Institutionalization of Juveniles in the Caribbean
Youth delinquency remains to be a major cause of juvenile incarceration. Generally, children and youth need to be nurtured and fostered in a congenial atmosphere for them to achieve holistic growth and development (Achari 2020). Society has a general urgency to nurture all adolescents to become better adults who contribute positively to society to ensure the growth and development of the said society. However, adolescents usually encounter challenges where juveniles tend to encounter or partake in deviant behaviours in most cases. It is dependent on adults to provide adequate measures to counter and create a learning experience.
In some cases, juveniles may commit petty crimes, and in more serious cases, some may commit serious acts of crime. In Trinidad and Tobago, crimes committed by juveniles are defined as the violation of laws by persons under the age of 18. In some jurisdictions, Juvenile delinquency differs from crime primarily due to the person’s age committing the act. If the offender is above 18 years of age, it is referred to as a crime.
There has been a growing concern over juvenile delinquency in Trinidad and Tobago since it first peaked in 1988. While 1988 was a record year, the matter of juvenile delinquency had continued to have a steady rise until the period between 2009 and 2010, when legislators sought to institute incarceration of juveniles as the primary goal of tackling the phenomenon first (Cain 1996). At the time, the increase in juvenile delinquency across Trinidad and Tobago worked to create a form of social hysteria and mass panic. It resulted in the calls for tougher actions such as the imprisonment of juveniles to tame their likelihood to commit a crime. Across the Caribbean, violence and crime is at an all-time high, with levels that exceed that of the United States of America (U.S.A.) 7 times over. At the same time, being young nations, youths make up for the majority of the population in these nations, often between 14 to 25% of all the population in the Caribbean (Freemon, Nuño and Katz 2020). As such, juvenile delinquency accounts for a remarkable percentage of total crimes committed (Foss et al 2013). Delinquency is usually characterized by gang involvement, petty crimes, serious crimes, and a general increase and propensity to youth violence. While research on the effects of juvenile institutionalization is low in the Caribbean, in the U.S.A. and other developed and developing regions, it is clear that incarceration alone does not benefit the individuals, especially at such a young age (Freemon, Nuño and Katz 2020).
According to Foss et al (2013), the Caribbean countries of Trinidad and Tobago, St. Vincent, and the Grenadines contribute to up to 50% of all juveniles institutionalized in the Caribbean, and while the average age is around 16 years, mostly males of African descent, there are special cases where people as young as eight and ten years old have been incarcerated. The following report outlines the benefits and limitations of institutionalization of juveniles, ultimately disagreeing with institutionalization in instances where restorative and rehabilitative frameworks are not provisions. This is because a lack of rehabilitation and restorative works potentially propel the individual back to crime. Researchers outline that in the U.S.A, non-rehabilitated juveniles are three times more likely to be re-arrested after release, ushering them to a life of crime and offenders as adults. There is a need for rehabilitative and restorative justice, some of which are not adequately provided to the youths in these developing countries. Based on past research in other regions of the world, institutionalization without the provision of proper rehabilitative care is not effective as it contributes to the lack of proper rehabilitation, which remains necessary to the juvenile/adolescent.
Juvenile Institutionalization in Caribbean Regions
With growing concerns on how to effectively deal with juvenile delinquency, juveniles who are exposed to crime, especially in Caribbean countries, usually become exposed to confined spaces, where they usually interact with other criminals and are rarely offered adequate care for rehabilitation. Effective rehabilitation remains an important tool as it helps eliminate the potential vicious cycle of recidivism. Proper rehabilitation can lead to the delinquent population resorting to less crime in adulthood. The institutionalization of youths through incarceration disrupts their positive social development. In many cases, it exposes them to negative behaviours. In most of the Caribbean world, incarceration of youths is commonly characterized by placing them in shared space with adult and hardened criminals, which often subjects them to criminality, especially where limited provisions are allocated to rehabilitation (Freemon, Nuño and Katz 2020).
The rate of juvenile incarceration in the Caribbean region is generally low. Research indicates that except Dominica, the average juvenile institutionalized includes less than 2.5% of the prison population. Also, with the exception of Dominica, most of the countries, at least on paper, had laws that restricted the housing of youth offenders with adults (Laurent et al 2011). Despite the availability of such policies and laws that restricted the same housing of youth and adults, lack of adequate funds for expansion and space within adult prison saw a majority of youth offenders in Jamaica and Grenada housed in adult prison quarters; Trinidad and Tobago, Grenada, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines did not have a separate facility to divide female from male offenders (Freemon, Nuño and Katz 2020).
Laurent et al (2011) posit that in most cases, countries lacked the capacities to offer extended rehabilitation to the youths, limited educational training of the youth, poor medical services and generally inadequate society re-entry programs. In St. Lucia, St. Kitts, and Nevis, vocational educational programs were offered to the youths, but they were rarely funded to provide adequate room for change. Researchers outline that lack of programming only worked to sustain an attitude among the youths that they were out-of-control. However, most of their crimes were status offences (up to 45% of all institutionalized youths in Trinidad and Tobago), such as running away from home or being very disobedient to their parents, the majority of which would not be categorized as a crime for adults (Williams et al 2018). Females were more likely to be involved in status offences, while male youth offenders were more likely to commit violent offences.
Major Disadvantages Associated With Youth Institutionalization
The institutionalization of youths at a young age creates avenues for developing and exacerbating mental illness gained from childhood trauma. Research shows that in Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago, youths as young as eight and ten were incarcerated; this was in direct contravention to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Children, which directly indicates that children’s criminal responsibility should start at 12 years of age (Freemon, Nuño and Katz 2020).
Williams et al (2018) point out that prisons, in general, can affect a child’s immediate surroundings and work to alter their development. In Trinidad and Tobago and St. Vincent and the Grenadines, chronic juvenile offenders were placed along with juveniles. In some cases, solitary confinement was implemented for use even among juveniles. It resulted in a rise in mental illness and exacerbated trauma. Individuals with mental illness face a fierce battle in their access to mental health services in most developing Caribbean countries. Cuts in funding and budget overruns have played significant roles in preventing adequate access to these services in the region.
Moreover, incarceration levels of adult and juvenile individuals have increased to the tipping point over the recent years, considering the probability that status offence could get a juvenile in jail. It is evident that their mental health symptoms only worsen with time as the resources to treat them is not set aside adequately. Undoubtedly, the placement of children with mental health conditions in correctional facilities only worsens their condition by exploiting their vulnerable position in society. Mental health courts should be expanded to juvenile courts as it has both a rehabilitative and collaborative approach that will shape a child’s life to be better as opposed to the punitive approach taken by correctional facilities, which contributes to recidivism (Williams et al 2018).
Juveniles with mental illness should be diverted from the juvenile justice system to focus on collaborative approaches to help in their treatment. It has been postulated that 65-70% of children in the juvenile system have a diagnosable mental health condition; this population has higher rates of mental conditions than children in the general population of the Americas as data from the Caribbean was limited (Freemon, Nuño and Katz 2020).
Owing to their background and motivations for crime, researchers assumed that this data would likely correlate to the situation in the Caribbean. Traditional correctional facilities are ill-equipped to provide mental health care for children adequately. If anything, the isolation and the harsh treatment they encounter only exacerbate stress levels and worsen their mental health conditions. This is because they are primarily used for incarceration and rarely provide individuals with avenues to rehabilitate and reform. Even when released, youths who were exposed to such a system suffer a high likelihood of re-offending and being incarcerated again.
Mental health advocates embrace the idea of treatment rather than punishment (Gardner 2011). Linking delinquent children and adolescents who have their mental health needs unaddressed to mental health services that focus on rehabilitation and treatment and their integration back into the community is beneficial to them and society. These collaborative efforts will go a long way to help bar possible involvement in crimes and incarceration in the juvenile justice system and, most of all, re-integrate them back into society for a better future they deserve to have. Indeed, mental health frameworks need to be expanded to juvenile institutions as they help re-evaluate and re-shape the lives of young children and adolescents through their collaborative and rehabilitative approach towards psychological issues and their treatment as opposed to the punitive approach that mostly serves to punish and offender which likely contributes to recidivism (Gardner 2011).
Wallace (2013) bemoan that institutionalization in Caribbean countries often results in juveniles being mixed with adult offenders. This raises the probability of victimization and association with criminal peers. Consequently, juveniles are more likely to label themselves or agree to perceive their role according to how society sees them. In the review of criminality among juveniles in Trinidad and Tobago, Wallace (2013) identifies a criminogenic effect of incarceration of juveniles that stems from social stigmatization and increases association with criminal elements even within incarceration. Prisons as institutions that also house juveniles are criminogenic primarily since they provide an environment that reinforces deviant values and also allows them to acquire new criminal skills. There are active prison subcultures that work to reinforce and encourage anti-social and criminal tendencies within an individual. This is especially seen in institutions with inadequate funds to implement rehabilitative programs, as discussed in prior chapters. Prisons also have a criminogenic effect of stigmatizing the average juvenile offender. The community perceives them differently, not as centers for correction and rehabilitation but centers to hold deviant people and punish them. Social stigmatization compels individuals to adopt a label from society and conform to their prison label of being criminals. As such, they tend to behave consistently with what the label associates them to. This is defined in a sociological theory as the labelling effect in the labelling theory. Research identifies that it effectively pushes the subject to criminality as it compels them to be anti-social to the larger society, pro-social with criminal peers, and more likely to severe ties and social relations with family and relatives (Wallace 2013).
In all this, society plays a significant role in how individuals perceive their place within the larger social organization process. At the same time, social value system and social positioning with respect to class, social positioning, political values, and cultural being creates an avenue for an individual to judge others and categorize them in the larger social context. Stereotypes come to manifest and define persons and their interaction within their social organization. Research indicates that people tend to conform to attributes of negative social stereotypes, especially when in their position they cannot fulfil their roles and values. Human beings depend on others to adequately fulfil their roles as social beings. Sociologists reveal that a theory stated as symbolic interactionism defines people’s values based on the persons they associate with and based on the ability to have regular social interactions (Hutchinson 2018). This implies that individuals co-create meaning of their world based on sharing their world with others around them. They subsequently negotiate, shape and re-shape their values, identities, language, and social skills based on their interaction with those around them. This can be defined as labelling as people usually situate the people around them under a predefined social role. It may happen to a few people and be subjected to a group. Labelling is an innate aspect that defines human interaction (Kobrin 1976). As such, a manifestation of otherness comes to play a role in how individuals conceptualize their roles within the larger socialization process.
According to Hirschi (1969), in a skewed system, where rehabilitation often fails to be achieved, a prejudicial and discriminatory role becomes justified as individuals who do not fit the perceived social group become perceived as an external force of conflict. Researchers further outline that a person named as a rule-breaker comes to internalize these names and labels and internalize them to perceive their own purpose on their society, as such maintain consistent deviant labels of themselves, creating a difference between their values and that of others. This is the basis from which criminality begins, but research indicates a variety of theories to shape how they conceptualize their role and reinforce it. An aspect that remains key in formulating an individual’s role in their social value system is based on the probability of whether they are provided with an opportunity to achieve growth and social development. In the case of Trinidad and Tobago, Wallace (2013) outlines a general shift to criminality among juveniles after prolonged association with criminal elements within their institutionalized facilities, as they become less incentivized to engage in law-abiding behaviour since they do not see a place for them in the society (Wallace 2013).
Institutions are poor substitutes for promoting a long-term behaviour change in an individual. They work towards sustaining a disconnect between family and the community, thus compelling most of them towards criminality. As members of society who are not adequately provided with avenues for growth, juveniles are more likely to recede after release. Adults too are more likely to stir into a life of criminality; there is a higher likelihood of an occurrence or prevalence of crime in a certain section of society can be linked to the social, political, and economic motivated deprivation from which the individual resides (Wallace 2013).
Research and data collection from English Speaking Caribbean countries shows a general lack of social and cognitive development among released juveniles. They also indicate that they have missed a significant chance to form meaningful bonds with family members, have no peer relationships with the outside world, and cannot make meaningful in-roads to gain employment. They cannot engage in age-appropriate activities in school, as most of their peers have advanced. As such, they re-associate with their institutionalized peers and, in most cases, risk altering their life trajectories for the worse (Freemon, Nuño and Katz 2020).
Social disorganization theory outlines that social background, economic background, ethnic diversity, the existence of a dysfunctional family, population size, and the existence of a large urban area may work to influence a community’s capacity to maintain strong systems of social relationships and often cause crime. In the case of the developing Caribbean nations, lack of adequate economic, social and cultural infrastructures often tend to confine offenders to a certain subsect of the social organization system. The theory rings true in light of crime and the increased probability of it occurring in minority communities that are predominantly poorly economically classed. This is owed to centuries of racial policies and discrimination that, in most cases, targeted minority communities and prevented them from accessing social, cultural, and economic capital (Piquero 2016).
Lack of these forms of capital due to institutionalization created a great divide between the institutionalized and the general population, generally limiting their ability to achieve upward social mobility. At the same time, racial policies that did not afford inclusion but championed marginalization resulted in greater dysfunctional families, especially among people of colour, specifically in countries such as Bahamas and Guyana, where there is a large and racially diverse population sustaining disproportionate institutionalization of males of African descent (Freemon, Nuño and Katz 2020).
Freemon, Nuño and Katz (2020) posit that with a lack of adequate access to social capital and cultural capital (such as schools, healthcare, or education), more and more of these groups come to lack avenues to access growth. In the case of a dysfunctional family, the concept of routine activity theory manifests. Here the juvenile with a lack of guardians, in a group of capable offenders, and being near urban areas where they have been exposed to potential targets, becomes more likely to participate in a crime. Due to limited avenues for intervention, they become increasingly repeat offenders as such. Even when they are out of jail, a lack of avenues to restructure their lives increases the probability of recidivism.
Advantages of Institutionalization of Juveniles
Provision of human experiences during institutionalization of juveniles, with the main goals of rehabilitating and through restorative justice measures, has been lauded to work well in reducing re-offending. In the Bahamas, Her Majesty’s Prison Fox Hill, inmates who were interested in meeting their victims or their victim’s families were less likely to re-offend after they were introduced to the harm they cost (Freemon, Nuño and Katz 2020).
In some sections of Trinidad and Tobago, as well as Jamaica, re-offending was reduced for juveniles who were exposed to restorative measures. The restoration program is a holistic program that sustains development with the main aim of defining delinquent teens’ rehabilitation and their re-entry into society. It focuses on education, vocational and employment training and opportunities, technical skill dissemination, and psychosocial and emotional services to reduce anger and introduce emotional control to the juvenile (Tindigarkayo, Leslie and Thwaites (2019).
Atienzo, Baxter and Kaltenthaler (2017), as outlined above, institutional facilities in the Caribbean need to consider unique social conditions wherein the crimes occurred to offer better rehabilitation to the youth. Aspects that have worked elsewhere cannot adequately address the unique social conditions in the Caribbean regions, and a need for evidence-based practices in approaching rehabilitation has been stressed.
Institutionalization has structure and routine that often leads to the rehabilitation of youths and allows them to be less exposed to the outside world where they are likely to be judged. Institutionalization limits their exposure to the general population that is likely to further exacerbate their propensity to crime. Labelling theory outlines that an individual’s ability to act criminally is not based on their intrinsic values but a tendency to act due to peer pressure from societal refusal. Likewise, the social identity theory takes a more nuanced approach and highlights a person’s sense of belonging within a social value system and social group membership. Consequently, people are more likely to be prejudiced against other groups based conceptually on who they are or their group and their position within society. Wallace (2013) agrees that accessibility to social and cultural capital creates avenues that create conflicts as some people become prejudiced. Institutionalized juveniles are less likely to become admitted to schools. The more their stay is within an institution, the higher probability that they will be less likely to be welcomed back into society. This curtails them from making any informed gains through legitimate means and also works to sustain an attitude towards criminality, effectively pointing to a general propensity to recede to criminality upon release. The institutionalized groups are usually treated as a pariah by society and never really achieve inclusion in the time they are required to have- when they are juveniles. Society generally maintains an ‘us versus them attitude and creates a separate class for them, viewing them through the lens of their criminal history or delinquent/ deviant behaviour.
Myers and Twenge (2013) identify that prejudice as a negative pre-conceived view towards a certain group. Conflict comes to manifest when more and more people do not seek to compromise their own values in favour of the other, as their identity and values may be compromised. Social identity theory creates a difference between social groups that manifest in “us” versus “them” as social categorization becomes more pronounced in defining group membership. Research opines that “Categorization is a central concept in inter-group relations … This grouping is understood to underlie generic processes of stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination.” (Lawrence 2001). Lack of adequate exposure between groups only manifests in prejudice due to differences in cultural value systems. People are more likely to easily associate with persons, social norms, and attitudes they are familiar with compared to foreign or new identities (Myers and Twenge 2013). People have been tuned to understand, internalize, and accept their social norms better than unfamiliar people.
Hutchinson (2018) also agrees that social identity theory propels people to either identify or create a connection with people they understand. They, as such, reject those with whom they do not share similarities and come to create differences between them and them. Self-concept manifests in a group and propels people to judge between them. In a limited number of institutions that use evidence-based practices in Guyana and Barbados to educate and create attitudes of change, learning and understanding one’s value in the community was adequately instituted in the lessons, and the we versus them mentality subsided (Tindigarkayo, Leslie and Thwaites (2019).
They accept similarities and reject differences. From this perspective, it becomes easier to outline how classism, racism, and social differences might manifest in Trinidad and Tobago. When people act based on their attitudes and feelings based on their social proximity to certain groups, they become more entrenched in their own beliefs and less likely to accept other people’s beliefs.
Denial of the above-named developmental milestone only works to deny the juvenile delinquent a normal chance to grow and become an upstanding member of society. In the prior research, it has been identified that institutionalization is primarily the main avenues legislators in the Caribbean use to punish juvenile delinquents. However, if they change them from punishing to rehabilitative centres, there is a greater likelihood of changing juveniles for the better. In most cases, juvenile delinquents who only commit status crimes are housed with serious delinquents’ offenders, as well as adult offenders and sometimes both (Wallace 2013). Such interactions are likely to reinforce a negative label and propel them towards criminal tendencies, thus devaluing them to lead and have access to a normal life. In most cases, the lack of an ability to enjoy a normal life results in a lack of self-control, lack of an ability to build positive relations, a lack of education that leads to comfortable employment, and a greater likelihood to edge towards criminality as an adult. This is because they lack the social, economic, political and cultural capital to ensure their growth and social mobility through legitimate means is achievable (Altschuler, Armstrong and MacKenzie 1999).
Conclusion
Generally, the institutionalization of juvenile delinquents is frowned upon. This is primarily because the Caribbean region has provided limited rehabilitation and restorative justice resources. As found in this research, some of the positive aspects of juvenile institutionalization revolve around institutions acting as cushions from a harsher external world where the juveniles are less likely to be accommodated. It also offers them a sense of safety from childhood traumas, sexual abuse, and other aspects that likely caused harm. In cases where adequate restorative justice measures are provisioned, a general sense of holistic growth can be achieved and sustained. As a result, this reduces a juveniles’ ability to offend.
On the contrary, most Caribbean countries have a general lack of institutionalized reforms to ensure restorative justice. More juveniles were likely to interact with adults or violent juvenile delinquents and became more exposed to criminal tendencies. Furthermore, there is also the danger of the delinquents likely to be less exposed to all developmental stages. Consequently, they will have a more skewed growth towards immaturity and criminal behaviour.
References
Achari, Umadevi. 2020. “Institutionalization of Children-To Groom or To Ground? University of Mumbai Law Academy. <https://leaglesamiksha.com/2020/10/20/institutionalization-of-children-to-groom-or-to-ground/> accessed 15 February 2022
Altschuler, David, Troy L. Armstrong and Doris Layton MacKenzie. 1999. “Reintegration, Supervised Release and Intensive Care.” Juvenile Justice Bulletin. Washington, D.C., Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/175715.pdf
Atienzo, Erik., Susan Baxter and Eva Kaltenthaler. 2017. Interventions to Prevent Youth Violence in Latin America: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Public Health, no. 62(1): 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00038-016-0909-6
Cain, Maureen. 1996. “Developing a Juvenile Justice Policy: Anomalies of Theory and Practice in Trinidad and Tobago.” Caribbean Quarterly 42, no. 2/3. 87–100. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40654200.
Foss, Aaron, Bertrand Laurent, Danielle de Garcia, Henry Charles, Mateusz Pucilowski, Nicole Hazel, Rajwantie Sahai, and Sharene McKenzie. 2013. “Eastern and Southern Caribbean Youth Assessment (ESCYA).” Retrieved from https://www.undp.org/content/ dam/trinidad_tobago/docs/DemocraticGovernance/Publications/ESCYA%20 Final%20Report%20(FINAL%20SUBMISSION) %2031%20Oct.pdf
Freemon, Kayla, Lidia Nuño and Charles Katz. 2020. “The Status of Youth Incarceration in the Caribbean. Caribbean Journal of Criminology 2, 1: 48–74. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349121005_The_Status_of_Youth_Incarceration_in_the_Caribbean
Hirschi, Travis. 1969. The Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Hutchinson, Carrie, C. 2018. Interpersonal communication. Plymouth, MI: Macmillan Learning Curriculum Solutions. https://www.macmillanlearning.com/college/ca/product/Interpersonal-Communication/p/0738096237
Gardner, Patrick. 2011. An Overview of Juvenile Mental Health Courts. American Bar Association. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_interest/child_law/resources/child_law_practiceonline/child_law_practice/vol30/september_2011/an_overview_of_juvenilementalhealthcourts/
Kobrin, S. 1976. Labeling Approaches: Problems and Limits. In Delinquency, Crime, and Society, edited by J. F. Short, 1–15. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Laurent, B, A. Barnes, T. Chambers, and S. Gray. 2011. “Caribbean Basin Security Imitative Juvenile Justice Assessment.” USAID Barbados, 2011. Retrieved from https://democracyinternational.com/media/Caribbean%20Basin%20 Security%20Initiative%20Juvenile%20Justice%20Assessment.pdf
Myer, David, and Jean Twenge. 2013. Social Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.
Piquero, Alex. 2016. The Handbook of Criminological Theory: Wiley Handbooks in Criminology and Criminal Justice, 1st Edition.
Santrock, John. 1999. Life Span Development. United States of America: McBraw Hill Companies Inc.
Lawrence, Regina. 2001. The Politics of Force: Media and the Construction of Police Brutality. Edited by Haven P. Simmons. Contemporary Sociology, 30(5), 520.Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.2307/3089363
Tindigarkayo, Jimmy, Dacia Leslie and Nicole Thwaites. 2019. External Evaluation of “A New Path: Promoting a Healthy Environment and Productive Alternatives for Juvenile Remandees and Offenders in Jamaica.” Organization of American States. Retrieved from http://portal.oas.org/en/saf/accountability/ docs/ANewPath_Final_Dec2019.pdf
Wallace, C, W. 2013. “Is Incarceration the Best Method for Altering the Life Trajectory of Juvenile Offenders in Trinidad and Tobago?” https://sta.uwi.edu/conferences/12/icopa/documents/CP-Wendall%20Wallace_Is%20Incarceration%20the%20Best%20Method%20for%20Altering%20the%20Life%20Trajectory%20of%20Juvenile%20Offenders%20in%20Trinidad%20and%20Tobago.doc#:~:text=In%20Trinidad%20and%20Tobago%20most,or%20the%20Youth%20Training%20Centre.&text=The%20use%20of%20incarceration%20therefore,the%20incidence%20of%20juvenile%20offending.
Williams, Dianne, Lily Hoffman, Daniel Sabet, Catherine Caligan, and Meredith Feenstra. 2018. “Evaluation of Juvenile Justice Sector Reform Implementation in St. Lucia, St. Kitts and Nevis, and Guyana: Baseline Report.” USAID, Retrieved from https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00T1BS.pdf.
