CJA
Research Brief No. 25
NEW YORK CITY CRIMINAL JUSTICE AGENCY, Inc.
January 2011
A series of reports summarizing current research from CJA Executive Director, Jerome E. McElroy Director, Research Dept., Richard R. Peterson, Ph.D. Research Brief Editor & Deputy Director, Research, Mary T. Phillips, Ph.D. Graphics & Production, Raymond P. Caligiure Administrative Associate, Annie Su
CJA is a not-for-profit corporation that provides a variety of criminal justice services under a contract with the City of New York. CJA staff interview defendants arrested in New York City, make recommendations for pretrial release, and notify released defendants of upcoming court dates. Within the Agency, the Research Department conducts studies covering a broad array of criminal justice policy concerns. The Research Brief series summarizes the results of some of these studies. New York City Criminal Justice Agency, Inc. 52 Duane Street New York, NY 10007 PHONE: 646 213-2500 FAX: 646 213-2650 WEB: www.nycja.org © 2011 NYC Criminal Justice Agency, Inc.
Adolescent Male Domestic Violence Offenders By Richard R. Peterson, Ph.D.
Could criminal justice interventions deter domestic violence among adolescent males? This Research Brief examines adolescent males’ history of arrests for domestic violence (DV) in New York City and considers the potential for early intervention with those arrested for their first adult DV offense. A previous study found that nearly 30% of young males (age 16-24) arrested for DV already had a history of DV arrests (Research Brief #22). This suggests that identifying the first opportunity for criminal justice interventions with young male DV offenders requires a focus on the youngest DV arrestees. In this Research Brief, we examine the arrest histories of adolescents, in-
cluding those under age 16 (juveniles, whose cases are usually processed in family court) and those age 16 to 19 (adults, whose cases are usually processed in criminal court), to address three questions: ● How frequently are adolescent males arrested for DV offenses? ● Do juvenile arrests for DV increase the likelihood of adult DV arrests? ● What opportunities are there for criminal justice intervention in adult DV cases of adolescent males?
This Research Brief is adapted from Arrest Histories Of Adolescent Male Domestic Violence Offenders In New York City (2011) by Richard R. Peterson, Ph.D., Director, Research Department The full report is available on CJA’s web site: www.nycja.org/research/research.htm Research Assistance: Steve Mardenfeld, David James Hauser, Raymond P. Caligiure Systems Programming: Wayne Nehwadowich Address comments to the author at rrpcja@gmail.com Please cite as follows, adapted to your citation style: Peterson, Richard R. 2011. “Adolescent Male Domestic Violence Offenders.” Research Brief series, no. 25. New York: New York City Criminal Justice Agency, Inc.
CJA
Research Brief The Dataset
This research is based on an Adolescent Male Arrest History data file extracted from the New York City Criminal Justice Agency database. This data file includes only male arrestees whose 16th birthday occurred between July 1, 2004, and December 31, 2007. It includes information about all their arrests during that time period, as well as arrests starting one year earlier (July 1, 2003), to allow us to identify juvenile arrests for a minimum of one year before their 16th birthday. The file includes arrests that were classified as adult arrests (for arrestees who were charged in adult criminal court with committing offenses on or after their 16th birthday), as well as JD arrests (for arrestees who were charged in family court as “juvenile delinquents” for committing offenses prior to their 16th birthday) and JO arrests (for arrestees who were charged in adult criminal court as “juvenile offenders” for committing specified offenses prior to their 16th birthday). Some adolescent male arrestees in the file had only juvenile arrests (JD and/or JO), others had only adult arrests, and others had both juvenile and adult arrests. The Arrest History data file was used to create analytical datasets for this study that measured the arrest history of each arrestee. To allow for a minimum of one year of adult arrests, data presented in Figures 1 through 5 exclude from the Arrest History data file all arrestees whose 16th birthday occurred after Dec. 31, 2006. Figures 6 and 7 are based on a dataset that includes all the
arrests in the Arrest History data file. To examine the influence of juvenile arrests on adult arrests, data presented in Figures 8 and 9 exclude arrestees who had no adult arrests. To allow for a minimum of one year for male arrestees to be arrested and re-arrested as adults, data in Figures 8 and 9 also exclude those whose 16th birthday occurred after Dec. 31, 2006, and those whose first adult arrest was disposed after Dec. 31, 2006. Identifying Domestic Violence Cases To identify domestic violence arrests among juvenile arrestees, we used the information collected by the police about the relationship between the offender and the victim. To identify domestic violence arrests among adult arrestees, we used information collected by the court about the relationship between the offender and the victim. Arrests where the offender-victim relationship involved a married couple, common-law spouses, samesex partners or boyfriends and girlfriends were classified as intimate partner violence (IPV) arrests. Arrests where the offender-victim relationship involved violence against a mother, father, brother or sister were classified as parent/sibling violence arrests. Arrests where the offender-victim relationship involved children, aunts, uncles, grandparents and others related by blood or marriage were classified as other family violence. Together, these three categories of juvenile arrests constituted “domestic violence” arrests for the purposes of the study.
A Portrait Of Adolescent Male Arrestees How frequently are adolescent males (age 19 and younger) arrested for DV offenses? About one third of adolescent male arrestees had at least one JD or JO arrest (see Figure 1). Most of these (about 29%) had a history of JD arrests, but no JO arrests, whereas only 2% of the arrestees had a history of JO arrests without JD arrests. About 2% had both JO and JD arrests. About
two thirds had no juvenile arrests. Although 31% of adolescent male arrestees had a history of JD arrests, only 2% had a history of JD DV offenses (see Figure 2). Only 0.1% of all arrestees had a JO arrest involving a DV offense. Because JO DV offenses are so rare, we do not discuss them further in this Research Brief.
Figure 1 Type Of Juvenile Arrests Among Adolescent Male Arrestees (N=34,939)
Figure 2 Juvenile Domestic Violence Arrest Histories Of Adolescent Male Arrestees (N=34,939) Percent with:*
*JO only *JD & JO 2% 2% *JD only
Percent with:* 31%31%
Any JD Arrest Any JD Arrest
Any JD DV Arrest Any JD DV Arrest 2%2% 29% 67%
No JD or JO (adult arrests only)
Any JO ArrestAny JO Arrest
4%4%
Any JO DV Arrest 0.1%0.1% Any JO DV Arrest
*Arrestees in this category may also have had adult arrests.
2
*Categories overlap; arrestees may be counted in more than one category.
January 2011
CJA
Research Brief
A Portrait Of Adolescent Male Arrestees (continued) The JD DV arrests can be further subdivided by type of domestic violence (see Figure 3). The most common type of domestic violence among JD arrestees was violence against parents or siblings (68%). Intimate partner violence (IPV, which includes offenses against a boyfriend, girlfriend, common-law spouse or spouse) was relatively rare—only 9% of JD DV arrestees were arrested for violence against an intimate partner. The remainder of JD DV arrestees (about 23%) were arrested only for “other” family violence, including violence against children, aunts, uncles, grandparents and other relatives. Next, we consider the adult arrest histories of these adolescent male arrestees. As shown in Figure 4, 85% of the adolescent male arrestees in our sample had an adult arrest. However, only a relatively small proportion of the arrestees had any adult DV arrests (7%). Just over half of adult DV arrests (51%) were arrests for violence against parents and siblings (see Figure 5). This proportion was considerably lower than it was for JD arrests (68%, as reported in Figure 3 above). Adolescent male arrestees charged as adults were more likely than those charged as juveniles to be involved in inti-
mate partner violence. About one quarter of adult arrestees with a DV arrest had an arrest for intimate partner violence, compared to only 9% of JD arrestees with a DV arrest (compare Figure 5 to Figure 3). Finally, the remainder of Adult DV arrestees (about 24%) were arrested only for “other” family violence, about the same as for JD DV arrestees (compare Figure 5 to Figure 3).
Figure 4 Adult Domestic Violence Arrest Histories Of Adolescent Male Arrestees (N=34,939)
Figure 5 Type Of DV Relationship For Adolescent Male Adult DV Arrestees (N=2,344)
Percent with:
AnyAdult AdultDV DVArrests Any Arrests
Other JD DV Arrests 23% *Any JD IPV Arrests
9%
68%
24%
85% 85%
51% 25%
7% 7%
Any JD Parent/Sibling Violence Arrests
*Includes 2 arrestees who also had JD Parent/Sibling Violence Arrests.
Other Adult DV Arrests Only
Percent with:*
Any AdultArrests Arrests Any Adult
Figure 3 Type Of DV Relationship For Adolescent Male JD DV Arrestees (N=706)
*Any Adult IPV Arrests
Any Adult Parent/Sibling Violence Arrests
*Includes 57 arrestees who also had Adult Parent/Sibling Violence Arrests.
DV Arrest Histories Of Adult Adolescent Males Does being arrested for a domestic violence offense as a juvenile increase the likelihood of being arrested for a domestic violence offense as an adult? We addressed this question by examining the age at which an adolescent male experiences his first adult arrest (if any) of a given type. We examined age at first
Research Brief #25
adult DV arrest and age at first adult IPV arrest. To display our results, we use arrest history curves, which show the proportion of adolescent males who had been arrested by a given age between age 16 and age 19½. The percentage arrested increases with age as more young men are arrested for the first time.
3
CJA
Research Brief
Figure 6 shows arrest history curves for the first adult domestic violence arrest for two groups of adolescent males: those who had a JD domestic violence arrest, and those who did not. As one would expect, those who had a JD DV arrest were more likely to have an adult DV arrest, and this difference was statistically significant (see inset box for an explanation of statistical significance). Prior to reaching age 19, about 18% of adolescent males who had a JD DV arrest had been arrested for an adult DV offense. (Data were not available for this group of arrestees beyond age 19.) The rate for adolescent males who had not had a JD DV arrest at that age was less than half that. The divergence of the arrest history curves shows that those who had a JD DV arrest were more likely to have an adult DV arrest at an earlier age than those who did not.
Tests of Statistical Significance Statistical significance tests assess the likelihood that the differences that were observed in the sample could have occurred by chance alone. The tests take into account the size of the sample and the magnitude of the differences observed. Larger differences and differences based on larger samples are more likely to be statistically significant. In this report, following standard convention, significance levels less than .05 were considered statistically significant. This means that the statistically significant differences found in this study had less than a 5% chance of being due to chance alone.
We now consider how the type of JD DV arrest influences the likelihood of an adult DV arrest. Specifically, we compare adolescent males who had a JD arrest for parent/sibling violence to those who had a JD arrest for intimate partner violence and to those who had other types of JD DV arrests. Figure 7 shows the arrest history curves for the first adult domestic violence arrest for adolescent males in these three groups. Because the sample sizes for each group are relatively small, these curves are not as smooth as in the previous figure. Nevertheless, some basic patterns are clear. Those whose JD DV arrests were for offenses against “other” relatives (i.e., other than intimate partners, parents or siblings), were least likely to be arrested for an adult DV offense. Among adolescent males who had a JD arrest for parent/sibling violence, about 14% had an adult DV arrest as they approached their 19th birthday. The arrest history curve for those who had a JD arrest for intimate partner violence generally overlaps the curve for those who had a JD arrest for parent/sibling
4
Arrest History Curves The arrest history curves indicate the proportion of adolescent males who had ever been arrested at a given age. Arrest history is measured from the 16th birthday, the first day a person can be arrested as an adult, until either he is arrested or his observation period ends. The maximum observation period is 3½ years, so we track adult arrests only up to age 19½. Males whose observation period ends prior to age 19½ are treated as “censored” cases, and contribute data to the curve only until the end of their observation period.
Figure 6 Age At First Adult DV Arrest By JD Arrest History 20%20% JD DV Arrests (N = 769)
Percent 15%15% Arrested Percent Arrested
10%10% No JD DV Arrests (N = 37,192)
5% 5% 0% 0% 16 16
17 17
18 18
19 19
20 20
Age at First Adult DV Arrest
Figure 7 Age At First Adult DV Arrest By Type Of JD DV Arrest History 20% 15% Percent Arrested
Any JD IPV arrests (N = 70)
10% 5%
Any JD parentsibling arrests (N = 529)
Other types of JV DV arrests only (N = 170)
0% 16
17
18
19
20
Age at First Adult DV Arrest
violence. However, it ends at an earlier age (prior to age 18) and is more erratic because the sample size is smaller. None of the differences between the curves were statistically significant (data not shown), suggesting that the type of JD DV arrest history did not influence the likelihood of an adult DV arrest.
January 2011
CJA
Research Brief
Factors Associated With Re-Arrest For A New DV Offense We developed a statistical model to identify factors that increased or decreased the likelihood of re-arrest for a new DV offense among first-time adult DV arrestees. The model examines the risk of re-arrest within one year of case disposition (or release from incarceration) after the first adult DV arrest. Six factors were statistically significant predictors of post-disposition re-arrest for a new DV offense for adolescent males who had a first adult DV arrest (Figure 8). A history of JD arrests increased the likelihood of postdisposition re-arrest for a new DV offense following the first adult DV arrest. The importance of JD arrest history in predicting re-arrest varied by the type of history. Having a JD history that included DV arrests, either alone or in combination with JD Non-DV arrests, had the strongest impact. Having a history of only JD Non-DV arrests had a weaker effect, but it was still statistically significant.
Standardized Beta Coefficients The bars in Figures 8 and 9 represent standardized beta coefficients, which reflect the impact of the predictor on the likelihood of post-disposition re-arrest, while controlling for other predictors in the model. The length of the bar represents the size of the coefficient: standardized betas vary from 0.0 to +1.0 or –1.0. The larger the coefficient (and the longer the bar), the greater the importance of the item in predicting pretrial re-arrest. Bars above the base depict positive coefficients, indicating that the characteristic was associated with a greater likelihood of re-arrest. Bars extending below the base depict negative coefficients, indicating reduced likelihood of re-arrest. Blue bars depict statistically significant variables; gray bars depict variables that are not statiscally significant.
Standardized Beta
Figure 8 Logistic Regression Model Predicting Likelihood Of Re-Arrest For A New DV Offense Among First-Time Adult DV Arrestees (N=945) JD Arrest History
Full-Time Activity
Borough
compared to: NO JD Arrests
compared to: HAS Full-Time Activity
compared to: BROOKLYN
.35
.33
.22
.23
Manhattan No Full-Time Activity
-.05 (ns)
Queens
Staten Island
-.36 (ns)
.17 (ns)
.12 (ns)
DP Bronx
-.07 (ns)
Those not engaged in full-time activity (employed, in school, or in a training program) were more likely to be re-arrested for a new DV offense during the postdisposition period. The likelihood of post-disposition re-arrest for a new DV offense was also greater for adolescent males arrested for their first adult DV offense in the Bronx than in Brooklyn. There were no statistically significant differences among the other boroughs. Three case processing variables had statistically significant effects on the likelihood of post-disposition rearrest for a new DV offense. One was whether the defendant was arrested during the pre-disposition period for a new DV offense. Case outcome was also a statistically significant predictor of re-arrest. Specifically, when the first adult DV arrest was declined for prosecution (DP’d) by the District Attorney’s office, the likelihood of re-
Research Brief #25
Case Outcome of 1st Adult DV Arrest compared to: DISMISSED
YO on 1st Adult DV Arrest compared to: NO YO
.45
.20
0
JD JD JD Non-DV DV DV & Arrests Arrests Non-DV Only Only Arrests
DV Arrest Prior to Disposition compared to: NO DV Arrest
Any Pretrial DV Arrest
ACD -.34
Convicted, No Jail
Convicted, With Jail
YO Status
-.03 (ns)
-.32
arrest for a new DV offense was lower than for arrests that were prosecuted and later dismissed by the court. Among prosecuted cases, however, there were no statistically significant differences in re-arrest among cases that were dismissed, adjourned in contemplation of dismissal (ACD), or convicted (with or without a jail sentence). Defendants who received Youthful Offender (YO) status as a condition of sentencing on their first adult DV arrest were less likely to be re-arrested for a new DV offense during the post-disposition period. YO status is a finding, at the time of sentencing, that a defendant who was 18 or younger at the time of the incident and who has been convicted of a serious offense for the first time merits lenient treatment. When YO status is granted at sentencing, the conviction is vacated, and the defendant receives a reduced sentence.
5
CJA
Research Brief Re-Arrest For A New DV Offense Among First-Time Adult Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) Arrestees
We also developed a statistical model predicting the likelihood of rearrest for a new DV offense among adolescents who were arrested for the first time as adults for intimate partner violence offenses. The variables considered for our model were the same as those previously considered for first-time adult DV arrestees. The number of cases is considerably smaller in this analysis (N = 165), and as a result it is more difficult to find statistically significant variables
to enter the model. Nevertheless, we found four variables that had a statistically significant effect on the likelihood of re-arrest (see Figure 9). As in the previous model for first-time adult DV arrestees, we found that the re-arrest rate for new DV offenses was higher in the Bronx than in the other boroughs among first-time adult IPV arrestees. In this model, a history of prior adult arrests had the largest standardized beta (.69), indicating that
Figure 9 Logistic Regression Model Predicting Likelihood Of Re-Arrest For A New DV Offense Among First-Time Adult IPV Arrestees N=165 Borough
Adult Arrest History
Arraignment Charge Severity
Residential Instability
Standardized Beta
.69
.39
.36 .30
0
Bronx
Any Prior Adult Arrest
Felony Arraignment Charge
At Current Address 1 Year Or Less
In Figure 9, the effect of each predictor is compared to cases that are characterized by the absence of that predictor. For example, the Bronx is compared to cases prosecuted elsewhere in New York City.
it explained more variation in the likelihood of re-arrest than any other factor. First-time adult IPV arrestees who were charged with felonies were more likely to be re-arrested for a new DV offense than those who were charged with misdemeanors or lesser offenses. Finally, residential instability increased the likelihood of re-arrest for a new DV offense among firsttime adult IPV arrestees.
We also developed a model to predict the likelihood of an IPV rearrest for first-time IPV arrestees (model not shown), but it did not provide additional useful information. Because the IPV re-arrest rate was lower than the DV re-arrest rate, it was more difficult to find predictors of IPV re-arrests. Only 2 variables entered the model predicting the likelihood of an IPV re-arrest: borough (Bronx vs. other boroughs) and criminal history (any prior adult arrests). Their effects were in the same direction reported in Figure 9.
Summary Arrests for domestic violence offenses are relatively rare among male juveniles (under age 16) in New York City. Among the adolescent male arrestees in our sample, only 2% had ever been arrested for a domestic violence offense prior to the age of 16. When juveniles are arrested for domestic violence, over two thirds of these arrests are for violence against parents or siblings, and less than 10% are for violence against intimate partners. Arrests for domestic violence offenses are more common among adult adolescent males age 16 to 19. Among the adult adolescent male arrestees in our sample, about 7% had ever been arrested for a domestic violence offense. Over half of DV arrests of adult adolescent males
6
are for violence against parents or siblings. Arrests for intimate partner violence are more common in this age group than among those under 16, accounting for about one quarter of the total. A history of juvenile arrests for domestic violence increases the likelihood of adult arrests for domestic violence. Adolescent males who had been arrested for DV offenses as juveniles are more likely to be arrested for DV offenses as adults than adolescent males who had no juvenile arrests, or whose juvenile arrests were only for Non-DV offenses. Over 18% of adolescent males who had a JD DV arrest were arrested for an adult DV offense by age 19. By comparison, only about 7% of
January 2011
CJA adolescent males who had no juvenile arrests, or only juvenile Non-DV arrests, had been arrested for an adult DV offense by that age. Adolescent males who had been arrested for parent/ sibling violence as juveniles were not more likely to be arrested for domestic violence as adults than juveniles who had been arrested for other types of domestic violence. At least for adolescent males under 20 years old, it does not appear that a history of juvenile arrests for parent/sibling violence was associated with a history of adult arrests for domestic violence. Within one year of case disposition (or release after incarceration) following the first adult DV arrest, those with a history of prior arrests, especially those previously arrested for DV offenses, were the most likely to be re-arrested for a new DV offense. A history of JD arrests, and particularly a history of JD DV arrests (either alone, or in combination with JD Non-DV arrests) was a strong predictor of the likelihood of re-arrest for a new DV offense after the first adult DV arrest. Similarly, we found that those who were arrested for a DV offense prior to the disposition of the first adult DV arrest were more likely to be re-arrested for a new
Research Brief
DV offense after case disposition. The likelihood of rearrest for a new DV offense also was higher for adolescent males who were not engaged in full-time activity. Because most of the adolescent males in this sample were 16 or 17 years old at the time of their first DV arrest, it seems likely that those who were not engaged in full-time activity had dropped out of school prior to graduating from high school and were not employed full-time. YO status was associated with lower recidivism, at least with respect to re-arrest for a new DV offense within one year of case disposition. Although our analyses were unable to determine the reasons for this effect, the findings suggest that this legislation designed to help youthful offenders may be having the desired impact on DV defendants. Within one year of case disposition (or release after incarceration) following the first adult IPV arrest, those with a prior adult arrest were the most likely to be re-arrested for a new DV offense. Residential instability, being arrested in the Bronx, and being charged with a felony at arraignment were also associated with a higher risk of re-arrest for a new DV offense among IPV arrestees.
Policy Implications Several of our findings suggest that intervening with adolescent male arrestees to reduce domestic violence, especially intimate partner violence, may be difficult. Among male juveniles (under age 16), arrests for domestic violence offenses are relatively rare. Although some research indicates that teen dating violence is common, it appears that such violence is either not criminal in nature, or is not often reported to the police. This limits the opportunities for contact between the criminal justice system (including the family courts) and male juveniles who commit domestic violence. The model predicting the likelihood of re-arrest among first-time adult DV arrestees identified several groups that could be targeted for intervention: those who were not engaged in full-time activity, those who had a JD history of DV arrests, those who were arrested for a new DV offense during the pendency of the case, and those who did not receive YO status. Additional interventions may be warranted for these arrestees. For example, adolescents not engaged in full-time activity might be offered services to enable them to return to school and/or work. Those arrested for a new DV offense during the pendency of the case might be placed in a supervised release program. De-
Research Brief #25
fendants whose cases end in conviction and who have a history of JD arrests for domestic violence could be sentenced to intensive probation supervision or to special batterer programs. Targeting specific subgroups of adolescent male DV arrestees (e.g., IPV offenders who had a previous adult arrest, or who were charged with a felony, DV offenders with a history of JD DV arrests) could be accomplished through specialized courts. New York City already has two such courts operating—one in Brooklyn and one in the Bronx—that handle cases of intimate partner violence among defendants age 16-19. These Youthful Offender Domestic Violence (YODV) courts sometimes refer adolescent male defendants to a special batterer’s intervention program tailored to adolescents. The courts also provide services and referrals to victims. The YODV courts handle about 100 cases a year in the Bronx, and 300-400 per year in Brooklyn. These courts could be expanded to other boroughs, and could identify high-risk defendants and develop special programs for them. Given the high rates of violence against parents and siblings in this age group, they could also consider expanding their eligibility criteria to include such cases.
7
Research Brief from
CJA
No. 25 (January 2011) Adolescent Male Domestic Violence Offenders Forthcoming No. 26 (May 2011) Commercial Bail Bonds in New York City by Mary T. Phillips
Most recently published in this series: No. 24 (September 2010) Predicting Post-Sentencing Re-Arrest (Siddiqi) No. 23 (May 2010) Making Bail In New York City (Phillips) No. 22 (January 2010) Young Male DV Offenders (Peterson) No. 21 (September 2009) Juvenile Offenders And Weapons (Gewirtz) No. 20 (May 2009) The CASES Day Custody Program (Solomon) No. 19 (January 2009) Pretrial Failure Among New York City Defendants (Siddiqi) No. 18 (September 2008) Bail, Detention, and Felony Case Outcomes (Phillips) No. 17 (May 2008) Pretrial Misconduct Among Domestic Violence Defendants (Peterson) No. 16 (January 2008) Predicting The Likelihood of Pretrial Re-Arrest For Violent Felony Offenses (Siddiqi) No. 15 (September 2007) The Risk of Re-Arrest For Serious Juvenile Offenders (Gewirtz) No. 14 (May 2007) Bail, Detention, & Nonfelony Case Outcomes (Phillips)
www.nycja.org/research/research.htm
Research Brief from
CJA
No. 25 (January 2011)
Adolescent Male Domestic Violence Offenders The New York City Criminal Justice Agency, Inc. 52 Duane Street New York, NY 10007
TO: