FASD and TRC Call to Action 34.4: A Consideration of Evaluation Methods
FASD in the Criminal Justice System
When TRC Calls to Action 34.4 speaks of evaluation of “such programs,” it leaves the reader with the impression that “such programs” would include items listed in 34.1-34.3, such as enhanced community supports, sentencing discretion, and release planning. The authors believe the discussion that follows will be of particular interest to justice professionals and that these items should be noted when considering evaluation practices.
As noted in the introduction, there is considerable attention to the issue of FASD and the criminal justice system. There is also a critical absence of the complex contexts that surround justice involvement for persons with FASD. As part of their systematic literature review, Flannigan et al. (2018) identified core themes in the area of FASD and justice:
- Estimated prevalence is understood to be high, but the rates of FASD in the criminal justice system are not certain (Fast, Conry, and Loock 1999; Popova et al. 2011).
- There is a lack of standardized screening methods for FASD in the criminal justice system.
- FASD in the criminal justice system accounts for approximately 40% of the total financial cost of FASD in Canada (Thanh and Jonsson 2015).
- People with FASD face the following risks: first contact with the criminal justice system at a young age (McLachlan et al. 2014); suggestibility can deeply impact outcomes (Brown, Gudjonsson, and Connor 2011); adversities early in life coupled with lack of access to early diagnosis can impact outcomes and the need to consider broader adversities in early life as well as overall structural changes that result in alienation and marginalization (Currie et al. 2016; Tait et al. 2017; Pei et al. 2011).
FASD and justice is itself a broad category. This report is focused on policing, courts, corrections, and probation.
The literature highlights a lack of effective practices or strategies for dealing with FASD in the criminal justice system, as well as a clear desire for more access to training and information (Douglas et al. 2012). Research demonstrates a need for training strategies across the judiciary which could serve to improve management for youth in custody, or for release planning and parole (Burd et al. 2010; Passmore et al. 2018).
The Aboriginal Corrections Unit of Corrections Canada (as cited in the TRC) stated, “the justice system is set up to fail FASD-affected individuals—poor memory functions results in missed court appearances resulting in fail to appear charges” (TRC 2015, 223). “Set up to fail” is an apt description of the current situation we find ourselves in.
For instance:
- Individuals with FASD are often under-resourced in the community. These unaddressed needs can result in crisis and lead to sustained contact with the criminal justice system much like similar challenges seen with mental health and addictions.
- Individuals with FASD who become involved in the criminal justice system are likely to encounter justice professionals with limited understanding and/or misunderstandings of the disability.
- Misunderstandings can have a host of negative outcomes including escalation of force, breaches, and ongoing contact.
Justice professionals are often unprepared to work with a client who has FASD (Cox et al. 2008; Douglas et al. 2012). This can result in uneven practices (Douds et al. 2013) which raises concern about the rights of individuals in and between jurisdictions. Education is seen to be critical across all subfields within justice.
- Date modified: