Toward a Tailored Model of Youth Justice: A Qualitative Analysis of the Factors Associated with Successful Placement in a Community-Integrated Facility

• Author: Fleur Souverein,Lieke van Domburg,Marcia Adriaanse,Eva Mulder,Arne Popma
• Date: 01 February 2022
• DOI: 10.1177/0306624X20944689
• Published date: 01 February 2022
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X20944689

International Journal of

Offender Therapy and

Comparative Criminology

2022, Vol. 66(2-3) 147 –167

© The Author(s) 2020

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0306624X20944689

journals.sagepub.com/home/ijo

Article

Toward a Tailored Model of

Youth Justice: A Qualitative

Analysis of the Factors

Associated with Successful

Placement in a Community-

Integrated Facility

Fleur Souverein1,2 , Eva Mulder1,2,3,4,

Lieke van Domburg1,2,3, Marcia Adriaanse5,

and Arne Popma1,2,5

Abstract

Community-integrated facilities provide security and care for justice-involved youth,

minimizing risks, while allowing youth to build on protective factors within their

community. Literature on the specific factors that determine appropriate placement

in a community-integrated facility, versus a more restrictive high-security setting, is

scarce. Current screening and assessment tools for youth are mostly applied after

placement and mainly focus on the reoffending risk. The current paper explored

which youth, who would previously have been placed in a high-security setting,

could be successfully placed in a less secure community-integrated facility. Through

qualitative analysis, based on the perspectives of professionals, youth and parents,

the current paper identified six distinct domains to guide appropriate screening and

outlines guidelines for policy and practice. These domains include: motivation to

comply, short and long-term perspective, current offense context, crime history,

safety and support from youth’s network, and mental health and intellectual abilities.

1Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

2Academic Workplace for (at risk) Forensic Youth (AWRJ), The Netherlands

3Intermetzo-Pluryn, The Netherlands

4Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands

5 De Bascule, Academic Center for Child- and Adolescent Psychiatry, Duivendrecht, Noord-Holland, The

Netherlands

Corresponding Author:

Fleur Souverein, Department of Child- and Adolescent Psychiatry, Amsterdam University Medical

Center, Meibergdreef 5, Amsterdam, 1105 AZ, The Netherlands.

Email: fleursouverein@live.nl

944689IJOXXX10.1177/0306624X20944689International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative CriminologySouverein et al.

research-article2020

148 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 66(2-3)

Keywords

youth justice, screening and indication, community-integrated youth justice facilities,

tailored security and care, justice-involved youth

Introduction

Effective rehabilitation and reintegration of justice-involved youth requires tailored

placements and programming to minimize risk, but also employing the least restrictive

setting to achieve this goal, permitting youth to build on protective factors within their

community (Austin et al., 2005). To move toward a tailored model of custodial set-

tings the current paper explores the appropriate factors that may guide assessment for

placement in semi-open community-integrated youth justice facilities, based on the

perspectives of professionals, youth and their parents or caregivers (further indicated

as parents). These facilities provide security and structure for justice-involved youth in

close proximity to their home environment and support, so that their criminogenic and

developmental needs can be more effectively targeted.

For effective rehabilitation of justice-involved youth it is essential that interven-

tions target the criminogenic needs that are functionally related to the delinquent

behavior (i.e., dynamic risk factors), as outlined in the ‘need principle’ of the Risk-

Need-Responsivity model (RNR; Andrews & Bonta, 2010). The Good-Lives-Model

(GLM; Ward & Stewart, 2003) further stresses that interventions should focus on pro-

tective factors and strengths. Evolving from longitudinal research (e.g., Sampson &

Laub, 2003; Stouthamer-Loeber et al., 2004) a number of factors have been identified

that build resilience against adverse events and foster desistance: structural day time

activities, leisure time activities, support from professional and informal networks,

and stable living conditions. In consonance with the GLM, positive youth develop-

ment should be a core focus of the youth justice system. The promotion of develop-

mental competencies, strengths and resources should be emphasized, within the

individual (e.g., self-esteem, autonomy) as well as within the environment (e.g., stable

employment positive peer group, stable housing) (Benson & Scales, 2009; Lerner

et al., 2015). Hence, youth justice interventions need to be tailored to the unique chal-

lenges that youth face during adolescence.

The setting of a high-security youth justice facility limits both the options of prop-

erly addressing dynamic risk factors (i.e., criminogenic needs) as to build on protec-

tive factors and strengths. High security and a large distance from the home

environment diminish the possibility to continue preexisting structures of education,

work or support or to initiate this in the youngster’s community (Lambie & Randell,

2013). Likewise as youth are predominantly removed from the environment in which

the delinquent behavior occurs it is challenging to properly address underlying risk

factors of the delinquent behavior. At the same time it is impracticable for the institu-

tions to provide all the necessary specialist education services and individualized

package of care, as youth in youth justice facilities constitute a heterogeneous popu-

lation, displaying a large variety of cognitive, psychological, and social problems