I am the current Commonwealth's Attorney for Loudoun County.  I have served in that capacity since January 1, 2020.  Prior to my current position, I practiced law in Virginia since 1993.  I served as a guardian ad litem (GAL) for over 25 years, and a substitute judge for the 20th Judicial Circuit for 11 years. 

I am requesting that the proposed "Guidelines for Determining the Length of Stay of Juveniles Indeterminately Committed to the Department of Juvenile Justice" be withdrawn as it is NOT based on data and will not enhance public safety nor increase the rehabilitation of the juveniles.

I represented hundreds of juveniles in the juvenile courts - either as a GAL in abuse & neglect cases or as defense counsel for juveniles accused of delinquency.  Initially, the courts were quick to separate children from their families and community and to order them in residential program or to commit them to the Department of Juvenile Justice.  It was common for the children to return to the community and be disconnected from their peers, family and community.  The lack of connection resulted from their separation from the same for extended periods of time.  As studies support, separating children from family, friends and community causes trauma to the children, their family, friends and community.

Extended periods of incarceration increase the harmful impact on the child, their family and the community.  The child's ties to the community become frayed and weaken their pro-social ties, increases their trauma, and interrupt the natural maturation process.

In the early 2010 decade, our courts in Loudoun County identified that the commitments to DJJ, placements in juvenile detention and residential facilities were disproportionately imposed upon our children from communities of color and poverty.  The focus by the Courts and later reinforced by DJJ policy was to keep the children in the community - use local detention centers, provide enhanced services, engage community stakeholders, etc. - in lieu of a commitment to DJJ.  The results were a resounding success.  Most of the children were held accountable and did not reoffend. The services were a success in that the children AND their family received assistance to make broader improvement and assert the family as the primary accountability partner for the child's behaviors.  The community, school and families were partners with the court in the education and rehabilitation of the children; Then, after the court was no longer involved with the child, the community, school and families assumed and continued with the role of holding the child accountable.  All of these stakeholders were engaged and invested in the individual success of the child.  They created a partnership of success because they know that the child will be in their community.

The proposed changes - increase in length of stay - for juveniles serving an indeterminate commitment to DJJ is a threat to the safety of our communities.  As is common knowledge, a child that comes into contact with the criminal system has a greater chance or recidivating if they are not engaged or involved in the community.  The engagement of the community increases the long-term success of the child.  The community is better equipped to assess the needs of the child, refer to or render appropriate services, and reintegrate into the community in stages.  The threat to the safety of the community arises when children are removed from their family and community - incarcerated/detained in a facility that does not provide easy access to family members, the children are excised from their community, they don't continue with relationships with peers and teachers.  Thus, upon their return to the community, they need to restart/develop relationships that may have diminished during their placement in DJJ.  This increases the chances that they will reoffend upon their return to their community.  The other challenge is that while the child is working on their programs, the community / family / school is not part of the child's progress. Thus, when the child returns, there is not a continuum or consistency of care but a drastic change.  

Local services and facilities are more able to provide for the safety, connection and development of the child than the DJJ facilities.  The cost of care is cheaper for everyone when we serve our children in our communities.  The proposed changes to the length of stay recommends almost doubling the stay for the children under the premise that they will be allowed time to complete their programs.  This is a false premise per DJJ's own recidivism data - the evidence supports that keeping children in their community for services has decreased recidivism from years of the past. 

Another consideration is that the adult courts have recognized that reduced incarceration increases safety in the community - thus, they invest in specialty / treatment courts that allow the participant to remain in the community and receive treatment/services rather than incarcerating them.  This consideration should be employed with children as they are more dependent on their families, community, schools, etc., and can benefit from building these support systems as a youth rather than being separated from them.

DJJ's premise that the proposed extended length of stays allows for DJJ to provide enhanced educational and vocational training is the very issue that we have with over-incarceration in America.  We must end the falsehood that incarceration is a form of treatment - it is not. We were not able to incarcerate ourselves out of the drug crisis, not the mental health crisis and we can't incarceration ourselves out of the juvenile brain development crisis.  Investing in adding these services in the DJJ facilities requires that the Commonwealth divert funding from the localities to the state facilities.  That is NOT a solution but a guarantee that we will increase the number of children in custody yet not enhance community safety.