criminology

Article

Suicidal Ideation in Juvenile Arrestees: Exploring Legal and Temporal Factors

Mike Tapia 1 , Henrika McCoy

2 , and Lynsey Tucker

3

Abstract Mental health screening data (Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument version 2 [MAYSI-2]) and offense history were used to study levels of suicidal ideation in a sample of juvenile arrestees held in a large, urban detention center located in a predominately Hispanic Southwestern U.S. city. We used t-tests and multinomial logistic regression to examine the relationships with particular attention to temporal issues. Results indicated that offense history, the timing of arrests, and demographics did influence levels of suicide ideation. We discuss these findings, strengths and limitations, and directions for future research.

Keywords juvenile offenders, suicidal ideation, MAYSI-2, Hispanic youth

Introduction

Adolescent suicide is a complex and multidimensional problem with a high incidence in the United

States. Suicide rates among adolescents and young adults nearly tripled between 1952 and 1996; and

by 1999, the U.S. Surgeon General, David Satcher, deemed suicide a major public health concern (U.S.

Department of Health and Human Services, 1999). In 2001, rates of suicide had risen so high that the

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services reported that a greater number of adolescents and

young adults were dying each year from suicide than from AIDS, birth defects, cancer, chronic lung

disease, heart disease, influenza, pneumonia, and stroke combined. By 2011, suicide was the second

leading cause of death among 15- to 24-year-olds with over 4,800 lives lost that year (Centers for Dis-

ease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2014a). Among that age-group, there is one successful comple-

tion for every 100–200 attempts made with 20% of all deaths attributable to suicide (CDC, 2012). Suicidal behavior varies by gender. For example, when compared to boys, girls are at a higher

risk for and have higher rates of suicidal behavior, attempts, and ideation (CDC, 2013; Lewinsohn,

1 New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM, USA

2 University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

3 University of Texas San Antonio and The Center for Health Care Services, San Antonio, TX, USA

Corresponding Author:

Mike Tapia, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM, 88003-8001, USA.

Email: [email protected]

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 2016, Vol. 14(4) 468-483 ª The Author(s) 2015 Reprints and permission: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1541204015579522 yvj.sagepub.com

Rohde, Seeley, & Baldwin, 2001; Wagner, 2009). Boys however, have a higher rate of completion

(CDC, 2014b), likely due to the use of more aggressive and lethal means during their attempts

(Wagner, 2009). Differences also exist in suicidal behavior by race and ethnicity (Goldston et al.,

2008). In 2012, for African American youth of age 12–18, suicide rates were 3.01 per 100,000, for

Hispanic youth rates were 3.62 per 100,000, and for White youth rates were 5.86 per 100,000

(National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, CDC, 2014). Despite White youth having the

highest rates of completion, Hispanic youth have the highest rates of suicidal ideation, plans, and

attempts among all youth (CDC, 2013).

Suicide and Juvenile Offenders

It has been well documented that incarcerated youth in particular are at high risk for attempting and

dying by suicide (Casiano, Katz, Globerman, & Sareen, 2013; CDC, 2014a; Gallagher & Dobrin,

2006; Mallett, DeRigne, Quinn, & Stoddard-Dare, 2012). Juvenile offenders are approximately

3 times more likely to die by suicide than youth in the general population (Gallagher & Dobrin,

2006). In fact, suicide is the leading reason juvenile offenders die when confined (Bureau of Justice

Statistics, 2005). This is highly concerning because in 2011, there were almost 62,000 juvenile

offenders in residential placement (Hockenberry, 2014). One of the most striking reasons for these

higher rates for incarcerated youth are partially due to the violent means they often use during their

suicide attempts (Rohde, Mace, & Seeley, 1997).

During the 15 years since suicide was deemed a public health risk for youth, there has been

increased awareness about its occurrence, especially related to juvenile offenders. In 2006, Gallagher

and Dobrin reported that 95% of facilities who had experienced a juvenile offender dying by suicide had instituted mental health screening. The need for such screening became even further highlighted

in 2013, when the National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention [NAASP] recommended that all

youth who were arrested or detained be screened for suicidal ideation. Thus, juvenile justice systems

in 47 states, and 44 statewide, accomplished that goal by implementing the Massachusetts Youth

Screening Instrument version 2 (MAYSI-2; Grisso et al., 2012).

Research about instruments used to screen for suicide ideation (SI) in this population, such as the

MAYSI-2, the Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire, the Suicidal Behaviors Questionnaire–Revised, and the

Global Appraisal of Individual Needs–Short Screener, has mostly focused on the clinical application,

validity, and generalizability of the measures across diagnoses, races/ethnicities, and gender (Archer,

Simonds-Bisbee, Spiegel, Handel, & Elkins, 2010; Cauffman & MacIntosh, 2006; Ford, Hartman,

Hawke, & Chapman, 2008; McCoy, 2014; McCoy, Vaughn, Maynard, & Salas-Wright, 2014; Vincent,

Grisso, Terry, & Banks, 2008a). In addition, the focus in the literature about suicide and juvenile detai-

nees has been primarily on clinical predictors such as the presence of psychiatric disorders, suicidal

ideation and/or attempts, substance use, and trauma exposure (Abram et al., 2008; Archer, Stredny,

Mason, & Arnau, 2004; Cauffman, 2004; Chapman & Ford, 2008; Nolen et al., 2008; Wasserman &

McReynolds, 2006). Understudied is the relationship between suicidal ideation and the legal char-

acteristics of juvenile detainees such as crime type and recidivism. This study aims to help fill that

gap by paying special attention to some of the temporal issues in the relationship between offense

history and suicidal ideation using MAYSI-2 and offense data from a sample of juveniles.

The Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument, Version 2

As previously noted, the MAYSI-2 is often used to screen for the presence of SI. It is a brief, self-

report, mental health screening tool designed to be administered to juvenile offenders, age 12–17,

within 24–48 hr of entry into any decision-making point in the juvenile justice system (Grisso,

Barnum, Fletcher, Cauffman, & Peuschold, 2001). It identifies current feelings, thoughts, and

Tapia et al. 469

behaviors indicative of mental or emotional needs that necessitate immediate response or further

assessment (Grisso et al., 2001; Grisso & Quinlan, 2005). Furthermore, it is used as a triage tool to

identify youth whom report symptoms of distress (e.g., depressed mood) or who manifest feelings

or behaviors (e.g., suicide potential) that may require immediate intervention or further assess-

ment (Grisso et al., 2001). However, it is not designed to identify disorders from the Diagnostic

and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Grisso et al., 2001).

The MAYSI-2 has 52 yes or no questions and takes approximately 10 min to administer. All

items are worded at the fifth-grade reading level and it contains the following 7 scales: Alcohol/

Drug Use, Angry-Irritable, Depressed-Anxious, Somatic Complaints, SI, Thought Disturbance

(boys only), and Traumatic Experiences. The number of items on each scale ranges from 5 to

9 and respondents answer each item using the time frame ‘‘in the past few months.’’ Six of the

scales use the cutoffs Caution and Warning. Caution indicates clinical significance and a score of

Warning means that the youth has scored in the top 15% of youth in the juvenile justice system (Grisso & Barnum, 2006). The Traumatic Events scale however uses a simple count where youth

respond to whether they have ever experienced one of the identified events during their lifetime.

The SI scale contains 5 items with potential scores ranging from 0 to 5. A score of 2 is desig-

nated as Caution while a score between 3 and 5 is designated as Warning. The 5 items are (1)

‘‘Have you wished you were dead?’’ (2) ‘‘Have you felt life was not worth living?’’ (3) ‘‘Have

you felt hopeless?’’ (4) ‘‘Have you felt like hurting yourself?’’ (5) ‘‘Have you felt like killing

yourself?’’

A number of studies have examined the psychometric properties of the MAYSI-2’s scales,

including comparing it with measures that were conceptually similar by using Pearson’s r and

receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves. From that research, the SI scale was shown to

have strong correlations and good to excellent accuracy including the Children’s Depressive

Inventory r ¼ .51 (Tille & Rose, 2007); the Millon Adolescent Clinical Inventory Suicide Ten- dency scale r ¼ .57 (Butler et al., 2007), r ¼ .61 (Grisso et al., 2001), and when using the Caution cutoff, area under the curve (AUC) of .94 for boys and .91 for girls (Grisso et al., 2001); the Neg-

ative Suicide Ideation Index from the Positive and Negative Suicide Ideation Inventory r ¼ .68 (Tille & Rose, 2007); the Suicide Ideation Questionnaire r ¼ .58 (Chapman & Ford, 2008); and the Youth Self-Report Self-Destructive Scale r ¼ .44 (Grisso et al., 2001).

When Archer, Stredny, Mason, and Arnau (2004) compared the respondent’s current suicidal

ideation to the Caution cutoff on the SI scale, there was good specificity (.81) and sensitivity

(.90). When the respondent’s history of suicidal attempts was compared to the Caution cutoff, sen-

sitivity (.66) was weaker while specificity (.85) increased slightly. When compared to the Warning

cutoff, results were similar, that is, current suicidal ideation, sensitivity ¼ .90 and specificity ¼ 0.88; and a history of suicidal ideation, sensitivity ¼ .48 and specificity ¼ .90. Archer, Simonds-Bisbee, Spiegel, Handel, and Elkins (2010) used data from detained adolescents (n ¼ 1,192) to further exam- ine the MAYSI-2’s validity. They used a standard of r ¼ .15 to determine correlation at a meaningful level, and the SI scale was found to have convergent validity with prior suicidal ideation (boys

r ¼ .30 and girls r ¼ .24), prior suicidal behaviors without medical attention (boys r ¼ .27 and girls r ¼ .28), prior suicide attempts with medical intervention (boys r ¼ .23 and girls ¼ .28), and a his- tory of self-mutilating behavior (boys r ¼ .28 and girls r ¼ .30).

A study by Wasserman et al. (2004) of n ¼ 325 detained youth examined how well MAYSI-2 scales mapped onto the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children-IV. Results showed that when

prior suicide attempts were compared to SI, youth who scored Caution on the SI scale were more

likely (OR [odds ratio] ¼ 6.12, p < .001) to report lifetime suicide attempts. When SI and suicide attempts were examined on a continuum, youth who reported a recent suicide attempt were more

likely (OR ¼ 3.46, p < .001) to show an increase on the SI scale. ROC analyses were also used to determine whether a score above Caution on the SI scale could accurately identify recent suicide

470 Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 14(4)

attempts, lifetime attempts, and no attempt both with and without a plan, results were AUC ¼ 0.96, 0.73, and 0.55, respectively.

Past MAYSI-2 SI Scale Research Findings

A recent, and the only, meta-analysis of MAYSI-2 data was examined by Vincent, Grisso, Terry, and

Banks (2008a) of sex, race, and ethnicity differences in a national sample of system-involved youth.

The data contained 70,423 intake records with MAYSI-2 scores from 283 juvenile justice probation,

detention, or corrections sites from 19 states across the country. On at least one of the five MAYSI-2

scales, 72% of girls and 63% of boys scored above Caution. On the SI scale, girls (29%) had a much higher prevalence of scoring above Caution than boys (15%). The pattern of girls consistently scor- ing higher than boys on the SI scale repeated in the numerous other studies where gender was exam-

ined (e.g., Archer et al., 2010; Archer, Stredny, Mason, & Arnau, 2004; Cauffman, 2004; Gretton &

Clift, 2011; Hayes, McReynolds, & Wasserman, 2005; Kerig, Moeddel, & Becker, 2011; Nordness

et al., 2002; Stathis et al., 2008; Wasserman et al., 2004).

Differences by race and ethnicity have also been examined. Vincent et al. (2008a) used a national

sample of White (39%), Black (34%), and Hispanic (24%) youth and found that most youth scored below Caution on the SI scale. The differences by race or ethnicity were small to virtually nonexis-

tent and the percentages of youth scoring above Caution on the SI scale were as follows: White

(22%), Black (15%), and Hispanic (17%). In other studies (e.g., Archer, Stredny, & Arnau, 2004; Cauffman, 2004; Dalton, Evans, Cruise, Feinstein, & Kendrick, 2009; Grisso et al., 2001) when

White youth were compared to Black youth on the SI scale, White youth had higher means or scored

Caution at higher percentages. When Black and Hispanic youth were compared, Hispanic youth

were more likely than Black youth to score higher on the SI scale (Cauffman, 2004; Grisso et al.,

2001). However, results on the SI scale were varied across studies when Hispanic youth were com-

pared to White youth. For example, Grisso, Barnum, Fletcher, Cauffman, and Peuschold (2001)

found that White and Hispanic males had equal means, while Cauffman (2004) found that White

males had lower means than Hispanic males. Grisso et al. (2001) also found that White females had

lower means than Hispanic females while Cauffman (2004) found the opposite.

The Current Study

The current study will fill two important gaps in the literature about SI among youth involved in the

juvenile justice system. First, where past research has uncovered many of the social and psychological

correlates of SI, this study explores some of the legal and temporal correlates. To accomplish this,

average scores on the MAYSI-2 SI scale are compared by crime type, crime severity, arrest frequency,

and demographics. In addition, SI scores for repeat arrestees at two points within a 6-month time frame

are examined to determine whether outcomes vary when a youth quickly recidivates. Second, while

various recent studies conducted with MAYSI-2 data do include Hispanic youth (e.g., Aalsma,

Schwartz, & Perkins, 2014; Cauffman & MacIntosh, 2006; Coker et al., 2014; Grisso et al., 2001;

Vincent et al., 2008a), many others exclude them (e.g., Cruise, Marsee, Dandreaux, & DePrato,

2007), have a small sample size (e.g., Maney, 2011), or do not delineate the findings for Hispanics

very well (McCoy et al., 2014). This study however includes youth residing in a large, Hispanic dom-

inated urban county and will allow a unique and needed focus in Hispanic juvenile offenders.

Hypotheses

Our first hypothesis (Hypothesis 1): Offenders who commit serious crime (felonies or violent

crimes) will have higher SI scores than less serious offenders who commit misdemeanors or status

Tapia et al. 471

offenses. Engaging in more serious crimes reflects a higher level of dysfunction in a youth’s

psychological or social background (Lynam et al., 2000; Valdez, Kaplan, & Codina, 2000). Thus,

we posit there will be higher levels of distress, such as suicidal ideation, for youth entering the

juvenile justice system for such crimes.

Our second hypothesis (Hypothesis 2): Having prior offenses will be negatively associated with

SI scores due to a desensitization effect. The tests for this hypothesis are 3-fold, focusing on the

difference in SI scores between (1) youth with priors versus those without (Prevalence test) and

(2) Time 1 and Time 2 arrests for repeat arrestees (Frequency test) and then on examining the

effect of the number of arrests on SI (Multivariate test). For the Prevalence test, we expect the

mean SI score for youth with priors to be lower than that of first offenders. For the Frequency test,

we used only the subset of youth arrested more than once during a specific 6-month time period

(n ¼ 222). We expect for scores at Arrest Time 1 to be higher than at Arrest Time 2. In the Multi- variate test, we control for other legal and demographic items and expect for the number of arrests

(ranging from 1 to 4) to be negatively associated with SI.

We posit the negative relationship between the number of detentions and level of suicidal idea-

tion will be either an artificial or genuine institutionalization effect. Due to prior detention experi-

ences, youth might expect that reporting certain symptoms could lead to further screening, unwanted

intervention, and possibly a lengthier detention stay. That knowledge might cause youth to be decep-

tive in their responses in order to mask symptoms of psychological distress (McCoy, 2014; NAASP,

2013) or because they believe that services would be ineffective so it would be fruitless to report

them (Coker et al., 2014). Regardless, this outcome would be categorized as an artificial effect.

A genuine effect would occur when a youth’s psychological distress symptoms are genuinely lower

and ultimately there is less fear and lower feelings of suicidal ideation related to potential long-term

system involvement.

Our third hypothesis (Hypothesis 3): Younger offenders will score higher than older offenders on

the SI scale. This hypothesis is supported from findings in a study conducted by Morris et al. (1995)

of youth in 39 juvenile correctional facilities, where being younger was associated with higher levels

of SI and more suicide attempts. Because younger offenders are less likely to commit acts leading to

arrest and detention, their psychological distress levels are likely to be more acute than that of older,

more experienced offenders. We posit that youth with less experience being processed (i.e.,

younger) are likely to view such an event as direr than older youth, who on average should be more

desensitized to the process. In regression, we control for prior offenses, in order to avoid confound-

ing age effects in Hypothesis 3 with the hypothesized desensitization effects in Hypothesis 2.

Our fourth hypothesis (Hypothesis 4): Race-ethnicity and gender will influence SI scores. Spe-

cifically, Hispanic youth will have higher SI means than White and Black youth and females will

have higher SI means than boys. According to Zayas and Pilat (2008), Hispanic females report some

of the highest levels of suicidal ideation of any demographic group. Based on prior research exam-

ining race-ethnicity and gender in the MAYSI-2, coupled with the identified stressors in Bexar

County, we posit our results will also show that Hispanic youth, and girls in particular, will demon-

strate higher levels of SI.

Method

Study Setting

Bexar County (i.e., San Antonio), Texas, is one of the nation’s largest urban hubs for U.S. Hispanics,

who comprise 59% of its population (U.S. Census Bureau, 2014b). It has high rates of childhood poverty (U.S. Census Bureau, 2014a), teen pregnancy (City of San Antonio, 2012), and the state

of child welfare there has been characterized as dismal (Stoeltje, 2014; The Stephen Group,

472 Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 14(4)

2014). This is particularly concerning because many youth who are involved in the child welfare

system are often also involved in the juvenile justice system (McCoy & Bowen, 2014) and Bexar

County has high rates of involvement in both systems (Bexar County Juvenile Probation Depart-

ment, n.d.a.). The multitude of stressors and risks to youth that this entails likely increase levels

of psychological and emotional distress for this group. Thus, the current family and social conditions

experienced by Hispanic juvenile offenders in Bexar County are possibly more toxic than in many

other contexts. Therefore, it might be expected that youth in Bexar County may show higher levels

of distress, and SI in particular, than a national sample.

Sample Description

This study sample includes juveniles (N ¼ 763), aged 10–18, who were apprehended, arrested, and detained in the Bexar County Detention Center for incidents occurring between December 1, 2009,

and May 31, 2010. The race and ethnic composition of the sample is Hispanic (n ¼ 569, 75%), Black (n ¼ 99, 13%), White (n ¼ 90, 12%), and Other (n ¼ 5, 0.01%); the gender breakdown is male (n ¼ 560, 73%) and female (n ¼ 203, 27%). Regarding age, 56% of the sample is below age 15. Table 1 contains the complete descriptive data for each variable.

Notably, fewer youth scored Caution (5%) versus Warning (10%) on the SI scale. Most youth were 1 Time arrestees during the 6-month period (71%) and committed either misdemeanors or sta- tus offenses (77%). Table 2 contains the average SI scores of various subgroup pairs, which are com- pared with t-tests to determine whether subgroup differences are statistically significant. Table 3

contains the average SI scores of the subset of repeat arrestees at Arrest Time 1 and Arrest Time

2. Table 4 contains results of the multinomial logistic regression.

We examined two types of data from the Bexar County Juvenile Probation Department as fol-

lows: (1) scores from each MAYSI-2 administered to arrestees as part of their detention intake and

(2) related offense data for each juvenile offender. All noncustodial arrests, such as ‘‘paper arrest’’

cases where a youth was detained on a warrant for missing a court date or for violating probation,

were dropped. In addition, cases with missing data on current and prior offenses were dropped. The

study’s hypotheses were tested using t-tests and multinomial logistic regression; our analyses were

conducted using SPSS 21.

Table 1. Descriptives.

Variable n %

SI caution (Time 1) 36 4.7 SI warning (Time 1) 76 10.0 No SI cautions/warnings (Time 1) 642 84.1 Single arrest 541 71.0 Two arrests 175 22.9 Three or more arrests 47 6.1 Felonies (Time 1) 175 22.9 Violent offenses (Time 1) 223 29.2 Misdemeanors and status offenses (Time 1) 588 77.1 Prior offenses (at Time 1) 530 69.5 10–15 age-group (at Time 1) 429 56.2 Males 560 73.4 Hispanics 569 74.6 Blacks 99 13.0 Whites 90 11.8

Note. SI ¼ suicide ideation.

Tapia et al. 473

For each hypothesis, we compare the mean scores of youth on the SI scale and use t-tests assum-

ing equal variances on items, to determine whether any observed differences are statistically signifi-

cant for different groups according to demographic (e.g., race, gender, and age) and legal categories

Table 2. SI by Paired Groups.

Group Mean SD Cohen’s d t Value

Felony 0.51 1.21 –0.116 –1.32 Misdemeanors 0.66 1.38 Violent 1.02 1.68 0.383 5.21** Status offenders 0.47 1.14 Prior record 0.44 1.08 –0.430 –6.03** No priors 1.06 1.73 Single arrest 0.69 1.40 0.154 1.84 Repeat arrests 0.49 1.19 Ages 10–15 0.73 1.43 0.174 2.32* Ages 16–18 0.50 1.21 Male 0.44 1.14 –0.487 –6.47** Female 1.14 1.69 Hispanic 0.54 1.24 –0.253 –3.21** Blacks and Whites combined 0.90 1.58 Black 0.83 1.58 0.159 1.58 Whites and Hispanics combined 0.60 1.30 White 1.00 1.63 0.286 2.78** Blacks and Hispanics combined 0.58 1.29

Note. SI ¼ suicide ideation. *p < .05. **p < .01.

Table 4. Multinomial Logistic Regression of SI Cutoffs on Legal Items, Age, and Controls.

Caution Warning

OR 95% CI OR 95% CI

Intercept — — Felony 0.999 [0.44, 2.28] 0.74 [0.38, 1.44] Violent 1.02 [0.46, 2.29] 1.93 [1.11, 3.34] Priors (yes/no) 1.32 [0.58, 2.98] 0.41 [0.23, 0.70] Number of arrests, past 6 months 0.74 [0.40, 1.37] 0.88 [0.56, 1.37] Ages 10–15 2.21 [1.02, 4.80] 1.00 [0.58, 1.74] Male 0.53 [0.26, 1.09] 0.37 [0.22, 0.62] Hispanic 0.73 [0.27, 1.99] 0.40 [0.21, 0.76] Black 0.85 [0.23, 3.14] 0.88 [0.39, 1.98]

Note. N ¼ 753. SI ¼ suicide ideation; OR ¼ odds ratio; CI ¼ confidence interval.

Table 3. Repeat Arrestees, SI Means at Time 1 and Time 2.

Group Mean SD Cohen’s d t Value

Time 1 0.49 1.19 –0.073 6.32* Time 2 0.58 1.27

Note. n ¼ 222. SI ¼ suicide ideation. *p < .01.

474 Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 14(4)

(e.g., offense type, severity, frequency, and history). Multinomial logistic regression is conducted

with the independent variables and controls in a model predicting SI scores of Caution or Warning,

with No Caution/No Warning as the reference category in order to evaluate hypotheses while con-

trolling for potential confounds. The results will show which variables increase the odds that youth

SI scores exceed the Caution and Warning cutoffs. For these analyses, the independent variables,

namely, felony, violent, priors, and age 10–15 are measured as dummy variables, coded 0 and 1; the

remaining independent variable, the number of arrests during the study’s 6-month period, has a

range from 1 to 4. The control items, sex, and race-ethnicity are dummy coded 0 and 1 with female

as the reference category for gender and White as the reference category for race-ethnicity.

Additionally, for the second hypothesis, three analyses were conducted. First, we examine the

difference in SI scores between youth with priors and those without using a t-test. This analysis uses

a left-censored time frame because youth in this study range in age from 10 to 18 with some criminal

histories extending retrospectively 8 years so the date of first offense is not measured. For the second

analysis, the average SI scores at Arrest Time 1 and Arrest Time 2 were compared for a subset

of repeat arrestees (n ¼ 222), also using a t-test. This group had two or more arrests during a 6-month period, enabling a test of whether SI scores decrease when a youth reenters the system and

retakes the MAYSI-2 within a short time frame (Table 3). Finally, the impact of the number of

arrests on the SI thresholds of Caution and Warning is further reexamined using multinomial logistic

regression (Table 4).

Results

Our first hypothesis was that offenders who committed serious crime (felonies or violent crimes)

would have higher SI scores than less serious offenders who commit misdemeanors or status

offenses. In partial support, youth who committed violent crimes had significantly higher SI scores

than youth who committed status offenses (t ¼ 5.21, p < .01). In addition, committing a violent offense significantly increased the odds of scoring Warning on the SI scale (OR ¼ 1.93).

Second, we hypothesized that having prior offenses would be negatively associated with SI

scores due to a desensitization effect. The first test conducted for this hypothesis (arrest Prevalence)

was proven true. Table 2 shows that first offenders had significantly higher SI means ( ¼ 1.06) than youth with priors (M ¼ 0.44) and results were statistically significant (t ¼ 6.03, p < .01). Further- more, in regression, having prior offenses decreased the odds of a Warning score (OR ¼ 0.40). On the second test (arrest Frequency), results were mixed. First, note that in Table 2, the multiple arrests

category had a significantly lower SI mean than the single arrest category, indicative of a desensi-

tization effect. However, when comparing SI scores at arrest time 1 and arrest time 2 only (Table 3),

the average score increases significantly during this brief period, opposite of the desensitization pre-

diction in Hypothesis 2. Finally, the multivariate test shows that the odds of scoring a Caution or

Warning on the SI scale decrease with the number of arrests, which, although not significant, is indi-

cative of desensitization. For this final test, there is no significant effect and the hypothesis is ulti-

mately not supported.

Results supported the third hypothesis: Younger offenders would score higher than older offen-

ders on the SI scale. The SI mean for the younger age-group (10–15) is significantly higher (t ¼ 2.32, p < .05) than that of the older youth (16–18). Further, the only independent variable that significantly

predicts the SI Caution cutoff is the young age-group (OR ¼ 2.21). The final hypothesis was that race-ethnicity and gender would influence SI scores. As hypothe-

sized, females (M ¼ 1.14) have a much higher SI average than that of males (M ¼ 0.44) and results were statistically significant (t ¼ 6.47, p < .01). Being male also decreased the odds of scoring a Warning on SI (OR ¼ 0.37). Contrary to the second portion of the hypothesis, Hispanics have a sig- nificantly lower SI score than Blacks and Whites combined (t ¼ 3.21, p < .01), Blacks had higher SI

Tapia et al. 475

scores than Whites and Hispanics combined (t ¼ 1.58, n.s.), and Whites had significantly higher scores than Blacks and Hispanics combined (t ¼ 2.78, p < .01). Finally, when race-ethnicity was examined in regression, the only significant results were that being Hispanic decreased the odds

of scoring a Warning (OR ¼ 0.40) when compared to Whites.

Discussion

Most research about the MAYSI-2 has not focused on the offense characteristics of the detained

youth to which it is administered. This study sought to highlight the relationship between several

legal items and SI, with particular attention to some of the temporal issues therein. Ultimately,

there was full or partial support for each of the four hypotheses. Where analyses of MAYSI-2

data on Hispanics are sparse in the literature, this study makes a unique contribution in that arena

as well.

Contrary to our expectation, youth charged with felonies had lower SI scale means than those

with misdemeanors and status offenses. Although the difference was not significant, prior research

does show that youth who engage in more serious crimes have higher levels of psychological dis-

tress. However, felonies are a broad category and include numerous crimes that may not be per-

ceived to be serious by a juvenile and that do not lead to self-injurious behaviors. For example,

in Texas, many property crimes are designated as felonies, but there is no compelling reason to

expect for such behavior to be associated with high levels of anxiety in young offenders.

As hypothesized, the SI scale mean for violent offenders was significantly higher than for non-

violent offenders. This finding has implications for direct service staff, particularly because it would

not be unusual for these youth to be managed differently from other youth, such as being housed

separately or engaged in more intensive services, which are targeted to youth with a history of vio-

lence. The training of these staff regarding how they assess and screen for suicidal ideation youth

who commit violent offenses should account for the increased potential SI with this group. In addi-

tion, the ultimate disposition for a youth who has committed a violent felony versus a status offense

is vastly different. It is the norm that youth adjudicated to have committed a violent felony can be

sent to the Texas Juvenile Justice Department (TJJD) or a post-adjudication secure correctional

facility (Texas Attorney General, 2014).

The second hypothesis addresses the following two competing assumptions: (1) youth with

prior arrest experiences would be desensitized to the negative aspects of detention and therefore

score lower on an SI scale and (2) anytime a youth is arrested, it is a negative experience, thus SI

scores will show no difference or even be higher for those with prior arrests. It is important to note

that only about 4–5% of national, representative samples of the youth population will report ever having been arrested (Tapia, 2012), making it a rather rare, and likely traumatic event. It would

follow that regardless of the amount of time between arrests, a youth will experience distress about

being rearrested and detained, particularly if they had been able to ‘‘stay out of trouble’’ for an

extended period of time. Support for either of these ideas in this study was contingent on the tim-

ing and number of arrests.

The comparison of SI means for those with prior offenses and those without was a basic, general

test in support of the second hypothesis. Indeed, it was a rather large effect, where the average SI

score is over twice as large for first offenders as for those with priors. Then, in regression, having

prior arrests significantly decreases the odds of scoring a Warning on the SI scale, further indicating

that first time arrestees experience higher levels of SI because they fear the unknown about their

detention experience. It may also indicate an awareness by repeat offenders of the possible limits

of the sanctions that can be imposed by the system when they recidivate over a lengthy time frame.

Ultimately, a youth might express feelings of failure or concern, but perhaps not to the extent of

producing suicidal ideation.

476 Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 14(4)

Among the subset of repeat arrestees within a 6-month period (n ¼ 222), however, there was no desensitization effect. In fact, the average SI scores at the second arrest were significantly higher

than at Arrest Time 1. This challenges our ideas about institutionalization effects and emphasizes

the importance of the temporal dimension in our study. Given the high prevalence of SI, thoughts,

behaviors, and completions in the juvenile justice population, this may be genuine versus being an

artificial survey effect. The higher scores are possibly attributed to feelings of failure about being

rearrested so quickly or be due to concerns about legal consequences, particularly if the youth had

multiple prior arrests and the latest, quickly occurring arrest could result in a more severe disposi-

tion. Psychological distress symptoms are also likely genuine since youth with a recent history of

detention will have a fresh recall of its many negative aspects (see Mendel, 2009), especially in a

large, urban county facility.

Interestingly, two arrests may be a threshold for the effect of multiple arrests on the SI score and

the relationship seems to be curvilinear. When the number of arrests (ranging 1–4) within a 6-month

time frame measure was used in regression, it did not increase the odds of a Caution or Warning

reading. In fact, the number of arrests was negatively associated with SI scores (n/s), which is a

reversal of the effect found with only two arrests as described earlier. These results again support

our ideas about institutionalization effects where youth having frequent, repeat arrests are ‘‘experi-

enced’’ and seem to have lower levels of mental crisis about this circumstance, yet we recognize the

possibility of mis-specification. While we do not employ a squared term on this exploratory article,

clearly there is a need to further test the relationship in that manner in future research.

Ultimately, we must also keep in mind that some part of the results may reflect youth manip-

ulation of their responses to the SI items. As noted previously, some youth attempt to mask psy-

chological distress symptoms with deceptive responses to avoid further screening, unwanted

interventions, and possibly a lengthier stay in detention. The scores may reflect such savviness,

thus more research, perhaps of the qualitative type is needed to further explore this issue with

Hispanic youth in the way that it has been done for Black youth (McCoy, 2014).

As hypothesized, younger offenders did have significantly higher SI scores than older youth and

being younger significantly predicted scoring Caution, although not Warning. Despite our effort to

isolate the age effect in regression, these results may indicate that age serves as a proxy for desen-

sitization due to a prior offense history; the older a youth is the less psychologically distressed they

feel. It is also possible that younger offenders are more impacted by being separated from their sup-

port system and have concerns about what might happen to them during and after their detention. In

a normative framework, the odds of having contact with the juvenile system can only increase with

age and thus the age effect may ultimately be a function of past detention experiences.

As expected, females had much higher SI means than males, over twice as high. Those results

support the fourth hypothesis and reflect the results from the detention portion of the 2003 national

sample (n ¼ 29,817) analyzed by Vincent, Grisso, Terry, and Banks (2008b). The females in the current study (M ¼ 1.14) had almost equal means to those in Vincent et al.’s national sample (M ¼ 1.15) whereas the males in the current study had lower SI means (M ¼ 0.44) than males in that U.S. sample (M ¼ 0.62). The results from our study continue to reinforce prior research that females in the juvenile justice system, and in this case who are detained, experience higher levels

of suicidal ideation than their male counterparts. This is possibly because they are in a system that

is primarily designed to respond to male needs (Veysey, 2003), leading to much higher levels of psy-

chological distress. It may also be because girls are less likely to be detained and therefore those that

are have higher levels of psychological distress (Veysey, 2003). Regardless, it is clear that female

juvenile offenders may require a particular focus on feelings of suicidal ideation that may be present.

Finally, consistent with other recent research using MAYSI-2 data (Aalsma et al., 2014),

Hispanics had the lowest scores among race groups. They had a significantly lower SI score than

Blacks and Whites combined. Whites, meanwhile, had significantly higher scores than Blacks and

Tapia et al. 477

Hispanics combined. When compared to the national-level data of Vincent et al. (2008b), the most

noticeable difference was that Hispanic youth in our study (M ¼ 0.54) scored far lower on the SI scale than they did nationally (M ¼ 0.84). The patterns for White youth, on the other hand, were the same between the two studies (White M ¼ 1.00 in Bexar County vs. M ¼ 0.95 in United States). Finally, Black youth in Bexar scored much higher (M ¼ 0.83) than their counterparts in the United States (M ¼ 0.53). The scores for Hispanic youth stand out as being far lower than expected in Bexar County. These results may reflect that Hispanic youth in this particular context

are resilient in the face of typical mental health stressors. Hispanic youth in this sample are nested

in a predominately Hispanic community, perhaps echoing research by Locke and Newcomb

(2005) showing that the sense of familial support can serve as a protective factor against suicid-

ality. The centrality of family (i.e., familism) which is particularly important for Hispanics

(Tienda & Mitchell, 2006) is likely reinforced by their community context. This and the possibility

of strong cultural norms against this ideation and practice may help these youth to eclipse their

feelings of suicidal ideation. This is all despite often experiencing a high rate of common stressors

for depression and mental illness (Gallo, Penedo, Espinoza, & Arguelles, 2009; Umaña-Taylor &

Updegraff, 2007), which are certainly present in Bexar County.

Strengths and Limitations

This study used self-report data from the MAYSI-2, which may be unreliable due to social desirabil-

ity dynamics. Respondents can often answer self-report items in ways that make them appear more

positive even when it is untruthful (Holtgraves, 2004). Regarding the MAYSI-2, prior research has

shown that juvenile offenders have specifically provided untrue responses to items (McCoy, 2014).

Our sample also does not reflect the typical population of the juvenile justice system nor does Bexar

County reflect most communities in the United States. These unique features mean that our findings

are not generalizable beyond this study or perhaps only to other large Hispanic-dominated counties.

Finally, the longitudinal portion of our analyses was restricted to 6 months, which left the extent of

repeat offending over a lengthier period unmeasured.

This study also had a number of strengths. We explored the underresearched influence of the level

of SI experienced by youth actively engaged in a detention setting and the impact of age, race, eth-

nicity, gender, and legal offense history on those feelings. We also make a unique contribution by

comparing the average scores on the SI scale by crime type, severity, frequency, and timing of deten-

tion in a large, Hispanic dominated urban county. The composition of Hispanic youth as the majority

in the study sample and in a setting that is predominately Hispanic provided an opportunity to exam-

ine a rarely focused on group, particularly in studies about or using the MAYSI-2.

There is a paucity of research looking at the temporal relationship between offending behaviors

and the presence of suicidal ideation. This study provides exploratory insight into that relationship as

well as on gender and race-ethnicity differences. Finally, although the analysis of the 6-month time

frame may have limited the findings, our comparison of SI scores for repeat arrestees at Arrest Time

1 and Arrest Time 2 to determine whether outcomes vary when a youth reenters the system fre-

quently is certainly a unique contribution to the literature in this subarea of juvenile research. We

now have some insight into the role that first offense and repeat arrests may have on suicidal idea-

tion. This information can be instrumental in informing how direct service staff monitors such youth

when they return to detention.

Future Research

This study’s population was youth detained in a county detention facility versus in a state correc-

tional facility. This fact is important when considering the implications of our findings because

478 Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 14(4)

in Texas, as in many other places, state corrections facilities are the most serious placement setting

with only adult facilities classified as more serious (TJJD, 2013). State facilities range broadly in

sentence severity; and in Texas, there are youth with indeterminate sentences who are placed in low,

medium, or high security risk facilities and youth with determinate sentences that include an even-

tual transfer to an adult facility (TJJD, 2013). In addition, youth in a state correctional facility expe-

rience minimum length of stay requirements ranging from 9 to 24 months, dependent on severity of

offense and risk to public safety. Conversely, the county detention facility, used during the pre-trial

phase of juvenile processing, is where youth are taken by law enforcement when they have been

arrested for a delinquent offense (Bexar County Juvenile Probation Department, n.d.b). Further-

more, after being seen by an intake probation officer, a decision is made regarding whether to release

or detain the youth (n.d.b.).

The findings from this study begin to fill an important gap in the literature, but their applicability

should be viewed in context—focused on youth who have not been adjudicated and sentenced. If we

studied youth in state correctional facilities, we might expect for the impact of incarceration on SI to

be even more evident than it was here. The difference between temporary confinement in one’s com-

munity versus removal from the community, and long-term incarceration causing separation from

family and friends, should weigh more heavily on a youths’ state of mind and likely raise the odds

of mental health crisis. Thus, it is important to acknowledge that this study captures a different con-

textual dynamic related to suicidal ideation for juvenile offenders. Future research should build on

this study and explore how the temporal relationship between SI and offending behavior manifest for

youth who have been adjudicated and are housed in state correctional facilities.

Future research on the county detention phase of incarceration should also further explore the

relationship between offending behavior and SI using a squared term for the number of arrests to

capture the nonlinearity of the effect that we seem to have detected here. More research is also

needed to understand how detention may impact the suicidal ideation of youth arrested for violent

offenses, younger offenders, and girls. At a minimum, for most youth, arrest and detention are seri-

ous events that may reflect engaging in other forms of risky, problematic behavior. Clearly, part of

this dynamic may include careless, impulsive, and self-destructive tendencies. This possibility

coupled with the potential outcome for failing to accurately identify a youth’s SI suggests the need

for additional, or at minimum more in-depth, screening.

The relationship of race-ethnicity to SI also requires more study. The literature we reviewed on

national-level estimates of SI by race-ethnicity contains conflicting estimates regarding which group

has the highest levels of SI. Our results showing Hispanic ethnicity to be a protective factor against

SI in detained youth appears to be the first such finding with MAYSI-2 data, albeit from a particular

context and locale. We are nonetheless encouraged by this and call for continued research in this

area that expands the model specification in the way we propose earlier and that replicates the model

in other places with sizeable Hispanic populations.

Acknowledgment

The authors wish to thank Erin Wit for her early work on this project.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or

publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Tapia et al. 479

References

Abram, K. M., Choe, J. Y., Washburn, J. J., Teplin, L. A., King, D. C., & Dulcan, M. K. (2008). Suicidal

ideation and behaviors among youths in juvenile detention. Journal of the American Academy of Child

& Adolescent Psychiatry, 47, 291–300.

Aalsma, M. C., Schwartz, K., & Perkins, A. J. (2014). A statewide collaboration to initiate mental health

screening and assess service for detained youths in Indiana. American Journal of Public Health, 104,

e82–e88.

Archer, R. P., Simonds-Bisbee, E., Spiegel, D., Handel, R., & Elkins, D. (2010). Validity of the Massachusetts

Youth Screening Instrument-2 (MAYSI-2) in juvenile justice settings. Journal of Personality Assessment,

92, 337–348.

Archer, R. P., Stredny, R. V., Mason, J. A., & Arnau, R. C. (2004). An examination and replication of the psy-

chometric properties of the Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument—Second Edition (MAYSI-2)

among adolescents in detention settings. Assessment, 11, 1–13.

Bexar County Juvenile Probation Department. (n.d.a.). Juvenile probation. Retrieved from http://gov.bexar.

org/jpd/stats.html

Bexar County Juvenile Probation Department. (n.d.b.). Probation services. Retrieved from http://home.bexar.

org/jpd/probservices.html

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2005). Deaths in custody statistical tables: State juvenile correctional facility

deaths, 2002–2005. Retrieved from http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/dcrp/tables/juvtab2.cfm

Butler, M., Loney, B., & Kistner, J. (2007). The Massachusetts Youth Screening Instrument as a predictor of

institutional maladjustment in severe male juvenile offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 476–492.

Casiano, H., Katz, L. Y., Globerman, D., & Sareen, J. (2013). Suicide and deliberate self-injurious behavior in

juvenile correctional facilities: a review. Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psy-

chiatry, 22, 118–124.

Cauffman, E. (2004). A statewide screening of mental health symptoms among juvenile offenders in detention.

Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 43, 430–439. doi:10.1097/00004583-

200404000-00009

Cauffman, E., & MacIntosh, R. (2006). A Rasch differential item functioning analysis of the Massachusetts

youth screening instrument. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 502–521.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2012). Suicide: Facts at a glance. Atlanta, GA: Author. Retrieved

from http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/Suicide-DataSheet-a.pdf

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2013). 1991–2013 high school youth risk behavior survey data.

[Online Database] Retrieved from http://nccd.cdc.gov*9/-/youthonline/

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2014a). Suicide prevention. Atlanta, GA: Author Retrieved from

http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pub/youth_suicide.html

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2014b). Ten leading causes of death and injury. Atlanta, GA:

Author. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/leadingcauses.html

Chapman, J., & Ford, J. (2008). Relationships between suicide risk, traumatic experiences, and substance use

among juvenile detainees. Archives of Suicide Research, 12, 50–61. doi:10.1080/13811110701800830

City of San Antonio. (2012). Teen pregnancy in Bexar County. Retrieved from http://www.sanantonio.gov/Por-

tals/0/Files/health/HealthyLiving/TeenHealth/FactSheet-Teen.pdf

Coker, K. L., Wernsman, J., Ikpe, U. N., Brooks, J. S., Bushell, L. L., & Kahn, B. A. (2014). Using the

Massachusetts youth screening instrument-2 on a community sample of African American and Latino/a

juvenile offenders to identify mental health and substance abuse and treatment needs. Criminal Justice and

Behavior, 41, 492–511.

Cruise, K., Marsee, M., Dandreaux, D., & DePrato, D. (2007). Mental health screening of female juvenile

offenders: Replication of a subtyping strategy. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 16, 615–625. doi:10.

1007/s10826-006-9111-4

480 Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 14(4)

Dalton, R. F., Evans, L. J., Cruise, K. R., Feinstein, R. A., & Kendrick, R. F. (2009). Race differences in

mental health service access in a secure male juvenile justice facility. Journal of Offender Rehabilita-

tion, 48, 194–209.

Ford, J. D., Hartman, J. K., Hawke, J., & Chapman, J. F. (2008). Traumatic victimization, posttraumatic stress

disorder, suicidal ideation, and substance abuse risk among juvenile justice-involved youths. Journal of

Child and Adolescent Trauma, 1, 75–92. doi:10.1080/19361520801934456

Gallagher, C. A., & Dobrin, A. (2006). Deaths in juvenile justice residential facilities. Journal of Adolescent

Health, 38, 662–668.

Gallo, L., Penedo, F., Espinoza, K., & Arguelles, W. (2009). Resiliency in the face of disadvantage? Do

Hispanic cultural characteristics protect health outcomes? Journal of Personality, 77, 1707–1746.

Goldston, D. B., Molock, S. D., Whitbeck, L. B., Murakami, J. L., Zayas, L. H., & Hall, G. C. N. (2008). Cul-

tural considerations in adolescent suicide prevention and psychosocial treatment. American Psychologist,

62, 14–31.

Gretton, H., & Clift, R. (2011). The mental health needs of incarcerated youth in British Columbia, Canada.

International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 34, 109–115.

Grisso, T., & Barnum, R. (2006). Massachusetts youth screening instrument version 2: User’s manual and tech-

nical report 2006 revised edition. Sarasota, FL: Professional Resource Press.

Grisso, T., Barnum, B., Fletcher, K., Cauffman, E., & Peuschold, D. (2001). Massachusetts youth screening

instrument for mental health needs of juvenile justice youths. Journal of the American Academy of Child

and Adolescent Psychiatry, 40, 541–548.

Grisso, T., Fusco, S., Paiva-Salisbury, M., Perrauot, R., Williams, V., & Barnum, R. (2012). The Massa-

chusetts Youth Screening Instrument-Version 2 (MAYSI-2): Comprehensive research review. Worcester,

MA: University of Massachusetts Medical School. Retrieved from http://www.nysap.us/MAYSI-

2%20Review.pdf

Grisso, T., & Quinlan, J. (2005). Massachusetts youth screening instrument-revised. In T. Grisso, G. Vincent, &

D. Seagrave (Eds.), Mental health screening and assessment in juvenile justice (pp. 99–111). New York,

NY: Guilford Press.

Hayes, M. A., McReynolds, L. S., & Wasserman, G. A. (2005). Paper and voice MAYSI-2: Format compar-

ability and concordance with the voice DISC-IV. Assessment, 12, 395–403.

Hockenberry, S. (2014). Juveniles in residential placement, 2011. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice,

Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Holtgraves, T. (2004). Social desirability and self-reports: Testing models of socially desirable responding. Per-

sonality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 161.

Kerig, P. K., Moeddel, M. A., & Becker, S. P. (2011). Assessing sensitivity and specificity of the MAYSI-2 for

detecting trauma among youth in juvenile detention. Child & Youth Care Forum, 40, 345–362.

Lewinsohn, P. M., Rohde, P., Seeley, J. R., & Baldwin, C. L. (2001). Gender differences in suicide attempts

from adolescence to young adulthood. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry,

40, 427–434. doi:10.1097/00004583-200104000-00011

Locke, T., & Newcomb, M. (2005). Psychosocial predictors and correlates of suicidality in teenage Latino

males. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 27, 319–326.

Lynam, D. R., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T., Wikstrom, P. O., Loeber, R., & Novak, S. (2000). The interaction between

impulsivity and neighborhood context on offending: The effects of impulsivity are stronger in poor neigh-

borhoods. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 109, 563–574.

Mallett, C., DeRigne, L. A., Quinn, L., & Stoddard-Dare, P. (2012). Discerning reported suicide attempts within

a youthful offender population. Suicide and Life Threatening Behavior, 42, 67–77. doi:10.1111/j.1943-

278X.2011.00071.x

Maney, S. (2011). Violent and nonviolent juvenile offenders: Comparisons concerning self report of mental

health symptoms and response styles. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts School of Profes-

sional Psychology, Boston, MA.

Tapia et al. 481

McCoy, H. (2014). Using cognitive interviewing to explore causes for racial differences in the MAYSI-2.

Crime and Delinquency, 60, 647–666. doi:10.1177/0011128710388922

McCoy, H., & Bowen, E. A. (2014). Disproportionality and disparities in the juvenile justice system and the

courts. In R. Fong, A. Dettlaff, J. James, & C. Rodriguez (Eds.), Eliminating racial disproportionality and

disparities: Multi systems culturally competent approaches (pp. 208–237). New York, NY: Columbia

University.

McCoy, H., Vaughn, M. G., Maynard, B. R., & Salas-Wright, C. P. (2014). Caution or warning? A validity

study of the MAYSI-2 with juvenile offenders. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 32, 508–526. doi:10.

1002/bsl.2128

Mendel, R. A. (2009). Two decades of JDAI. Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation.

Morris, R. E., Harrison, E. A., Knox, G. W., Tromanhauser, E., Marquis, D. K., & Watts, L. L. (1995). Health

risk behavioral survey from 39 juvenile correctional facilities in the United States. Journal of Adolescent

Health, 17, 334–344.

National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention. (2013). Guide to developing and revising suicide prevention

protocols for youth in contact with the juvenile justice system. Washington, DC: Author.

National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control. (2014). 2012, United

States suicide injury deaths and rates per 100,000. Retrieved from http://webappa.cdc.gov/cgi-bin/bro-

ker.exe

Nolen, S., McReynolds, L. S., DeComo, R. E., John, R., Keating, J. M., & Wasserman, G. A. (2008). Lifetime

suicide attempts in juvenile assessment center youth. Archives of Suicide Research, 12, 111–123. doi:10.

1080/13811110701857087

Nordness, P., Grummert, M., Banks, D., Schindler, M., Moss, M., Gallagher, K., . . . Epstein, M. (2002).

Screening the mental health needs of youths in juvenile detention. Juvenile and Family Court Journal,

52, 43–50.

Rohde, P., Mace, D. E., & Seeley, J. R. (1997). The association of psychiatric disorders with suicide attempts in

a juvenile delinquent sample. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 7, 187–200. doi:10.1002/cbm.172

Stathis, S., Letters, P., Doolan, I., Fleming, R., Heath, K., Arnett, A., . . . Cory, S. (2008). Use of the Massachu-

setts youth screening instrument to assess mental health problems in young people within an Australian

youth detention centre. Journal of Pediatrics and Child Health, 44, 438–443.

Stoeltje, M. F. (2014, February 11). CPS stats: Bexar County No. 2 in abuse, neglect. San Antonio Express.

Retrieved from http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/CPS-stats-Bexar-County-No-2-in-abuse-

neglect-5224476.php.

Tapia, M. (2012). Juvenile arrest in America: Race, social class, and gang membership. New York, NY: LFB

Scholarly.

Texas Attorney General. (2014). 2014 Juvenile justice handbook. Retrieved from http://www.texasattorneygen-

eral.gov/AG_Publications/pdfs/juvenile_justice.pdf

Texas Juvenile Justice Department. (2013). How offenders move through TJJD. Retrieved from http://www.

tjjd.texas.gov/about/how_movethru.aspx

The Stephen Group. (2014). DFPS CPS operational review executive summary: Assessment. Manchester, NH:

Texas Department of Family and Protective Services. Retrieved from http://www.dfps.state.tx.us/docu-

ments/about/Other_Reports/stephen_group_report/Stephens_Grp_Findings_exec_overview.pdf

Tienda, M., & Mitchell, F. (Eds.). (2006). Hispanics and the future of America. Washington, DC: National

Research Council, Panel on Hispanics in the U.S. National Academies Press.

Tille, J., & Rose, J. (2007). Emotional and behavioral problems of 13-to-18-year-old incarcerated female

first-time offenders and recidivists. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 5, 426–435. doi:10.1177/

1541204007300355

Umaña-Taylor, A. J., & Updegraff, K. A. (2007). Latino adolescents’ mental health: Exploring the interrela-

tions among discrimination, ethnic identity, cultural orientation, self-esteem, and depressive symptoms.

Journal of Adolescence, 30, 549–567.

482 Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 14(4)

U.S. Census Bureau. (2014a). Selected economic characteristics 2008–2012 American community survey

5-year estimates. Retrieved from http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.

xhtml?src¼bkmk U.S. Census Bureau. (2014b). State & County QuickFacts. Bexar County, Texas. Retrieved from http://quick-

facts.census.gov/qfd/states/48/48029.html

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1999). The surgeon general’s call to action to prevent

suicide. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/calltoaction/

fact3.htm

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2001). National strategy for suicide prevention: Goals and

objectives for action. Rockville, MD: Public Health Service. Retrieved from http://www.surgeongeneral.

gov/library/reports/national-strategy-suicide-prevention/

Valdez, A., Kaplan, C. D., & Codina, E. (2000). Psychopathy among Mexican American gang members: A

comparative study. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 44, 46–58.

Veysey, B. M. (2003). Adolescent girls with mental health disorders involved with the juvenile justice system.

Delmar, NY: National Center for Mental health and Juvenile Justice.

Vincent, G., Grisso, T., Terry, A., & Banks, S. (2008a). Sex and race differences in mental health symptoms

in juvenile justice: The MAYSI-2 national meta-analysis. Journal of the American Academy of Child and

Adolescent Psychiatry, 57, 282–290.

Vincent, G., Grisso, T., Terry, A., & Banks, S. (2008b). [Sex and race differences in mental health symptoms in

juvenile justice: The MAYSI-2 national meta-analysis]. Unpublished raw data.

Wagner, B. M. (2009). Suicidal behavior in children & adolescents. New Haven, CT: Yale University.

Wasserman, G. A., & McReynolds, L. S. (2006). Suicide risk at juvenile justice intake. Suicide and Life Threa-

tening Behavior, 36, 239–249.

Wasserman, G. A., McReynolds, L. S., Ko, S. J., Katz, L. M., Cauffman, E., Haxton, W., & Lucas, C. P. (2004).

Screening for emergent risk and service needs among incarcerated youth: Comparing MAYSI-2 and Voice

DISC-IV. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 43, 629–639.

Zayas, L., & Pilat, A. (2008). Suicidal behavior in Latinas: Explanatory cultural factors and implications for

intervention. Suicide and Life Threatening Behavior, 38, 334–342.

Author Biographies

Mike Tapia is an assistant professor of Criminal Justice at New Mexico State University. His

research interests include juvenile corrections, race-ethnicity, and Latino gangs. He holds a PhD

in Sociology from the Ohio State University and was on the faculty at UT San Antonio’s Department

of Criminal Justice from 2003–2014.

Henrika McCoy is an assistant professor at the Jane Addams College of Social Work at the Uni-

versity of Illinois at Chicago. She has a PhD from the George Warren Brown School of Social Work

at Washington University in St. Louis. Her work, which has been funded by the Robert Wood John-

son Foundation, focuses on the intersection between juvenile delinquency, mental health disorders,

and health disparities for youth of color.

Lynsey Tucker is a master of Social Work clinician working with people experiencing homeless-

ness and serious mental illness. She received her MSW degree from UT San Antonio. Her past work

includes multicultural engagement with orphaned and vulnerable children with HIV/AIDS.

Tapia et al. 483