GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY Department of Social Work Fall, SOCW 654 001: Social Policy for Children and Youth CRN 77281 Professor: Steven Rose, PhD Class: Tuesdays, 4:30 7:10 p.m., 10340 Democracy Lane, Room 322 Office: 10340 Democracy Lane, SOCW Room 315 Office Hours: 1:30 2:30 p.m., Mondays; 3:00 4:00 p.m. Tuesdays Email: srose@gmu.edu Phone: 703-993-4204 Fax: 703-934-2193 Prerequisite: Completion of MSW foundation coursework Course Description: Examines social policies, programs, and services on behalf of children and youth with implications for social work; including child welfare, child and adolescent health and mental health, juvenile justice, and school social work. Explores how societal norms regarding family and definitions of children s well-being influenced these policies over time. Course Objectives: Upon successful completion of the course, the student will be able to: 1. Understand the historical development of social welfare policy for children and youth in the United States. 2. Analyze the influencing factors and available policy options as they pertain to welfare policies for children and youth. 3. Analyze the unique social policies relevant for child welfare, juvenile justice, mental health and health, and school social work. 4. Critically assess the interrelations between child welfare, juvenile justice, mental health and health, and school social work polices. 5. Differentiate the role of social work and other helping professionals in influencing social welfare policies for children and youth across a range of settings and organizational contexts. 6. Analyze the underlying value assumptions inherent in child welfare policies. 7. Assess the impact of social welfare policies for children and youth in fostering social justice. 1
Required Textbooks: Jenson, J. M., & Fraser, M. W. (Eds.). (). Social policy for children and families: A risk and resilience perspective. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. ISBN-10: 1412981395 ISBN- 13: 978-1412981392 [abbreviation: SPC&F] Lindsay, D. (2009). Child poverty and inequality: Securing a better future for America s children. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN-10: 0195305442 ISBN-13: 978-0195305449 [abbreviation: CP&I] Course Expectations: 1. All students are expected to adhere to George Mason University s Honor Code: To promote a stronger sense of mutual responsibility, respect, trust, and fairness among all members of the George Mason University community and with the desire for greater academic and personal achievement, we, the student members of the University Community have set forth this: Student members of the George Mason University community pledge not to cheat, plagiarize, steal, or lie in matters related to academic work. 2. The use of person first language in written and verbal class communications (e.g. people with disabilities rather than the disabled) is preferred. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 provides protection from discrimination for qualified individuals with disabilities. Students who are qualified by the Office of Disability Services (703-993-2474) and require special accommodations must provide faculty with documentation explaining the required accommodations at the beginning of the semester. 3. MASONLIVE is George Mason University's student e-mail system which can be accessed at: https://thanatos.gmu.edu/masonlive/login Useful assistance pertaining to student e-mail is available at the above website. 4. E-mail messages should identify the course and section number in the subject line. Each message should refer to one course and one subject. The instructor is ordinarily available via e-mail during business hours. 5. You are responsible for the proper functioning of your Mason e-mail account such that you are able to send and receive e-mail. If you experience any technical difficulties with your Mason e-mail account call the ITU Support Center at 703-993-8870 during business hours to resolve the issue. 6. Good writing skills are crucial for social workers. Being able to organize your thoughts in clear sentences, using proper English, is essential. All written assignments submitted in this class will be evaluated on content as well as organization, construction, grammar, spelling and usage. Graduate students may use the GMU Writing Center to further their skills. Visit: 2
http://www.writingcenter.gmu.edu 7. When conducting research for an assignment, students should not rely solely on internet sources. A combination of library and internet sources is acceptable. All sources must be properly cited in text and in the reference list. Use the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA, 6 th edition, 2 nd printing) guidelines for writing and formatting your paper. When considering the use of online sources, scrutinize the website carefully. Wikipedia should not be cited as a source. The following link should be consulted as a guide for evaluating internet sources: http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/teachinglib/guides/internet/evaluate.html 8. Include your name, date, course and section numbers, and course and paper titles on the cover page of your paper. Pages should be numbered and double-spaced using Times New Roman 12 point font with 1 margins on all sides. 9. Keep a copy of every assignment you write. Written assignments should be handed directly to the course instructor. Alternatively, they may be turned in, in person, to administrative staff in the Social Work Department office during regular business hours. Papers left in faculty mailboxes or slipped under closed office doors will not be considered received unless and until they are retrieved by the instructor. Students should not send assignments to the instructor via e-mail or fax unless they have received prior approval to do so. Assignments submitted in this manner should not be considered received until a confirmation is received from the instructor. 10. The assignment deadlines have been established to promote your progress and the orderly, sequential development of the course material. Complete and submit your work on time. Your paper is docked one full letter grade if it is turned in seven days past the due date. After seven days, your paper will not be accepted at all, absent prior written approval of the instructor. Requests for late acceptance must be made in writing prior to the due date for the assignment; approval is not routinely granted. 11. Students are expected to complete assigned readings before coming to class. Lecture material may not necessarily parallel the text; it is intended to supplement, not substitute for, the required readings. For each class, be prepared to discuss the assigned readings, ask and answer questions, and integrate reading material into class discussions and activities. 12. Students are expected to attend class regularly. Any absence from class should be communicated to the instructor via e-mail prior to the beginning of class whenever possible, or as soon as possible thereafter. Students who miss a class should obtain class notes and find out what they missed from their classmates. 13. Plan to arrive to class on time. Late arrival is disruptive to the class. If you know that you will be late send an e-mail message to the instructor at your earliest convenience. 14. Active verbal participation in class discussions and exercises is expected of all students. Those students who rarely or never speak up during class are not verbally contributing to class. No class 3
member should participate in a manner which either disrupts the class or regularly hinders other class members from participating. 15. Cell phone use compromises the concentration needed for successful learning. Turn off your cell phone or place it on silent mode during class. Laptop computers should only be used in class for class work. 16. A respectful relationship between the student and the instructor is essential. This course is a joint effort between the student and the instructor. The instructor will be available to meet with students during office hours, before or after class, and by appointment. Students are encouraged to contact the instructor by e-mail. 17. The most effective learning is interactive and collaborative. Collaborative learning requires student participation and cooperative efforts and interaction in class discussions and small group work. You are expected to be an active member of class discussions. This supports your learning as well as that of your peers. Be prepared to present your assigned work to the class and discuss it with all. 18. The course schedule is subject to change. Any changes will be announced in class. It is the student s responsibility to monitor and adhere to any such changes. Grading: A The work is among the very best in the class. It shows extraordinary creativity, ingenuity and critical thinking. Grammar, spelling, and sentence structure are flawless. The prose is of the caliber that reading the work is a pleasure. Structure, evidence, logic, style, and originality are all excellent. A- The work significantly exceeds minimal requirements. Concepts from the social science and social work literature are well incorporated and applied evenly. The work shows clear evidence of careful and creative thought. It is well written, with minimal, if any errors in syntax or grammar. B+ The work solidly addresses all of the assignment requirements. Structure, evidence, logic, style, and originality are all very good. B There is some effort to incorporate ideas, but they are not consistently applied throughout the work. Major points of assignment are addressed but much more effort should have been made to engage in critical thinking or to improve writing. B- Structure, evidence, logic, style, and originality are all minimally acceptable. Students must achieve a B- or better to pass the course. C+ Structure, evidence, logic, style, and originality are not all minimally acceptable. C The assignment requirements are not fully met. Serious problems exist in organization, explanation of concepts, grammar, or syntax. 4
D One or more of the following are not present: thesis, arguments, textual evidence. Organization is incoherent; writing is very awkward and unintelligible. The writer shows no conception of the most rudimentary aspects of writing, e.g., outline, paragraphs. F One or more major elements of the assignment have been omitted, or the assignment is handed in more than seven days late without having sought and received written permission to do so from the course instructor. IN A grade of incomplete (IN) will be assigned if, due to serious extenuating circumstances, the student is unable to complete the required course work by the due date. It is the instructor s discretion whether or not to allow a student to be assigned an incomplete grade. These situations will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. All missing work must be completed and submitted to the instructor in accordance with the Mason academic calendar: http://registrar.gmu.edu/calendars/ Letter Grade Numerical Range A 95-100 A- 89-94 B+ 85-88 B 82-84 B- 79-81 C+ 75-78 C 69-74 D 58-68 F 0-57 Mason grading policies appear in the University catalog: http://catalog.gmu.edu/index.php If you want advice on how to improve your grades, let s meet and discuss this. If you want to dispute an assignment grade, first provide me with a written statement explaining your rationale. Then I will review your work and we can meet to discuss the matter if necessary. Assignments: You will write four short, scholarly papers, each of which should be 1000-1500 words (in addition to the title page, reference list, and appendices). These papers will become the basis for your class 5
presentations and your panel discussions. Each set of work for a unit, i.e., written paper, class presentation, and panel discussion, will comprise 25% of your course grade. The quality of your written work will determine your grade. The papers will reflect social policy readings that you do for each unit of the course, i.e., child welfare; school social work; child and adolescent health and mental health; and juvenile justice. In each paper, focus on a particular trend or issue. Explicate competing values reflected in current social policies. Examples include child-centered vs. family-centered policies (child welfare), mainstreaming vs. specialized education (schools), targeted treatment vs. universal assessment for early intervention and prevention (child and adolescent mental health), and rights to due process vs. best interests of the child (juvenile justice). Explain how knowledge and values impact current social policies for children and youth. For each paper, focus on an issue that is essential in promoting child well-being and positive youth development, and indicate how social policies could be changed to better the lives of children and youth. Meeting Date Topic Activities Readings Written Assignments 1 8-30- Introduction to Course CP&I: Introduction, Chapter 1; Introduction & Chapter 1 2 9-6- Child Poverty CP&I: Chapters 2 & 3; Chapters 1&2 3 9-13- Child Welfare: Part I CP&I: Chapters 4&5; Chapter 3 4 9-20- Child Welfare: Part II Presentations CP&I: Chapters 6&7 5 9-27- Child Welfare: Part III Lecture, Presentations, & Panel Child Welfare paper due 6
6 10-4- School Social Work: Part I Chapter 4 7 10-18- School Social Work: Part II Presentations 8 10-25- School Social Work: Part III Lecture, Presentations, & Panel School Social Work paper due 9 11-1- Child & Adolescent Health & Mental Health: Part I Chapter 5 10 11-8- Child & Adolescent Health & Mental Health: Part II Presentations Chapters 6&7 11 11-15- Child & Adolescent Health & Mental Health: Part III Lecture, Presentations, & Panel Chapter 8 Child & Adolescent Health & Mental Health paper due 12 11-22- Juvenile Justice: Part I Chapter 9 13 11-29- Juvenile Justice: Part II Presentations Chapter 10 14 12-6- Juvenile Justice: Part III Lecture, Presentations, & Panel Juvenile Justice paper due 7
Topical Outline and Readings: The course includes the following four major units: child welfare, school social work, health and mental health, and juvenile justice, and. Each unit will consist of lectures, presentations, and panels. Unit 1: Child Welfare Addresses the historical development of child welfare services and examines critical policy issues relevant for the government s role in promoting the safety and security of minors, and for various forms of adoption (interracial, international, closed, open, and those involving single, gay and lesbian couples). Special attention will be given to policy implications of the implementation of the Adoption and Safe Families Act. Bagdasaryan, S. (2005). Evaluating family preservation services: Reframing the question of effectiveness. Children and Youth Services Review, 27(6), 615-635. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2004.11.014 Bell, M., & Wilson, K. (2006). Children's views of family group conferences. Br J Soc Work, 36(4), 671-681. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bch421 Berebitsky, J. (2000). Like our very own: Adoption and the changing culture of motherhood, 1851-1950. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. Bernstein, N. (2001). The lost children of Wilder: The epic struggle to change foster care. New York: Vintage Books. Berzin, S. C., Cohen, E., Thomas, K., & Dawson, W. C. (2008). Does family group decision making affect child welfare outcomes? Findings from a randomized control study. Child Welfare, 87(4), 35-54. doi:article Crampton, D., & Natarajan, A. (2006). Connections between group work and family meetings in child welfare practice: What can we learn from each other? Social Work with Groups, 28(1), 65. doi:10.1300/j009v28n01_05 Curry, L. (2007). The DeShaney case: Child abuse, family rights, and the dilemma of state intervention. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. Dagenais, C., Bégin, J., Bouchard, C., & Fortin, D. (2004). Impact of intensive family support programs: a synthesis of evaluation studies. Children and Youth Services Review, 26(3), 249-263. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2004.01.015 Haskins, R., Wulczyn, F., & Webb, M. B. (Eds.). (2007). Child protection: Using research to improve policy and practice. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Jackson, K. F. (2009). Building cultural competence: A systematic evaluation of the effectiveness of culturally sensitive interventions with ethnic minority youth. Children and Youth Services Review, 31(11), 1192-1198. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2009.08.001 Kolko, D. J., Herschell, A. D., Costello, A. H., & Kolko, R. P. (2009). Child welfare recommendations to improve mental health services for children who have experienced abuse and neglect: A national perspective. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 36(1), 50-62. doi:10.1007/s10488-008-0202-y 8
Lewandowski, C.A. & Briar-Lawson, K. (2009). Child welfare. In: S.F. Allen and E.M. Tracy (Eds.) Delivering home-based services: A social work perspective. New York: Columbia University Press. Lewandowski, C.A. & Briar-Lawson, K. (2009). Social policy context for home visiting. In: S.F. Allen and E.M. Tracy (Eds.) Delivering home-based services: A social work perspective. New York: Columbia University Press. Lewandowski, C. A., & GlenMaye, L. F. (2002). Teams in child welfare settings: Interprofessional and collaborative processes. Families in Society, 83(3), 245-256. Lindsey, D. (2003). The welfare of children. New York: Oxford University Press. Maas, C., Herrenkohl, T.I., & Sousa, C. (2008). Review of research on child maltreatment and violence in youth. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 9, 1, 56-67. Preyde, M., Adams, G., Cameron, G., & Frensch, K. (2009). Outcomes of children participating in mental health residential and intensive family services: Preliminary findings. Residential Treatment for Children & Youth, 26(1), 1-20. Rycraft, J. R., & Dettlaff, A. J. (2009). Hurdling the artificial fence between child welfare and the community: Engaging community partners to address disproportionality. Journal of Community Practice, 17(4), 464-482. doi:10.1080/10705420903300025 Sheets, J., Wittenstrom, K., Fong, R., James, J., Tecci, M., Baumann, D. J., & Rodriguez, C. (2009). Evidence-based practice in family group decision-making for Anglo, African American and Hispanic families. Children and Youth Services Review, 31(11), 1187-1191. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2009.08.003 Shirk, M., & Stangler, G. (2004). On their own: What happens to kids when they age out of the foster care system. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books. Walsh, J.D., & Mattingly, M.J. (2010). How are we measuring resilience following childhood maltreatment? Is the research adequate and consistent? What is the impact on research, practice, and policy? Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 11(1), 27-41. Wells, S. J., Merritt, L. M., & Briggs, H. E. (2009). Bias, racism and evidence-based practice: The case for more focused development of the child welfare evidence base. Children and Youth Services Review, 31(11), 1160-1171. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2009.09.002 Unit 2: School Social Work This unit explores the interface of social work in school settings. It addresses the historical development of school social work, and examines the effectiveness of the school/community/pupil relationship model of school social work practice. Attention will be given to the IDEA Act, and school social workers role in its implementation. Bower, H. A., Bowen, N. K., & Powers, J. D. (). Family-faculty trust as measured with the elementary school success profile. Children & Schools, 33(3), 158-167. Bye L., Shepard M., Partridge J., & Alvarez M. (2009). School social work outcomes: perspectives of school social workers and school administrators. Children & Schools, 31(2), 97-108. 9
Ciffone, J. (2007). Suicide prevention: An analysis and replication of a curriculum-based high school program. Social Work, 52(1), 41-49. Constable, R., & Alvarez M. (2006). Moving into specialization in school social work: issues in practice, policy, and education. School Social Work Journal, 42(3), 116-131. Corbin, J. N. (2005). Increasing opportunities for school social work practice resulting from comprehensive school reform. Children & Schools, 27(4), 239-246. Danielsen, A. G., Samdal, O., Hetland, J., & Wold, B. (2009). School-related social support and students perceived life satisfaction. Journal of Educational Research, 102 (4), 303-320. Dupper, D. R., & Montgomery Dingus, A. E. (2008). Corporal punishment in U.S. public schools: A continuing challenge for school social workers. Children & Schools, 30(4), 243-250. Early, T.J., & Vonk, M.E. (2001). Effectiveness of school social work from a risk and resilience perspective. Children & Schools, 23(1), 9-31. Franklin, C., & Kelly, M.S. (2009). Becoming evidence-informed in the real world of school social work practice. Children & Schools, 31(1), 46-56. Franklin, C., Kim, J.S., & Tripodi, S.J. (2009). A meta-analysis of published school social work practice studies: 1980-2007. Research on Social Work Practice, 19(6), 667-677. Jonson, R. M. (2008). School social work: engaging the community. Children & Schools, 30(3), 131-132. Jonson-Reid, M. Davis, L., Saunders, J., Williams, T., & Herbert Williams, J. (2005). Academic self-efficacy among African American youths: Implications for school social work practice. Children & Schools, 27(1), 5-14. Jonson, R. M., Kim, J., Barolak, M., Citerman, B., Laudel, C., Essma, A., Fezzi N., Green, D., Kontak, D., Mueller, N., & Thomas, C. (2007). Maltreated children in schools: the interface of school social work and child welfare. Children & Schools, 29(3), 182-191. Jozefowicz-Simbeni, D. M. (2008). An ecological and developmental perspective on dropout risk factors in early adolescence: Role of school social workers in dropout prevention efforts. Children & Schools, 30(1), 49-62. Kopels, S., & Lindsey, B.C. (2006). The complexity of confidentiality in schools today: the school social work context. School Social Work Journal, 42(3), 63-78. Rosier, K. B. (2000). Mothering inner city children: The early school years. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Teasley, M. L., & Miller, C. R. (). School social workers perceived efficacy at tasks related to curbing suspension and undesirable behaviors. Children & Schools, 33(3), 136-145. Vetere, R., & Carley, G. (2006). Creating a new model of help in school social work. Children & Schools, 28(3), 175-179. Unit 3: Child & Adolescent Mental Health and Health This unit includes an examination of 1) the policy implications associated with various ways to define and measure the need for health and mental health services for children and adolescents, 2) the impact of mental health reform on providing mental health care to children and adolescents, and 3) current models for providing mental health services to children and 10
adolescents, including wrap-around, systems of care, and school-based mental health. Social policies guiding the implementation of strategies to prevent health and mental health problems among youth will also be addressed. Bruns, E. J., & Walker, J. S. (2010). Defining practice: Flexibility, legitimacy, and the nature of systems of care and wraparound. Evaluation and Program Planning, 33(1), 45-48. doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2009.05.013 Costello, A. H. (2009). Child welfare recommendations to improve mental health services for children who have experienced abuse and neglect: A national perspective. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 36(1), 50-62. doi:10.1007/s10488-008-0202-y Farmer, E. M. Z., Burns, B. J., Phillips, S. D., Angold, A., & Costello, E. J. (2003). Pathways into and through mental health services for children and adolescents. Psychiatric Services, 54(1), 60-66. doi:10.1176/appi.ps.54.1.60 Flango, C. R. (2000). Family-focused courts. Journal of the Center for Families, Children and the Courts, 2, 99-106. Glied, S., & Cuellar, A.E. (2003). Trends and issues in child and adolescent mental health. Health Affairs, 22(5): 39-50. Kataoka, S. H., Zhang, L., & Wells, K. B. (2002). Unmet need for mental health care among U.S. children: Variation by ethnicity and insurance status. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 159(9), 1548-1555. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.159.9.1548. Kaye, L., Warner, L., Lewandowski, C.A., Greene, R., Acker, J.K., & Chiarella, N. (2009). The role of nurse practitioners in meeting the need for child and adolescent psychiatric services: A state-wide survey. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services, 47(3), 34-40. Kerker, B. D., & Dore, M. M. (2006). Mental health needs and treatment of foster youth: Barriers and opportunities. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 76(1), 138-147. doi:10.1037/0002-9432.76.1.138 Knitzer, J., & Cooper, J. (2006). Beyond integration: Challenges for children s mental health. Health Affairs 25(3): 670-679. Kolko, D. J., Herschell, A. D., Costello, A. H., & Kolko, R. P. (2009). Child welfare recommendations to improve mental health services for children who have experienced abuse and neglect: A national perspective. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 36(1), 50-62. doi:10.1007/s10488-008-0202-y Kutash, K., Duchnowski, A. J., & Lynn, N. (2006). School-based mental health: An empirical guide for decision-makers. The Research and Training Center for Children s Mental Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida. McGuinness, T. M. (2009). Youth in the mental health void: Wraparound is one solution. Journal of Psychosocial Nursing & Mental Health Services, 47(6), 23. Mennen, F. E., & Trickett, P. K. (2007). Mental health needs of urban children. Children and Youth Services Review, 29(9), 1220-1234. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.05.007 Moffit, T., and Melchior, M. (2007). Why does the worldwide prevalence of childhood attention deficit hyperactivity disorder matter? Am J Psychiatry 164(6): 856-858. Raines, J. C. (2008). Evidence-based practice in school mental health. New York: Oxford University Press. 11
Sturm, R., Ringel, J. S., & Andreyeva, T. (2003). Geographic disparities in children's mental health care. Pediatrics, 112(4), e308. Thompson, R. (2005). The course and correlates of mental health care received by young children: Descriptive data from a longitudinal urban high-risk sample. Children and Youth Services Review, 27(1), 39-50. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2004.07.003 U.S. Public Health Service, (2000) Report of the Surgeon General's Conference on Children's Mental Health: A National Action Agenda. Washington, DC: Department of Health and Human Services. Unit 4: Juvenile Justice This unit examines the historical development of the juvenile court, and how juveniles came to be treated differently than adults in the U.S. criminal justice system. Juvenile courts have jurisdiction over children in three basic types of situations: (1) when they are accused of conduct that would be considered a crime if committed by an adult; (2) when their parents or guardians abuse or neglect them or when they are in need; and, (3) when they violate rules that apply only to juveniles, called status offenses. Status offenses include unapproved absence from school. Special attention will be given to the policy issue of a juvenile s right to due process, and the juvenile court s special mandate to look after the best interests of the child. Barton, W. (2006). Incorporating the strengths perspective into intensive juvenile aftercare. Western Criminology Review, 7(2), 48-61. Bernard, T. J., & Kurlychek, M. C. (2010). The cycle of juvenile justice (2 nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Bishop, D. (2000). Juvenile offenders in the adult criminal justice system. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Clement, M. (2002). The juvenile justice system. (3rd ed.) Woburn, MA: Butterworth. Coalition for Juvenile Justice. (2000). Serving the mental health needs of young offenders. Washington, DC: Author. Fagan, J., & Zimring, F. (Eds.) (2000). The changing borders of juvenile justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Forgays, D. K., & DeMilio, L. (2005). Is teen court effective for repeat offenders? A test of the restorative justice approach. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 49(1), 107-118. Gebo, E. (2005). Do family courts administer individualized justice in delinquency cases? Criminal Justice Policy Review, 16(2), 190-210. Greenwood, P. (2006). Changing lives: Delinquency prevention as crime-control policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Grisso, T. (2004). Double jeopardy: Adolescent offenders with mental disorders. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Human Rights Watch. (2005). The rest of their lives: Life without parole for child offenders in the U.S. New York: Human Rights Watch & Amnesty International. Jonson-Reid, M., & Barth, R. (2000). From treatment report to juvenile incarceration: The role of child welfare services. Children and Youth Services Review, 22(7), 493-516. 12
Lane, J., Turner, S., Fain, T., & Sehgal, A. (2005). Evaluating an experimental intensive juvenile probation program: Supervision and official outcomes. Crime and Delinquency, 51, 26-52. Manfredi, C.P. (2000). The Supreme Court and juvenile justice. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. McNeece, C. A., & Jackson, S. (2004). Juvenile justice policy: Current trends and 21 st century issues. In A. Roberts (Ed.), Juvenile justice sourcebook (pp. 41-68). New York: Oxford University Press. Mears, D., Hay, C., Gertz, M., & Mancini, C. (2007). Public opinion and the foundation of the juvenile court. Criminology, 45 (1), 223-258. Moon, M. M., Sundt, J. L., Cullen, F. T., & Wright, J. P. (2000). Is child saving dead? Public support for juvenile rehabilitation. Crime and Delinquency, 46(1), 38-60. Nunn, K. (2002). The child as other: Race and differential treatment in the juvenile justice system. DePaul Law Review, 51 (Spring), 134-146. Osgood, D. W., Foster, M., Flanagan, C., & Ruth, G. (2005). On your own without a net: The transition to adulthood for vulnerable populations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Rodriguez, N., & Webb, V. J. (2004). Multiple measures of juvenile drug court effectiveness: Results of a quasi-experimental design. Crime and Delinquency, 50(2), 292-314. Rosenheim, M., Zimring, F.,Tanenhaus, D., & Dohrn, B. (Eds.). (2002). A century of juvenile justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Sampson, R., Morenoff, J., & Raudenbush, S. (2005). Social anatomy of racial and ethnic disparities in violence. American Journal of Public Health, 95(2), 224-232. Sarri, R., & Shook, J. (2005). Human rights and juvenile justice in the United States: Challenges and opportunities. In M. Ensalaco & L. Majka (Eds.), Children s human rights (pp. 197-228). New York: Rowman and Littlefield. Setterstein, R., Furstenberg, F., & Rumbaut, R. (2005). On the frontier of young adulthood: Theory, research and public policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Sloan, J. J., III, & Smykla, J. O. (2003). Juvenile drug courts: Understanding the importance of dimensional variability. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 14(3), 339-360. Slobogin, C., & Fondacaro, M. R. (). Juveniles at risk: A plea for preventive justice. New York: Oxford University Press. Spear, L. (2000). The adolescent brain and age-related behavioral manifestations. Neuroscience Biobehavior, 24, 417-463. Spencer, M. B., & Jones-Walker, C. (2004). Interventions and services offered to former juvenile offenders reentering their communities: An analysis of program effectiveness. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2(1), 88-89. Sprott, J. B., & Doob, A. N. (2009). Justice for girls? Stability and change in the youth justice systems of the United States and Canada. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Youngclarke, D., Ramos, K. D., & Granger-Merkle, L. (2004). A systematic review of the impact of court appointed special advocates. Journal of the Center for Families, Children and the Courts, 5, 109-126. Zimring, F. E. (2004). An American travesty: Legal responses to adolescent juvenile offending. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Zimring, F. E. (2005). American juvenile justice. New York: Oxford University Press. 13