The Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics released a findings report pursuant to the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003
(P.L. 108-79) (PREA) requires the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) to carry out a
comprehensive statistical review and analysis of the incidents and effects of prison rape for each calendar year. This report fulfills the requirement under Sec. 4(c)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act to provide a list of juvenile correctional facilities
according to the prevalence of sexual victimization, entitled Sexual Victimization in Juvenile Facilities 2008-09
Completed by Allen H. Beck, Ph.D., Paige M. Harrison and Paul Guerino, BJS Statisticians, is the first pathetic attempt at a National Survey of Youth in Custody.
The attempt is pathetic because it accepts, as seen in its methodology section, that the facilities are in compliance of federal, state and local laws of reporting abuse and neglect. That is an assumption that could have easily been ruled out if the BJS Statisticians had any type of rudimentary background in child welfare policy.
For instance, if one looks U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA), one would be able to see the lack of reporting and monitoring, documented by the same Department this report was generated.
In most juvenile facilities, the only avenue for a youth to file a complaint is through the facility. The facility, not wanting to be contractually debarred, fined, license revoked, sanction, or risk bad publicity, will not report, let alone maintain a complaint registry database.
Then there is the next stratosphere of administrative deficiencies, pouring more fuel on the flames heating up the controversy in the legitimacy of data, is the non-existence of local regulation or databases. Continuing on up to a state level will further demonstrate the data are all suspect as the states have never once met annual benchmarks in its child welfare system.
What were not even raised as possible biases:
(1)Researcher bias: The DOJ was investigating itself, an inherent conflict of interest as it never raised participation of the DHHS OIG activities;
(2)Selection bias: In the sample, there were no residential institutions or temporary foster care shelters which would have fallen well within the range of acceptability.
Included are questions surrounding the qualifications of the population of facilities. If the validity of reporting of abuse and neglect is at the heart of the matter, then it should have been properly identified;
(3)Policy bias: This one is all mine. Never did they mention the exclusions and exemptions with the Freedom of Information Act in dealing with matters of children who are under the aegis of the state. States have multiple confidentiality policies that do not allow the warehousing of youth complaints;
(4) Contamination bias:
Q: Who does a youth report abuses to while incarcerated?
A: Reporting it to the incarcerator who is abusing.
Q: How does a youth report sexual abuse when there is fraud in the case?
A: Never.
Out of pure safety and survival issues, a youth may not be inclined to report out of fear of retaliation or threats, meaning the abuser will "intervene" with an increase of abuse to continue revenue-maximization schemes;
(5)Compliance bias: As touched upon earlier in this post, compliance to abuse and neglect reporting was automatically assumed;
(6)Operationalization bias: It breaks down the incidents into those involving actual private parts, and those that involve kissing, exhibitionist behavior and misc. (i.e. showing porn). There are significant difference between the degrees of sexual misconduct, even on federal and state levels. There were no specification of the categories nor were there any assignment. This leaves the reader to, I guess, "guess" as to the rates of occurrence and how it relates to staff interactions with youths.
I could continue, but I believe I have made my point.
If the writers of these findings properly identify the limitations of the study, then, the report would be worth replication. As it stands, the National Survey of Youth in Custody Report, Sexual Victimization in Juvenile Facilities 2008-09 completed by Allen H. Beck, Ph.D., Paige M. Harrison and Paul Guerino, BJS Statisticians, is a wonderful educational tool for better understanding the lack of accountability and transparency in child welfare.
U.S. DOJ Report on Sexual Victimization in Juvenile Facilities 2010
State of Michigan Committee on Appropriations for Human Services will be holding session to review this report, Thursday, January 14, 2010 at 9:00 a.m., 426 State Capitol Building, Chaired by Representative Dudley Spade, Clerk Phone Number 517-373-8080.
As Michigan has some of the most egregious administrative child welfare administrative operations in the nation, it will be interesting to review the review of the committee.
It can only be hoped that the need for a central registry for child welfare be established to end fraud in child welfare, not just in Michigan, but for the entire nation, and world.
The rates of sexual victimization in juvenile facilities reported by youth needs to be considered higher that what is found in this report. I do not know what to be considered worse, the fact that youth are being harmed at an alarming rate under the care of the state, or the fact that this DOJ publication is covering it up.
No comments:
Post a Comment