The Register Citizen (Torrington, CT)
If we’re invested in Conn.’s youth, we must recognize the real crisis
We’ve seen the recent headlines about car thefts and juvenile crime. This has led some to argue that teen offenders need harsher punishment and that recent reforms to the juvenile system went too far. It’s time for a reality check: the safety of our communities and wellbeing of our youth depend on it.
Here are the facts, starting with motor vehicle thefts. The recent increase is happening across the nation and is largely driven by key fobs left in cars. Ken Barone, at the Institute for Municipal and Regional Policy at Central Connecticut State University, reports that the uptick in auto thefts mirrored similar trends in other parts of the country since the early months of the pandemic. Connecticut is not alone in seeing a rise in motor vehicle thefts. This includes a 65 percent increase in New York City between 2019 and 2020 and a 125 percent increase in Denver since the start of the pandemic.
A 2021 report from the National Insurance Crime Bureau states “considerations such as pandemic, economic downturn, loss of juvenile outreach programs, and public safety budgetary and resource limitations are likely contributing factors” to a national uptick in auto thefts. Youth have been deprived of school, social activities, and most support systems and services for more than a year.
Connecticut’s predominantly white communities are being impacted, feeling the effects of a pandemic that has exposed the disparities in opportunities and investment between Connecticut’s urban centers and suburban parts of the state. It is all too predictable that the call is to ramp up punishment and incarceration, knowing very well which youth would be targeted. In addition, the facts are clear. More punitive responses lead to higher recidivism, and recidivism with much higher offenses.
A common refrain from law enforcement in recent months is that their “hands are tied” because of juvenile justice reforms, leaving them with no options to detain youth who represent a threat to public safety. But according to state law, an “officer may seek a court order to detain the child in a juvenile detention center” following an arrest, and that a judge can order a child to be detained if he or she determines that there is “probable cause to believe that the child will pose a risk to public safety if released to the community prior to the court hearing or disposition.”
Our state, recognized as a national leader in juvenile justice, already has the ability to remove youth from the
community who pose a public safety risk. Our youth incarceration rate, particularly the disparity rates for youth of color, is one area where Connecticut cannot claim to be a model. A report last month from the Sentencing Project noted that Connecticut ranked third highest of all 50 states in disparities in youth incarceration between white youth and Black youth. So not only does youth incarceration occur in Connecticut, it is used disproportionately for Black children.
At best, recent rhetoric about hands being tied reflects a failure to understand the basics of Connecticut law. At worst, it is an intentional mischaracterization intended to create a sense of panic among the public to roll back evidence-based improvements to Connecticut’s youth justice system — improvements that have been focused on increased public safety, community well-being, and youth rehabilitation and achievement.
One of Barone’s conclusions was that there was “very little evidence to support a claim that changes to the juvenile justice laws are causing an increase” in motor vehicle thefts. If Connecticut responds by doubling down on punitive policies and incarceration, let’s not call it a crisis of juvenile justice reform. Let’s acknowledge that it is an unwillingness to invest in the well-being of Black and brown youth. Let’s acknowledge that it is a politically expedient response to the pandemic that will appease some of Connecticut’s residents and disadvantage those who have been most marginalized. A large part of the reform work has been backed and overseen by the state’s Juvenile Justice Policy and Oversight Committee, which includes representation from stakeholders throughout the juvenile justice system and across all branches of government, including prosecutors and law enforcement
As members of the Juvenile Justice Policy and Oversight Committee, we support Connecticut’s current juvenile justice laws and policies. They are based in research, data and policies that are designed to achieve the best outcomes for public safety, communities, families and youth. We solicit the advice of researchers, public policy experts and practitioners when considering changes to laws and policies. We are committed to addressing the real crises for youth demonstrated by the pandemic: the need to invest in community-based supports, services and connections, particularly in communities of color. The JJPOC’s meetings are open to the public, and materials are posted on the Tow Youth Justice Institute website, towyouth@newhaven.edu.
We are ready to have a serious conversation about interventions that will make a positive difference in youth’s lives, as opposed to reverting to incarceration and other measures that have been shown to be costly and ineffective for Connecticut’s citizens. Let’s not compound issues by passing legislation as a knee-jerk reaction to a slight increase in crime that will affect an already marginalized small group of young people. We hope others will join us in this conversation, with the goal of giving all of Connecticut’s youth the opportunity to achieve their full potential.
State Rep. Toni Walker, Juvenile Justice Policy and Oversight Committee Co-Chair State Sen. Gary Winfield State Rep. Robyn Porter State Rep. Anthony Nolan Hector Glynn, Racial and Ethnic Disparities Workgroup Co-Chair, Chief Operating Officer, The Village for Families & Children Derrick M. Gordon, Racial and Ethnic Disparities Workgroup CoChair, Associate Professor of Psychiatry (Psychology Section) and Child Study Center Division of Prevention & Community Research, Yale University School of Medicine Martha Stone, Center for Children’s Advocacy, Racial and Ethnic Disparities Workgroup Member Robert Francis, Racial and Ethnic Disparities Workgroup Member Agata Raszczyk-Lawska, Managing Attorney of the Children at Risk Unit for Connecticut Legal Services, Racial and Ethnic Disparities Workgroup Member Erica Bromley, Connecticut Youth Services Association, Racial and Ethnic Disparities Workgroup Member Christina Quaranta, Executive Director, Connecticut Justice Alliance, Racial and Ethnic Disparities Workgroup Member Rashanda McCollum, Executive Director, Students for Educational Justice David McGuire, Executive Director, ACLU-CT