A civil rights organization is suing to halt the forced pregnancy testing of women when they are booked into the Alameda County jail.
This amounts to an invasion of the women’s privacy, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said in the lawsuit filed in June against Alameda County Sheriff Greg Ahern.
Plaintiffs are three women, including a 69-year-old political activist, who were forced to submit to the testing. The suit says the forced testing violates privacy rights under both federal and state constitutions, and violates state law allowing inmates to refuse non-emergency medical care.
“The sheriff’s policy publicly intrudes into one of the most intimate and private areas of a person’s life – reproductive decision-making,” the suit states.
This case comes on the heels of the revelation that some women were sterilized by state prison doctors against their will and consent.
Plaintiff Nancy Macias said she was forced to take a pregnancy test after her arrest during an August 2012 political protest.
“Being forced to submit to a pregnancy test against my will was not about my health,” Macias told the San Francisco Chronicle. “It was invasive, offensive and humiliating.”
The suit filed in Superior Court included a 2010 letter from Ahern to the ACLU, stating that women who are brought to the Glenn Dyer Jail are tested so they can be provided with the necessary medical treatment. When a woman tests positive, she is transferred to the Santa Rita County Jail where there is an obstetrics clinic, the letter said.
Susan Harman, a political activist, was 69 years old when she was forced to take a pregnancy test in 2010 after being arrested during a protest of the Oscar Grant shooting. Harman says the testing was not done out of concern for her health.
“Nobody gave us any explanation,” she told the Chronicle. Harman, who is diabetic, says officers ignored her requests for her daily insulin shot, but were insistent that she take a pregnancy test. Both Harman and Macias were released the following day, without the results of their tests.
The ACLU says that the proper way to conduct the testing is to offer it on a voluntary basis as part of the routine health care screening.
A spokesman for Ahern, Sgt. J.D. Nelson, said the forced testing was part of the settlement from a 10-year-old lawsuit against the sheriff’s office for not providing pregnancy testing.
“If you tell us that we have to test people and then tell us that we can’t test people, what can we do?” Nelson said. He did not provide details of the settled lawsuit or who filed it.
The lawsuit does not seek monetary damages, but instead requests the court to order the sheriff’s office to end the practice.
Archives for October 2014
80-90 Percent Women Seeking Mental Health Experienced Trauma
Eighty to 90 percent of women seeking services from public mental health and substance abuse programs have experienced violence and trauma, frequently beginning at childhood, according to a September 2013 report.
The Federal Partners Committee on Women and Trauma has published “a working document” entitled “Trauma-Informed Approaches: Federal Activities and Initiatives” that stresses a “trauma-informed” approach to addressing the consequences of violence and abuse against adult and young women.
“I was shocked by the sobering statistics. Thirty-seven percent of women with disabilities have experienced violence and abuse in their lifetime, compared with 20 percent of women without disabilities,” said Kathy Martinez, assistant secretary, U.S. Department of Labor Office of Disability Employment Policy.
The report relies on findings made by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) that sponsored a five-year study on this issue called “Women, Co-Occurring Disorders and Violence.”
This long-term study demonstrated that in addressing the needs of women regarding public health and social services, the central focus for a successful recovery must be on the trauma they experienced. New ways of responding to such trauma also were stressed, including evidence-based interventions and education counseling models.
The Federal Partners Committee supports a “trauma-informed” approach to addressing the needs of women and girls and describes efforts to reduce rates of violence and trauma as a multi-agency and multi-pronged strategy, with prevention being a key part of the plan.
The committee reported on “cross-agency” collaboration — the coordination between more than three dozen federal agencies and sub-agencies, based upon a shared concern about trauma.
“All of us have to be out there convincing folks that this is the right work to be done, and this is the right time to do it,” said Commissioner Bryan Samuels of the Department of Health and Human Services Administration on Children, Youth and Families.
The Department of Defense (DOD) Family Advocacy Program (FAP) and the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office of the Office of the Secretary of Defense (SAPRO) are now assisting women and girls by use of “trauma-specific treatments.”
The DOD’s sister agency, U.S. Department of Education, is tackling the issue by assigning the women, violence and trauma problem to its Office for Civil Rights (OCR). OCR is responsible for enforcing Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972, which has brought a significant measure of fair treatment and equal protection to both male and female students. The act prohibits discrimination based on gender, and protects against sexual harassment and sexual violence in public and private spaces and institutions.
Another major federal agency, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), has also adopted trauma-informed strategy in dealing with women and abuse issues. Its sub-agency, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), states as part of its mission that by learning more about the trajectories by which trauma develops, NIH wants to stimulate innovative psychological and biomedical approaches that can prevent or change these trajectories before the consequences of the trauma occur.
These initiatives and activities on behalf of major agencies of the federal government indicate that cross-collaboration is underway.
Other federal agencies showing distinct orientation toward the trauma-informed strategy include DHHS’s Office on Women’s Health (OWH), the Department of Justice’s National Institute of Corrections (NIC), the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) and the Office for Victims of Crime, each of which are mentioned in the report.
The core finding by SAMHSA, as stated in the report’s preface, is that empowering women to tell their own stories produces both healing and a powerful force for change. SAMHSA’s influential study conducted from 1998-2003 has been the foundation of the Federal Partners Committee’s trauma-informed approach.
However, “One thing was immediately self-evident,” says Valorie Carson of Johnson County, Kansas’ Interagency Trauma-Informed Care Task Force: “No organization would ever be ‘done’ implementing trauma-informed care. Once begun, it would be a continuous process requiring ongoing reflection on practices and policies, training for new staff and boosters for long-time staff and an attentive eye on the organization’s culture to prevent returning to prior practices.”
The Experiences and Struggles Of Undocumented Immigrants
Many people wonder what it is like to live in an underground economy. Undocumented immigrants live that life. Living in a country without documents and being a part of an underground economy is something I have experienced. I know what it’s like to live in a country where you want to become a citizen, but cannot.
Readers probably are thinking that I wanted to be a citizen of the U.S., but that is not the case. I am a U.S. citizen. I was living as an illegal immigrant in Mexico.
Living undocumented and underground gave me an interesting perspective on U.S. immigration policy. Reflecting on it now, I can feel empathy for the 11 million U.S. undocumented people living in the U.S.
Reflection also brings to mind the saying, “Don’t judge me until you’ve walked a mile in my shoes.”
Walking in my Shoes:
I was facing 123 years to life for a residential burglary under California’s Three Strikes law. Before my trial, I got out on bail and fled to Mexico.
Authorities from both countries hunted for me as a fugitive from the U.S. and I had to live underground in Mexico. Even though my entire heritage was Mexican, I couldn’t be a citizen while undocumented.
While working on a farm, I met a beautiful woman, settled down and started a family. I had to look over my shoulder all the time. Despite that fearful feeling, I did my best to settle into my life.
That fear of dodging the authorities made me think of my heritage — of my father when he first came to the U.S.
My situation in Mexico was the opposite of my father’s situation. My father was illegally in the U.S.; I was illegally in Mexico. The difference: My father wasn’t wanted by the law. Nevertheless, we both lived fearing the authorities.
U.S. History Generally Untold:
During World War II, as many U.S. citizens were pressed into military service, there was a gaping need for laborers in the workforce. When Mexico joined the Allied Forces in 1942, the U.S. and Mexican governments entered into the Bracero agreement.
The Bracero program was a series of diplomatic agreements whereby the U. S. hired temporary contract laborers from Mexico for manual labor. However, the program created a new underclass of American workers who were underpaid and who could not climb up the socioeconomic ladder. Americans looked down upon this new immigrant class.
When the war was over, the Braceros were supposed to go back to Mexico, but many had established families in the U.S. Going back to Mexico would mean uprooting their families and going into a situation best described as uncertain. Moreover, there was an estimated half billion dollars still owed to ex-Braceros. The fight for that money continues even today.
My father came to the U.S. under the Bracero agreement. But, he didn’t want to go back to Mexico. He stayed because marriage to my mother brought the responsibilities of raising nine children. Being a hard worker in the U.S. provided the resources to care for them. Thus he became an illegal immigrant.
If the Shoe Fits:
Reflecting on my family history, I am able to see that the Bracero program altered the fate of many people, the many Mexicans who came to the U.S. seeking a better life for their families.
When I worked as a farm laborer in Mexico and my beautiful daughter was born, I also took on family responsibilities. But, that didn’t change the fact that I was a fugitive and living illegally in Mexico. I was caught between two worlds of my own creation—being an outlaw and wanting to take care of my family. In the end, my family came first.
When it comes to the immigrants who are now working in the U.S. but are outside of the law, I think we should reach out and change the rules because these people are human beings and doing hard labor that really helps the U.S. economy.
It is a “tough on crime” mentality — not wanting the U.S. to look weak — that makes some citizens steadfastly say, “The law is the law.”
But we need to face reality: The people who would be helped by immigration reform are people who break their backs to create a better life for their family. There has to be a balance if America is to be considered a place where compassionate people live and it is a country of opportunity in the eyes of the world.
I am suggesting that U.S. immigration policy should provide a path for law-abiding undocumented workers to become citizens. They are the hard working, family-first type of people who Americans respect.
Respecto a las Apelaciones De Reclusos
Reclusos a menudo se quejan acerca del rechazo de la tramitación de sus quejas, las cuales son conocidas como apelaciones administrativas, cuando los coordinadores locales las procesan.
El problema se incrementa cuando los reclusos no comprenden completamente el sistema de apelación y los continuos cambios hechos a los Códigos de Regulaciones de California, Estatuto 15 — Title 15— (División 3).
La ultima revisión importante al proceso de apelación tomo lugar en el 2011, cuando la Regulación y Sucursal de la Gerencia de Póliza (RMPB, por sus siglas en ingles) del Departamento de Correcciones y Rehabilitación de California (CDCR) presento una Notificación de Cambio de Emergencia a las Regulaciones (NCR) para adoptar y enmendar secciones del Estatuto 15.
Estas nuevas regulaciones introdujeron la Forma CDCR 22, Recluso/Solicitud de Entrevista para ex-reclusos en libertad-condicional, Articulo o Servicios (CDCR Form 22, Inmate/Parolee Request for Interview, Item or Services). Esta forma reemplaza el nivel informal de revisión en la Forma CDCR 602 (CDCR Form 602) anterior.
Las apelaciones son presentadas en una Forma CDCR 602, Recluso/Apelación para ex-reclusos (CDCR Form 602 Inmate/Parolee Appeal. Estatuto 15, secciones 3084 y 3084.1 hasta 3084.9 gobiernan la Forma CDCR 602.
No existe referencia a la Forma CDCR 22 en ninguna de estas secciones porque ellas no gobiernan esta nueva forma. La forma 22 es gobernada por el Estatuto15, sección 3086. Esta sección delinea el procedimiento en como escribir peticiones sólidas.
El Estatuto 15 esta en un continuo estado de desarrollo porque el CDCR no es una entidad estática. El Estatuto 15 cambia en acorde a las necesidades del departamento, la población presidiaría, y mandatos expuestos en la ley.
“Todas las regulaciones del CDCR tienen que ser creadas y aprobadas en acorde con los requerimientos del Acta de Procedimientos Administrativos de California (APA)”
Cambios propuestos para el Estatuto 15 son escritos por el CDCR e imprimidos en NCRs; los reclusos algunas veces se refieren a ellas como “esas cosas rosadas” por el color de la portada.
“Todas las regulaciones del CDCR tienen que ser creadas y aprobadas de acuerdo con los requerimientos del Acta de Procedimientos Administrativos de California (APA),” según al Manual para Prisioneros del Estado de California, por Heather MacKay y la Oficina Legal de Prisiones. “La APA es explicada en la sección del Código de Gobierno 1134 y secuencial. Los estatutos requiriendo al CDCR promulgar reglas conforme a el APA fueron aprobados en 1975, legislativamente anulando una decisión de la corte que había dictaminado que el APA no aplica a las reglas del CDCR.”
El APA manda que los cambios a regulaciones sean disponibles al público con un periodo subsiguiente para los comentarios públicos. Esto puede suceder al atender una audiencia publica sobre regulaciones propuestas en fechas y horarios especificados en las oficinas del CDCR 1515 S St., North Building, Sacramento, CA. 95811; Audiencias publicas so sostenidas en otros localidades, de aquerdo a Kristina Khokhobashvili, oficial de Información Publica de CDCR escribiéndole a CDCR RPMB, P.O. Box 942883, Sacramento, CA. 94283-0001; enviando un fax al (916) 324-6075; o enviando un correo electrónico a RPMB@cdcr.ca.gov. Cuando el periodo de comentario publico termina, información sobre los cambios propuestos a regulaciones es transmitida a la Oficina de Ley Administrativa (OAL)
Para ser analizados en Sacramento. La OAL puede o no aprobar ciertos cambios por muchas razones.
Una Decisión de Desapruebo de Acción Regulatoria puede ser emitida para algunas regulaciones. Regulaciones aprobadas son dirigidas a la Secretaria del Estado de California para ser actualizadas en el Estatuto 15.
Regulaciones en trámite (NCRs) no citadas en una publicación actual del Estatuto 15 pueden ser leídas en las librerías legales de la prisión o en la Internet. Notificaciones “tienen que ser publicadas inmediatamente en cuanto son recibidas en las locaciones accesibles a los reclusos, ex-reclusos bajo libertad-condicional, y empleados en cada instalación del departamento y esfera de actividades…” de acuerdo con el Manual de Operaciones del Departamento.
NCRs también pueden ser enviadas directamente por correo si alguien desea recibir una copia escribiendo al CDCR RPMB y solicitando ser añadido en su lista de direcciones.
Las regulaciones dirigen el uso de las formas CDCR (i.e. CDCR 22, 602, etc.). Comprendiendo como trabaja el proceso de regulación puede hacer la comunicación entre reclusos y personal menos adversaria, partidarios dicen.
–Traducción Jorge Heredia
Report: Tough on Crime Era Resulted in Failure
Years of “get tough on crime” policies have failed, according to a study by Karol Lucken of the University of Central Florida. Lucken’s study condensed decades of analysis of mass incarceration policies.
When coupled with reports of the Vera Institute of Justice, clear conclusions can be drawn that demonstrate few winners in the “get tough on crime” era. According to the analysis, the get-tough era, or as some call it, mass incarceration, has failed in every respect. The perpetual prisoner machine is a broken-down clunker.
Lucken pointed out that financial considerations are bringing criminal justice operatives face-to-face with the reality of their failed policies. Unsustainable practices leading to mass incarceration have caused political jurisdictions to suffer financial strain. Because of their inability to carry the financial burden they created, politicians and bureaucrats are now changing course and their messages.
Public sentiment and penal practices are shifting. Pronouncements fanning public fear as a way into office are giving way to more reasoned policies. According to Lucken, “voters are moved by language that suggests they could be getting more bang for their investment,” when it comes to corrections.
The university report says “policies which defined the era such as the War on Drugs, minimum mandatory sentencing, habitual offender statutes, three strikes and truth in sentencing statutes, have been thoroughly analyzed and disputed.” In addition, according to Lucken, documented effectiveness of the programs has been found lacking.
Years of interpretation by many organizations leads to an inescapable conclusion that the failures are significant. There is a clear lack of success in criminal sentencing practices across the board. The studies show mass incarceration has no demonstrable affect on crime or recidivism. William Shepherd, chairman of the American Bar Association, said that over-criminalization has in fact produced negative results and made the problem worse.
Newly incarcerated people primarily come from three sources, according to the Vera Institute.
The first group are people who have been just been convicted of a crime. Then there are those who are on probation or parole, who violate the conditions of their probation or parole. This second group of probation or parole violators makes up 44 percent of the national prison population, according to the report.
However, research found when examining the probation/parole group who have committed a new offense in which the evidence is weak, the authorities simply declare the person “in violation of his parole” and do not have to prove anything in court. This makes up the third group.
As a punitive policy experiment, scare tactics of law enforcement propelled the get-tough era. Legal factors such as legislative and statutory changes to penal codes facilitated excessively long sentences, according to Vera.
In the last 40 years, the combined prison population of all states swelled by over 700 percent. During the same period, costs of running state prisons increased from $6.7 billion to about $50 billion.
Department of Justice Focuses On Improving Criminal Justice
The U.S. Department of Justice has conducted a review of the criminal justice system to identify reforms needed to ensure the uniform application of federal laws for the 21st century. This project identified five goals:
- The devotion of finite resources to the most important law enforcement priorities.
- To promote even-handed law enforcement and reduce unequal impacts of the criminal justice system.
- To ensure fair punishments for low-level, nonviolent convictions.
- Bolster offender re-entry efforts geared to deter crime and reduce recidivism.
- Strengthen protections for vulnerable populations.
All phases of the criminal justice were reviewed in August 2013 — including charging, sentencing, incarceration and re-entry — to examine which practices are most successful at deterring crime and protecting the public. Demographic disparities of fundamental fairness were also reviewed.
The review suggests a need for a significant change in the approach to enforcing the nation’s laws. It found the cycle of poverty, criminality and incarceration snares too many Americans and debilitates communities, and many aspects of the criminal justice system may actually exacerbate these problems.
Although aggressive enforcement of federal laws is necessary, the government cannot prosecute its way to becoming a safer nation, according to the study. Federal efforts must also focus on prevention and re-entry to be effective. The report also acknowledged it is time to rethink the nation’s system of mass incarceration. In 2010 alone, state and federal incarceration budgets cost $80 billion nationwide.
The DOJ wants to shift away from over-reliance on incarceration for low-level offenders and concentrate resources on law enforcement priorities, such as violence prevention and protection of vulnerable populations.
The Justice Department’s initial package of reforms is dubbed the “Smart on Crime” initiative. It is the start of an ongoing effort to update the criminal justice system. The DOJ proposed these principles for getting smart on crime:
Prioritized prosecutions focused on the most serious crimes that implicate clear, substantial federal interests. These interests include protecting citizens from national security threats, violent crime and financial fraud as well as, protecting the most vulnerable members of society.
Reform sentencing to eliminate unfair disparities and reduce overburdened prisons. The rising cost of maintaining prisons imposes an oppressive burden on taxpayers and communities. The Bureau of Prisons comprises one-third of the Justice Department’s budget.
Pursue alternatives to incarceration for low-level, non-violent crimes. Incarceration is not the answer in every case. Alternatives to confinement include substance abuse treatment programs and better supervision as a means to reducing recidivism.
Improve re-entry to curb repeat offenses and re-victimization. Recidivism rates are high. A reduction of even one or two percentage points in the recidivism rate could create long-lasting benefits for the formerly incarcerated and their communities.
“Surge” resources to violence prevention and protecting the most vulnerable populations.
Even though crime rates have fallen, neighborhoods still suffer high levels of homicide, shootings and aggravated assaults. Exploring cost-effective reforms to the prison system will allow law enforcement to redirect scarce resources toward violence prevention.
In addition to these violence prevention efforts, the Department of Justice also remains focused on serving victims of crime. It will empower survivors who need assistance the most.
Gov. Brown Signs Senate Bill 1010
Legislation to eliminate disparities for certain drug crimes has made its way through the California Legislature.
The measure, SB 1010, would “reduce the penalty for possession for sale of cocaine base to be the same as that for powder cocaine” and revises “the guidelines for probation eligibility for both the possession for sale of powder cocaine and cocaine base.”
The bill, titled the California Fair Sentencing Act, is authored by Sen. Holly Mitchell, D-Los Angeles.
Opposition to the measure has surfaced from the California Narcotics Officers Association and California Police Chiefs Association.
The CPCA is quoted in the bill analysis as saying, “We believe that the preferable approach is to raise the penalties for powder cocaine trafficking to the same level that currently exists for trafficking in cocaine base … Although we support equalizing the penalty structures, we do not believe that drug traffickers — who visit real harm on communities — should be the beneficiaries of legislation that equalizes the penalty structure.”
Advocates for SB 1010 include Susan Burton, Michelle Alexander, Jonathan Simon and Dr. Joy Degrew. They suggest that for years disproportionate sentencing practices have targeted specific races. In her book, A New Way of Life, Burton wrote that, “For far too many years, we have had to watch harsh penalties applied disproportionately to black and brown urban communities.”
The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation reports that from 2005 to 2010, statistics show that blacks accounted for 77.4 percent, Latinos 18.1 percent and whites less than 2 percent of the people who were convicted and sentenced to prison for the possession and sales of crack cocaine.
Delia de la Vara, vice president of the National Council for La Raza, California Region, told the ACLU, “Statistics don’t lie. Communities of color are treated differently within California’s judicial system, often subjected to harsher sentencing for essentially the same crimes as their white counterparts.”
Supporters of the bill include Los Angeles District Attorney Jackie Lacey, Santa Clara District Attorney Jeff Rosen, San Francisco District Attorney George Gascón and Santa Barbara District Attorney Joyce Dudley.
After Assembly approval, SB 1010 advanced to the full Senate for final legislative action. On Sept. 29, Gov. Jerry Brown signed the bill.
Stanislaus County Invests Millions For Re-entry and Bed Expansion
Stanislaus County has launched a $113 million construction program to add 480 jail beds and a re-entry center.
It is the largest capital project in county history. The jail expansion includes a medical and mental health wing, The Modesto Bee reported.
“It is good for jobs and the builders, but the outcome of jail expansion has been nothing but failure,” said Vonya Quarles, an organizer for All of Us or None. She has organized rallies against jail expansion in Riverside County.
“It costs $52,000 a year to put someone in county jail. That would be better spent on mental health services, substance-abuse treatment or early education,” Quarles told The Bee.
As part of Realignment, the state awarded $80 million for jail expansion and $40 million for the re-entry center in Modesto.
Patty Hill Thomas, the county’s chief operating officer, expects construction work to start in September and be completed in late 2016.
“It is goodfor jobs and the builders, but the outcome of jail expansion has been nothing but failure”
The state’s jail construction financing program coincides with the public safety Realignment program passed by the California Legislature. It had been proposed by Gov. Jerry Brown in response to court orders to reduce prison overcrowding. It keeps some lower-level prisoners in county custody, instead of locking them up in state prison.
The county will cap the current expansion with 288 beds of transition jail housing in the new re-entry facility, which will have classrooms and resources for inmates who are within a year of release.
The new jail beds will allow the antiquated men’s jail in downtown Modesto to be emptied, the newspaper reported.
Jill Silva, chief probation officer, said at an Aug. 15 kickoff ceremony that programs are changing the lives of criminal offenders. The new jail facilities will come with services for those struggling with mental health issues, substance abuse and addiction.
Hensel Phelps of San Jose will construct the maximum-security units and support facilities under contracts totaling $82.6 million. The county awarded a $4.4 million contract for Simile Construction of Modesto to build the probation reporting center.
Disciplinary Policies Send Black Preschoolers To Court Instead of Principal’s Office
President Obama’s administration has advised educators to abandon overly zealous disciplinary policies, many of which send students to courts instead of the principals’ offices, reports The Associated Press.
Black children make up about 18 percent of the nation’s preschoolers but almost half of the students who were suspended more than once, the American Education Department’s (AED) civil rights arm reported earlier this year.
Highlighted in the report were racial disparities, lack of access to advanced classes and quality instruction, and discipline policies within the educational system. These lead to the argument that due to racial disparities associated with the handling of disciplinary issues, black children begin to gravitate toward criminal behavior.
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said something must be done immediately.
“Every data point represents a life impacted and a future potentially diverted or derailed. This administration is moving aggressively to disrupt the school-to-prison pipeline in order to ensure that all of our young people have equal educational opportunities,” Holder said.
The report drew this response of U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan: “It is clear that the United States has a great distance to go to meet our goal of providing opportunities for every student to succeed.”
The AED study on pre-school children suspension disparities was a first. However, it is widely recognized that get-tough suspension and arrest policies target minority students and contribute to the “school-to-prison” pipeline, according to the AP report.
“The racial disparities in American education, from access to high-level classes and experienced teachers to discipline” were highlighted in the AED report.
There is more training going on to ensure teachers are aware of the importance of keeping students in school, said Reggie Felton, associate director at the National School Boards Association.
National Education Association teachers’ union President Dennis Van Roekel said, “too many children don’t have equitable access to experienced and fully licensed teachers.”
Van Roekel said he believes that today’s policies, at least in part, disregard the professionalism of teaching, and there is a revolving door of under-prepared teachers, resulting in the inability to make a notable difference.
The report also gave statistics on Hispanic children who face similar disciplinary improprieties.
While Hispanics make up nearly one-third of the preschooler population, they made up 25 percent of the preschoolers suspended once and 20 percent of preschoolers suspended more than once.
Curbing Truancy in California to Prevent Dropouts
A campaign is underway to curb truancy in California, termed a crisis that frequently leads to dropouts, crime and prison.
“We take this matter very seriously,” Attorney General Kamala Harris said in a March news conference to endorse a series of bills in the Legislature to combat truancy.
She said more than 690,000 elementary (K-6) students – 20 percent of the total – were truant at least once in the 2011-12 school year.
If not stopped in elementary grades, students are more likely to drop out of high school, and dropouts are more likely to wind up in prison, the San Francisco Chronicle reported Harris said.
Five bills introduced in March of this year aim to strengthen accountability by both state and local school districts when it comes to the collection and reporting of truancy statistics. Truancy is defined as any student who is late to class by 30 minutes or more without a valid excuse three times during the year.
“We need to try to get ahold of our young people early and make sure they end up in the classroom and not the courtroom,” said Assemblyman Chris Holden, D-Pasadena, during the news conference. Holden is the author of one of the proposed bills.
“With this slate of bills, we are not putting more students in the juvenile justice system, but inviting communities to intervene before they end up in the penal system,” said Holden.
The proposed legislation would require that the Attorney General’s Office issue a report each year, increase truancy data collection and require counties to create school attendance review boards that issue reports on truancy intervention programs. It also requires prosecutors to issue reports whenever charges are filed against a parent or student to enforce attendance laws.
“We act like it’s a surprise, but it’s not,” Harris said during the press conference. “Almost all of it is predictable. Instead of being reactive, this data will allow us to be preventive.”
Harris said her interest in the truancy issue began when she was San Francisco district attorney. She noted that 94 percent of San Francisco’s homicide victims under the age of 25 were high school dropouts.
In September 2013, Harris released her report of the truancy problem in the state, which was the first statewide assessment of truancy specifically addressing elementary schools and the financial impact on counties.
The report concluded chronic truancy and absenteeism in the state’s schools caused California to lose $1.4 billion a year in funding and suffer lower test scores and a higher dropout rate. The report estimates that society lost $46 billion a year when other factors are added, including reduced earnings, increased welfare services and higher crime rates for high school dropouts.
Calaveras County reported the highest truancy rate at 31 percent of the county’s elementary school students. Yuba County had the lowest rate, with only 4.9 percent of elementary students being truant.