Crossover Youth

Author(s):  
Robin Rosenberg ◽  
Christina L. Spudeas
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Wendy Haight ◽  
Min Hae Cho

“Crossover youth” are maltreated youth who have engaged in delinquency. They are of particular concern to child welfare, juvenile justice, and other professionals because of their risks for problematic developmental outcomes. Effective interventions that promote more positive developmental trajectories require an understanding of the various pathways from maltreatment to delinquency. A growing body of research identifies potential risk and protective processes for maltreated youth crossing over into delinquency at ecological levels ranging from the micro to the macro. Most scholarship, however, is not developmental and provides little insight into how children’s emerging capacities relate to their abilities to actively respond to risk or protective processes. Solutions to crossing over are likely to be found in interventions that simultaneously address risk and protective processes across multiple ecological levels and across development. Emerging research suggests that the Crossover Youth Practice Model is one such promising intervention for improving outcomes for maltreated youth.


2020 ◽  
Vol 36 ◽  
pp. 115-137
Author(s):  
Jennifer Bergman

Huge numbers of children in Canada suffer from mental health issues, yet only a fraction gets needed supports and services.  Left untreated, childhood mental illnesses carry serious consequences for children, families, and society as a whole.  This public health crisis is significantly more pronounced for children who are engaged with the family law (child welfare) and youth criminal justice systems (“crossover youth”).  Crossover youth face multiplicative challenges, including disproportionate rates of mental health issues.  In this article, I explore how the failure to provide crossover youth with needed supports and services, and the related dire consequences suffered by these children and society more generally (e.g. deteriorating mental health, repeated engagement in the criminal justice system) is tied to the failure in the family law (child welfare) and youth criminal justice systems to recognize the effects of the intersection of the various challenges and disadvantages (e.g. poverty, racism, instability) experienced by these children. I describe the paradigm of intersectionality, and argue that the adoption of an intersectional approach by the family law (child welfare) and youth criminal justice systems is imperative in order for the legal system to meet its mandate and protect and promote the well-being of these vulnerable children.


2017 ◽  
Vol 75 ◽  
pp. 110-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew A. Walsh ◽  
Jeremiah W. Jaggers
Keyword(s):  

2015 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 625-654 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael T. Baglivio ◽  
Kevin T. Wolff ◽  
Alex R. Piquero ◽  
Shay Bilchik ◽  
Katherine Jackowski ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Amy M. Magnus

‘Specialized justice’ is deeply rooted in a movement toward socializing and humanizing crime and justice in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Structurally and ideologically, this movement influenced courts to maintain their law-upholding purpose while simultaneously operating as a public service to communities in need. Based on this ideological and structural shift, specialized justice via specialty courts is one mechanism through which citizens should be able to access justice, therapeutic jurisprudence, and restorative forms of justice. Given this reality, this chapter serves as an entry point for a critical assessment of alternative and specialized justice initiatives, their historical roots, and the potential collateral consequences of specializing justice for crossover youth and families in particular. This chapter posits some of the benefits, challenges, and potential drawbacks of alternative justice initiatives of this kind, especially in relation to the adversarial and punitive justice model from which they derive.


2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 381-394
Author(s):  
Emily M. Wright ◽  
Ryan Spohn ◽  
Michael Campagna

Crossover youth are involved in both child welfare and juvenile justice systems. The Crossover Youth Practice Model (CYPM) promotes collaboration between these systems to inform decision making between the two agencies and better serve these youth. Yet, few outcome evaluations of the CYPM exist, especially those that assess outcomes beyond recidivism, such as case dispositions, case closure, or placement or living situations. This study examined whether the CYPM ( n = 210) decreased recidivism and increased system/case responses and positive outcomes among youth within 9–18 months after the youth’s initial arrest relative to a comparison group of crossover youth ( n = 425) who were arrested 1 year before the CYPM was implemented. Overall, the findings suggest that the CYPM in the jurisdiction under study dismisses or diverts crossover youth more often, closes delinquency cases more often, and leads to more home placements than was previously done in the jurisdiction, but it does not significantly reduce recidivism.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document