Critical Intervention Point:

Initial Contact with Law Enforcement

Overview of Intervention Point

There are essentially two types of young offenders. Status offenders are youth who engage in behavior, such as running away from home, skipping school or breaking curfew that if committed by an adult, would not be considered illegal. Delinquents are those youth under the age of 18 who engage in behaviors, such as shoplifting, trespassing, and assault, that if committed by an adult would be deemed illegal (Coalition for Juvenile Justice, 2000).

If a youth is suspected of committing a status or delinquency offense, the police are frequently the first to intervene. At this point, law enforcement officials play a pivotal role in determining whether the case proceeds into the juvenile justice system, or whether the case can be diverted, often into alternative programs (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention [OJJDP], 2004). Generally, the police have a fair amount of discretion in determining how best to respond to the situation. The Coalition for Juvenile Justice (2000) identifies the most common practices used by law enforcement upon an encounter with a delinquent youth or a status offender:

1. Street corner adjustment: Police officers use verbal persuasion to order a youth to go home in response to mischievous behavior.
2. Station house adjustment: Police officers take the youth to police headquarters where the youth is sternly warned by the police to improve their conduct and released. No official complaint is filed with the juvenile court.
3. Station house adjustment with parental involvement: Police officers take a misbehaving youth to police headquarters, and their names and addresses are often entered into a police database. Parents or guardians are asked to come to police headquarters where the youth is sternly warned by the police to improve their conduct. The youth is released to the parents or guardian once the matter is discussed with the youth and the parent or guardian. No official complaint is filed with the juvenile court.
4. Police Diversion: Police officers bring a youth engaging in disruptive behavior to police head quarters and agree not to file an official complaint with the juvenile court if the youth agrees to certain conditions, such as obtaining specific services or performing community service.
5. Formal Complaint: Police officers file a formal complaint or charges with the juvenile court. This moves the case formally into the jurisdiction of the juvenile justice system.

In 2000, twenty percent of all youth arrested were handled within the police department and then released. Seventy percent of all youth arrested were referred to juvenile court (OJJDP, 2004). Most cases are referred to juvenile court by law enforcement officials (84% in 2000), while the remainder of cases are referred to court by either parents, victims, schools or probation officers (OJJDP, 2004).

Mental Health Needs and Issues

Often, a youth’s disruptive or delinquent behavior is the result or a symptom of a mental health problem that has gone undetected and untreated. The problem may manifest in behavior that brings the youth to the attention of law enforcement. Police response at this initial contact has significant implications in determining what happens next to the youth. An opportunity exists at this point for law enforcement, upon an encounter with a youth who appears to have a mental health problem, to connect the youth with emergency mental health services, or refer the youth for mental health screening and evaluation. In some ways, this represents the ideal time to prevent youth with mental disorders from further penetrating the juvenile justice system by diverting them at their earliest stage of justice contact into community-based mental health care. This type of a response, however, requires a number of factors to be in place. First, law enforcement officials either need to be properly trained to identify the signs and symptoms of mental disorder among the youth with whom they are interacting, or mental health professionals need to be available to assist the police in responding to incidents involving youth with mental disorder. Second, it is critical that law enforcement have a place where they can take youth who may require immediate mental health attention.

There is also growing concern that zero tolerance policies within schools are resulting in more youth entering the juvenile justice system for relatively minor infractions that previously had been addressed by school administrators. It is believed that the juvenile justice system is becoming a “dumping ground” for many of these youth (Rimer, 2004). Further support comes from a recent study conducted in Pennsylvania, which found that students with disabilities are referred to the police at twice the rate of others (Lynagh & Mancuso, 2004). School district staff, including school police officers, need to be trained to educate and manage the behavior of students with disabilities, including youth with mental health needs, instead of unnecessarily referring these youth to law enforcement (Browne, 2003).

Recently, there has been much attention given to the idea of training law enforcement officers to better identify and respond to individuals with mental health needs and disorders. Much of the work that has been done in this area has focused on the adult criminal justice population with far less attention being paid to training law enforcement officials to identify the signs and symptoms of mental illness among juveniles. On the adult level, the Criminal Justice/Mental Health Consensus project report, released in 2002 by the Council of State Governments, offers a series of recommended policies and practices aimed at improving the criminal justice response to people with mental illness, including contact with law enforcement. The report recommends, among other things, that law enforcement officers recognize signs and symptoms that may indicate that mental illness is a factor in the incident; that de-escalation techniques be used that are appropriate for people with mental illness; and that area hospitals or mental health facilities be designated as disposition centers to facilitate intake for people with mental illness (Council of State Governments, 2002). In 2004, the TAPA Center for Jail Diversion released a report, “A Guide to Implementing Police-Based Diversion Programs for People with Mental Illness,” which builds on the Consensus report and discusses a series of specialized police approaches to people with mental illness. This report suggests that there are essentially two models of specialized police response. The first model involves specially trained police officers that provide crisis response at the scene, typically referred to as Crisis Intervention Teams (CIT’s). The CIT model, which was created by Major Sam Cochran of the Memphis Police Department, is made up of officers who are specially trained to respond to all crisis calls that involve an individual with mental illness. The core components of the CIT model include 1) selective recruitment and intensive training of police officers who become specialists in crisis intervention and de-escalation; and 2) improved access to mental health care and services. The second model involves a close partnership between police officers and mental health officials who co-respond to the scene (Reuland, 2004). Independent of the specific model, the author suggests that there are three essential elements to establishing a police-based response to people with mental illness: extensive training for law enforcement and mental health staff; justice/mental health partnerships; and an adapted view of the role of the police.

In the absence of any specific work done to date to develop a knowledge base on the issue of police responses for youth with mental health disorders, the work that has been done at the adult level can provide some general guidance. In fact, some communities across the country have initiated specialized programs to assist police when responding to calls or incidents involving youth. In most of these communities, an existing adult program has been expanded to serve juveniles. Colorado operates a CIT program that serves both adults and youth with mental illness. The program has trained hundreds of officers, deputies, and dispatchers on mental illness and de-escalation techniques. Although the program is not specific to youth, crisis calls involving youth accounted for almost 20 percent of the total calls in two pilot sites (Colorado crisis intervention, 2004). Services are provided by partnerships that have been formed by the police, providers, hospitals, and advocates. Another example of effective community partnerships can be found in Rochester , New York, where the Rochester Police Department developed a CIT in 2004. Mental health providers, county government, and the local chapter of the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) offered in-kind support to help train a core team of police  officers to respond to individuals who come to the attention of law enforcement and who are experiencing a psychiatric emergency or increased emotional distress. From its inception, team members were trained to respond to individuals of all ages. The team handles about 600 calls on an annual basis; approximately 10 percent involve juveniles. Ongoing training and clinical consultation is provided during scheduled training days.