Maryland on the right track to reduce juvenile crime.

Is juvenile delinquency increasing in Maryland? And if so, are current juvenile justice policies and programs in Maryland effective or ineffective in combating juvenile delinquency?

Armstrong Williams begins to address these issues in his recent column in the Baltimore Sun (“Armstrong Williams: We must rebalance the juvenile justice system,” Aug. 3). His brief commentary, however, is inaccurate and needs to be placed in a larger context.

His claim that juvenile crime in Maryland has increased dramatically from 2022 to the present does not give a fair picture of long-term trends. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, juvenile crime was at an all-time low nationwide in 2022. According to the Maryland Department of Juvenile Justice, total complaints against juveniles (allegations that a juvenile has committed one or more crimes) decreased by more than 50% between fiscal year 2014 and fiscal year 2023. Looking back even further, you can see that juvenile crime was much higher in previous years.

Furthermore, it is not accurate to claim that Maryland's current policies and programs are not working and are responsible for the current, short-term rise in juvenile crime. In fact, research — as documented, for example, in the U.S. Department of Justice's Model Programs Guide — has consistently found that the kinds of policies and programs Maryland has implemented can be, and often are, effective, while the kinds of tough crime-fighting programs Williams seems to advocate have proven largely ineffective.

In particular, Williams is wrong when he writes, “Youths charged and convicted of violent crimes need an equally vigorous response from the justice system, including long prison sentences.” On the contrary, research studies have repeatedly found that harsh prison sentences often have negative consequences, such as increases in alcohol use and addiction, lower school graduation rates, higher adult unemployment, and higher rates of future crime.

Steps can be taken to reduce these negative consequences. For example, good risk assessment tools can weed out those youth who can be successfully treated in the community and those who need to be removed from the community for public safety reasons. In addition, probation officers can be supported by police to provide security during random checks outside of work hours, which can strengthen the effectiveness of probation and community supervision. We know how to better protect the public from a select few without turning the rest of the youth into career criminals in the name of prevention.

Evidence has been provided that it is possible to safely reduce youth incarceration. In Virginia, for example, after a peak of 1,500 youth in eight correctional facilities in 1997, that number has been reduced to 225 youth in one youth correctional center and in several small programs in youth correctional facilities.

Maryland has done the right thing by pursuing a path based on the most current and rigorous research on how to effectively reduce juvenile delinquency and increase the chances that troubled youth can one day become healthy and productive members of society.

—Dave Marsden, Burke, Virginia

— Alan Bekelman, Bethesda

The authors are the former director of the Virginia Department of Juvenile Justice and the executive vice president of the Development Services Group.

Share your opinion: Respond to this article or other Sun content by Submitting your own letter.