No abstract

No abstract

Juvenile justice (JJ) has become a default system of services for many students with special needs. Quinn, Rutherford, Leone, Osher, and Poirier (2005) found that the average prevalence rate of youth with disabilities in JJ was 34% and that the most common disabilities were specific learning disabilities and emotional disturbance. According to the National Collaborative on Workforce and Disability (2015), youth with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBDs) comprised about 47.4% of students with disabilities in JJ, while in public schools they accounted for only about 8% of students with disabilities. Students with learning disabilities are also overrepresented in the JJ system, accounting for 38.6% (Quinn et al., 2005). Of the remaining youth with disabilities in JJ, almost 5% have intellectual disabilities, 2.9% have Other Health Impairments, and 0.8% have multiple disabilities (Gagnon & Barber, 2014; National Collaborative on Workforce and Disability, 2015). One reason that students with EBDs get involved in the JJ system is due to unresolved academic, behavioral, or mental health issues. They frequently have long histories of referrals for academic deficiencies, behavior problems, truancy, substance use, and mental health and may slip into the JJ system in a relatively subtle way. They then find themselves placed in highly structured and secured settings where they have very limited freedom and decision making. When released many find great difficulty navigating their way out of this physically and mentally restricted setting and need extra help to make the transition back to school, work, and community (Mathur & Griller Clark, 2014).

Reentry outcomes for formerly incarcerated youth are dismal. The challenges these youth face are even further intensified when they have learning or emotional and behavioral disabilities. Successful transition services need to be initiated in the correctional facility and continue in the community. This article discusses interventions designed to aid the reentry of formerly incarcerated youth into their communities. Caps in existing service delivery are identified. Guiding principles for effective reentry programs and specific strategies focused on increasing employment and continuing education, both while incarcerated and when released, are highlighted.

No abstract