Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
Other: Aacap Official ActionPractice Parameter for the Assessment and Treatment of Youth in Juvenile Detention and Correctional Facilities
Section snippets
METHODOLOGY
The list of references for this parameter was developed by searching PsycINFO, Medline, and Psychological Abstracts; by reviewing the bibliographies of book chapters and review articles; and by asking colleagues for suggested source materials. The searches covered the period 1990 through 2004 and yielded about 60 articles. Each of these references was reviewed, and only the most relevant were included in this document.
DEFINITIONS
These are general definitions only, and the reader should be aware of local differences by jurisdiction.
YOUTHS IN JUVENILE JUSTICE SETTINGS
Youths with mental illness present a special challenge to the juvenile justice system. Although epidemiological studies on the prevalence of mental and substance-related disorders among youths in the juvenile justice system are limited, research suggests that these problems are significantly more common among youthful offenders than in other youths (Atkins et al., 1999; Cocozza, 1992; Garland et al., 2001). Although as many as 65% to 75% of youthful offenders have one or more diagnosable
CHALLENGES TO EFFECTIVE MENTAL HEALTH EVALUATION AND TREATMENT OF INCARCERATED JUVENILES
Numerous issues raise challenges for clinicians working in juvenile justice settings (Thomas and Penn, 2002). Seeing youths in correctional attire, chained, or handcuffed may elicit a wide range of responses in clinicians. Secure juvenile correctional settings present a stark contrast to more traditional mental health treatment settings. Although there are limited systematic data regarding specific ages of youths in juvenile justice facilities, there appears to be an increasing national trend
RECOMMENDATIONS
Each recommendation in this parameter is identified as falling into one of the following categories of endorsement, indicated by an abbreviation in brackets after the statement. These categories indicate the degree of importance or certainty of each recommendation.
[MS] Minimal standards are recommendations that are based on substantial empirical evidence (e.g., well-controlled, double-blind trials) or overwhelming clinical consensus. Minimal standards are expected to apply more than 95% of the
CONCLUSION
Numerous challenges confront mental health professionals serving the needs of incarcerated juveniles. Effective screening, timely referral, and appropriate treatment require interagency collaboration, adherence to established standards of care, and continuing research on the mental health needs of youths in the juvenile justice system. This will require continued development and validation of mental health screening and other assessment tools in juvenile correctional settings. In addition, more
SCIENTIFIC DATA AND CLINICAL CONSENSUS
Practice parameters are strategies for patient management, developed to assist clinicians in psychiatric decision-making. AACAP practice parameters, based on evaluation of the scientific literature and relevant clinical consensus, describe generally accepted approaches to assess and treat specific disorders or to perform specific medical procedures. These parameters are not intended to define the standard of care, nor should they be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care or exclusive of
REFERENCES (43)
- et al.
Posttraumatic stress disorder among female juvenile offenders
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry
(1998) - et al.
Prevalence of psychiatric disorders in youths across five sectors of care
J Am Child Adolesc Psychiatry
(2001) - et al.
Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument for mental health needs of juvenile justice youths
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry
(2001) - et al.
Mental health problems and service use among female juvenile offenders: their relationship to criminal history
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry
(2001) - et al.
A clinical follow-up of delinquent males: ignored vulnerabilities, unmet needs, and the perpetuation of violence
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry
(1994) How to take a weapons history: interviewing children at risk for violence at school
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry
(1998)- et al.
Psychiatric comorbidity and the 16-month trajectory of substance-abusing and substance-dependent juvenile offenders
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry
(1999) - et al.
Juvenile justice mental health services
Child Adolesc Psychiatry Clin N Am
(2002) - et al.
Mental health assessments in juvenile justice: report on the consensus conference
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry
(2003) Recommendations for Juvenile Justice Reform
(2001)
Practice parameters for the psychiatric assessment of children and adolescents
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry
Practice parameters for the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents who are sexually abusive of others
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry
Practice parameters for the prevention and management of aggressive behavior in child and adolescent psychiatric institutions, with special reference to seclusion and restraint
J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry
Policy statement on psychiatric diagnostic evaluations
Task Force to Revise the APA Guidelines on Psychiatric Services in Jails and Prisons
Position Statement on Assessing the Risk for Violence
() Mental health and incarcerated youth. I: Prevalence and nature of psychopathology
J Child Fam Studies
Assessment and treatment of juvenile offenders
An Assessment of the National Incidence of Juvenile Suicides in Adult Jails, Lockups, and Juvenile Detention Centers
Forensic Evaluation of Juveniles
Cited by (75)
Correlates of informant discrepancies in self-harm among youth involved in child protective services
2023, Children and Youth Services ReviewAdverse childhood experiences (ACEs), psychotropic medication prescription, and continued offending among youth with serious offending histories in juvenile justice residential placement
2022, Journal of Criminal JusticeCitation Excerpt :Also critical is the exacerbated history of traumatic exposure among detained youth, with one study finding over 90% evidencing traumatic exposure, with 11% meeting criteria for PTSD in the past year (Abram et al., 2004; Duron, Williams-Butler, Nesi, Fay and Kim, 2021). A strong body of research shows the rates of psychiatric diagnoses, including PTSD, as well as traumatic exposure among youth involved in the juvenile justice system exceed the prevalence reported for non-justice-involved youth (AACAP, 2005; Cuffe et al., 1998; Kessler, Sonnega, Bromet, Hughes, & Nelson, 1995; Teplin et al., 2007). The prevalence of mental health disorders and the extensive abuse, neglect, and household dysfunction histories of youth with justice system involvement have enormous health ramifications and associated implications for juvenile justice system policy.
Assessing the links between internalizing symptoms and treatment motivation in incarcerated juveniles
2021, Children and Youth Services ReviewCitation Excerpt :However, symptoms are often undetected or are not assessed thoroughly among incarcerated juveniles (e.g., Mitchell & Shaw, 2011), with some research indicating that up to half of youth with symptoms of psychological disorders are not identified during their intake into the facility (e.g., Burke, Mulvey & Schubert, 2015). While efforts and improvements have been made to provide appropriate screening of mental health problems within juvenile detention facilities (e.g., Penn & Thomas, 2005), youth within the juvenile justice system overall display low levels of internal motivation for treatment of their mental health problems (Yeterian, Greene, Bergman, & Kelly, 2013). As a consequence, incarcerated juveniles may benefit from treatment services within the facility or referrals after their release.
Pediatric and Adolescent Issues in Underserved Populations
2019, Physician Assistant ClinicsPediatric and Adolescent Issues in Underserved Populations
2017, Primary Care - Clinics in Office Practice
This parameter was developed by Joseph V. Penn, M.D., and Christopher Thomas, M.D., and the Work Group on Quality Issues: William Bernet, M.D., and Oscar G. Bukstein, M.D., Co-Chairs, and Valerie Arnold, M.D., Joseph Beitchman, M.D., R. Scott Benson, M.D., Joan Kinlan, M.D., Jon McClellan, M.D., Jon Shaw, M.D., and Saundra Stock, M.D. AACAP staff: Kristin Kroeger Ptakowski. A group of invited experts, including members of the AACAP Committee on Rights and Legal Matters and the AACAP Committee on Juvenile Justice Reform, also reviewed the parameter.
This parameter was reviewed at the member forum at the 2003 annual meeting of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.
During July to October 2004, a consensus group reviewed and finalized the content of this practice parameter. The consensus group consisted of representatives of relevant AACAP components as well as independent experts: William Bernet, M.D., Chair; Joseph V. Penn, M.D., and Christopher Thomas, M.D., authors of the parameter; Saundra Stock, M.D., and Jon McClellan, M.D., representatives of the Work Group on Quality Issues; Louis Kraus, M.D., and David Fassler, M.D., representatives of the AACAP Council; William Arroyo, M.D., and Andres J. Pumariega, M.D., representatives of the AACAP Assembly of Regional Organizations; Diane H. Schetky, M.D., independent expert reviewer; and Kristin Kroeger Ptakowski, Director of Clinical Affairs, AACAP.
This practice parameter was approved by AACAP Council on November 8, 2004.
This practice parameter is available on the Internet (www.aacap.org). Reprint requests to the AACAP Communications Department, 3615 Wisconsin Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20016.
Disclosure: Dr. Penn has served as a consultant for McNeil Consumer and Specialty Pharmaceuticals. He has previously served on the speaker's bureau for McNeil Consumer and Specialty Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly, and UCB Pharma (formerly Cell Tech Pharmaceuticals). Dr. Thomas has no financial relationships to disclose.