In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

82 | 4 Preventing Incarceration through Special Education and Mental Health Collaboration for Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders Joseph C. Gagnon and Brian R. Barber J.D.S. is a thirteen-year-old who had difficulties with school attendance. In 2006 she was placed on probation for her truancy; over the next three years, J.D.S. continued to have attendance problems at school. Early in 2009, J.D.S. ran away from her foster home, was placed in a residential facility, and then ran away from the residential facility. Throughout this time, J.D.S. continued to have problems attending school. In May of 2009 J.D.S. was placed in the Department of Corrections (DOC). Following a status review hearing in August of that year, J.D.S. was ordered to remain in the DOC and complete a General Education Development (GED) program. The basis of the trial court’s decision was that due to drug use, truancy, and running away from the foster home and residential facility , it was in J.D.S.’s best interests to be placed in the DOC. The attorney for J.D.S. argued, in part, that the DOC facility was not the least restrictive placement, and was not close to her home. Concerning the restrictiveness of the placement, the Indiana court of appeals concluded that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by continuing J.D.S.’s placement with the DOC (J.D.S. v. State of Indiana 2010). Unfortunately the case of J.D.S. is not unique. Relying on the corrections system to serve as a de facto mental health system in place of more appropriate school– and community-based services is common (Grisso 2008). The U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform (2004) reported that in two-thirds of the states, youth with mental disorders are detained even though no criminal charges have been filed. The case of J.D.S. represents a distressing example of our failure to appropriately support youth with severe emotional and behavioral needs. Preventing Incarceration through Special Education | 83 The unlawful reliance on the juvenile justice system to supplant appropriate community– and school-based treatment serves as but one indicator of the complex issues involved in the provision of appropriate educational and mental health supports for at-risk youth. Emotional and behavioral supports for youth are also hindered by inadequacies of the treatment that is provided. Approximately 20-38 percent of youth in public schools are in need of mental health interventions; yet less than one-third receive treatment (Zahner, Pawelkiewicz, DeFrancesco, and Adnopoz 1992). Psychologists, special educators, and general educators all view mental health services in their schools as ineffective (Repie 2005). In fact, less than half of students receiving treatment are provided with services considered by mental health experts to be adequate (Paternite 2005). Despite concerns with quality of services, youth are substantially more likely to seek help when school-based services are available than when services are offered in the community (Slade 2002). The U.S. surgeon general considers schools to be an important setting for the potential recognition of mental disorders in children and adolescents (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 1999). School-based mental health service delivery has received increased recognition within juvenile justice and mental health communities (The National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors and the Policymaker Partnership for Implementing IDEA 2002; Repie 2005). As education, mental health, and juvenile justice service systems look to comprehensive service delivery models that capitalize on the strengths inherent in each system, policies that have historically informed approaches to service provision have come under scrutiny. What is clear is that reactive and punitive approaches to dealing with youth mental disorders, such as expanding juvenile correctional facilities and “get tough” policies, are less effective and cost more than proactive approaches (Leone, Quinn, and Osher 2002). Moreover, there is widespread agreement that multiagency collaboration is essential to effectively serve youth with mental health needs and that failure to do so leads to a host of problems, including gaps in service, redundancy, and contradictory approaches to service (Pullman et al. 2010). Youth Characteristics Youth at risk for involvement with the juvenile corrections system present with a range of educational and mental health issues that affect the services they require. To understand the complicated needs of youth, we must first consider these characteristics, as well as common risk factors. For example, youth with the special education classification...

Share