Explaining Homeless Youths' Criminal Justice ... - Springer Link

Community Ment Health J (2014) 50:135–144 DOI 10.1007/s10597-013-9690-7

ORIGINAL PAPER

Explaining Homeless Youths’ Criminal Justice Interactions: Childhood Trauma or Surviving Life on the Streets? Jamie Rae Yoder • Kimberly Bender • Sanna J. Thompson • Kristin M. Ferguson Badiah Haffejee

•

Received: 12 June 2013 / Accepted: 9 December 2013 / Published online: 13 December 2013 Ó Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Abstract Homeless youth are at increased risk for involvement in the criminal justice system. This study investigated childhood trauma as a risk factor for arrest or jail among a sample of youth seeking services at drop in, shelter, and transitional housing settings, while controlling for more established risk factors including: substance use, peer deviance, and engagement in survival behaviors. Standardized and researcher developed measures collected quantitative data through face-to-face interviews with youth (N = 202). Two sequential logic regression models identified significant predictors of arrest and jail, with a particular interest in the effects of childhood maltreatment. Youth with a history of physical abuse were nearly twice as likely to be arrested and to be jailed compared to nonabused youth, controlling for the significant influence of drug use and survival behaviors. These findings suggest the need for trauma screening and trauma-informed services for homeless youth at risk of illegal behavior.

J. R. Yoder (&) College of Social Work, The Ohio State University, 1947 College Rd, Columbus, OH 43210, USA e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] K. Bender B. Haffejee Graduate School of Social Work, University of Denver, Denver, CO, USA S. J. Thompson School of Social Work, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA K. M. Ferguson Silberman School of Social Work at Hunter College, The City University of New York, New York, NY, USA

Keywords system

Homeless youth Trauma Criminal justice

Literature Review Numerous negative outcomes are associated with youth homelessness, including increased involvement in the criminal justice system (Chapple et al. 2004). Among large samples of homeless youth, more than half report having been arrested at least once (Chapple et al. 2004), and chronic runaways are nearly 3 times more likely to be arrested during adolescence than non-runaways (Kaufman and Widom 1999). With homeless youth committing significantly higher rates of crime compared to their housed counterparts (McCarthy and Hagan 1992), it is crucial to understand more about factors that may contribute to this social problem. Homeless youth involvement in the criminal justice system can be understood through the context of risk and resiliency. The risk and resiliency framework explains how certain internal or external factors promote or constrain positive youth development (Jenson and Fraser 2010). Risk factors are personal, interpersonal, environmental, or external conditions that increase the probability of negative youth behaviors or outcomes (Hawkins et al. 1992; Jenson and Fraser 2010). Conversely, protective factors are youth characteristics or access to external resources that buffer youth against risks (Jenson and Fraser 2010; Wagnild and Young 1993). Given high rates of crime among homeless youth, delinquency prevention programs may benefit from a better understanding of the risk factors associated with criminal justice involvement among homeless youth. Certain risk factors found to be predictive of youth offending in the

123

136

general population also place homeless youth at risk for criminal justice involvement. One particularly salient risk factor is youths’ involvement with delinquent peers. A great deal of research suggests youth with delinquent peer networks are at risk for offending (Warr 2002), and this association is consistent among homeless youth, specifically boys (Chapple et al. 2004). The coercive nature of peer relationships can be responsible for this manifestation, as peer pressure can spur violent offending among homeless youth with low self-control (Baron 2009). Deviant peers can also foster the development of skewed perceptions of harm, resulting in the use of violence and force as methods of self-protection (Baron et al. 2007). Substance use and abuse is another traditional risk factor found among youth in the general population as well as among homeless youth (Barczyk and Thompson 2008; McCarthy and Hagan 1992; Nyamathi et al. 2010; Schwartz et al. 2008). This relationship is of particular concern because homeless youth use and abuse substances at much higher rates than their non-homeless peers (Bousman et al. 2005; Fors and Rojek 1991; Keeshin and Campbell 2011). Researchers have suggested that substance use places youth at risk for offending behaviors because it lowers inhibitions (Chamberlain and Daley 2009) and increases their exposure to criminal situations (Baron 2003, 2004). Heavy use of drugs and alcohol plays a large role in explaining extremely violent behavior among homeless youth (Baron et al. 2007; Baron and Hartnagel 1998). In addition, previous research suggests youth may get caught in a cyclical pattern by which they engage in criminal behaviors to fund their addictions (Bender et al. 2012). Although substance use and delinquent peers are important factors explaining criminal justice system involvement and have received widespread attention in the literature, they are not necessarily exclusive risk factors among homeless youth. A unique set of risk behaviors for homeless youth, termed survival behaviors, have been associated with criminal justice involvement and help explain how delinquency among homeless youth may differ from that of the general population (Ferguson et al. 2011a). Youth living on the streets may be more susceptible to engaging in illegal behaviors because they frequently lack economic resources and perceive themselves to have limited opportunities (Baron and Hartnagel 1998). As such, some homeless youth are not deterred from dangerous situations; rather they feel it is necessary to combat danger by engaging in delinquency because their life often depends on it (McCarthy and Hagan 2005). Homeless youth, particularly transient homeless youth, rely on survival behaviors (drug dealing, prostitution, and theft) because they generate immediate economic returns, can be used in any city, and require fewer commitments, relationships, and responsibilities than traditional employment (Ferguson et al.

123

Community Ment Health J (2014) 50:135–144

2011a). Accordingly, homeless youth frequently engage in panhandling, theft, prostitution, and drug sales in order to earn income for food and shelter (Ferguson et al. 2011a). While participating in risky behaviors is a common way for youth to survive street life, the illegal nature of survival behaviors often positions them in the criminal justice system. One potentially important but less studied risk factor among homeless youth is a history of trauma. Childhood trauma has been associated with offending among other youth populations (Falshaw 2005; Kaufman and Widom 1999; Keeshin and Campbell 2011), where years of research has linked youths’ histories of neglect, physical, and sexual abuse with subsequent criminal records for arrests for violent offenses (Widom 1989). Yet, surprisingly little research has examined exposure to early life trauma as a risk factor for homeless youths’ criminal justice involvement. The lack of research in this area is concerning in light of high rates of childhood trauma among homeless youth (Whitbeck et al. 2007). Research finds that the majority of homeless youth have histories of familial abuse prior to becoming homeless (Baron 2003; Ferguson 2009; Sullivan and Knutson 2000), with high rates of both physical abuse (47 %) as well as sexual abuse (29 %; Tyler and Cauce 2002). In fact, youth frequently report that familial trauma is the primary reason they leave home (Tyler and Cauce 2002). Although running away from home has been found to mediate the relationship between early maltreatment and criminal justice system involvement, where youth who chronically run away to escape trauma are at risk for being arrested (Kaufman and Widom 1999), little is known about the types of early trauma experiences that lead to arrest among runaway or homeless youth. Limited available research suggests that homeless and runaway youth who report early sexual victimization by a family member are at risk for being arrested (Chapple et al. 2004). Other studies have found that homeless youth with histories of physical abuse are at risk for criminal activity (Baron 2004, 2009). Overall, the literature is scant in differentiating the relative impact of different forms of childhood maltreatment on subsequent involvement in the criminal justice system. Although trauma and criminal justice system involvement has not been well studied among homeless youth, related research has investigated posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and criminal justice involvement. This work finds that PTSD does not directly predict arrest behavior (Ferguson et al. 2011b, 2012) but instead PTSD indirectly predicts arrest through drug use and survival behaviors (Ferguson et al. 2012). This work suggests investigation of the link between trauma and its effects on homeless youths’ deviant behaviors requires inclusion of substance use and survival behaviors to fully understand the complexity of criminal justice involvement (Ferguson et al. 2011b).


Based on the current state of the literature, it is important to investigate how different forms of early trauma may lead to differing degrees of involvement in the criminal justice system (e.g., arrest, jail), while accounting for factors that would typically be coupled with offending behavior such as association with deviant peers, substance abuse, and engagement in survival behaviors. Better understanding the relative influence of early trauma on criminal justice involvement may inform the development of trauma-sensitive delinquency prevention programs among homeless youth. The current study, thus, sought to explore predictors of criminal justice involvement (being arrested and going to jail). The research questions are as follows: (1) When controlling for traditional risk factors, are survival behaviors associated with homeless youths being arrested or going to jail; and (2) When controlling for traditional risk factors and survival behaviors, are early trauma experiences associated with homeless youth being arrested or going to jail?

137

Agency staff introduced eligible youth to research staff who explained the study procedures and secured written consent. Researchers then administered a 45-min quantitative retrospective interview containing both standardized self-report instruments and researcher-developed items that assessed demographic and background information, criminal justice system involvement, childhood trauma experiences, survival behaviors, substance use, and peer deviance. The principal investigator (PI) and three trained graduate student interviewers performed interviews. To ensure fidelity of data collection, the PI trained interviewers on interview methods and background content on homeless youths’ lifestyles and observed several practice interviews prior to data collection. Interviewers read questions and response options aloud to participants and youth responded verbally. Youth were compensated with a $10.00 gift card to a local food vendor. Measures Demographics

Methods Sample and Procedures Youth participants (N = 202) were recruited, using purposive sampling, through a homeless youth service agency in a midsized western city. Agency recruitment sites included a drop-in center offering case management, referral services, and basic subsistence items (food, hygiene supplies); a shelter offering short-term (40 days) stay, counseling, and General Educational Development (GED) preparation courses; and a transitional housing apartment offering temporary (6 months) housing. Recruitment of participants took place from March 2010 to April 2011. Human subjects’ approval was received at the principal investigator’s university. At the time of recruitment, youth had to meet three inclusion criteria to participate in the study: (1) be 18–24 years of age, (2) have spent at least 2 weeks away from home in the month before the interview and (3) provide written informed consent. Youth were excluded if they could not comprehend the consent form because of cognitive limitations (psychotic symptoms or developmental delays) or if they were noticeably intoxicated at the time of the interview. In the latter case, youth were asked to return at a later time when they could more competently answer interview questions. Agency case managers made the determination whether a particular individual was eligible for recruitment into the study based on their knowledge of each individual and their current level of intoxication.

Basic demographics included age, gender (0 = male, 1 = female), and ethnicity (1 = white, not Latino; 2 = Black, not Latino; 3 = Latino; 4 = American Indian; 5 = Asian; 6 = other/mixed). Due to small samples in some ethnic categories, ethnicity was subsequently dummy-coded to include Black (0 = no, 1 = yes), Latino (0 = no, 1 = yes), and other (0 = no, 1 = yes), with White as a reference category. Service location (1 = dropin, 2 = shelter, 3 = transitional housing) was also collected. Due to assumptions of logistical regression models requiring independent categorical variables to be ordinal, continuous, or dichotomous (Meyers et al. 2006), service location was also dummy-coded to include shelter (0 = no, 1 = yes) and transitional housing (0 = no, 1 = yes), with drop-in as a reference category. Dependent Variables Youths’ involvement in the criminal justice system was assessed with two researcher-developed items that asked youth whether they had ever been arrested (0 = no, 1 = yes) or been in jail (0 = no, 1 = yes). Independent Variables Several variables thought to increase risk of criminal justice involvement were included as predictor variables. These were categorized as traditional risk factors (substance use and abuse and association with delinquent peers), survival behaviors, and childhood trauma.

123

138

Traditional risk factors included youth substance use and peer delinquency. Youth substance abuse and dependency were measured by the Mini International Neuropsychiatry Interview (MINI; Sheehan et al. 1998). Respondents were asked a series of questions, based on DSM-IV-TR criteria, regarding symptoms experienced during the past 12 months related to alcohol and drugs. The MINI has been shown to have good reliability and validity (Lecrubier et al. 1997). Questions are asked about symptoms experienced in a decision-tree manner in which positive answers were explored with more in-depth questions in order to distinguish between abuse and dependence for alcohol and drugs. This resulted in four substance use variables that assessed whether youth met criteria for: (1) alcohol abuse (0 = no, 1 = alcohol abuse); (2) alcohol dependence (0 = no, 1 = alcohol dependence); (3) drug abuse (0 = no, 1 = drug abuse); and (4) drug dependence (0 = no, 1 = drug dependence). For the analyses, the four variables were combined to create two separate variables and were given the umbrella term ‘‘substance use disorder’’ to refer to both abuse and dependence. Alcohol use disorder and drug use disorder were the final variables that indicated whether homeless youth had any alcohol/drug abuse or dependence (0 = no, 1 = yes). Association with delinquent peers was measured by a series of separate researcher-developed items that asked youth how many of their friends (0 = no friends, 1 = some friends, 2 = most friends), during the past month, had gotten drunk, smoked marijuana, gotten high on inhalants, used cocaine, used heroin, used prescription drugs, or sold drugs. For the analyses, all 7 of the items were averaged to create one variable that assessed youths’ friends’ delinquency. In this way, each youth had a composite score (ranging from 0 to 2) that was indicative of their average involvement with delinquent peers and was labeled Peer Delinquency. Survival behaviors were measured by a series of separate researcher-developed items that asked youth whether, in the past 6 months, youth had engaged in the following methods to get money or resources to meet their basic needs: panhandling, dealing drugs, prostitution, gambling, and stealing (0 = no, 1 = yes). All of the survival behaviors included in the analyses were indicative of behaviors that would otherwise be deemed illegal. During analysis, a dichotomized variable was created to indicate whether each participant had used any survival behavior to obtain money or resources (0 = no survival behaviors and 1 = one or more behaviors). Childhood trauma was measured by the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire, a standardized 25-item measure, that asked youth to indicate how often specific traumatic experiences had happened to them before leaving home (Bernstein et al. 1994). Five subscales were included: (1)

123


Physical neglect (e.g., I didn’t have enough to eat; I had to wear dirty clothes); (2) Emotional abuse (e.g., I felt that someone in my family hated me; I thought my parents wished I had never been born); (3) Physical abuse (e.g., I was punished with a belt, board, cord, or some other hard object; people in my family hit me so hard it left me with bruises or marks); (4) Sexual abuse (e.g., someone molested me; someone tried to make me do sexual things or watch sexual things); and (5) Emotional neglect (e.g., I felt loved; People in my family felt close to each other). Responses to each item were recorded as: 1 = never, 2 = rarely, 3 = sometimes, 4 = often, 5 = very often. Necessary items were reverse coded, and items were averaged to form subscale variables. The scale demonstrated good reliability, Cronbach’s alpha = .86. Data Analyses Data were entered into SPSS (18.0) and descriptive analyses (i.e., frequencies, means, and standard deviations) were conducted to characterize the sample. Variables were assessed for normality, and cases with missing data were deleted list wise. Two sequential logistic regression models were used to determine whether independent variables predicted whether youth were (1) ever arrested and (2) ever in jail. For each of the models, independent variables were entered in blocks; in the first block, demographic control variables and traditional risk factors (substance use and peer deviance) were entered; in the second block, survival behaviors were added to the model, and finally, in the third block, childhood trauma subscales were added to each multivariate model. In this manner, the analyses allowed an interpretation of whether each block of predictors significantly contributed to variance in criminal justice system involvement and examined whether each type of predictor was significant while accounting for the contributions of other predictors.

Results Sample Characteristics Sample characteristics are illustrated in Table 1. Of the sample (N = 202), 157 (78 %) reported ever being arrested and 122 (60 %) reported ever going to jail. 45 (22 %) youth reported that they had never been arrested and 80 (40 %) youth reported that they had never gone to jail. The average number of times youth reported being arrested was 7.3 (SD = 12.2) and the average number of times youth reported going to jail was 2.4 (SD = 3.8). The average age was 20 years old (SD = 1.6). The majority of the sample was male (129; 63.9 %), and the ethnic composition of the


139

Table 1 Descriptive statistics on sample characteristics

Specifically, some sample characteristics were statistically significant; males (OR = .22, p \ .001) and older youth were more likely to be arrested (OR = 1.3, p = .036). Youth who met criteria for a drug use disorder were nearly 3 times more likely to be arrested (OR = 2.8, p = .024).

Frequency

%

Drop-in

142

70.3

Shelter

38

18.8

Transition

22

10.9

Survival Behavior Risk Factors

129

63.9

73

36.1

White

70

34.7

Black

54

26.7

Latino

37

18.3

Other

41

20.3

157

78.0

122

60.0

Results from block 2 revealed that the block of survival behavior risk factors accounted for a significant amount of the variance in arrest (v2 = 45.8, p \ .001, R2 = .21). Youth who reported engaging in a greater number of survival behaviors were 2.6 times more likely to be arrested (OR = 2.6, p = .04). Traditional risk variables, including drug use disorder, remained significant predictors of arrest (OR = 2.6, p = .044). Demographic variables also continued to remain significant, including being male (OR = .2, p \ .001) and older (OR = 1.4, p = .013).

Yes

76

38.8

Trauma Risk Factors

No

123

61.2

Service location

Gender Male Female Ethnicity

Outcomes Arrests Jail Alcohol addictions

Drug addictions Yes

118

59.0

No

82

41.0

Yes

120

59.4

No

82

40.6

Survival behaviors

Mean

SD

Number of times arrested

7.3

12.2

Number of times in jail

2.4

3.8

19.9

1.6

Age Peer deviance

.83

.43

Emotional neglect

2.8

1.2

Emotional abuse

2.9

1.3

Sexual abuse

1.8

1.3

Physical neglect

2.2

1.0

Physical abuse

2.4

1.2

youth varied, and included White (70; 34.7 %), Black (54; 26.7 %), Latino (37; 18.3 %), and other ethnic categories (41; 20.3 %). The majority of the sample was recruited from the drop-in center (142; 70.3 %). Model Predicting Arrest

Results from block 3 revealed that the block of trauma risk factors accounted for a significant amount of the variance in arrest (v2 = 51.98, p \ .001, R2 = .23). Even while accounting for traditional risk factors and survival behaviors, youth who reported greater physical abuse were more likely to be arrested (OR = 1.9, p = .035). Survival behaviors were no longer significant (OR = 2.5, n.s.), while drug use disorder remained significant (OR = 2.9, p = .031) as did age (OR = 1.5, p = .01), and gender (OR = .2, p \ .001). Model Predicting Jail Control Variables As seen in Table 3, sequential logistic regression results from block 1 revealed that the block of control and traditional risk variables accounted for a significant amount of the variance in jail (v2 = 59.67, p \ .001, R2 = .26). Specifically, male youth (OR = .27, p \ .001), older youth (OR = 1.4, p = .008), and youth who were receiving services from drop in centers (as compared to those in transitional housing) were more likely to have been in jail (OR = .16, p = .003). Youth who met criteria for a drug use disorder were more than three times more likely to have ever been in jail (OR = 3.2; p = .004).

Control and Traditional Risk Variables Survival Behavior Risk Factors As seen in Table 2, sequential logistic regression results from block 1 revealed that the block of control and traditional risk variables accounted for a significant amount of the variance in arrest (v2 = 41.5, p \ .001, R2 = .19).

Results from block 2 revealed that the block of survival behavior risk factors accounted for a significant amount of the variance in jail (v2 = 60.3, p \ .001, R2 = .26).

123

140


Table 2 Sequential regression model: predicting arrest

Block 1 OR Gender Age

.22***

Block 2 b(SE) -1.5(.41)

OR .19***

Block 3 b(SE) -1.7(.43)

OR .17***

b(SE) -1.8(.46)

1.3*

.30(.14)

1.5*

.37(.15)

1.5*

.41(.16)

1.4

.32(.6)

1.5

.41(.60)

1.5

.37(.63)

Ethnicity Latino Black Other

.71 1.5

-.34(.50) .43(.59)

.81 1.6

-.21(.51) .48(.60)

.66 1.2

-.41(.54) .23(.63)

Service location Shelter

.45

-.8(.49)

.50

-.69(.50)

.51

-.66(.52)

Housing

.66

-.42(.59)

.89

-.12(.62)

.88

-.12(.65)

Drug addictions

2.8*

1.0 (.46)

2.6*

.94(.47)

2.9*

1.1(.49)

Alcohol addictions Peer delinquency

1.1 1.3

.08(.46) .30(.50)

.92 1.1

-.08(.50) .10(.52)

.92 .98

-.07(.48) -.02(.54)

2.6*

.96(.46)

Survival behaviors

2.4

.90(.5)

1.9*

.63(.30)

.95

-.05(.27)

Childhood trauma Physical abuse Emotional abuse Sexual abuse

* p \ .05, ** p \ .01, *** p \ .001

1.0 .74

-.30(.34)

Emotional neglect

.90

-.11(.27)

Adjusted R2

.19

.21

.23

Model v2

41.5***

45.8***

51.98***

Survival behavior risk factors were not significantly associated with whether youth had ever been in jail (OR = 1.4, n.s.). Traditional risk factors (i.e., drug use disorder) (OR = 3.0, p = .006) as well demographic variables, including gender (OR = .27, p \ .001), age (OR = 1.4, p = .006), and service location (OR = .17, p = .005) remained significant predictors of jail involvement. Trauma Risk Factors Results from block 3 revealed that the block of trauma risk factors accounted for a significant amount of the variance in jail (v2 = 65.87, p \ .001, R2 = .28). While controlling for traditional risk factors and survival behaviors, youth reporting greater physical abuse were more likely to have ever been in jail (OR = 1.7, p = .03). Traditional risk factors and demographic variables (i.e., drug use disorder) (OR = 3.1, p = .006), gender (OR = .26, p \ .001), age (OR = 1.4, p = .006), and service location (OR = .18, p = .006) remained significant predictors of jail involvement while survival behaviors were not significant (OR = 1.3, n.s.).

Discussion This study points to the importance of considering trauma as a risk factor for homeless youths’ involvement in the

123

-.01(.20)

Physical neglect

criminal justice system. Specifically, results revealed that exposure to childhood physical abuse predicted arrest and jail even after accounting for youths’ level of substance use, interactions with deviant peer groups, and engagement in survival behaviors on the streets. These findings suggest that early physical abuse may have a lasting impact on homeless youth and their functioning later in life. Scholars have provided plausible explanations for the risk associated with previous trauma. It has been well documented that youth often leave home to escape abuse in their homes of origin (Ferguson 2009; Rotheram-Borus 1993; Tyler and Cauce 2002). Yet, even after leaving the traumatic situation, youth are often overcome with residual emotions, sensations, or reactions related to the trauma (Thompson 2005). Unresolved feelings from early trauma can lead to poor self-regulation and coping skills (Thompson et al. 2006), and thus may place youth at risk for illegal behavior. Early physical abuse stands out as a salient traumatic experience with long-term effects (Haber and Toro 2009). Physical abuse has been described as a particularly dangerous and life-threatening experience leading youth to leave home (Cochrane 2006). Compared to other forms of abuse, physical abuse has been found to have a greater effect on youth functioning and development (Ney et al. 1994) and heighten risk for later mental health symptoms and alcohol use among homeless youth (Haber and Toro

Community Ment Health J (2014) 50:135–144 Table 3 Sequential regression model: predicting jail

141

Block 1 OR Gender Age

.28*** 1.4**

Block 2 b(SE) -1.3(.36) .32(.12)

OR .27*** 1.4**

Block 3 b(SE) -1.3(.36) .33(.12)

OR .26** 1.4**

b(SE) -1.3(.40) .34(.13)

Ethnicity Latino Black Other

.96

-.04(.50)

.83

-.19(.46)

1.5

.38(.49)

.98

-.02(.50)

.86

-.15(.46)

1.5

.41(.49)

.91

-.09(.52)

.72

-.33(.48)

1.2

.22(.52)

Service location Shelter

.57

-.56(.45)

.59

-.53(.45)

.54

-.62(.46)

Housing

.16**

-1.8(.61)

.17**

-1.8(.62)

.18**

-1.7(.62)

Drug addictions

3.2**

1.2(.4)

3.0**

1.1(.4)

3.1**

1.1(.42)

Alcohol addictions Peer delinquency

1.9 .75

.63(.39) -.29(.44)

1.8 .69

.59(.40) -.37(.46)

1.8 .67

.61(.42) -.4(.48)

Survival behaviors

1.4

.31(.39)

1.3

.3(.40)

1.7*

.53(.25)

.76

-.28(.23)

Childhood trauma Physical abuse Emotional abuse Sexual abuse

1.0

Physical neglect Emotional neglect * p \ .05, ** p \ .01, *** p \ .001

Adjusted R2

.26

Model v2

59.67***

2009). In addition, homeless youth with histories physical abuse often internalize the modeled behavior and use similar behavior patterns for handling problem situations (Baron and Hartnagel 1998). This ‘‘learned behavior’’ may result from continuous exposure to externalizing or violent mechanisms to handle emotions (Baron and Hartnagel 1998), and may subsequently place youth at an increased risk for offending behavior (Baron 2004, 2009). Adding to the extant literature on survival behaviors (Ferguson et al. 2011a), this study reveals how high-risk survival behaviors, while predictive of arrest, were less important in predicting involvement in more severe levels of the criminal justice system. A possible explanation for this finding, deserving further investigation, is that homeless youth may be released (rather than prosecuted) after arrest for engaging in survival behaviors intended to meet basic needs. Nevertheless, it is clear that initial involvement in the criminal justice system is associated, at least in part, with youths’ attempts to make money and find resources to survive on the streets. Traditional risk factors, chiefly substance use, should not be ignored as valuable predictors of homeless youths’ involvement in the criminal justice system. Building on previous research, this study finds that meeting criteria for a drug use disorder significantly predicted homeless youths’ arrest and involvement in jail (Baron and Hartnagel 1998; Baron et al. 2007). Drug abuse can lower youth inhibitions, and, in letting down their guards, homeless

.26 60.28***

.02(.17)

.90

-.12(.27)

.91

-.09(.21)

.28 65.87***

youth may be more likely to engage in activities they would not otherwise partake in, criminal and delinquent behavior included (Chamberlain and Daley 2009). The finding could also suggest that youth participate in delinquent activities as a way to feed addictions, with criminal activity funding their substance use (Inciardi et al. 1993). Peer delinquency was not significantly associated with either arrest or delinquency. This is inconsistent with previous research that points to the influence of peers in youth lifestyle choices and decision-making (Baron 2009; Baron et al. 2007). When studied as an isolated factor, previous studies have found peers to be a strong risk factor (Schreck et al. 2004). However, when the interactions between risk factors are taken into account, peers may make an obsolete contribution, particularly in homeless youths’ lives where variation and unpredictability of peers is commonplace (Johnson et al. 2005). Furthermore, the way in which peer influence was measured in this study was limited to assessing peer engagement in substances as a proxy for peer delinquency (Mason and Windle 2002), which may have limited its predictive ability. A more precise measure is needed to truly study this relationship in the future. Limitations Specific limitations should be noted when interpreting the findings from this study. Additional research is needed to

123

142

replicate this study nation-wide to determine whether trauma, and physical abuse in particular, continues to be predictive of criminal justice involvement among homeless youth samples in other regions of the United States. Moreover, further research can delineate protective factors for youth who were not arrested or incarcerated. The identification of such factors may inform services and prevent criminal justice system involvement among homeless youth. Because this study only evaluates one mid-size western city, other regions, demographics, ethnic and cultural variations exist that could yield different findings. Different interviewers collected data in specific service locations (transitional housing, shelter, and dropin), and interviewer styles may be attributed to the differences between the settings. Because the data was measured through self-report, youth may have under-reported early trauma exposure and criminal justice system involvement due social desirability bias. The researchers attempted to reduce this bias by allowing youth to answer sensitive sections of the survey by marking answers privately. Lastly, because data were collected through social service settings, findings may have limited generalizability to youth who do not seek services. These youth need to be studied further, as they may be at elevated risk of both trauma and criminal justice system involvement. Implications The results clearly demonstrate that physical abuse is associated not only with arrest, but also with deeper levels of system involvement, such as jail. Interventions for homeless youth should aim to address all significant risk factors leading to deleterious outcomes; therefore, current services aimed at preventing delinquency and enhancing youth functioning should address substance use and financial resources for homeless youth while utilizing a trauma-informed approach. Such programs should consider the possible social, emotional, or cognitive challenges associated with experiencing previous trauma and provide delinquency prevention programming adapted for youth with these challenges (Black et al. 2012). For youth who are receiving community-based care where treatment is delivered, services should be provided to specifically target symptoms of trauma. Due to the intensive nature of trauma treatment, which requires exposure to traumatic thoughts or memories, it may be more appropriate for youth in transitional housing, community-based settings with access to treatment, or perhaps, those in juvenile justice facilities. Typical trauma treatments include skills training focused on enhancing coping skills, role-playing, self-talk, cognitive restructuring, and relaxation while also including exposure treatment, many

123


times in the form of a trauma narrative to help youth work through the anxiety associated with previous traumatic events (Foa et al. 1991; McMackin et al. 2002). This approach has recently been adapted for youth with delinquent behavior by including components of psychoeducation, behavioral management skills, safety planning, and incorporating parents, caregivers, or loved ones (Cohen et al. 2010). Previous research finds that delinquent youth who receive trauma treatments are better able to work through their trauma and recognize the associations between their traumatic experiences and criminal behavior (McMackin et al. 2002). An ongoing obstacle in providing trauma-informed services among the homeless youth population is a lack of standardized screening processes for identifying youth with histories of trauma (Merscham et al. 2009). Without systematically screening youth for trauma experiences and symptomatology, service settings may fail to recognize the need for trauma-informed services among the youth served. In addition, the broader juvenile justice system lacks understanding of the role that trauma plays in the etiology of delinquent behaviors and how rehabilitative efforts can be enhanced through trauma-informed approaches (Ko et al. 2008). For example, one study found traumatic experiences noted in approximately 71 % of files of youth who have been involved in the justice system, yet only 6 % of those evaluations included a recommendation for trauma-informed care (Riggs-Romaine et al. 2011). This work highlights a need for greater identification and integration of past trauma experiences in service delivery and during justice system decision-making. Future research should investigate potential cognitive and affective mediators of the relationship between childhood trauma and crime among homeless youth to inform intervention development. There is a great need to examine whether homeless youth with physical abuse histories appraise others’ intentions accurately and regulate emotions effectively, and how this could be a potential mechanism that explains their elevated risk for involvement in the criminal justice system. Identifying these mediators may result in identifying malleable factors for therapeutic intervention. Such efforts at incorporating trauma screening, traumainformed care, and trauma treatment (when safe to do so) should be provided alongside efforts at addressing other significant risk factors identified in this study, namely substance use and survival behaviors. As both drug use and survival behaviors are common among this population, there is a need to increase substance use prevention and intervention initiatives to help youth attain sustainable methods of formal employment and to reduce their involvement in the criminal justice system. The study argues for continuing these more traditional services while also incorporating or integrating trauma-informed services.


References Barczyk, A., & Thompson, S. (2008). Alcohol/drug dependency in homeless youth. Alcoholism, Clinical and Experimental Research, 32, 367. Baron, S. W. (2003). Self-control, social consequences, and criminal behavior: Street youth and the general theory of crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 40(2), 403–425. Baron, S. W. (2004). General strain, street youth and crime: A test of Agnew’s revised theory. Criminology, 42(2), 457–483. Baron, S. W. (2009). Differential coercion, street youth, and violent crime. Criminology, 47(1), 239–268. Baron, S. W., Forde, D. R., & Kennedy, L. W. (2007). Disputatiousness, aggressiveness, and victimization among street youths. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 5, 411–425. Baron, S. W., & Hartnagel, T. F. (1998). Street youth and criminal violence. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 35(2), 166. Bender, K., Thompson, S. J., Ferguson, K. M., Komlo, C., Taylor, C., & Yoder, J. (2012). Substance use and victimization: Streetinvolved youth’ perspectives and service implications. Children and Youth Services Review, 34, 2392–2399. Bernstein, D. P., Fink, L., Handelsman, L., & Foote, J. (1994). Initial reliability and validity of a new retrospective measure of child abuse and neglect. American Journal of Psychiatry, 151, 1132–1136. Black, P. J., Woodworth, M., Tremblay, M., & Carpenter, T. (2012). A review of trauma-informed treatment for adolescents. Canadian Psychology, 53(3), 192–203. Bousman, C. A., Blumberg, E. J., Shillington, A. M., Hovell, M. F., Ji, M., Lehman, S., et al. (2005). Predictors of substance use among homeless youth in San Diego. Addictive Behaviors, 30(6), 1100–1110. Chamberlain, C., & Daley, K. (2009). Moving on: Young people and substance abuse. Youth Studies Australia, 28(4), 35–43. Chapple, C. L., Johnson, K. D., & Whitbeck, L. D. (2004). Gender and arrest among homeless and runaway youth: An analysis of background, family, and situational factors. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2(2), 129–147. Cochrane, K. (2006). Our young runaways. New Statesman, 135(4786), 30–31. Cohen, J. A., Berliner, L., & Mannarino, A. (2010). Trauma focused CBT for children with co-occurring trauma and behavior problems. Child Abuse and Neglect, 34, 215–224. Falshaw, L. (2005). The link between a history of maltreatment and subsequent offending behavior. The Journal of Community and Criminal Justice, 52(4), 423–434. Ferguson, K. (2009). Exploring the psychosocial and behavioral outcomes of multi-type abuse among homeless young adults. Social Work Research, 33(4), 219–230. Ferguson, K. M., Bender, K., Thompson, S. J., Maccio, E. M., Xie, B., & Pollio, D. (2011a). Social control correlates of arrest behavior among homeless youth in five U.S. cities. Violence and Victims, 26(5), 648–668. Ferguson, K. M., Bender, K., Thompson, S., Xie, B., & Pollio, D. (2011b). Correlates of street-survival behaviors in homeless young adults in four U.S. cities. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 81, 401–409. Ferguson, K. M., Bender, K., Thompson, S. J., Xie, B., & Pollio, D. (2012). General strain predictors of arrest among homeless youth from four United States Cities. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Journal of Juvenile Justice, 1(2), 1–19. Foa, E. B., Rothbaum, B. O., Riggs, D. S., & Murdock, T. B. (1991). Treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder in rape victims: A comparison between cognitive behavioral procedures and counseling. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59, 715–723.

143 Fors, S. W., & Rojek, D. G. (1991). A comparison of drug involvement between runaways and school youths. Journal of Drug Education, 21(1), 13–25. Haber, M. G., & Toro, P. A. (2009). Parent-adolescent violence and later behavioral health problems among homeless and housed youth. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 79(3), 305–318. Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. F., & Miller, J. Y. (1992). Risk and protective factors for alcohol and other drug problems in adolescence and early adulthood: Implications for substance abuse prevention. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 64–105. Inciardi, J. A., Horowitz, R., & Pottieger, A. E. (1993). Street kids, street drugs, street crime. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Pub. Co. Jenson, J. M., & Fraser, M. W. (Eds.). (2010). Social policy for children and families: A risk and resilience perspective. Beverly Hills: Sage. Johnson, K. D., Whitbeck, L. B., & Hoyt, D. R. (2005). Predictors of social network composition among homeless and runaway adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 28, 231–248. Kaufman, J. G., & Widom, C. S. (1999). Childhood victimization, running away, and delinquency. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 36(4), 347–381. Keeshin, B. R., & Campbell, K. (2011). Screening homeless youth for histories of abuse: Prevalence, enduring effects, and interest in treatment. Child Abuse and Neglect, 35(6), 401–407. Ko, S. J., Ford, J. D., Kassam-Adams, N., Berkowitz, S. J., Wilson, C., Wong, M., et al. (2008). Creating trauma-informed systems: Child welfare, education, first responders, health care, juvenile justice. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 39(4), 396–404. Lecrubier, Y., Sheehan, D. V., Weiller, E., Amorim, P., Bonora, I., Harnett-Sheehan, K., et al. (1997). The mini international neuropsychiatric interview (MINI). A short diagnostic structured interview: Reliability and validity according to the CIDI. European Psychiatry, 12(5), 224–231. Mason, W. A., & Windle, M. (2002). Reciprocal relations between adolescent substance use and delinquency: A longitudinal latent variable analysis. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 111(1), 63–76. McCarthy, B., & Hagan, J. (1992). Mean streets: The theoretical significance of situational delinquency among homeless youths. American Journal of Sociology, 98(3), 597–627. McCarthy, B., & Hagan, J. (2005). Danger and the decision to offend. Social Forces, 83(3), 1065–1096. McMackin, R. A., Leisen, M. B., Sattler, L., Krinsley, K., & Riggs, D. S. (2002). Preliminary development of trauma-focused treatment groups for incarcerated juvenile offenders. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment, & Trauma, 6(1), 175–199. Merscham, C., Van Leeuwen, J. M., & McGuire, M. (2009). Mental health and substance abuse indicators among homeless youth in Denver, Colorado. Child Welfare League of America, 88(2), 93–110. Meyers, L. S., Gamst, G., & Guarino, A. J. (2006). Applied multivariate research: Design and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Ney, P. G., Fung, T., & Wickett, A. R. (1994). The worst combinations of child abuse and neglect. Child Abuse and Neglect, 18(9), 705–714. Nyamathi, A., Hudson, A., Greengold, B., Slagle, A., Marfisee, M., Khalilifard, F., et al. (2010). Correlates of substance use severity among homeless youth. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing, 23(4), 214–222. Riggs-Romaine, C. L., Sevin-Goldstein, N. E., Hunt, E., & DeMatteo, D. (2011). Traumatic experiences and juvenile amenability: The role of trauma in forensic evaluations and judicial decision making. Child & Youth Care Forum, 40(5), 363–380.

123

144 Rotheram-Borus, M. J. (1993). Suicidal behavior and risk factors among runaway youths. American Journal of Psychiatry, 150(1), 103–107. Schreck, C. J., Fisher, B., & Miller, M. (2004). The social context of violent victimization: A study of the delinquent peer effect. Justice Quarterly, 21(1), 23–47. Schwartz, M., Sorensen, H. K., Ammerman, S., & Bard, E. (2008). Exploring the relationship between homelessness and delinquency: A snapshop of a group of homeless youth in San Jose, California. Child Adolescent Social Work Journal, 25(4), 255–269. Sheehan, D. V., Lecrubier, Y., Sheehan, K. H., Amorim, P., Janvas, J., Weiller, E., et al. (1998). The mini-international neuropsychiatric interview (M.I.N.I): The development and validation of a structured diagnostic psychiatric interview for DSM-IV and ICD-10. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 59(20), 22–33. Sullivan, P. M., & Knutson, J. F. (2000). The prevalence of disabilities and maltreatment among runaway children. Child Abuse and Neglect, 24, 1275–1288. Thompson, S. J. (2005). Factors associated with trauma symptoms among runaway/homeless adolescents. Stress, Trauma, and Crisis: An International Journal, 8, 143–156.

123

Community Ment Health J (2014) 50:135–144 Thompson, S. J., McManus, H., & Voss, T. (2006). Posttraumatic stress disorder and substance among youth who are homeless: Treatment issues and implications. Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention, 6(3), 206–216. Tyler, K. A., & Cauce, A. M. (2002). Perpetrators of early physical and sexual abuse among homeless and runaway adolescents. Child Abuse and Neglect, 26, 1261–1274. Wagnild, G. M., & Young, H. M. (1993). Development and psychometric evaluation of the resilience scale. Journal of Nursing Measurement, 1, 165–178. Warr, M. (2002). Companions in crime: The social aspects of criminal conduct. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Whitbeck, L. B., Hoyt, D. R., Johnson, K. D., & Chen, X. (2007). Victimization and posttraumatic stress disorder among runaway and homeless adolescents. Violence and Victims, 22(6), 721–734. Widom, C. S. (1989). Child abuse, neglect, and violent criminal behavior. Criminology, 27(2), 251–270.