Most youths under voluntary probation engage in teenage related behaviors such as talking back at teachers, poor school attendance, poor academic performance, being late at class and other related adolescent behaviors. These are not crimes requiring the intervention of probation officers since they are normal behaviors among teenagers. Besides, most of the youths under voluntary probation are there because of attaining low grades or poor school attendance. It is worth noting that youth undergo various challenges in their lives and any behavior they depict highlights the underlying events in their lives that stakeholders must strive to understand. Some have problems with their parents due to misunderstandings while others are just navigating the world to understand their place in it. Most need support services such as counseling, mentoring, and tutoring to find their path in life rather than being referred to probation officers. Without adequate support, they will continue having problems at home or in school.
Outlawing teenage behavior and placing teenagers on probation denies the youth their rights to due process and privacy, which subjects them to invasive interrogations regarding their private lives, limitations on who they can talk with, surprise home visits, and surprise searches. Besides, probation officers are trained as law enforcement officials with responsibilities such as supervising people released from jail or those charged with crimes. They are not trained in social services, youth development, teaching, or mental health. Thus, they cannot understand the underlying causes of the various youth behaviors. Youths require specialized programs dealing with counseling, job readiness, the arts, and academic enrichment and support. California Assembly Bill 901 (AB 901) focuses on addressing the aforementioned issues related to probation and teenagers.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The present paper explores how the bill influences juvenile justice in California through examining its legal, rehabilitative, public safety, delinquent and dependent youth treatment approaches, parental accountability, educational achievement gaps, and the ‘prison pipeline’ implications of the new law.
Legal Implications
The bill decriminalizes truancy and deals with the issue of voluntary probation by restricting the authority of probation departments over the youth who have not committed any crime. Specifically, AB 901 forbids juvenile court judges from indicting young people for truancy in numerous cases. Previous regulations considered teenagers as habitually truant when they missed three or more school days in a single year and an employee of the school intervened at least once with a guardian or parent (California Legislative Information, 2020). The school could refer the student to a mediation program under the office of the district attorney, a county department of probation, or a school attendance board based on a county if there is no behavior change (Openstates, 2020). The next step would be the juvenile court before being placed under probation supervision. The regulations also subjected youths to interrogations, surprise home visits, curfews, and random searches to prevent juvenile delinquency. In turn, this criminalized the youth despite the voluntary nature of the probation programs.
The bill makes important changes to existing regulations by ensuring the young people access appropriate interventions to deal with the aforementioned reasons without being criminalized for problem behaviors or truancy. In particular, the bill repeals the need to refer students to a probation officer, district attorney, or the attendance review board at school due to disorderliness or insubordination among the students. It also repeals the need for youths with problem behaviors to face the juvenile court and parole or probation officers. Besides, the bill clarifies the voluntary nature of the programs or services that are provided to the youth or their parents
Truancy indeed adversely affects the future life prospect of youths because it results in absent students missing vital educational milestones such as reading and graduating from high school (Chang et al., 2018). Besides, studies show that nearly a half of all truant youths end up with criminal charges by the time they are 18 years compared to 12% of non-truant youths (Keppens & Spruyt, 2020). In turn, this demonstrates the way the previous regulations criminalized students for traditional teenage behaviors with underlying causes and the need for social and educational programs for the youth, not the juvenile court system. Youths experience complex issues concerning truancy and judges, prosecutors, and probation officers cannot understand the underlying causes of the issues or any potential solutions. Thus, the bill removes truancy from the juvenile court system by suggesting alternative measures of addressing the issues outside the court.
Rehabilitative Implications
The bill also emphasizes rehabilitation and education by eliminating the harmful voluntary probation programs. Research shows that the involvement in probation including excessive youth services and supervision among the youth who have not been charged with crimes results in more adverse effects than positive ones and risk broadening the number of youth involved in the justice system (Barnes-Lee, 2020). The bill prevents youths from being subjected to harmful justice system interventions by supporting a new way of youth development and system diversion across California. It recognizes youths through their strengths and supports meaningful school-based and community interventions to address educational and development issues among the youth.
While problem behaviors among the youth can be serious within the community, teenagers require and deserve special interventions given that they are undergoing the formative stage and problem behavior at this development phase will not necessarily persist until adulthood. Thus, rehabilitation programs are important, which the bill supports by allowing counties to seek alternative programs for young people experiencing attendance problems. For example, they can refer the youth to diversion programs in the community before considering the juvenile court path. Most corrections program for young people focuses on rehabilitations (Keppens & Spruyt, 2020). Consequently, focusing on implementing strong rehabilitation programs within communities can result in significant transformations among the youth, as it will help them address the underlying causes of their problem behaviors.
It is questionable whether harsh penalties such as voluntary probation and contact with the juvenile justice system are appropriate for juveniles with problem behaviors. Teenagers regularly engage in specific behaviors for various reasons compared to grown-ups and do not respond adequately to punishments (Keppens & Spruyt, 2020). The new bill establishes more sustainable approaches to teenager problem behaviors while still supporting the key objective of the juvenile justice system concerning the need to rehabilitate youths than punish them. Previous regulations placed adolescents aged 12-17 years old under the juvenile court jurisdiction for specific problem behaviors such as disobeying school authorities. Juvenile courts were authorized to sentence youths in these circumstances in which school administrators or peace officer could issue notices to appear to young people under the juvenile court jurisdiction.
The new bill deletes the juvenile court authority to sentence minors based on the aforementioned problem behaviors. It requires peace officers to refer minors to community-based interventions before issuing appearance notices by imposing state-based local programs. These changes are appropriate owing to the immaturity of typical teenagers. While adolescents are prone to short-term thinking, strong emotions, and aggression, they can change their behaviors. Research shows that aggression tendencies arise mostly towards age 16 years but nearly 75% of adolescents who exhibit these tendencies outgrow them later (Chang et al., 2018). In turn, this shows that teenagers misbehave because of developmental differences in their brain. The regions of the adolescents’ brain that control reasoning and logic is less developed than the regions that control impulses and feelings.
Consequently, teenagers cannot control their emotions adequately, engage in objective reasoning, focus on long-term outcomes, and resist peer pressure. The misbehavior among young people often mirrors these underlying components, which demonstrates the importance of rehabilitating them through interventions that deal with developmental and educational issues (Barnes-Lee, 2020). Besides, the offenses that the previous regulations intended to punish are not very serious to require the involvement of the juvenile justice system when compared to serious crimes such as murder, kidnapping, or assault. Convicting youths of developmental behaviors can severely affect their ability to complete education, find meaningful work, and be successful adults. The bill recognizes the vulnerability of young people to development issues and establishes ways of addressing the issues without the need to criminalize the youth.
Public Safety Implications
It is also important to address behavioral problems among the youth through target approaches for developing reformed citizens. The emphasis should be placed on community and educational based programs that avoid incarcerating young people who have not committed any crimes. Nevertheless, the problem-focused model that identifies only wrong things among the youth does not solve the underlying development issues (Barnes-Lee, 2020). Through supporting diversion programs and other community-based strategies, the new bill will help local communities to focus on the right things about the youth, recognize the strengths of youths, and offer alternatives to problem behaviors, which will contribute towards preventing juvenile offenses before they begin.
The bill advocates for early interventions to offer positive opportunities for the youth, which is in line with growing perspectives in juvenile justice regarding the importance of positive youth development in which programs focus on the teenagers’ sense of influence, belonging, usefulness, and competency (Iwasaki, 2015). Instead of the conventional deficit model that highlights the wrongdoings and flaws among young people, positive development emphasizes optimistic perspectives and focuses on good features and strengths, which encourages youths to learn better ways of behaving or living.
Community and school-based programs can help young people to recognize and be responsible for their actions, offer opportunities for young people to repair damages that result from their behavior, and encourage the youth to interact with good role models while helping them to be better decision-makers in the future (Iwasaki, 2015). The programs can also help youth access mental health resources such as counselling given that a majority of juveniles with problem behaviors suffer from mental issues such as aggression, anxiety, and depression (Underwood & Washington, 2016). Access to mental health resources ensures successful rehabilitation. School-based programs can also be used to address educational issues among the youth to increase their educational opportunities through solving underlying causes for absenteeism.
Academic development is a crucial element among the youth as it empowers them and increases their chances of succeeding in life. Rather than forcing the youth to go through the juvenile system, community and school-based programs focus on opportunities for rehabilitation to address developmental and educational issues among the youth. In turn, this increases public safety through considering positive development among young people, recognizing and addressing underlying issues among the youth, and offering adequate educational opportunities.
Delinquent and Dependent Youth Treatment Strategies Implications
Problematic behaviors among youth usually begin during the early adolescence period. While the behaviors can be regarded as a normal developmental occurrence, they can worsen if not managed (Chang et al., 2018). The requirement for the state to emphasize local-based programs over the juvenile justice systems by enrolling youths with problematic behaviors in various community and school-based programs helps to address delinquent behaviors before they escalate to serious offenses. For instance, the bill requires probation officers to refer minors to local educational-based, community-based, and health-based services. It also requires stakeholders offering such services to include parents in the programs, particularly those concerning education and counseling. Thus, the bill supports early-phase interventions aiming to prevent juvenile delinquency.
The need to refer children to various social programs also highlights the role of different stakeholders in helping adolescents adopt positive habits. The previous focus on punitive punishment based on voluntary probation was ineffective because it focused on addressing the issue that is already happening, which frightened teenagers by demonstrating to them the possibility of severe punishments. The new law shifts to localized preventive programs in the community. For instance, educational-based programs can help the youth learn the various ways of engaging in positive behaviors, dealing with conflicts, and managing aggression. The program can also assist young people to find alternatives to problematic behaviors (Thornberry et al., 2018). These programs can transform young people by working with troubled teenagers to assist them in developing the required cognitive and social skills to manage aggression and avoid conflicts with peers and adults. Such programs usually involve different stakeholders such as parents, schools, local communities, and law enforcement agencies, which enhances their effectiveness.
The bill also highlights the role of local communities in addressing juvenile delinquency by including the youth in constructive activities. Local-based approaches entail allowing teenagers to collaborate with adults in their communities in programs focusing on improving conditions. Youth can be asked to offer ideas and support local efforts through volunteering (Iwasaki, 2015). It is a promising approach to preventing delinquency among teenagers as it can involve non-governmental organizations and volunteers ranging from public figures, politicians, and sportsmen in social work with teenagers. In particular, programs focusing on preventing delinquency among the youth should strive to integrate both minors and teenagers into organized growth events. Local-based approaches can involve local government recreational events, social service agency events, or activities organized by student clubs and community centers.
The bill also requires stakeholders such as parents and program organizers to cooperate. The involvement of the entire community in the development and implementation of programs for youth is effective even though such programs must focus on the interests and strengths of adolescents. Therefore, programs can take advantage of interests such as sports and athletics as forums for teenagers to discuss community issues and the challenges they face. Health-based programs focused on offering mental health support for youth such as youth and parent-counselling sessions can help the youth address the underlying mental health problems that cause problematic behavior.
Voluntary probation programs attempt to suppress youth offenses through continuous observations by probation officers and sometimes prosecution in juvenile courts. Suppression can be considered as an active intervention approach that precludes attempts to support appropriate behavior because of its focus on addressing unwanted behavior. Nevertheless, authorities implementing these approaches are usually aggressive, contribute to delinquency, and increase offenses among the youth. These approaches are ineffective among teenagers given their immaturity. Restorative justice is the best prevention approach for recurrent offenses as it involves local communities and non-governmental organizations. The approach involves the collaboration between all stakeholders affected by youth problems to design effective strategies for dealing with the issues (Keppens & Spruyt, 2020). The approach allows the youth to understand the severity of their problematic behavior and work with social workers to develop new habits. Such strategies preventing the youth from being placed in the juvenile justice system, which avoids the influence of the environment or the system in reinforcing delinquent habits.
Parental Accountability Implications
Regarding the role of parents, the bill supports the inclusion and participation of parents or guardians in local-based programs such as educational or counseling programs targeting their children. Adolescents engage in behavioral patterns that influence their current and future life. The youth can avoid problematic behaviors by implementing appropriate protective measures. One example of the protective measures involves allowing parents to participate in local programs targeting teenagers. The role of family participation cannot be underestimated in dealing with the needs of teenagers with problematic behaviors. Parents play a crucial role in supporting the learning and health of their children, offering guidance to their children through local programs, and advocating for their children.
The inclusion of parents in local counseling or educational programs enhances collaboration between program stakeholders and parents to support the development and learning of teenagers (Iwasaki, 2015). Program stakeholder can reach out to engage parents in meaningful ways to ensure that parents support the development and learning of their teenagers in the community and other programs. Studies show that poor parenting practices intensify problematic behaviors in adolescents (Thornberry et al., 2018). These parenting practices can lead to early aggressive behavior, which can later result in issues such as inadequate school performance, troubles with instructors, and troubles with peers. Thus, parents can contribute significantly in altering inappropriate and anti-social behavior among the youth owing to their close relationship with their children.
Community and school contexts influence parenting and problematic behavior in youths (Keppens & Spruyt, 2020). Schools are major components of teenagers’ lives because they allow the youth to meet different types of people. Educational institutions can establish school-based programs that involve the participation of parents to support proper monitoring of teenagers, support their academic performance, and establish limits regarding inappropriate behaviors. School-based programs can be very effective owing to the large number of teenagers attending schools. Stakeholders in school can work with parents to identify high-risk student, design interventions, and implement them to eliminate problematic and anti-social behaviors. Parents are potentially the most reliable source of information regarding the experiences, needs, and strengths of their children.
Since the main goals of the community and school-based programs are behavioral change and rehabilitation, involving parents increases the impact of the programs. The collaboration between programs and parents can also be used to help youths learn appropriate behaviors, learn to solve problems, and engage in social activities (Iwasaki, 2015). Programs can also focus on addressing the underlying causes of problem behaviors since parents can illuminate about their children to help stakeholders gain deeper insights into their lives, identify sources of problem behavior, and design interventions to help youths learn positive behaviors. Stakeholders can also work with parents to design interventions to develop school strategies for communicating with parents. When such programs regularly offer information on class behavior, school behavior, homework, and attendance, they offer parents opportunities to support and monitor the engagement of their children with the school. Parents are responsible for their children, which means that they should participate in programs that aim to improve behavior of their children. Parental participation keeps their kids engaged in such programs, which is vital in supporting the overall development of teenagers. The involvement of parents also influence program stakeholders positively
Educational Achievement Gaps Implications
There are also educational achievement gaps implications of the new bill. For instance, a key contributor to student performance entails ensuring that students attend schools. Studies indicate that 11.1% of students in California are chronically absent or have not attended 10% or more school days. The behavior affects youth of color disproportionately, which affects 20.1% of African Americans, 21% of Native Americans, 17.4% of Pacific Islanders, and 12% of Latinos compared to 9.7% of White students (Chang et al., 2018). When considering other subgroups, 26% of foster youths, 23% of homeless youths, 18.4% of students with disabilities, and 13.9% of students from low-income families are found to be chronically absent from schools (Chang et al., 2018). Missing 10% of the school period can adversely affect students because students with high absenteeism rates face high risks of dropping out of school or performing poorly in college (Chang et al., 2018).
The major reasons for chronic absenteeism include neglect, abuse, bullying, disabilities, language barriers, and the absence of educational and social support services (Chang et al., 2018). Others include reduced parental involvement, access to unstable transportation, and housing instability. These reasons reflect the unaddressed mental health, behavioral, and academic needs of young people in the general education system. Filling these educational gaps requires a multi-faceted approach that considers the students, their family, and the communities where they live. The requirement in the AB 901 for counties to focus on local-based community and educational programs can emerge as a potential approach to address the issue of chronic absenteeism. For example, school districts can develop educational approaches that engage students, their families, and the communities in which they live to address barriers to attendance.
The programs can use the aforementioned data to understand the underlying reasons for the issue, assess the effectiveness of current attendance plans, and collaborate with school attendance stakeholders across the state or within counties, and engage affected students and their parents to develop measures aimed at improving attendance. The programs can also identify the required actions to assist students and their parents deal with attendance barriers. Reduced absenteeism rates can be achieved through adopting preventive and effective strategies to motivate students to attend school each day.
Enhancing attendance levels requires stakeholders to shift away from the conventional truancy-based approaches to inadequate attendance. Programs based on the truancy approach take a long time to act, which results in disproportionate levels of attendance and ineffective strategies such as the involvement of the juvenile justice system. However, this strategy aggravates the situation and create other issues such as wide educational achievement gaps.
Local approaches focused on community or school-based strategies can be used to solve the issue. For instance, schools or school districts can establish educational programs with the involvement of parents and use chronic absence data to interrupt and transform inadequate attendance patterns before it affects educational achievement (Chang et al., 2018). They can use the data to identify students who require immediate assistance, find the required supports, and design the needed intervention. Targeting students with attendance problems using evidence-based strategies improve the attendance rate gradually.
Educational programs can also use chronic absence data to determine where to invest extra resources to identify underlying causes of the problem and develop meaningful and effective interventions (Chang et al., 2018). Understanding the causes of the issue in addition to the required resources to address the issue is essential to creating solutions.
The ‘School to Prison Pipeline’ Implications
The bill also unifies resources to hinder young people from entering the juvenile justice system completely. It implements the required limits to the school-to-prison pipeline by introducing safeguards that focus on reducing system contact while providing young people with the required tools to be successful adults. It does this by ending the practice of referring teenagers to probation programs. Previously, school districts implemented punitive punishments that forced students of schools. Past regulations based on the voluntary probation program offer the law enforcement a greater role in schools through the juvenile justice system in which teenagers were regularly referred to juvenile courts just by engaging in fights, misbehaving at school or towards teachers, using profanity, interrupting classes, and truancy.
The AB 901 seeks to disrupt this harmful process and hinder young people from having early contacts with the juvenile justice system. The bill proposes measures such as educational and community-based interventions founded on collaboration with parents and focused on addressing the underlying causes of problematic behavior among the youth. The intention is to meet the behavioral and educational needs of teenagers and help them live better lives and complete their education.
Conclusion
It can be very frightening for a student in high school when they know that a probation officer is continuously following them each day at school. Such contacts with probation officers or the juvenile justice system are unnecessary for young people who are just discovering their world and are attempting to understand themselves. Majorities of the students are teenagers and are at a vital developmental stage that prepares them for adult life. Thus, involving young people who are not on probation and have not been charged with any crimes makes them feel like criminals and the involvement of probation officers offer a wrong impression of the teenagers to other people. This was the situation across California before the AB 901 came into force in 2021. Probation officers were allowed to track thousands of adolescents even though none of them had broken any law. Most of the involved students underperform at school and experience problematic behavior typical of teenagers. The probation officers did not only track the students, they also offered surprise visits at their homes, searched them, and ordered them to avoid contacts with specific people in addition to imposing curfews.
Consequently, the new AB 901 law limits the ability of school officials to place specific students under probation conditions or on probation caseloads without being charged with crimes. Rather than encouraging probation supervision, the new law emphasizes the importance of offering students with educational and community-based support and services to help them learn positive behaviors, improve their academic achievement, and develop adequately. It is common for teenagers to be rude, aggressive, underperform at school, or disobey teachers.
While these behaviors are unwelcome, they are not crimes that allow the juvenile justice system to place teenagers on probation. Most of the behaviors are typical for adolescents even though most of the youths were previously referred to probation officers because of attaining low grades or underperforming at school. The new law attempts to encourage schools and communities to find the underlying causes of problematic behavior among the youths and implement appropriate interventions to improve the lives of young people. Most teenagers are still immature even though they have strong emotional and aggressive impulses.
Besides, when teenagers struggle or underperform, they are usually experiencing issues at home or with their lives that they do not know how to tackle. Rather than punish these youths, the new law encourages the schools and communities to offer support services such as counseling, health care, and tutoring among others to help young people and their families address any underlying issues that cause the problematic behavior. The involvement of the juvenile justice system is inappropriate and ineffective in helping the youth develop properly. It only exacerbates the issues the young people are experiencing. Besides, law enforcement should focus on supervising those charged with crimes or those who have completed jail time. Youths required people with specialized training to understand the way they develop and the reason they behave in specific ways. Programs focused on educational support and enrichment, counseling, job preparedness, recreation and the arts can be very useful in helping youths adopt positive behavioral practices. The new law eliminates the contact of youths with the juvenile justice system to prepare them for further education in the future.
References
Barnes-Lee, A. R. (2020). Development of Protective Factors for Reducing Juvenile Reoffending: A Strengths-Based Approach to Risk Assessment. Criminal Justice and Behavior , 009385482094960. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854820949601
California Legislative Information. (2020). Bill Text - AB-901 Juveniles. Leginfo.legislature.ca.gov. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB901
Chang, H., Bauer, L., & Byrnes, V. (2018). Data Matters Using Chronic Absence to Accelerate Action for Student Success SEPTEMBER 2018* . https://www.attendanceworks.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Attendance-Works-Data-Matters_010919.pdf
Iwasaki, Y. (2015). The role of youth engagement in positive youth development and social justice youth development for high-risk, marginalised youth. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth , 21 (3), 267–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673843.2015.1067893
Keppens, G., & Spruyt, B. (2020). The impact of interventions to prevent truancy: A review of the research literature. Studies in Educational Evaluation , 65 , 100840. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100840
Openstates. (2020). AB 901 - California Assembly (20192020) . Openstates.org. https://openstates.org/ca/bills/20192020/AB901/
Thornberry, T. P., Kearley, B., Gottfredson, D. C., Slothower, M. P., Devlin, D. N., & Fader, J. J. (2018). Reducing Crime Among Youth at Risk for Gang Involvement. Criminology & Public Policy , 17 (4), 953–989. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12395
Underwood, L., & Washington, A. (2016). Mental Illness and Juvenile Offenders. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 13 (2), 228. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph13020228
