K.J.C., who was 17, was a model summer counselor for two years at a youth activities club, was liked by his teachers in high school, was not a disruptive influence in class, and excelled at photography. However, K.J.C. suffered from Attention Deficit Disorder ("ADD"). His grades were spotty and he was suspended from school twice because of his behavior. More importantly, befell in with a friend of questionable character, Ryan Washburn. K.J.C. owed Washburn $180 for drugs that Washburn had sold to K.J.C. In order to discharge the debt (and to receive ten percent of the profits), KJ.C. agreed to drive Washburn to a local bank so that Washburn could commit an armed robbery. K.J.C. did not have to wait for Washburn, since Washburn intended to make his escape through the city's sewer system.
Washburn, using a replica pistol, robbed the bank of over $15,000, but after a bank employee reported the robbery to the police, two officers arrived at the bank just as Washburn was exiting. After Washburn pointed his replica weapon at the officers, one of the officers fatally shot Washburn.
K.J.C. was later arrested and charged with armed robbery for his part in the crime. He also was charged with two felony drug offenses relating to K.J.C.'s contribution of $100 to Washburn, who purchased $1,300 worth of LSD, and his role in subsequently selling the LSD.
Under the Federal Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act ("FJJDPA"), 18 U.S.C. § 5038, the court had to decide whether KJ.C. was a good candidate for rehabilitation, or, in the alternative, if he should be transferred for adult prosecution in federal district court.
Holding: The facts of the case did not warrant a transfer for adult prosecution. In accordance with the Eighth Circuit's prior decisions, the court had to consider six statutory factors in K.J.C. should be transferred for adult prosecution:
"[T]he age and social background of the juvenile; the nature of the offense; the extent and nature of the juvenile's prior delinquency record; the juvenile's present intellectual development and psychological maturity; the nature of past treatment efforts and the juvenile's response to such efforts; [and] the availability of programs designed to treat the juvenile's behavioral problems."
Family and social environment are probably the most important influences on the long-term outcome of ADHD.
The court conceded that K.J.C. was close to 18 years old, the age at which he would not have been covered by the FJJDPA. However, he had a very stable family; both his mother and father were professionals, his brother was a teacher, his sister had a graduate degree, and they all demonstrated support for K.J.C. Thus, the court ruled that the first factor was neutral, weighing neither for nor against transfer. And noting the importance of the drug offenses, but pointing to the lack of violence associated with all of the alleged offenses and K.J.C.'s relatively minor role, the court ruled that this factor did not weigh heavily in favor of transfer.
On the other hand, with regard to the remaining four factors, the court found that K.J.C. had a nearly clean record, average intelligence and maturity a complete absence of prior treatment, and the fact that treatment programs (including for substance abuse) were available, all of which weighed heavily against transfer for adult prosecution. The court held that the interests of justice would not be served by a transfer of K.J.C. for adult prosecution, and that K.J.C. could benefit from treatment.
| C. Keith Conners, Ph.D. Director of Med. Psychology Duke University Med. Center |
Dr. Conners comments: The natural history of children with Attention Deficit Disorder (also known as Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder or "ADHD") has been well studied. Problems in school, both academic and behavioral, are prominent in early childhood. In adolescence there is increased risk of antisocial behavior, alcohol or drug abuse, and an almost universal loss of self-esteem. The latter effect is likely to increase susceptibility to deviant peer influences, expressions of anger, and resentment towards authority or establishment culture. {Weiss, G. and L Hechtman, HYPERACTIVE CHILDREN GROWN UP: ADHD IN CHILDREN ADOLESCENTS AND ADULTS. 2nd Ed. 1993, New York: Guilford.} Rates of single and multiple serious offenses and of institutionalization for delinquency are significantly higher in ADHD adolescents and young adults compared with matched controls. Findings suggest a strong relationship between childhood ADHD and later arrests for delinquent behavior {Satterfield, J.H. CM. Hoppe, et al., American Journal of Psychiatry, 1982 139(6):p. 795-798.}, driving accidents, and sexual misconduct. In young adulthood there is lowered academic and vocational success relative to siblings and general family achievement status.
The long-term outcome is highly dependent upon the relative protective and risk factors present in the individual case. Of these, family and social environment are probably the most significant. ADHD children coming from more intact and advantaged homes have a greater likelihood of successful outcomes. Treatment has a significant impact, but medication alone is not enough to prevent serious crimes. Evidence suggests that a combination of drug therapy and other forms of therapy targeting specific needs of the individual can have a significant role in preventing subsequent felonious behavior. For example, in one study where county police records were used as an outcome measure, multimodal therapy had a highly significant effect in reducing felony convictions. {Satterfield, Hoppe, et al., supra.}
One odd fact about the legal precedents, however, is the argument that above average intellectual ability and personal maturity should dispose to transferring the child to adult prosecution. The argument appears to reflect the belief that when the individual is both bright and more mature, there is less likelihood of changing one's ways. Therefore, in this case, the finding that the adolescent was only of average intellect and maturity disposed towards a consideration as a child litigant rather than as an adult. This argument appears to fly in the face of much evidence to the contrary. It is generally held that high IQ and personal maturity are protective factors, not risk factors, with respect to treatment outcome efforts. {Moffitt, T.E. and PA. Silva, Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 1988. 16(5): p. 553-569. Rae-Grant, N, et al., Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 1989.28(2): p. 262.8.}
Evidence in the present case suggests that at the time of his crimes, this 17 year-old youngster with ADHD was a "late-onset delinquent." That is, he showed few signs of an early conduct disorder or antisocial personality, both of which have a morbid course and high risk of continued worsening overtime, characterized by diminishing response to interventions. Instead, he was a child with good social skills, well-liked by teachers, and valiantly attempting to find some area in school where he felt competent (such as photography in this instance). He may have been the black sheep in a family with successful siblings and accomplished parents.
Treatment must include a high level of monitoring.
In many such cases, the cumulative trauma to self-esteem leads to a search for validation in a deviant peer group. Such children are easy prey to slick manipulators who can capitalize on the ADHD child's failure to evaluate consequences, and their desperate need for approval from an older, "stronger" or street-smart individual. The best chance for treatment success is early multi-modal therapy. While this youngster got part of the needed treatment (Ritalin), as is frequently the case, there was an absence of other therapies that could have made a difference. The court is correct that with his combination of strengths, he is still a good candidate for rehabilitation.
The courts have recognized the needs for multi-modal treatment in their frequent contractual relationships with adult treatment facilities that offer drug and alcohol treatment, supportive psychotherapy educational support, cognitive restructuring, anger and violence management programs, etc. A further irony is the recognition that secure treatment facilities with 24-hour monitoring are often necessary for adjudicated delinquents, but most available in adult facilities. Research shows that monitoring the child's whereabouts while still in the home is the single most important factor in preventing ADHD and conduct-disordered children from committing delinquent acts. Treatment for this youngster, whether still at home or in a juvenile facility, must include a high level of monitoring along with the other needed treatment components. His failure to receive the combination of dose monitoring, psychological support, and pharmacotherapy is all too familiar in the life stories of ADHD youth.
