The Disproportionate Overrepresentation of Minority Youth in ...

334
I have seen a couple of instances of that. I don’t know why it happens, but
I have seen a couple of instances. But we give real good court appointed
attorneys so I don’t know. Maybe it has more to do with the family and
their ability to pay or it has to do with the economic stuff.
Sometimes (juveniles) might be able to have access to better treatment as a
result of having money and therefore maybe having another alternative
available for a court disposition that otherwise wouldn’t be available under
normal circumstances.
Finally, some decision makers feel that decisions can be affected by a youth’s access to
resources, not necessarily in terms of counsel but in terms of services. According to this
view, the system will not intervene as much if the child can afford services. An example
of this would be if a youth was caught drinking and driving. In Scott County, the typical
response to a drug or alcohol related charge is to require the youth to attend some type of
CADS (Center for Alcohol and Drug Services) program. It may or may not be residential.
However, if a youth’s family has the financial resources necessary for private treatment,
the court may allow the family to take care of the matter privately, without being forced
to do so by court order.
According to most of the decision makers, they have not seen blatant racism.
However, there may have been some subtle situations in which bias occurred. Two
juvenile court officers did admit to seeing blatant racism in the system when asked if they
had witnessed or been aware of race or ethnic bias. In the interviews, blatant racism was
defined as any action by a decision maker that was obviously made strictly on the basis of
race. The question “Have you ever witnessed racism in the system” was answered with a
number of responses.