School: University of Tennessee School of Law

I think that if surveyed, issues concerning the safety, well-being, and education of children would be paramount in importance to most Georgians. After 11 weeks of working within the Georgia Juvenile Court system it is clear that a concern for the long-term health, emotional stability, and safety of children is either unexpressed by or completely lacking within the Georgia legislature's financial policies and actions concerning children. Over the past couple of months, thanks to the Barton Child Law & Policy Clinic, I have been able to observe every aspect of the Juvenile Court System in Georgia. What I have learned is that every department with a significant impact on the system is overworked and under-funded, that there is a lack of communication between the various departments which inflates the time and cost of dealing with children in a given community, and that the goal of protecting children is lost in the bureaucratic shuffle.

The Department of Juvenile Justice

I spent two full days with the Department of Juvenile Justice over the summer. The first day I spent at a RYDC, where I participated in a screening. The purpose of this meeting is to determine the placement of children who have been committed to the Department of Juvenile Justice. Only rather than a determination, the most influence the committee can share is a mere recommendation. I mention this to emphasize that there is yet another layer of the Department of Juvenile Justice, or DJJ, who ultimately decides, based on funding, the placement of the child. I was told that more often than not, the deciding committee does not follow the recommendation of the screening committee, especially if the recommendation is for a more expensive placement such as a Youth Detention Center (YDC), wilderness program or Therapeutic setting. I was a bit surprised to learn that a child can go before a judge, be sentenced to a wilderness program then go before a screening committee that recommends the same program, yet ultimately be placed on probation in the community due to funding concerns. After observing this process, I wondered what message a juvenile might receive from going through this flip-flop among committees. Then, after seeing that the child was simply returned to his former way of life, with only the added inconvenience of probation, I asked myself, "Where is the deterrent?"

The answer is that it isn't a deterrent at all. This could explain why so many of these children are multiple offenders. My second day with DJJ was spent visiting the places where these multiple offenders are placed: YDC in Macon, as well as a Wilderness Program. I felt very sad at the YDC, seeing children who had committed several felonies sitting in a prison setting serving a five-year sentence. Again I wondered if this is the most effective response to juvenile crime. What good can five years in prison do for a child? I saw a child, age 16 who is two years into a twenty-year sentence, the first four of which will be served in a YDC and the remainder to be served in adult prison. This boy was so scared of his environment that he was committing minor infractions that would send him to solitary confinement in order to avoid time in the general population. It seems logical that the child, when transferred to adult jail will either not make it, meaning he will commit suicide or harmed in general population, or he will become a hardened criminal only to be released back into the public no earlier than his twenty-sixth birthday.

I was under the false impression that the juvenile justice system was supposed to be largely rehabilitative. I see no rehabilitation in this system. I was very impressed with the Wilderness program. I believe it is the ideal setting for rehabilitation. The children are given mentors and positive male role models. They are taught values, probably for the first time in their lives. The program has a pretty good success rate though it is cost prohibitive as it has capacity for only a few kids with a lot of overhead for staff and facilities. It is unfortunate that despite Georgia's abundant wilderness areas, a more cost effective program has not been developed so as to provide another generation of Georgians with productive members of society.

Department of Family and Children Services

DFCS is another agency that seems to be ripe with opportunities for productive change. I observed this department when I spent a good amount of time talking with various representatives from DFCS, and an entire day with an investigator. This agency is the epitome of overworked and underpaid. The central problem is obviously caseloads. The case worker that I shadowed for a day literally broke down at one point in the afternoon due to the overwhelming amount of work that was yet to be done before she could call it a day. In addition to the sheer volume of children that each of these people must evaluate and serve, is the pressure of knowing that any mistake, even made in good faith, could ultimately cause a child's death or serious injury.

I am also disturbed by the business practices of the Agency. It seems that many of the employment practices are financially inefficient. For example, the Department utilizes a 90-day training program for DFCS workers that typically stay less than that same amount of time. The amount of money that the State of Georgia is losing in training has to be astronomical. In addition to the actual cost, this practice tends to leave agencies awaiting trained workers even more short handed. Logically, better incentives for workers might prevent such excessive turn-over. Higher salaries are just one incentive that might be utilized and I realize that much of this will be settled by the Kenny A. settlement, eventually. Four day weeks, flex hours, and better benefits might also be options. Regardless, fewer turnovers would prevent the shift of cases onto already overburdened workers, thus alleviating worker stress and creating a happier workplace. Efficiency seems to be the cornerstone of this much needed solution.

In reflecting upon the cases that I have seen involving DFCS, my biggest concern is that for the most part, the children are removed from their home and are not placed in a reasonably alternative setting. In the county that I observed, there were several occasions where there was no placement for a child, leaving the child to spend their first night of foster care in a motel room. Don't get me wrong; I am not advocating that children be left in homes with methamphetamine labs, or abusive parents. But the reality is that removing a child from their bonded adult, whomever that may be, will cause psychological damage. Knowing that, the evaluation for removing a child from a home should be: does the child face greater danger staying in the home than what is inevitable by the act of removing him/her from the home and during the subsequent chaos that is foster care? In the event that removal is determined to be the least damaging choice, the ideal minimum that DFCS can do is provide a loving and semi-permanent setting for the child to go. Again, I know this solution seems to be hindered by a lack of financial resources, but should be considered as a goal nonetheless.

Mental Health

I spent the least amount of my time with the Mental Health Agency, as a result I have a casual observer's viewpoint. As such I immediately observed that Mental Health does not communicate well with the other agencies. In addition, it seems as though the people at Mental Health do not have a clear understanding of their responsibilities to the community. I actually heard a representative for Mental Health say in a meeting that a particular child could not be helped because she was "too disturbed". Apparently I have been under the erroneous impression that those who are "too disturbed" are the Mental Health agencies' specialty. Who else is better qualified to deal with the "too disturbed" children? This again, in my opinion is a financial consideration. I think that an effort needs to be made by the administrators to inform their employees of the responsibilities and the resources available, so that children in need can be better served.

Methamphetamine

This is the drug of choice in the County of my placement, and is involved in about 95% of the cases that we see in Juvenile Court. I was able to attend a meeting with the citizen group formed to fight the meth problem in this county, but efforts need to take place on a federal level to effectively fight the expansion of meth use. I am not normally a big supporter of the DEA, however in the case of meth, some serious money needs to be put into the prevention of this drug. I can't tell you how many times in the last two months that I have seen parents when faced with the choice of keeping their baby or their drug, choose meth. That is a powerful drug.

The new legislation concerning Sudafed, while a step in the right direction, has a huge loophole in its language that needs to be closed. The language reads that all medicine containing pseudoephedrine as its sole active ingredient must be kept behind the counter; this leaves all other medicines which contain pseudoephedrine among other active ingredients on the shelf. In addition to these steps, pressure should be put on the manufacturers of the drugs to come up with an alternative cold remedy with fewer social consequences.

Education

Due to the nature of a summer placement, I was unable to observe the local school system during my internship. Nonetheless I feel the need to comment. Nothing impacts children more than education. Education is the single most important thing that a state can do for its citizens especially those who are children. Education could solve many of the problems seen in the Juvenile Court System. Unfortunately the budget does not reflect the importance of education. It is an institution with too many responsibilities and not enough resources, which is why you see schools in my county who have had special education students arrested for actions that are not crimes but instead are a manifestation of their disability, high school juvenile delinquents with grade-school reading levels, and students who effectively drop out of school prior to the legal age with no repercussions. The schools are aware of these problems, but are given a garden hose to put out a three-alarm fire. So they either pass the buck, by redirecting the child into the Juvenile Court system or they drop the ball altogether doing nothing. This, once again, appears to be a financial consideration.

Juvenile Court

Juvenile Courts have the daunting job of taking a child who may very well have been involved with every aforementioned institution and render a solution. Obviously, I have spent the vast majority of my time in the Juvenile Court. I will say that I am fortunate enough to be in one of the best Juvenile Courts in the State. Despite the efforts of the dedicated staff, the problems here are the same, financial. While the court calendar is overwhelming, for the most part the time limits are met and a limited number of continuances occur. Judge Tilley does a fantastic job of keeping the cases on track by keeping her thumb on all involved. This takes a great deal of overtime, and most Juvenile Court Judges are not willing to put forth the effort.

It's funny that I came into this placement with many preconceived notions, which have now been placed on shaky ground. One case in particular comes to mind. It was a dirty house case. Both parents came to court very sorry, and testified that the house was clean and it would never happen again. Knowing the trauma to the children, I felt that they should have been returned to their parents that day. The Judge kept the kids in DFCS custody and set the calendar for a 30-day review. When we came back to Court, the Guardian Ad Litem testified that the new residence was marginally better, but that it had a propane tank hooked to the stove. Clearly the Judge had been correct in keeping these children in the first place. The sequence of this case made me realize what a difficult job it is to be a Juvenile Court Judge. Really it's a guessing game as to which parents will get it together and which will not.

Conclusion

I feel very fortunate to have had this experience this summer. I was able to learn about all facets of the Juvenile Court system from the varying perspective of the participants. I will be able to take this experience back to Tennessee where I will have a deeper understanding of the Juvenile process, and a perspective that will allow me to facilitate change for the children in Tennessee.