Abstract
Foster youth are at increased risk of entering the justice system, particularly as they age out of foster care. The high prevalence of crime among foster youth has concerned practitioners, researchers, and policymakers. Given the public attention to address the disproportionate rates of juvenile justice system involvement among young people in foster care, this study focuses on the association of the new federal legislation for extending foster care to age 21 with foster youth’s juvenile justice system involvement. Drawing from 2006 to 2016 California state child welfare administrative data on individuals in care between their 16th and 18th birthdays (N = 69,140), this study (1) examines whether the extended care policy is associated with reduced juvenile justice system involvement and (2) compares juvenile justice system involvement between 16-year-olds and 17-year-olds during the periods before and after California implemented the extended care policy. The results show that youth approaching the age of majority in foster care were more likely to avoid juvenile justice system involvement after the state implemented the policy controlling for the general declining trend in delinquency petitions within the state, and that this was true for both age cohorts. These findings have national implications because in most states being transferred from the child welfare system to the juvenile justice system before reaching age 18 can result in later ineligibility for extended care available through Title IV-E benefits. Further implications and recommendations for professionals, researchers, and policymakers are provided.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to the review process required by the state social service agency that provided key study data, but may be available from the corresponding author pursuant to obtaining permission from that government agency.
References
Abadie, A. (2005). Semiparametric difference-in-differences estimators. The Review of Economic Studies, 72(1), 1–19.
Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J. S. (2008). Mostly harmless econometrics: An empiricist’s companion. Princeton University Press.
Barth, R. P. (1990). On their own: The experiences of youth after foster care. Child and Adolescent Social Work, 7(5), 419–440.
Brandford, C., & English, D. J. (2004). Foster youth transition to independence study: Final report. Retrieved from www.dshs.wa.gov/pdf/ca/FYTfinal2004.pdf
California Department of Justice. (2016). Crime in California 2016. Retrieved from https://oag.ca.gov/crime
California Legislative Information. (2016). Assembly Bill No. 1911. Retrieved from https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1%09911
California Legislative Information. (2018). Assembly Bill No. 1911. Retrieved from https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB1%09911
Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2018). Working with youth to develop a transition plan. Retrieved from https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubPDFs/transitional_plan.pdf
Collett, D. (2015). Modelling survival data in medical research. CRC Press.
Courtney, M. E., Dworsky, A., Cusick, G. R., Havlicek, J., Perez, A., & Keller, T. (2007). Midwest evaluation of the adult functioning of former foster youth: Outcomes at age 21. Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago. Retrieved from http://www.chapinhall.org/sites/default/files/ChapinHallDocument_2.pdf
Courtney, M. E., Dworsky, A., Ruth, G., Keller, T., Havlicek, J., & Bost, N. (2005). Midwest evaluation of the adult functioning of former foster youth: Outcomes at age 19. Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago. Retrieved from http://www.chapinhall.org/sites/default/files/ChapinHallDocument_4.pdf
Courtney, M. E., & Okpych, N. (2015). Memo from CalYOUTH: Early findings on extended foster care and legal permanency. Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago. Retrieved from https://www.chapinhall.org/wp-content/uploads/CY_LP_IB0715.pdf
Courtney, M. E., Piliavin, I., Grogan-Kaylor, A., & Nesmith, A. (2001). Foster youth transitions to adulthood: A longitudinal view of youth leaving care. Child Welfare, 80(6), 685.
Courtney, M. E., Terao, S., & Bost, N. (2004). Midwest evaluation of the adult functioning of former foster youth: Conditions of youth preparing to leave state care. Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago. Retrieved from https://www.chapinhall.org/sites/default/files/CS_97.pdf
Cusick, G. R., & Courtney, M. E. (2007). Offending during late adolescence: How do youth aging out of care compare with their peers? Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago.
Cusick, G. R., Havlicek, J. R., & Courtney, M. E. (2012). Risk for arrest: The role of social bonds in protecting foster youth making the transition to adulthood. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 82(1), 19–31.
Dunlap, B. (2006). Dependents who become delinquents: Implementing dual jurisdiction in California under Assembly Bill 129. Whittier Journal of Child and Family Advocacy, 507, 1–43.
Elder, G. H. (1975). Age differentiation and the life course. Annual Review of Sociology, 1(1), 165–190.
Elder, G. H. (1994). Time, human agency, and social change: Perspectives on the life course. Social Psychology Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/2786971
Fazel, S., & Danesh, J. (2002). Serious mental disorder in 23000 prisoners: A systematic review of 62 surveys. The Lancet, 359(9306), 545–550.
Geen, R. (2009). The fostering connections to success and increasing adoptions act: Implementation issues and a look ahead at additional child welfare reforms (Working Paper). Child Trends.
Herz, D. C., Ryan, J. P., & Bilchik, S. (2010). Challenges facing crossover youth: An examination of juvenile-justice decision making and recidivism. Family Court Review, 48(2), 305–321.
Huang, H., & Ryan, J. P. (2014). The location of placement and juvenile delinquency: Do neighborhoods matter in child welfare? Children and Youth Services Review, 44, 33–45.
Huang, H., Ryan, J. P., & Herz, D. (2012). The journey of dually-involved youth: The description and prediction of rereporting and recidivism. Children and Youth Services Review, 34(1), 254–260.
Hughes, D. M., Condron, B., Jackson, N., Pitchal, E., Garton, N., & Elliott, S. P. (2008). Preparing our kids for education, work and life: A report of the task force on youth aging out of DSS care. The Boston Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.tbf.org/uploadedFiles/tbforg/Utility_Navigation/Multimedia_Library/Reports/DSS_Report_0522.pdf
Jonson-Reid, M., & Barth, R. P. (2000). From placement to prison: The path to adolescent incarceration from child welfare supervised foster or group care. Children and Youth Services Review, 22(7), 493–516.
Judicial Council of California. (2017). Assembly Bill 129: Dual status children. Retrieved from http://www.courts.ca.gov/7989.htm
Klein, J. P., & Moeschberger, M. L. (2006). Survival analysis: Techniques for censored and truncated data. Springer.
Kolivoski, K. (2012). Patterns of justice system involvement among child-welfare involved youth (Doctoral dissertation). University of Pittsburgh.
Laub, J. H., & Sampson, R. J. (1995). Crime and context in the lives of 1000 Boston men, circa 1925–1955. In Z. S. Blau & J. Hagan (Eds.), Current perspectives on aging and the life cycle: Delinquency and disrepute in the life course (pp. 119–139). JAI Press.
Laub, J. H., & Sampson, R. J. (2003). Shared beginnings, divergent lives: Delinquent boys to age 70. Harvard University Press.
Lee, J. S., Courtney, M. E., & Hook, J. L. (2012). Formal bonds during the transition to adulthood: Extended foster care support and criminal/legal involvement. Journal of Public Child Welfare, 6(3), 255–279.
Lee, J. S., Courtney, M. E., & Tajima, E. (2014). Extended foster care support during the transition to adulthood: Effect on the risk of arrest. Children and Youth Services Review, 42, 34–42.
Livsey, S., Hockenberry, S., Smith, J, & Kang, W. (2010). Easy access to state and county juvenile court case. National Center for Juvenile Justice.
Moore, T. D., McDonald, T. P., & Cronbaugh-Auld, K. (2016). Assessing risk of placement instability to aid foster care placement decision making. Journal of Public Child Welfare, 10(2), 117–131.
National Conference of State Legislatures. (2020a). Older youth housing, financial literacy and other supports. Retrieved from https://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/supports-older-youth.aspx
National Conference of State Legislatures. (2020b). Juvenile age of jurisdiction and transfer to adult court laws. Retrieved from https://www.ncsl.org/research/human-services/supports-older-youth.aspx
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. (2017). Statistical briefing book. Retrieved from http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/structure_process/qa04102.asp?qaDate=2016
Park, K., Courtney, M. E., Okpych, N. J., & Nadon, M., (2020). Trends in justice system involvement from ages 17 to 21. Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago.
Postlethwait, A. W., Barth, R. P., & Guo, S. (2010). Gender variation in delinquent behavior changes of child welfare-involved youth. Children and Youth Services Review, 32(3), 318–324.
Ryan, J. P., Herz, D., Hernandez, P. M., & Marshall, J. M. (2007). Maltreatment and delinquency: Investigating child welfare bias in juvenile justice processing. Children and Youth Services Review, 29(8), 1035–1050.
Ryan, J. P., & Testa, M. F. (2005). Child maltreatment and juvenile delinquency: Investigating the role of placement and placement instability. Children and Youth Services Review, 27, 227–249.
Ryan, J. P., Testa, M. F., & Zhai, F. (2008). African American youth in foster care and the risk of delinquency: The value of social bonds and permanence. Child Welfare, 87(1), 115–140.
Sarri, R. C. (2014). Juvenile justice in a changing environment. In J. Hall (Ed.), Underprivileged school children and the assault on dignity: Policy challenges and resistance (pp. 89–106). Routledge.
Shulman, E. P., & Cauffman, E. (2014). Deciding in the dark: Age differences in intuitive risk judgment. Developmental Psychology, 50(1), 167.
Steadman, H. J., Osher, F. C., Robbins, P. C., Case, B., & Samuels, S. (2009). Prevalence of serious mental illness among jail inmates. Psychiatric Services, 60(6), 761–765.
Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Wei, E. H., Homish, D. L., & Loeber, R. (2002). Which family and demographic factors are related to both maltreatment and persistent serious juvenile delinquency? Children’s Services: Social Policy, Research, and Practice, 5(4), 261–272.
U.S. Department of Justice. (2018). Juvenile arrests, 2016. Retrieved from https://www.ojjdp.gov/pubs/251861.pdf
Vaughn, M. G., Shook, J. J., & McMillen, J. C. (2008). Aging out of foster care and legal involvement: Toward a typology of risk. Social Service Review, 82(3), 419–446.
Vidal, S., Prince, D., Connell, C. M., Caron, C. M., Kaufman, J. S., & Tebes, J. K. (2017). Maltreatment, family environment, and social risk factors: Determinants of the child welfare to juvenile justice transition among maltreated children and adolescents. Child Abuse & Neglect, 63, 7–18.
Widom, C. S. (1989). Child abuse, neglect, and adult behavior: Research design and findings on criminality, violence, and child abuse. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 59(3), 355–367.
Widom, C. S., & Maxfield, M. G. (2001). An update on the “cycle of violence”: National institute of justice research in brief. National Institute of Justice.
Williams, J. R., Pope, S. M., Sirles, E. A., & Lally, E. M. (2005). Alaska foster care alumni study. Casey Family Programs, University of Alaska Anchorage School of Social Work, Alaska State Office of Children’s services, Tribal-State Collaboration Group.
Zinn, A., & Courtney, M. E. (2018). Extended foster care and legal permanency: An update from CalYOUTH. Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago. Retrieved from https://www.chapinhall.org/wp-content/uploads/Permanency-rates-CalYOUTH.pdf
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank partners at the California Department of Social Services and CalYOUTH Study project funders—the Conrad N. Hilton Foundation, the Reissa Foundation, the Walter S. Johnson Foundation, the Zellerbach Family Foundation, the William T. Grant Foundation, and the California Wellness Foundation—for the support for administrative data used in this study and commitment to policy evaluation and program development for youth. Additionally, the author wishes to acknowledge Mark Courtney and collaborating colleagues from the University of Chicago for the guidance, dedication to support, and encouragement.
Disclaimer
The findings reported herein were performed with the permission of the California Department of Social Services. The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are solely those of the author and should not be considered as representing the policy of the collaborating agency or any agency of the California government.
Funding
This work was supported by the National Institute of Justice [Grant Number: 2018-R2-CX-0007], Conrad N. Hilton Foundation, Reissa Foundation, Walter S. Johnson Foundation, William T. Grant Foundation, California Wellness Foundation, Zellerbach Family Foundation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent
For this type of study formal consent is not required.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Park, K. Is Juvenile Justice System Involvement Context-Dependent?: The Differential Experiences of Older Foster Youth in the Context of Extended Foster Care. Child Adolesc Soc Work J 41, 107–124 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560-022-00840-w
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560-022-00840-w