Those Who Do Not Return

Abstract

In this article we examine the facility-to-community transition experiences of formerly incarcerated youth in the sample who remained in the community for 1 year following release from the juvenile correctional system. Specifically, we studied the relationship of selected predictor variables to engagement status (a transition outcome based on working, going to school, or both activities) at two points in time after the participants exited the juvenile correctional system: 6 months post-exit (Time 1) and 12 months postexit (Time 2).The data for the study were gathered in a 5-year longitudinal study that examined the community reintegration of 531 incarcerated youth from Oregon's juvenile justice system. Data were gathered on the sample while they were still in custody and then every 6 months through phone interviews in order to describe their work, educational, living, and social experiences in the community. Data on their return to the juvenile correctional system were gathered from an extant database maintained by the state agency. Findings suggest that (a) transition and post-exit services may need to be focused to particular subgroups and (b) career/vocational instruction in the juvenile correctional setting coupled with services offered upon returning to the community could have a positive impact on the adjustment of incarcerated youth.

Gender Differences in the Perceived Needs and Barriers of Youth Offenders Preparing for Community Reentry

“…For example, in their study of over 500 formerly incarcerated youth in Oregon, Bullis and Yovanoff (2002) found that only 30% were enrolled in school or substantially employed at 1 year post release. Additional research has discovered that returning youth offenders commonly struggle to find safe and stable housing after leaving the correctional system, and a high proportion of offenders (estimates lie between 40% and 60%) contend with mental health challenges and/or substance abuse disorders (Altschuler and Brash 2004; Teplin et al 2002).…”

“…Findings from longitudinal studies have shown that juvenile offenders are likely to experience persistent social problems such as unemployment, low educational attainment, homelessness, and recidivism into the juvenile and adult penal systems (Bullis and Yovanoff 2002; Snyder and Sickmund 2006). These negative outcomes stem in part from exposure to childhood risks that are known to contribute to negative life outcomes, such as child abuse and neighborhood disorganization.…”

Criminal History and Adverse Childhood Experiences in Relation to Recidivism and Social Functioning in Multi-problem Young Adults

“…In turn, this possibly resulted in limited employment opportunities. According to previous research, the experience of imprisonment complicates graduation or finding employment (Bullis & Yovanoff, 2002;Van der Geest et al, 2016). Another explanation might be possible stigmatization during the job application process as a result of past convictions or imprisonment (Decker et al, 2015).…”

“…Adolescentlimited offending is common and generally considered to be a normative response to the social context of an adolescent, whereas life course persistent offending is more rare and often related to experienced family adversities, inadequate parenting, neurocognitive problems, and temperament and behavior problems (Moffitt & Caspi, 2001). According to previous studies, youth who commit frequent and serious crimes in adolescence tend to be less successful later in life than non-offending youth: They are frequently engaged in multiple types of crimes during young adulthood (Piquero et al, 2012) and experience difficulty in finishing school and finding employment (Bullis & Yovanoff, 2002;Van der Geest et al, 2016). In turn, this relates negatively to quality of life (QoL) in young adulthood (Lanctôt et al, 2007).…”

A Spatial Analysis of Risks and Resources for Reentry Youth in Los Angeles County

“…There is some evidence that use of formal neighborhood resources may positively influence the transition to school and work and can potentially deter recidivism. Bullis & Yovanoff’s (2002) longitudinal study of over 500 released youth in Oregon found that those who engaged mental health services were 4.8 times as likely to be engaged in work or school at one year post release. In a separate analysis, they found that these “engaged youth’ were at least twice as likely as those who were not engaged to avoid repeat contact with the criminal justice system (Bullis, Yovanoff, Mueller, & Havel, 2002).…”