprise two-thirds of the minor corrections population (Jones, 2016) . Disproportionate Minority Confinement has consequences that affect not only the youths but society at large. The document also indicates several factors that have contributed to Disproportionate Minority Confinement within justice systems. In a U.S. state study, it was found out that some states lacked appropriate cultural and linguistic services that create misunderstanding in the court process (Campbell, Barnes, Mandalari, Onifade, Campbell, Anderson, & Davidson, 2018) . This deficiency made the system process navigation unsuccessful. To add, misuse of discretionary authority policies and law implementation causes Disproportionate Minority Confinement. One habit portrayed in such a cause is the practice of staking offenses on a single incident. Lack of detention and incarceration alternatives has also caused Disproportionate Minority Confinement (Donnelly, 2017) . The result of this is the frequent use of confinement. Another Disproportionate Minority Confinement cause is cultural insensitivity and racial stereotyping, which can be done either unintentionally or intentionally.
Towards Alleviating Disproportionate Minority Confinement
There exist many policy recommendations and actions that can be adopted to reduce disproportionate minority confinement. First, policies should aim at promoting community-based interventions, addressing diversion programs, and considering community-based prevention. For example, from the document, disproportionate minority confinement: 2002 update, it pointed out that thirty states funded prevention and intervention programs in communities had been initiated as community based disproportionate minority confinement programs (Donnelly, 2017) . These community-based programs can address factors that predispose youths to delinquent behaviors and make them disadvantaged in the juvenile justice system. Other approaches can be created based on surveys and include the creation of minority family advocates, probation advocates. Also, increasing parenting projects for minority speaking language groups and incorporating minority language groups case managers are viable solutions to minimize disproportionate minority confinement.
In addition to the creation of intervention programs and prevention, alternatives to incarceration and detention can be increased. This facilitation can be done by instituting home detention, electronic monitoring, intensive supervision, having expedited programs to curb unnecessary confinements, and providing transition and aftercare services for minority groups leaving the correctional services (Donnelly, 2017) . Policies formed should also aim at addressing efforts to increase cultural sensitivity, and public awareness of disproportionate minority confinement issues should be culturally sensitive. In a study, it was noted that twenty states in the U.S. instituted cultural sensitivity training for personnel in the educational, juvenile justice, law enforcement, and human services. However, curriculums should also be developed with cultural sensitivity in mind. The government, states, and other organizations can seek to increase cultural diversity through promotions and recruitment practices. The authorities should also start programs to host minority groups for internships. Juvenile justice systems can also be improved by developing information materials in languages other than the majority speaking the language (Dumont, King, and Shaler, 2015) . More so, the addition of juvenile court probation staffs in tribal juvenile courts can be done. The authorities should include policies to recruit minority group members to serve on community accountability boards. Besides, parents can be informed about the proposed policy plans. The strategies should also focus on reducing barriers to advocacy.
Local communities can be formed and tasked with the tracking and monitoring of disproportionate minority confinement at the local level. The local communities can do advocacy for equal presentation to enhance the relationship between the juvenile justice system and minority communities. (Frase and Hester, 2015) . While practicing all these, policies can also base on the minority groups' engagement in planning, and implementation phases as all these efforts contribute to the community empowerment at large.
Another measure that can be used to reduce disproportionate minority confinement is the use of standardized screening equipment. This approach will curb the problems related to racial stereotyping and bias. The adoption of standardized instruments will lead to the achievement of standard decision-making. Policies should base on standardizing risks and help in developing models and guidelines that guide screening. Thus, in the juvenile court system, disproportionate minority confinement can be reduced by mandating prosecutorial standards.
The leadership of states should be strengthened to curb disproportionate minority confinement. In a study by Donnelly (2019), it was found that twenty-one states had established disproportionate minority confinement subcommittees as part of the State Advisory Groups. The communities strongly advocated for priority funding aimed at reducing disproportionate minority confinement. Another benefit of having such influential leadership groups is that public awareness is enhanced to focus on disproportionate minority confinement issues (Hsia, 2004) . Such leadership will also ensure that monitoring of disproportionate minority confinement reduction strategies is done. While being champions of addressing disproportionate minority confinement issues, leaders should be a repository for disparate minority confinement information, and provide required technical assistance and facilitate the sustaining of disproportionate minority confinement efforts.
Change of systems through legislation can also be adopted to mitigate disproportionate minority confinement. For example, Oregon and Washington have been identified to have institutional systems that improve legislative efforts (Frase and Hester, 2015) . Oregon made a law mandating cultural competency to all state agencies. One of the systems used was to develop youth advocacy services, minority internship programs, and cultural competency program criteria. In the U.S., American Indian males and minority females leaving correctional facilities are given correctional instructions and provided with alternative education services for high risks. Another way for a change of systems was evident when the congress adjusted the provision act 2002 that suggested a shift from Disproportionate Minority Confinement to Disproportionate Minority Contact (Hsia, 2004) . The adjustments encompassed all racially disproportionate patterns in the juvenile justice systems. The shift focused more considerable attention regarding racial inequalities for juveniles' in the criminal justice system. Thus, the States should be urged to implement intervention strategies to prevent juvenile delinquency and assure racial equality.
A high school dropout rate among the youth of color is one of the leading causes of delinquencies among the youth of color. The governing systems should also promote programs to curb school dropout rates. Studies have established that only ten states in America identified a lack of educational resources in minority communities (Fix, Fix, Wienke Totura, & Burkhart, 2017) . There was also a failure of the schools to engage the minority students and their families and the inability to prevent early and high rates of school dropouts. The education sector should come up with policies to encourage the rates of school attendance by the minority groups.
Legislative authorities should keep track of the ethnic or race of juveniles involved in the criminal justice system. This step will assist in understanding the effect of a disproportionate system. Consequences identified in such policies will lead to an ultimate change in legislation to alleviate disproportionate minority confinement. The Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 passed a bill that involved concrete policy initiatives to alleviate disproportionate minority confinement (Frase and Hester, 2015) . One of the policies aimed at deinstitutionalization of offenders' status. This process involves the removal of youths from correctional facilities. Confinement of such youths has serious implications, including mental health, development and may also promote the number of criminally rebellious youths.
Policy initiatives established by the Act that focuses on materializing the 'sight and sound' provisions can also assist in alleviating disproportionate minority confinement. The statute can be developed to keep confined youths and adult prisoners from interacting in secure facilities (Lake, 2019) . Juveniles were supposed not to see or hear from adults at any time during confinement. The policymakers did believe that separation of the youths from the adult could deter future criminality. The JJDP Act prohibited the placement of juveniles on adults together in jails and facilities.
Legislators have not reviewed mandates to address the issue of language within minority groups. Policymakers should define what level of 'disproportionality' is acceptable. The meaning of minorities has been changing over time despite government researches on the subject remaining static. This categorization may be meaningless in the long run. With such a trend, research value will be lost (Peck, 2018) . Therefore, potential changes in policy should be done to reduce disproportionality.
Politicians also have a role to play towards alleviating disproportionate minority confinement. For example, the Lowa case hearing in December 1987 illustrated the attitude of justice departments (Mallett, 2018) . Debates failed to capture the attention of politicians to address disproportionate minority confinement. Many of the hearings showed how racial disparities played a more significant role in federal juvenile justice systems schemes and justice policy. Politicians should, therefore, be receptive to disproportionate minority confinement messages and listen to related data to address the issue.
Conclusion
In conclusion, an effective juvenile justice system that provides youths with opportunities to have a crime-free life will alleviate their inappropriate pre-trial detention. Efforts have been made to prevent any cause of disproportionate minority confinement. However, there are pressing challenges that have remained and need a solution to achieve a significant reduction in disproportionate minority confinement rates. Relevant authorities should ensure that precise evaluation of disproportionate minority confinement efforts is done, solve gaps in data systems that hinder disproportionate minority confinement effort, research on unidentified disproportionate minority confinement causes, expanding systems to accommodate more disproportionate minority confinement reduction programs and have sufficient infrastructure to assess and respond to disproportionate minority
References
Campbell, N. A., Barnes, A. R., Mandalari, A., Onifade, E., Campbell, C. A., Anderson, V. R., ... & Davidson, W. S. (2018). Disproportionate minority contact in the juvenile justice system: An investigation of ethnic disparity in program referral at disposition. Journal of ethnicity in criminal justice , 16 (2), 77-98.
Dawson-Edwards, C., Tewksbury, R., & Nelson, N. T. (2020). The causes and pervasiveness of DMC: Stakeholder perceptions of disproportionate minority contact in the juvenile justice system. Race and Justice , 10 (2), 223-242.
Donnelly, E. A. (2017). The disproportionate minority contact mandate: An examination of its impacts on juvenile justice processing outcomes (1997-2011). Criminal Justice Policy Review , 28 (4), 347-369.
Donnelly, E. A. (2019). Do disproportionate minority contact (DMC) mandate reforms change decision-making? Decomposing disparities in the juvenile justice system. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice , 17 (3), 288-308.
Dumont, R., King MSW, E., & Shaler, MPH, G. (2015). Disproportionate Contact: Youth of Color in Maine's Juvenile Justice System.
Feinstein, R. (2015). A qualitative analysis of police interactions and disproportionate minority contact. Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice , 13 (2), 159-178.
Fix, R. L., Fix, S. T., Wienke Totura, C. M., & Burkhart, B. R. (2017). Disproportionate minority contact among juveniles adjudicated for sexual, violent, and general offending: The importance of home, school, and community contexts. Crime & Delinquency , 63 (2), 189-209.
Frase, R. S., & Hester, R. (2015). Criminal history enhancements as a cause of minority over-representation. Richard S. Frase, Julian V. Roberts, Rhys Hester, and Kelly Lyn Mitchell, Criminal History Enhancements Sourcebook. Minneapolis, MN: Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice .
Hsia, H. M. (2004). Disproportionate minority confinement, 2002 update: summary . U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice, and Delinquency Prevention.
Jones, C. A. (2016). Is disproportionate minority contact improving? An exploratory analysis of the arrest, confinement, and transfer stages in rural and urban settings. Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice , 14 (1), 40-57.
Lake, A. (2019). Criminalization of minority youth in the youth justice system in Canada. Canadian Journal of Undergraduate Research , 4 (1).
Mallett, C. A. (2018). Disproportionate minority contact in juvenile justice: Today's, and yesterdays, problems. Criminal justice studies , 31 (3), 230-248.
Peck, J. H. (2018). The importance of evaluation and monitoring within the disproportionate minority contact (DMC) mandate: Future directions in juvenile justice research. Race and Justice , 8 (4), 305-329.
Sullivan, C. J., Mueller, D. J., Gann, S. M., Spiegel, S. N., & McManus, H. D. (2016). Weapon and drug offenses and juvenile disproportionate minority contact: an impact assessment and practical discussion. Journal of crime and justice , 39 (1), 107-130.
Spinney, E., Cohen, M., Feyerherm, W., Stephenson, R., Yeide, M., & Shreve, T. (2018). Disproportionate minority contact in the U.S. juvenile justice system: a review of the DMC literature, 2001–2014, Part I. Journal of Crime and Justice , 41 (5), 573-595.
