System Backgrounds, Psychosocial Characteristics, and Service Access Among Dually Involved Youth: A Los Angeles Case Study. (July 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Dierkhising, Carly B.; Herz, Denise; Hirsch, Rebecca A.; Abbott, Sam
• Is Part Of: Youth violence and juvenile justice. Volume 17:Number 3(2019)
• Page Start: 309
• Page End: 329
• Publication Date: 2019-07
• Subjects: juvenile justice -- child welfare -- service access -- mental health -- dually involved youth; Youth and violence -- United States -- Periodicals; Juvenile justice, Administration of -- United States -- Periodicals; Juvenile delinquency -- United States -- Prevention -- Periodicals; Juvenile corrections -- United States -- Periodicals; 364.360973
• DOI: 10.1177/1541204018790647
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1541-2040

Abstract

Dually involved youth are youth who are concurrently involved in both the child welfare and juvenile justice systems. Dually involved youth require a broader array of services compared to single-system youth though less is known about what types of services youth ultimately access while under the supervision of both systems. The current study examines the juvenile justice and child welfare histories, psychosocial characteristics, and predictors of rearrest among the dually involved population in Los Angeles County ( N = 718) as well as the services youth are referred to and utilize among a subsample of dually involved youth tracked postdisposition ( n = 152). Findings reveal an increased representation of females and an overrepresentation of African Americans among the sample. In fact, African American youth in Los Angeles County are disproportionately dually involved at a rate almost 6 times their general population numbers (7.4% vs. 43%). Youth histories show significant involvement in both systems with 33% of the sample having been arrested prior to the current referral, and youth having an average of 10.8 referrals to child welfare in their past. Youth exhibited high levels of behavioral health issues, which were associated with rearrest. Youth were referred to a broad range of services, though not all of them were accessed. Placement changes and contact with probation officers were identified as both challenges to and facilitators of service access in unique ways.