Posts Tagged ‘prevention’

Smart on Crime: Interview with Jamie Courtorielle [video]

When you have the opportunity to learn from someone who has ‘been there’… take it! This week, we had the honour of welcoming and hosting Jamie Courtorielle in Waterloo Region. Jamie is cycling across Canada in order to raise awareness about addictions and the destruction it is causing in our families, communities, and most of all, our youth. Jamie spent 3 days in our communities visiting youth programs like R.O.O.F and inREACH, meeting area politicians and spending time at the Weejeendimin Native Resource Centre. Our regular guest blogger, Frank Johnson, sat down with Jamie one afternoon to pick his brain on a few questions.

I’ll let you hear from Jamie, in his own words.

1 + 1 = Crime prevention in school

As an educator I used to dread August because of all the back to school ads. Why were we rushing summer? Now that the ads have officially begun I guess it’s time to think about how schools can advance the work of the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council and its community partners in informing the public and creating momentum for keeping communities safe and thriving. I’m not proposing yet another “add-on” to an overburdened school system that is sometimes seen as the place to solve society’s ills. Schools can help, but we can’t expect teachers to carry the load regarding things like recycling, social justice, bullying, gangs and other worthwhile causes. Rather, we need to partner with them and build upon opportunities that already exist within the curriculum.

For instance, students at the secondary level often wonder about the relevance of Mathematics, frequently asking teachers “when am I ever going to use this in real life?” Here’s a thought…with the recent publication of the latest crime rate statistics from StatsCan and the media attention given to the decline in crime with some notable exceptions, why is there still a significant proportion of the population worried about crime? How can the rates of crime and their severity be graphed? What can explain the differences in regions? How can we compare them visually? Can we broaden the discussion through an interdisciplinary approach with History, Sociology or Philosophy classes working with Math classes to analyze data and formulate possible interventions that may be less costly than incarceration? What are the costs of incarceration vs early intervention? Can these be graphed? What about the rate of recidivism for certain crimes? Using the interdisciplinary approach, teachers from diverse subject areas work together to create a seamless and timely approach to learning using current events and materials. Guest speakers could also be brought in and debates staged so that students begin to develop a deeper awareness not only of the issues, but the use of language to effectively message a position.

Single discipline courses like History, Philosophy and Sociology offer several opportunities to discuss social and government policy that can be related to issues of crime prevention such as corrections, roots of crime, gangs, sentencing and the political responses to fear of crime. Not only will students better appreciate the complexity of these issues related to the core curriculum they must cover, but they will have the added benefit of becoming better informed voters. Teachers can devote a few minutes at the beginning of the day or each class to discuss current events. Technology exists to bring up online versions of major newspapers or other media outlets so that students who don’t have access to a daily paper or device can view breaking news. A few minutes each week, if not every day, will add variety to the lesson and engage students by helping them see the relevance of their learning. As a History teacher, students used to revel in getting me ‘off topic’ but to a History teacher who sees History as the totality of human experience, he/she can easily tie events together with the current day’s lesson.

Many schools already partner with local agencies in offering programs on emotions management, anti-bullying, roots of empathy, what some might call “soft skills”. Emotional self-regulation and awareness of our actions, along with an understanding of the adolescent brain help students appreciate the gifts and challenges this age brings. Youth crime can often be attributed to a lack of emotional management directly attributed to their still developing brains. How else to explain the phenomenon of ‘sexting” where young people send sexually explicit images of themselves, unaware that once out “there” they can be forwarded to others, making this a criminal offence? Not only that, but photos of this type never really disappear and may come back to haunt the young (or even older person, Anthony Weiner for example). Working with police and other agencies students themselves can take the lead in educating their peers about the dangers and consequences of the dark side of social media. Online bullying is yet another example and schools can play a role in reducing the rate of these occurrences.

Schools offer several occasions for healthy choices in terms of teams, arts, volunteer activities, social justice initiatives and so on. These help fill the void of boredom that can be a precursor to criminal activity.

There are several more avenues for schools and crime prevention networks to work together to create safe and caring communities. But, it’s can’t be up to schools alone. What can you do to help?

Author: Frank Johnson is a regular guest writer for Smart on Crime in Waterloo Region. Frank is a retired principal with the local Catholic school board, a dad, and sometimes runner who possesses an irreverent sense of humour that periodically gets him in trouble. He lives in Waterloo, Ontario.

Frank Johnson’s writing reflects his own opinions and do not necessarily reflect the views or official positions of the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council.

Who decides? Supporting community led grassroots solutions to youth violence

Guest blog post from Fanis Juma Radstake
In response to the July Toronto shootings, it was reported that the Toronto Police Chief, the Ontario Premier and the Toronto Mayor held a meeting that resulted in a decision to continue to fund an increased police presence in Toronto neighbourhoods that are affected by youth violence. This will be done by securing ongoing funding for the Toronto Anti-Violence Intervention Strategy (TAVIS). In March of 2012, it was reported in the Toronto Star that TAVIS, a program created by Toronto Police Chief Blair, operates by “targeting violent areas with officers who stop, question and document at a higher rate than regular officers”.  The same report also revealed that “in each of the city’s 72 patrol zones, blacks are more likely than whites to be stopped and carded. The likelihood increases in areas that are predominantly white”. TAVIS will continue to receive $5 million per year for the deployment of police into the poor Toronto neighbourhoods affected by crime. While reading these reports, I can’t help but question what fraction of those dollars could be effective in providing mental health support, educational support or youth employment opportunities in urban immigrant communities. It still leaves me with a questions that lingers: Who says that what our beautiful children need is more police?

As an African immigrant mother with a young black son and community organizer working with the African Canadian Association of Waterloo Region and Area, I am concerned about the disproportionate rate of African youth incarceration that we are experiencing in our community and in neighbouring Ontario urban immigrant communities. In rural Ontario and in white suburban neighborhoods a youth is far less likely to become system involved than a visible minority youth in the city even if they commit the same crime.  We know that teenagers who become involved in the correction system at an early age instead of receiving education and employment supports, addictions and/or mental health services and other tangible opportunities for success are more likely to commit a violent crime in the future. We also know that children and youth in low-income urban communities where most of our African immigrant communities reside are less likely to have access to the same educational opportunities and social supports as youth living in middle-income suburbs, and rural communities. As community leaders we are able recognize that our elected officials and public servants have weighty responsibilities while responding to incidences of youth violence in affected neighbourhoods. But we do want to see a balanced approach that recognizes the value of investing in protective factors that increase chances of wellness and success for ALL youth.

We need to support existing community-led early intervention programming that work; homework support programs, green collar summer jobs for youth, cultural-based community and family services and neighbourhood based youth centres. These efforts are often self-led by affected urban immigrant communities who are trying to support their children and youth. The Somali community is working so hard in Toronto with very little resources to engage their youth after school. The same kind of community-led efforts are being made in other Ontario urban centers including the Waterloo Region. Some of these programs can serve up to 100+ children on a school evening and run on as little as $5,000 to $10,000 dollars per year per site.  Also in the Waterloo Region, the African Community Wellness Initiative has worked with community partners and on minimal resources to develop four community garden sites with the intent of creating employment opportunities for our youth.

No child is born with a propensity to commit crime. Research has shown that “the positive growth and adaptation of newcomer youth are dependent on the personal, social, and economic resources available to the individual, as well as to his or her family and community” (To Build Hope: Overcoming the Challenges Facing Newcomer Youth At-Risk in Ontario, Kilbride & Anisef, 2001).  I believe that we need to invest more intentionally in the personal, social and economic well-being of young people to prevent youth crime and violence. Parents and cultural leaders from affected communities take seriously the needs of our families and youth and we are working hard to re-create the supportive networks that are interrupted during the settlement process. As community leaders, we are not asking or waiting for handouts, we seek and develop our own solutions for the protection and safety of our youth; and we almost always do so with very minimal resources. As June Jordan wrote in her 1956 Poem to South African Women; “we are the ones we’ve been waiting for”!

This is a mobilizing call for the voices of Ontario mothers of immigrant youth from affected communities; we need to rally in support for wellness promoting community efforts and the protection of our youth. We also call on our allies from all sectors to join in the conversation and gain an understanding of the proven alternative approaches to preventing youth violence in our cities. If this concerns you and you want more information on how to join, support or start a local mobilization for the protection of immigrant youth in your Ontario city, connect with us.

Fanis Juma Radstake is an African born immigrant and mother living in the Waterloo Region. She is also a community organizer with the African Community Wellness Initiative that seeks to increase immigrant participation in promoting community wellness. Currently Fanis is involved in promoting urban agriculture opportunities for immigrant youth in the Waterloo Region through Young City Growers. Fanis can be contacted via the African Canadian Association of Waterloo Region.

This article reflects the writer’s own opinions and do not necessarily reflect the views or official positions of the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council.

Why a Trauma-informed System of Care is Better for Children and Youth

This week, I joined KidsLINK and community leaders from across Waterloo Region and the child and youth services sector in Ontario to talk about trauma – really, a conversation of hope and change, challenge and change…. and of course, prevention.

This was my first experience hearing from Dr. Ann Jennings – an advocate for changing our social and human service systems to be equipped to deal with early childhood trauma. Dr. Jennings used the 15 year Adverse Childhood Experiences study to outline the impacts of childhood trauma and the long term consequences of unaddressed trauma. The parallels to “root causes” of crime and “risk factors” for crime that informs the work of the Waterlo Region Crime Prevention Council were not lost on me! I felt like Dr. Jennings was speaking our language!!

What spoke volumes was Dr. Jennings’ story of her daughter Anna.

“Anna Jennings was sexually abused when she was less than three years old. This was the first of several abuses that occurred over her lifetime, and put a confused, frightened child into a mental health system that neither recognized nor treated Anna’s real problem. Diagnosed “schizophrenic”.. she was institutionalized for more than 12 years from age 15 to 32. Although she attempted to communicate the “awful things” that had happened to her, there was no one to listen, understand or help her. She took her life on October 24, 1992, on a back ward of a state mental hospital.”
(http://www.theannainstitute.org/a-bio.html)

Dr. Jennings went on to outline the “wall of missed opportunities” that took place over the course of Anna’s life. The sheer number of dates, warning signs and professional involvements could have literally filled a wall. Had these opportunities not been missed, her daughter might have been helped and might still be alive today.

Why is it that we can pinpoint – after the fact – all the places in a person’s life where change could have made a difference, yet our services, systems, families, schools and communities can’t seem break through at those critical moments?

This got me wondering – what if our entire social support systems was equipped to recognize and deal with trauma in our children and youth. Dr. Jennings, quoting a colleague, suggested that if we could effectively do that, we could reduce the size of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V) to that of a pamphlet. I suspect there might also be fewer people in the criminal justice system and in prison.

Research tells us that a high percentage of people in prisons, those with addictions and many who have mental health issues have stories of trauma such as abuse, witness to abuse, neglect, and early trauma in a household environment. Now, I’ve never been to prison, but I’ve visited enough of them to know that it is not a place where one could not effectively deal with the impact of trauma in a helpful way. Trauma-informed practices are showing evidence that another way is not only possible, but also practical and cost effective.

Through the ACE Study, it is estimated that the long term consequences of unaddressed trauma (disease, disability, suicide, chronic health problems and social problems) currently stands at $103,754,017,492.00. Yes, you read that correctly. That’s over 103 BILLION (US) dollars.

Now there’s a ” wall of missed opportunity”. Taking a prevention-based approach could save billions of dollars and help people in a healthier way.

Smart on crime, indeed.

We need to talk about Justice… and Injustice

And while we’re at it, let’s also talk about prevention, addictions and compassion.

I suppose you’re wondering, where am I going with all of this? Well, the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council recently held the 34th Annual Justice Dinner, an awareness-raising event about local justice issues. Our guest was The Honourable Justice Kofi Barnes, who started the very first Drug Treatment Court in 1998 in Toronto.

I was expecting a chronology and history about the initiation and implementation of the first Drug Treatment Court. However, I found myself leaning in a bit closer when Justice Barnes told his own personal story – how he was handed the task of finding alternative ways of dealing with the revolving door of people in courts and corrections who clearly had underlying addictions or mental health issues. Admittedly, fueled, in part, by a desire to preserve his career, and in part inspired by his own father, Justice Barnes spent 4 years developing an alternative ‘problem solving court’ which, 14 years later, has grown to more than 10 drug treatment and mental health courts in Canada.

What struck me most was Justice Barnes’ insistence that we need to move beyond our narrow view of ‘justice’ as ‘the letter of the law’ in every case. Rather, ‘justice’ must find a balance for the person who has committed a crime, the victim and our community as a whole. Rightly, he claims that it serves none of these if we never deal with the root cause of a problem. Regular Smart on Crime guest blogger Frank Johnson, put it this way:

“Drug treatment and mental health treatment courts are two approaches where the particular needs of individuals that may have contributed to criminal behaviour are addressed in a supportive yet accountable environment. In these courts the emphasis is on preserving the dignity of those involved with crime by holding them accountable while providing them with the tools to make changes in their lives, where change is possible. This is a recognition that a ‘cookie-cutter’ approach to justice has not and will not reduce crime or the recidivism rate. It makes social and economic sense, as the more alternatives to prison we create, the more benefit we see to taxpayers by reducing the costs of crime.”

Justice Barnes admits that he had a hard time convincing his colleagues in the courts, corrections and law enforcement communities that this approach could work. But gradually, as people from these systems had opportunities to participate in the alternative processes and saw the humanity present there, they became easy converts.

Justice Barnes’ story of personal connection and the potential for system change has stuck with me now for days. In fact, it reminded me of this Ted Talk by Bryan Stevenson “We need to talk about an injustice“. While Stevenson is a lawyer in the southern United States and daily confronts the issue of race in the U.S Criminal Justice system, the parallels between his talk and that of Justice Barnes is not lost on me.

They both believe in the need for justice that is based on hope and tied to dignity and compassion. They both believe that each of us is more than the worst thing we’ve ever done. They both believe that each of us has a basic fundamental human dignity that must be respected by law. They both believe that our whole community is made stronger when we use smart on crime approaches that address the greatest injustices.

While it’s the more challenging place to be and to work, it will ultimately make us more human. And isn’t that what we should all be working for?

I’m interested in hearing your thoughts about the Honourable Justice Barnes’ talk at the Justice Dinner. What has stuck with you? What inspired you or challenged you? Let us know.

In the meantime, watch the talk from Bryan Stevenson.

Let’s be Smart on Bullying

On this, the international Day of Pink – a day of celebrating diversity and for standing up against bullying, discrimination, homophobia and transphobia in our schools, workplaces and our communities – it’s only fitting to have reflection from someone who’s been there.

A new movie has recently debuted in theatres and has won critical acclaim. It’s called “Bully” and I plan to see it. In the meantime though, I can say that I have lived it. Likely many of you have as well. We all have our stories of how we were bullied and, maybe even how we bullied others. Those are the harder ones to come to grips with and admit. As adults, our bullying may have been done within our work organizations. Some seems to be so prevalent as to be almost institutional. It seems hypocritical to decry bullying in our schools when we allow it to exist in our work environments or homes. I’ve worked in those environments and, truth be told, probably contributed to them; climates in offices where exclusion is a norm, where gossip is an accepted practice, where co-workers are demonized for differences in beliefs, attitudes, capabilities or appearance.
Bullying isn’t confined to school hallways and classrooms or through social media, though one would be forgiven for thinking that based upon the media coverage given the horrific stories about the consequences of such behaviour. To think that young people opt to end their lives rather than face another day of torment is just so sad. As an educator and parent my heart breaks each time I learn that another child or teen has been victimized to the extent that there only hope of escape is death.

In Waterloo Region we are focused on being “smart on crime” and strive to be “smart on bullying” as well. Both school boards and the Region of Waterloo Public Health have implemented the “Imagine a School Without Bullying” program (most commonly referred to as the “Imagine” program) which focuses on teaching emotional literacy to student through approaches that are embedded into the academic program. It is based on the core values of justice, compassion, respect, inclusion and equality. School staff have been trained to work with their students and have a wealth of resources to draw upon. The Region of Waterloo Public Health has done an incredible job in its partnership with school boards in putting this program together and the program has been recognized far and wide because of the array of supports to schools in this effort. At this point the program is currently directed at elementary schools and all secondary schools have developed anti-bullying initiatives that are unique to their school environments. As a school principal for several years, I know that the effects of bullying don’t stop at the school’s boundaries. Those memories travel with victims and perpetrators, often as emotional scars that stay until they are healed through understanding, love and perhaps professional intervention.

Still, bullying exists. In his book, “The Better Angels of our Nature”, Steven Pinker noted that bullying has always existed in schools and likely will continue to do so, despite our best efforts. Though it’s been awhile since I read it, I think it has to do with the innate sense or need for some to be dominant over others, some of which is likely biological and some sociological. We see examples of bullies in movies and books and we all cheer when they get their comeuppance. Who didn’t do a fist pump when the bully was dealt with in movies such as “Bad Day at Black Rock”, “The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance” or “Back to the Future”? Okay, I am dating myself but these are classics. Now, before you go on to Netflix in the hope of finding an answer to bullying in these movies, I need to forewarn you that, in each instance there’s a level of violence where the bullied takes on the bully. I am not suggesting that’s the preferred strategy to use; far from it. Better ones are being used locally. Restorative Justice is a process developed from the healing circles associated with Canada’s aboriginal population and religious traditions and practices from our Mennonite community. In Restorative Justice the focus is on victim rights and needs being recognized by the offender who, along with community members, works to take responsibility and ownership for his/her actions to develop a plan that make things right. Much of our legal system is retributive, not restorative. Gandhi once said that if we adopt a position of “eye for an eye” we will eventually be left with a world where everyone ends up blind.

Recently the Ontario government introduced anti-bullying legislation known as the “Accepting Schools Act” which has incited controversy because it addresses the issue of bullying related to LGBTQ youth as part of the population of students being bullied. Some Catholic school parents are upset because they feel the government is moving into areas they feel are best left in the home. Attached to this is the issue of what to call “gay-straight alliances” in Catholic schools. While I support the right of parents and students to hold divergent views, let’s not lose sight of the fact that kids are being bullied at school and on the Internet and sexual orientation is a significant factor.

My question is a larger one. Is legislation the answer? The cynic in me says that if we have to resort to legislation we may have already lost the battle against bullying. However, given all of the tragedies associated with bullying it is something the government is forced to do. Parents, victims and schools will welcome some further rules and consequences. However, it seems to me that we need to frame the issue differently. We need to start at the beginning, not at the end. I have always been a proponent of the Invitational Education approach  associated with Dr William Purkey. His theory is that if schools (and I believe any business or institution where people come together for a common purpose) bases all they do on the concepts of trust, respect, intentionality, optimism and caring and that these are demonstrated in their policies, processes, programs, environments involving the people they work with and serve, they will create intentionally inviting places where all people are accepted. In this approach we will find a better answer than legislation. There is no doubt that after seeing the movie “Bully” there will be greater support for new rules, processes and sanctions. But folks, the answer is not “out there” in the realm of government. It is inside each of us. It is in our beliefs, attitudes and actions; it’s in our world view.

How do we view the people around us? Do we want them to succeed? Do we want to help them do so, even if it means the effort costs us? I am not pointing a finger at the government or the efforts of our MPP Elizabeth Witmer who are deeply concerned enough to take action. They are as frustrated with bullying as the rest of us; their responses are limited by their roles. Legislation is what they do. As Abraham Maslow has said, “If your only tool is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail.” While legislation may well be a necessary tool in the box, it can’t be the only one. Though Waterloo Region has been smarter on bullying in its approach, there is still much to do.

There’s no simple answer to bullying. It is as complex as the humans who practise it or are victimized by it. I think what is needed is a fresh look at how we want our institutions and relationships to be. It’s a bigger issue than bullying. Bullying is symptomatic of relationships, schools and organizational structures that are not functioning at their peak. The Imagine framework and Invitational Education, along with the principles of Restorative Justice could be the starting place. It won’t be easy because these programs call for a cultural shift. They get at our thinking and even deeper; they get at how we live our lives. However, without change at this fundamental level, no legislated behaviour will take hold. We need to make bullying so socially unacceptable, so anti-cultural that it is a contravention of the way we are in our schools, places of work and our homes; it is the exception, not the norm. As Richard Rohr says, “We don’t think ourselves into a new way of living; we live ourselves into a new way of thinking.”

If we place our hopes in legislation I fear we are already lost.

Maybe you think differently. Let me know.

Author: Frank Johnson is a regular guest writer for Smart on Crime in Waterloo Region. Frank is a retired principal with the local Catholic school board, a dad, and sometimes runner who possesses an irreverent sense of humour that periodically gets him in trouble. He lives in Waterloo, Ontario.

Frank Johnson’s writing reflects his own opinions and do not necessarily reflect the views or official positions of the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council.

Improving Outcomes for Youth Leaving Residential Mental Health Programs

It costs a lot of money to provide treatment in a residential facility for children facing mental health issues. For a typical 6 – 8 month stay, costs can range from $20,000 to $38,400. But Social Work professors at Wilfrid Laurier University (WLU) found that after spending these resources, it still doesn’t seem to provide enough support to help kids transition from the treatment program back to their normal lives.

For the past three years, WLU researchers have been examining the community adaptation of over 200 youth as they left long term intensive children’s mental health programs in Ontario. They found youth leaving these treatment programs face challenges in adapting to community life after treatment. The findings are available in an executive summary, summary report, and full report.

With these issues identified the researchers set off to find a solution and they come up with the type of solution that makes policy wonks drool. They suggest youth transitioning out of residential mental health treatment should be provided programming that offers four things:

• Youth and education advocates
• Tutoring supports for at least 45 hours
• Parent training and support groups
• Youth skills development courses

You may be reading that and thinking what is to drool over in this proposal, it seems so logical? This is the beauty of the plan from a policy perspective, it’s a straightforward approach requiring minimal resources and most importantly, the program is based in good evidence.

It’s also effective from a crime prevention approach. Children leaving treatment are at greater risk for delinquent behavior. In addition, one half of the individuals in a mental health treatment program will return to the care of family and children services likely ending up in a group home placement. Criminal behaviour for youth in group homes is extremely high. Providing youth leaving mental health treatment facilities with the support they need can prevent them from being involved in the justice system.

Preventing crime does not need to be flashy, it just needs to work. It needs to be smart on crime.

Penny for your thoughts… Crime is Costly

Crime costs Canadians. It reaches deep into our wallets and our overall quality of life. And who is doing most of this spending? Mainly victims. When we crunch the cost of policing, corrections and courts, we’re looking at $31.4 billion in 2008. For pain and suffering, we’re looking at $68.2 billion. That’s billions people (and if I could stand on top of a mountain and sing these numbers – knowing that you’d all hear me – I would).

Victims are forced to spend, spend, spend. In fact, victims carry the majority of the financial burden, spending a whooping $14.3 billion in 2008. They pay for lost wages, stolen property, medical attention, and the list goes on. Once again, that’s billions.

So why is this important you ask? It’s important because the “tougher” we get on crime, the more we spend reacting to crimes that have already happened.

The more we spend reacting, the less we spend being smart on crime, on investing in our communities, and building resilience in our kids.

Judge Barry Stuart in a radio interview on The Current asked an interesting question and speaks to how we can be smart on crime, “When are we going to stop spending money on the justice system, money that needs to be spent on questions of poverty, education, health, opportunity? These are the things that are going to change the flow of people into our jails”. (Judge Barry Stuart’s interview begins at minute 4:45 in the program).

Now we know that crime and the criminal justice system are expensive to taxpayers, especially victims. But aren’t poverty reduction strategies, more effective education, and increased health care support expensive? And how are we suppose to believe people like Judge Stuart, who tell us that this will reduce the amount we spend on jails?

The Washington State Institute for Public Policy can answer that for us. As a nonpartisan group, they are well suited to develop a cutting edge-model to identify evidence-based policies that give taxpayers the best return on their investment. And it just so happens that the model has extensive experience in the criminal justice system. Their cost-benefit analysis of the criminal justice system (United States) showed that efforts redirected toward proven crime-prevention and treatment programs result in:

• Reduced crime rates AND juvenile-arrest rates in comparison to the US average
• Lower incarceration rates compared to the national average
• Eliminated need for new prisons, closure of adult prison & juvenile-detention facility
• A saving of $1.3 BILLION per two-year budget cycle (there’s that billion again)

When we invest in prevention, we invest in safer, healthier and more sustainable futures for our kids.

Crime is costly… but it doesn’t have to be.

**Additional resource: “Rights for Victims of Crime: Rebalancing Justice” by Irvin Waller.

Author: Kayla Follet – Born in St. John’s, Newfoundland, Kayla Follett studied at St. Thomas University in Fredericton, New Brunswick where she completed an honours degree in Criminology and Criminal Justice. Upon graduation she travelled and worked in different community settings. She is now working toward her Master of Social Work degree from Wilfrid Laurier University and happily fulfilling her Practicum Placement at the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council.

Does Readiness for School Make Safer Communities?

“A Community Fit for Children Interim Update: Results of the 2010 Early Development Instrument and Kindergarten Parent Survey for Waterloo Region” was shared with members of the Alliance for Children and Youth at its most recent meeting. The introduction states, “This report paints a picture of how well Senior Kindergarten children are doing in Waterloo Region.It focuses on data gathered through the Early Development Instrument (EDI) and the Kindergarten Parent Survey (KPS), and compares the results of 2004, 2007 and 2010 data”. Later on it explains that the “EDI measures readiness to learn in five domains of child development: physical health and well-being, social competence, emotional maturity, language and cognitive development,and communication skills and general knowledge.”

The EDI is completed by teachers based upon their observations of the students in front of them. The data is gathered by school and community to paint a picture of the readiness of children across the Region with the added perspective of a neighbourhood by neighbourhood scan so that social agencies and planners can be proactive in programming to support those areas where young people are doing well, and the allow for early intervention to address areas of need.

How does this relate to being smart on crime you might ask? if we accept the premise that a key to crime prevention is in approaches tailored to the needs of a specific neighbourhood, then this information allows social agencies and schools to develop programs to counter deficits that may be exposed as a result of the surveys. For example, in the subdomain of social competence with peers  “there has been a consistently smaller percentage of children who are ready in comparison to Ontario” since 2004. Social competence refers to skills related to managing behaviour in social situations. Targeted interventions that address this issue, while not discounting impulsivity related to brain development, may lead to a decreased need for behavioural consequences later in their school life or in community interactions with others that could result in poor choices leading to criminal charges. For the subdomain of aggressive behaviour (including getting into physical fights, laughing at the discomfort of others, bullying or being disobedient) the report indicates that “the percentage of children ready in this subdomain increased significantly between 2007 and 2010 and was not significantly different from the Ontario baseline”. This is good news as we know that getting to young people as soon as possible and investing in their well-being helps us create a safer community for all in later years.

Another good news story is that the EDI shows the language and cognitive development scores from the latest data indicate that in 2010 there were “significantly less children scoring low than in Ontario as a whole. Higher academic scores leads to greater school success which means increased engagement in school. Down the line this leads to higher graduation rates that allow young people a greater chance to meet career goals. Again, this leads to a safer society by addressing at least one root cause of crime, low education levels. More work needs to be done in the subdomain of communication skills and general knowledge where children in Waterloo Region are still scoring lower than in Ontario as a whole.

Knowing what we know from this snapshot of school readiness, all levels of government, community agencies and service clubs can be even more intentional about funding and placing programs in high needs neighbourhoods. For example, an asset or strength-based approach to community development can focus on certain neighbourhoods where needs are most pronounced. The use of data to inform decisions like these is critical because it allows tailored solutions. Much like a doctor might prescribe a specific drug to fight a certain infection instead of a broad-based antibiotic we too need to use the information contained in reports like “The Community Fit for Children” to design interventions that can be more readily evaluated for success.

I know some might argue that it’s quite a leap from the school readiness of kindergarten children to crime prevention initiatives or that I am implying that certain deficits in identified neighbourhoods are directly linked to crime. Let me be clear, this is not my intent. My argument is that we know early intervention is the best prevention, therefore, we need to look at all of the data available to us in order to be proactive earlier so that we prevent problems at a later age. We owe that to all children and their parents.

What are your thoughts?

Author: Frank Johnson is a regular guest writer for Smart on Crime in Waterloo Region. Frank is a retired principal with the local Catholic school board, a dad, and sometimes runner who possesses an irreverent sense of humour that periodically gets him in trouble. He lives in Waterloo, Ontario.

Frank Johnson’s writing reflects his own opinions and do not necessarily reflect the views or official positions of the Waterloo Region Crime Prevention Council.

The Face of Youth Court

As someone lucky enough to be a mere observer of the criminal justice system and not a participant, my curiosity was peaked when I heard a young offender (let’s call him Henry) speak about his experiences and the wisdom gained as a result. Henry and I met recently to give me a close-up view of the perspective of someone who has been affected by the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA), an act that has been widely praised for the balance it strikes between compassion and consequence. Much of the rationale given by the Minister of Justice in regards to the changes to the Act, as part of Bill C-10, is in regards to what he perceives to be “out of control youth”. Now, in my time as a school principal I probably met many of the young people who, for a period of time, might fall into this category.  But, isn’t anyone who commits a crime temporarily out of control?

Everyone has a different story so legislation like Bill C-10 that severely reduces the discretion judges can use knowing the story behind the youth and the crime is disturbing. Judges need this discretion because every person coming before the bench is unique and, what works for some won’t work for all. Some young offenders never come into contact with the courts or police ever again because they have benefitted from the alternative measures and diversion programs designed to do just that. Whereas others, like Henry, aren’t helped by them, not because they aren’t good programs but participation in them requires a commitment not every offender is able to give because they aren’t ready for it. Human nature is incredibly complex, requiring a nuanced approach that C-10 does not seem to offer.

Henry allowed me to hear his story one afternoon recently. In order to protect his identity I have changed some of the facts in his story. Henry was an inmate in the correctional system more than once. He has seen it up close.  Not a pretty place, though it can bring structure and support to some who might need it. There are some guards who are helpful and hopeful and others who are disrespectful of inmates and abuse their authority through the arbitrary loss of points inmates can use for privileges. It’s not an easy place to maintain one’s dignity, particularly with overcrowding (which is already seen in many jails and prisons and will only worsen under C-10). Being brought to court for remands and made to wait hours in cuffs and shackles for the appearance and then to wait again for the return to jail was frustrating. Made to sit on a concrete bench for hours doesn’t help one maintain a sense of dignity. For Henry court was a frustrating experience because it seemed no one was interested in his side of the story as his lawyer did most of the interaction with the judge and court officials.

The adolescent brain is still in a stage of maturation and has not fully developed the capability to reason thoughtfully. Many young people don’t take the time to reason out the impulse to act out, whether it results in a theft, a fight, a threat or a robbery. Steven Pinker, in his book “The Better Angels of our Nature” says “The arc of crime in adolescence is the outcome of these inner forces [sensation-seeking and competitiveness] pushing and pulling in different directions (p.600-601). Young people, if Henry is an exemplar, do not always take the time to reason out the deterrence factors of the penalties associated with laws. It’s not necessarily in their biological nature during adolescence. It is evolving and not fully-formed.

As part of the program at inREACH, Henry has learned about brain development and the role it has played in his discernment process. Through the lessons learned there he has come to personify what Pinker says…”In the long run, self-control gains the upper hand when it is fortified by experience which teaches adolescents that thrill-seeking and competitiveness have costs and that self-control has rewards” (p 601).

Not only has he learned valuable lessons himself but he hopes others can too. He especially hopes police will take every opportunity to be people and not just their roles. He hopes that more can be gained by listening and offering respect than a heavy hand or preconceptions about youth. In his view, some officers think fear is better than respect. Thankfully that has not been the attitude of every officer or correctional staff member. He also learned that family is more important than friends, maybe making truth of the old saying that “blood is thicker than water”. Henry’s family has been there for him, at each court appearance and with regular visits when he was incarcerated. He has come to a deeper appreciation of them.

Henry’s is just one story and I wish I could tell it more fully but I don’t want to take the chance of anyone identifying him because of this article. There are many stories of youth who haven’t had the support of family, school or programs like inREACH. Henry has taken the support he’s been given and made himself a better person. He hopes to use his experiences to help others as a career and will likely be a positive influence in the lives of many others. He is resilient. My worry is for those for whom the harsher strictures of C-10 will turn the benefits of the YCJA into something destructive.