A Community‐Based Model for Remediating Juveniles Adjudicated Incompetent to Stand Trial: Feedback from Youth, Attorneys, and Judges

AuthorJanet I. Warren,Jessica Jones Coburn,Shelly L. Jackson
DOIhttp://doi.org/10.1111/jfcj.12017
Published date01 March 2014
Date01 March 2014
A Community-Based Model for Remediating
Juveniles Adjudicated Incompetent to Stand
Trial: Feedback from Youth, Attorneys,
and Judges
By Shelly L. Jackson, Ph.D., Janet I. Warren, DSW, and Jessica Jones Coburn
ABSTRACT
This study examined client satisfaction with a community-based restoration
services program for youth adjudicated incompetent to stand trial in Virginia. The
sample consisted of 130 youth (ages 8-21 years), 80 attorneys, and 43 juvenile court
judges. Youth overwhelming found restoration services helpful to them, although
some concepts were harder to learn than others. Both judges and attorneys were
generally knowledgeable about juvenile competency law, although both were less
knowledgeable about competency evaluators and the services provided to youth.
Results will be used to improve teaching tools, training of Restoration Counselors,
and communication between program providers and the legal community.
INTRODUCTION
Although challenging, the need to develop and refine restoration services for youth
reflects a growing legal imperative. To our knowledge, no restoration services program
has published research on the experiences and impression of key stakeholders involved in
these legal and clinical processes. The purpose of our study was to analyze and summarize
Shelly L. Jackson, Ph.D. is Adjunct Assistant Professor at the Institute of Law, Psychiatry, and
Public Policy at the University of Virginia. Dr. Jackson has been engaged in juvenile competency research,
prison rape research, and family violence research.
Janet I. Warren, DSW is Clinical Professor of Psychiatry and Neurobehavioral Sciences in the School
of Medicine, and Associate Director of the Institute of Law, Psychiatry, and Public Policy. Dr. Warren
maintains an active research agenda in the areas of forensic psychiatry and psychology, adult and juvenile
competency, and prison rape. She has authored numerous papers related to these topics. Over the past 10
years, Dr. Warren has developed a juvenile competency restoration program.
Jessica Jones Coburn is a program assistant at the University of Virginia. Ms. Coburn contributes to
many aspects of the juvenile competency restoration program including program development and case
tracking.
bs_bs_banner
Juvenile and Family Court Journal 65, No. 2 (Spring) 23
© 2014 National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges
the results of clients’ (youth, attorneys, judges) knowledge and satisfaction with the
juvenile competency restoration services program operating in Virginia and to offer
recommendations for program improvement.
Background
To ensure that youth receive fair trials, there has been a growing national interest
in juvenile competency legislation in juvenile court (Larson & Grisso, 2011). Adjudica-
tive competence (i.e., competence to stand trial) is a legal construct describing the
criminal defendant’s ability to understand and participate in legal proceedings. It is a
functional assessment that addresses capacities rather than knowledge, is contextual in
nature, and is calibrated according to the complexity of the legal situation facing each
defendant (Christy, Douglas, Otto & Petrila, 2004; Mossman et al., 2007; Zapf &
Roesch, 2006).
The Supreme Court articulated the standard test for competency to stand trial in
Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960). Currently, 23 states have juvenile compe-
tence statutes, most of which use the Dusky standard (see Larson & Grisso, 2011, for a list
of states adopting juvenile competency legislation). Before the mid-1990s, it was uncom-
mon for the issue of adjudicative competence to be raised in juvenile court. Even with this
legislation, adjudicative competence appears to be raised relatively infrequently. In a
survey of 217 defense attorneys affiliated with the National Association of Counsel for
Children and/or the National Juvenile Defender Center, the attorneys raised juvenile
competency in only about 10 percent of their cases (Viljoen, McLachlan, Wingrove &
Penner, 2010). However, once the issue of juvenile competency is raised, a judge may
refer the youth for a competency evaluation. If the youth is deemed incompetent to stand
trial, the court may require the provision of restoration services.
Restoration Services
Restoration services are designed to “restore” an individual’s abilities and capacities
articulated in Dusky, and are not more broadly designed to make permanent therapeutic or
rehabilitative changes in the individual’s overall life functioning. Unlike adults, youth (in
some states) may be found incompetent due to developmental immaturity in addition to
mental illness and intellectual deficits. Therefore, some scholars prefer the term remediation
rather than restoration when referring to youth. Remediation is achieved through support-
ive learning using developmentally and culturally appropriate psycho-educational inter-
ventions combined with child-specific intensive case management to address the relevant
barriers to adjudicative competency (Viljoen & Grisso, 2007). Restoration services only
recently have been applied to youth. Virginia, Florida, and Maryland were the first three
states to develop comprehensive juvenile competency restoration programs and are often
consulted by other jurisdictions when developing their own state programs. Each has
promoted a different type of program, with Florida initially using residential treatment
exclusively, Maryland a regional service delivery structure, and Virginia an exclusive
community-based program for youth between 8 and 21.
24 | JUVENILE AND FAMILY COURT JOURNAL / Spring 2014

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT