![[ Visit Client Website ]](images/banner.gif)
Over the past two decades, US juvenile systems underwent notable progressive reforms, but challenges remain including severe inequities, re-traumatizing practices in custody, and over-reliance on formal sanctions. Many youth justice stakeholders agree that change is necessary, but there is disagreement over what that change should look like, and how to achieve it.
The present study explores how diverse stakeholders—including youth, families, front line staff, and system experts— envision the future of youth justice. Findings examine the shared and unique views of groups with differing positionality in the juvenile system, and offer insights for collective visioning and improved collaboration.
Methods
A series of 11 in-person and zoom focus group sessions were conducted with participants across the US with three groups: front-line staff (n = 13), system impacted youth and family members (n = 48) and stakeholder/experts in youth justice policy, administrative, academic, and advocacy roles (n = 30).
Expert stakeholders were recruited through purposive sampling and direct outreach. Front line staff and system impacted youth and families were recruited through referrals from stakeholders and organizations that distributed and posted study fliers. Front line staff and system impacted participants were compensated $50 for their time.
The moderator led each group (n = 11) through a series of questions discussing ideal visions for youth justice, strategies to pursue that vision, and the roles of various participants in the change process. Groups were video and audio recorded, transcribed and coded thematically by three researchers, and analyzed for key themes.
Findings
Overarching themes for the “ideal” vision of youth justice included healthy youth development and thriving, strong environments and social supports for youth, protection of youth dignity and rights, and minimizing institutional abuses. Expert stakeholders considered more transformative visions of a society without the need for a juvenile justice system. Front line staff and youth and families underscored staffing issues as critical priorities. All groups also emphasized the need for formal re-entry programming.
Regarding the question of how to achieve an ideal youth justice system, overarching themes included changes to the problem definition (seeing youth justice as a complex issue intertwined with gun violence, child welfare, schools, etc.), changes to public narratives about the system and impacted youth, and resource reallocation. Generally, the front line staff and system impacted youth and families focused on more concrete policy and practice changes, whereas the expert group emphasized ideological shifts.
Finally, all groups emphasized the need for greater inclusion of youth, families, and direct service providers in the system change process. Furthermore, the approach to inclusion was essential for all groups; simply including historically underrepresented groups in decision making would be insufficient, rather they must be able to participate in meaningful ways, and those currently in power must adapt in turn.
Conclusion and Implications
The study offers important findings regarding the future of youth justice, and how to get there, with new insights comparing the visions of diverse stakeholders. Results point to opportunities for strategic collaboration, and areas of disagreement to navigate for continued change.