Costs should drop in sentencing juveniles

A revision in state law regarding sentencing of juvenile offenders should not burden local officials and likely will result in cost savings for taxpayers. The law described in an Oct. 22 news article (“Kane officials dreading change in juvenile law”) requires some clarification.

When sentencing juvenile offenders, the change to take effect next year will require juvenile court judges to consider whether treatment in a youth’s community would be a better option than sentencing the youth to incarceration in a state juvenile prison.

It does not mandate provision of services that are not present now, and it does not require schools to do new planning. Far from costing more money, the legislation contains language designed to help communities access federal funds for treatment services for youth in the justice system.

A primary purpose of the legislation is to assist judges make better, more effective and less costly decisions when deciding what options will best serve the needs of the public and the youth.

Most judges already examine all sentencing options, and the new law simply clarifies that all judges must follow this best practice. Before removing a minor from his or her home and sending that young person to a youth prison, judges need to inquire whether there are options available, like drug addiction therapy and family counseling, that would be a more appropriate response and keep the youth at home and in school. This is important to all of us, as youth who are kept at home with comprehensive services are less likely to repeat offend.

At a cost of more than $86,500 per youth annually, incarceration of a youth is expensive, and too often fails to rehabilitate the youth sent to prison. Services in the community save taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars per youth, and more effective services have the added benefit of improving public safety.

George W. Timberlake

Chairman, Illinois Juvenile Justice Commission