APA Condemns Trying Juveniles in Adult Courts

Children are not just short adults, even when they are accused of violent crimes. The question of whether young children should be tried as adults in capital cases arose again recently in cases from two states, prompting APA to issue a statement reiterating its opposition to trying juveniles in adult criminal courts.

In one case, a 9-year-old Arizona boy was charged with shooting his father and his father's housemate to death. In Pennsylvania, an 11-year-old boy stands accused of shooting his father's pregnant girlfriend, and prosecutors are weighing whether to try him as an adult.

The younger boy, who was 8 at the time of the crime in November 2008, avoided trial as an adult by pleading guilty to negligent homicide. Sentencing is pending, but the boy will remain under court supervision, and possibly in detention, until he turns 18.

“I was appalled by the fact that this child was allowed by his attorney and the judge to plead guilty in this case,” said APA President Nada Stotland, M.D., in an interview with Psychiatric News.“ Anyone can understand that a 9-year-old doesn't understand enough to make that decision.”

Many juveniles do not comprehend the consequences of their actions, either when committing a crime or in entering a plea, nor do they understand their legal rights and the lasting impact of criminal conviction on their lives, said Stotland. In fact, the Arizona boy's plea has been criticized by some, including his mother, for just that reason. He had also been interrogated alone by police, violating another of Stotland's points, that young children should not be questioned by police or courts unless a parent or guardian is present.

“We need to be clear that not all bad behavior is related to a psychiatric disorder, but an accused child should be evaluated to rule it out,” she said. Children who commit crimes are often the victims of neglect and abuse, said Stotland. In each case of young children accused of a violent crime, there should be an inquiry into the child's history and circumstances to determine whether signs of abuse, neglect, and/or psychiatric problems were overlooked until the alleged crime occurred. Treating these children as adults, especially by processing them through a criminal justice system designed to deal with adults accused of crimes, makes it harder for them to rebuild their lives.

The status of the two boys exemplifies the conflict between the punitive, adversarial view of young defendants that typified juvenile courts in the 1980s and 1990s and research showing that the brains of teenagers and young adults are not fully developed, leading to more impulsivity.

Juveniles aged 15 and younger are significantly more likely than older adolescents and young adults to be impaired in ways that compromise their ability to serve as competent defendants in criminal proceedings, the APA statement pointed out. Also, they should never be allowed to waive their right to an attorney.

Both boys were held initially in isolation in adult detention centers because juvenile and adult prisoners are not supposed to be housed together. APA believes that children should not be subjected to such isolation, a form of punishment that is likely to produce lasting psychiatric symptoms.

“Those who are ultimately incarcerated in adult jails are often the victims of violent assault and suicide and are 34 percent more likely to be rearrested than those retained in the juvenile system,” Stotland noted.

The APA news release “Incarcerated Juveniles Belong in Juvenile Facilities” is posted at<www.psych.org/MainMenu/Newsroom/NewsReleases/2009NewsReleases/IncarceratedJuveniles.aspx>.▪