| SUBSCRIBE | | Why we charge |
|
|
|
Front Page
opinion guest_columns
Monday, June 02, 2008
Taking Hard Line Won't End Truancy
By Kari Brandenburg
2nd Judicial District Attorney
In 2002, the Second Judicial District Attorney's Office joined in partnership with the Children, Youth and Families Department, Albuquerque Public Schools and other agencies that work with children. The goal of this community collaborative was simple and profound — get truant children to attend school.
A few thought a hard-hitting approach with the prosecution of parents was the answer. However, the overwhelming majority decided that intervention was the appropriate approach and refused to sign on if the emphasis was prosecution oriented. In order to get the initiative off the ground, after several past failed attempts, we adopted the intervention approach and moved forward.
Five years later, the office and its community partners have done just that, providing education, intervention, case management and, when all else fails, prosecution of parents who will not send their children to school.
Research has drawn a clear connection between truancy and delinquency. When kids are not in school learning, they are often out on the streets committing crimes. Truants are more likely to abuse drugs and alcohol, engage in sexual behavior at an earlier age and be involved with gangs. As adults, they comprise an undereducated work force, have a greater reliance on public assistance and represent a large number of adult criminal offenders.
It is in everyone's best interest to discourage truancy.
Our efforts have been multifold. We have been actively educating the public on truancy prevention via our office Web site, through a community-access television broadcast and in our truancy prevention programs that occur throughout the year. In an era of tight budgets and heavy demands, we have dedicated two employees to work with the community partnership. Deputy District Attorney Garry Breeswine manages the office's truancy caseload. He speaks regularly with school district personnel and parents whose children are on the school district radar for nonattendance. He screens referrals from APS for legal sufficiency and the likely effectiveness of a specific prosecution in getting a child back in school.
Truancy Prevention Specialist Marvin Johnson spearheads the office's interventions with families of truant children. His work includes counseling with families and schools, referrals for therapeutic and social services, case management, and mediation with the involved parties. His position is unique among district attorneys' offices throughout the state.
Though we want to be tough on parents whose kids are truant, we have to recognize the intricacy of most situations. There are many reasons children fail to attend school: overwhelming family problems, including addiction and lack of financial resources, parental indifference or ignorance regarding the importance of education, alienation from the schools and older children who decline to attend school despite their parents' best efforts. Clearly, the varied causes of truancy require varied responses.
From the onset, it was decided our efforts would be directed toward a less punitive, indiscriminate approach to truancy, and more toward a collaborative, proactive effort to identify and remedy the cause of each child's truancy. Research and experience has shown that with minimal intervention, there can be significant reductions in truancy. This is especially true in grades 1-8. Prosecution should be used only when all less restrictive interventions have failed and the child's truancy is clearly someone's choice, rather than a reaction to overwhelming circumstances.
The efforts of our office and its community partners have impacted over 5,000 families since 2002, greatly diminishing the need for truancy prosecution. Most cases have been resolved without prosecution due to effective interventions. Other cases could not be prosecuted due to insufficient notice to families by the school district or inadequate/undocumented efforts at intervention and family responses. Since 2003, we have moved forward with the prosecution of nine cases. All cases resulted in a conviction with a deferred sentence. Parents convicted of a first offense face a fine of up to $100. There is no potential jail sentence. A second offense carries the possibility of a 6-month jail sentence and a fine of up to $500.
Truancy can be a complex problem, requiring more than a simplistic approach if we are looking for real solutions. We endorse a diagnosis/treatment model for each family and child because that is what gets children to school and keeps them there. It also helps families function more effectively in our community.
Our goal remains the same as it was in the beginning of the initiative in 2002 — for children to attend school on a regular basis. The Second Judicial District Attorney's Office maintains its commitment to the reduction of truancy, recognizing that education guarantees a better and safer life for our children, our families and the entire community.
...go to bookmarks
E-mail Story
Print Friendly
