NCJFCJ Resolves to Stop Indiscriminate Shackling of Children in Juvenile Court

Abstract

Youth often appear in juvenile court handcuffed and in leg irons and belly chains. They may pose no threat to others in the courtroom. They may not be a flight risk. The reason they are shackled may simply be because all youth in that juvenile court are shackled. Opponents of such indiscriminant shackling of youth in court note that the practice runs directly counter to the rehabilitative goals of the juvenile justice system and may cloud the presumption of innocence and impede due process (McLaurin, 2012). Shackling is humiliating and is not considered a developmentally appropriate response to youth offending behavior. The Florida Supreme Court (2009) stated that the indiscriminate shackling of juveniles is “repugnant, degrading, humiliating, and contrary to the stated primary purposes of the juvenile justice system and to the principles of therapeutic justice.” What follows here is the recent resolution passed by the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ) regarding the shackling of children in juvenile court (National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, 2015a). The NCJFCJ defines shackles to include handcuffs, waist chains, ankle restraints, zip ties or other restraints that are designed to impede movement or control behavior (National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, 2015a). Recognizing that up to 90% of justice-involved youth report exposure to some type of traumatic event, the resolution supports the advancement of a trauma-informed and developmentally appropriate approach to juvenile justice that limits the use of shackles in court. “Across the country, tens of thousands of young people are needlessly shackled in juvenile and family courts,” said David Shapiro, campaign manager for the Campaign Against Indiscriminate Juvenile Shackling (CAIJS) at the National Juvenile Defender Center. “The courtroom is the last place this practice should occur. Judges have a unique responsibility to ensure not only fair outcomes, but also fair processes. They control what takes place in their courtrooms. The NCJFCJ, the nation's leading organization of juvenile and family court judges, has issued a powerful message that the practice of automatically shackling youth in our courtrooms does not comport with what it means to be fair and trauma-informed, and that such a practice will no longer be tolerated. Judges look to the NCJFCJ for guidance. On the issue of shackling in court, the NCJFCJ position is now clear and direct” (National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, 2015b). NCJFCJ's development of its resolutions and policy statements occurs independently from the Juvenile and Family Court Journal editorial decisions regarding what to publish. It is the goal of the Journal to keep the readership informed and up-to-date on important reform efforts. The topic of shackling was also addressed in an article published in an earlier issue of the Juvenile and Family Court Journal (Groman, Spring 2015, p. 19). RESOLUTION REGARDING SHACKLING OF CHILDREN IN JUVENILE COURT Whereas, the NCJFCJ defines shackles to include handcuffs, waist chains, ankle restraints, zip ties, or other restraints that are designed to impede movement or control behavior; and Whereas, shackling of children in court may infringe upon the presumption of innocence, undermine confidence in the fairness of our justice system, interfere with the right to a fair trial, impede communication with judges, attorneys, and other parties, and can limit the child's ability to engage in the court process; and Whereas, research in social and developmental psychology suggests that shackling children interferes with healthy identity development; and Whereas, placing children in shackles can be traumatizing and contrary to the developmentally appropriate approach to juvenile justice; and Whereas, placing children in shackles can negatively influence how a child behaves as well as how a child is perceived by others; and Whereas, shackling promotes punishment and retribution over the rehabilitation and development of children under the court's jurisdiction; and Whereas, shackling is contrary to the goals of juvenile justice, as defined in the Juvenile Delinquency Guidelines to implement a continuum of effective and least intrusive responses to reduce recidivism and develop competent and productive citizens; and Whereas, continued attention and consistent judicial leadership is necessary to ensure that policies regarding shackling continue to be upheld regardless of changes in leadership or administration; and Whereas, judges have the ability to advance and maintain policies and practices that limit the use of restraints or shackles. BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: The NCJFCJ supports the advancement of a trauma-informed and developmentally appropriate approach to juvenile justice that limits the use of shackles in court. The NCJFCJ calls for judges to utilize their leadership position to convene security personnel and other justice system stakeholders to address shackling and to work together to identify ways to ensure the safety of children and other parties. The NCJFCJ encourages judges and court systems to continually review policies and practices related to shackling children. The NCJFCJ supports a presumptive rule or policy against shackling children; requests for exceptions should be made to the court on an individualized basis and must include a cogent rationale, including the demonstrated safety risk the child poses to him or herself or others. The NCJFCJ believes judges should have the ultimate authority to determine whether or not a child needs to be shackled in the courtroom. Adopted by the NCJFCJ Board of Directors during their meeting July 25, 2015 in Austin, Texas.