The purpose of this study was to discover the current awareness of speech-language pathologists (SLPs) regarding the link between language disorder and the juvenile justice system. It is to consider how speech-language pathology, as a profession, think about the implications of language disorder on life outcomes as well as determine the need for speech-language intervention within the juvenile justice system. A Google Form was created and distributed to current speech-language pathologists that have their Certificate of Clinical competence, and have experience working with students in the educational setting. Results suggest SLPs are aware of the link between LD and the juvenile justice system as well as the aspects of language found difficult for these young offenders, but training and professional development on this topic is minimal. Participants report an interest in interprofessional practice and are positioned to become advocates for young offenders with LD in the juvenile justice system.

Although a number of studies have been conducted to understand the impact of ICT on a country’s economic output; a complete account for ICT’s influence on real GDP per capita has yet to be visualized. This study aims to investigate this topic, by exploring the hypothesis whether ICT has an impact (causal relationship) on real GDP per worker in 41 European countries from 1996-2010. Confidence in the judicial system is taken as an instrument to solve for endogeneity problems. ICT is defined as mobile, broadband and internet penetration per 100 people. We find that confidence in the justice system is a strong instrument for ICT. Therefore, using IV 2sls regression, it is observed that ICT does have a strong positive correlation and causal relationship with GDP per worker, with an elasticity of 0.4 between the variables. In light of the results, the author recommends that economic policies must be tailored to support ICT development in countries.

No description available.

Equitable schooling requires that all students are able to participate, including those who are involved in the justice system. However, schools for youth who are in custody or in treatment are presented with challenges that may inhibit offering their student body science courses. This exclusion is a result of safety restrictions that coincide with what General Strain Theory (Agnew, 2006) refers to as having a strained population. Strained individuals experience significant life stressors that pressure them to anomie. Given the prevalent absence of strained individuals from science courses, it was a pleasant surprise to learn that the Healing Outdoor Program and Education (HOPE)–a remote treatment centre in a western province in Canada–had offered a for-credit high school science program during its operation from 2005 to 2020 that was a popular pick amongst students. In order to examine the science education experiences of youth who are involved in the justice system, this case study explores the types of strains that HOPE’s students faced, how those strains affected their learning, and how the pedagogical strategies mitigated/exacerbated strains. Document analysis, interviews with teachers and staff, and a field observation revealed that a pedagogy built on relationship, place-based science education, and personalized education were integral to academic success. However, underpinning educational achievement was a distinctive holistic approach to students’ wellness that addressed their physical, mental, emotional, spiritual, and social needs, through the use of Indigenous inspired practices, other forms of therapy, and the remote wilderness location. Furthermore, this case exemplified that it is not only feasible to offer science courses to strained individuals, but also possible to use science as a catalyst to reengage strained youth with schooling when teachers have the right conditions and supports. Therefore, this study presents pedagogical approaches that were successfully used with a marginalized group and provides recommendations for HOPE as they seek out funding partners to reinstate operations, so that they can continue providing youth with hope for a better future.

No description available.

Background: Current national prevalence estimates of DSM-5 diagnosed substance use disorders (SUDs) among adults with justice system involvement are lacking. Methods: This study drew from NESARC-III data (n = 36,309; 2012–2013), a nationally representative U.S. sample, to examine current and lifetime alcohol use disorder (AUD) and drug use disorder (DUD) diagnoses among adults reporting current or prior drug-related, alcohol-related, and general legal problems. Results: Adults reporting current alcohol-related legal problems were 22 times more likely to have a current AUD diagnosis (AOR = 22.0, 95% CI = 12.1; 40.1) and 15 times more likely to have had a lifetime AUD diagnosis (AOR = 15.2, 95% CI = 7.5; 30.9) than adults without alcohol-related legal problems. Adults with lifetime drug-related legal problems were 3–5 times more likely to have a current (AOR = 2.6, 95% CI = 2.1; 3.2) and lifetime (AOR = 5.1, 95% CI = 4.3; 6.1) DUD diagnosis, with stimulant use disorder being the most prevalent (AOR = 5.4, 95% CI = 4.5; 6.5). Adults with general legal problems were around 3 times more likely to have a current AUD (AOR = 3.2, 95% CI = 2.6; 4.0) or DUD (AOR = 3.5, 95% CI = 2.8; 4.4). Women with any type of legal problem were more likely to have SUD diagnoses than men. Conclusions: SUD diagnoses are prevalent among adults reporting legal problems, particularly those involving alcohol. There is a continued need for community-based addiction prevention and intervention efforts, especially for women with justice system involvement.

<p><strong>Objectives:</strong> Compared to youth without justice-involvement, justice-involved youth are more likely to experience substance use disorders. Yet, few justice-involved youth receive appropriate, evidence-based treatment for substance use disorders. Although there are numerous barriers to the accessibility of appropriate treatment, research also suggests that it is difficult to engage justice-involved youth in treatment even when it is available and accessible. It is possible that substance use disorder stigma, or negative attitudes towards youth with substance use disorders, may contribute to low treatment accessibility, and make it more difficult for justice-involved youth to engage with available treatment. Few researchers have examined substance use disorder stigma among this population. The purpose of this study was to 1) explore the nature of substance use disorder stigma among justice-involved youth, at multiple ecological levels and 2) examine the role of substance use disorder stigma in limiting the accessibility of and engagement in treatment and justice-involved youth’s engagement in treatment. </p> <p><strong>Methods:</strong> Participants (n = 44 youth-guardian dyads) were referred to the study by juvenile probation departments in two Indiana counties. In addition, 66 system personnel participants who work with justice-involved youth with substance use disorders were recruited from community mental health centers and juvenile probation departments in rural and suburban Indiana counties. All participants completed survey measures of substance use disorder stigma and familiarity with substance use; youth-guardian dyads also provided information about the youth’s substance use history and treatment utilization. A subset of participants (n = 9 youth, 11 guardians, 12 system personnel) completed qualitative interviews, providing perspectives on substance use disorder stigma and the role of stigma in discouraging treatment. Using analysis of covariance, multiple regression analyses, and qualitative grounded theory analysis, I explored the nature of stigma toward justice-involved youth with substance use disorders and examined the impact of stigma on treatment accessibility and engagement. </p> <p><strong>Results:</strong> For aim 1, as hypothesized, public stigma (assessed by survey data) varied significantly according to participant role and specific substance, with guardians endorsing greater stigma than system personnel. All participants expressed greater negative emotions towards youth with opioid use disorder compared to marijuana use disorder. Interview data revealed particularly nuanced attitudes about marijuana use. Contrary to expectations, youth reported little self-stigma. Both youth and guardians described limited knowledge of problematic substance use. For aim 2, interview data suggests that youth and guardians may identify more stigma associated with seeking treatment for problematic substance use than with using substances. All participants reported that perceived stigma has improved in recent years, and that youth feel more comfortable discussing their substance use. However, guardians identified family attitudes about behavioral health treatment as negatively impacting engagement among youth. In addition, system personnel reported that stigma continues to limit the accessibility of youth SUD treatment.  </p> <p><strong>Discussion:</strong> Youth endorsed lower than expected levels of self-stigma with no difference by primary substance type; this may have been affected by youth’s limited understanding of problematic substance use and lower than expected heterogeneity in substance use type among participants. Consistent with prior research, self-stigma was directly related to the severity of mental health symptoms. The high prevalence of public stigma among guardians of JIY with SUDs suggests that parents and guardians would benefit from interventions to better support their caregiving experiences. All participants identified complex attitudes about marijuana use, suggesting that the increasing public acceptability and endorsement of marijuana as a helpful substance may complicate treatment seeking when use becomes problematic. Although youth did not conceptualize self-stigma as a barrier to treatment, given that the primary substance used in this study was marijuana, these results may be complicated by changing societal attitudes about marijuana in particular. Qualitative perspectives from guardians and system personnel suggest that substance use disorder stigma may limit both the accessibility of treatment and youth’s likelihood to engage with treatment; this may depend on type of substance used. Particularly for the participants in this study, extremely limited treatment accessibility posed the largest barrier to evidence-based substance use disorder treatment for adolescents, making it difficult to accurately assess the role of stigma in actual treatment use. Finally, findings suggest that measuring substance use disorder stigma may be dependent on participants’ ability to accurately identify problematic substance use. It may also be important to refine both qualitative and quantitative measurement of stigma specifically with adolescents. Limitations and suggestions for future research are discussed.</p>

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.