Content area
Juvenile offenders with Developmental Language Disorders ofien lack the right words to express their thoughts and feelings, pose serious social challenges and their behaviour is often misinterpreted, they are seen as defiant or low commitment persons. The challenges in this area are wide-ranging and, in the long term, can also make it difficult for them to integrate successfully into society after serving their sentence. Dealing with the problem can help us understand what may underlie the development of developmental language disorders and how to successfully address the problems that arise, so the long-term impact of studying the topic is unquestionable. Emphasis should be placed on the psychological difficulties that arise, as research has shown that young people with DLD have higher levels of mental health problems, self-harm and drug use. We have collected several suggestions and good practices that shouldbe widely applied As implications we can highlight that the key is to diagnose at an earlier age, using effective screening procedures for reading comprehension, and to address any mental health problems that may arise. The development of literacy and oral and written language skills in juvenile offenders is essential to prevent further offending, and SLPs are therefore much needed in correctional facilities. Addressing this issue properly, and providing professional support for these adolescences, is of utmost importance for the functioning of society, because it would ensure that these young people become valuable members of society and do not become involvedin crime as adults.
Abstract
Juvenile offenders with Developmental Language Disorders ofien lack the right words to express their thoughts and feelings, pose serious social challenges and their behaviour is often misinterpreted, they are seen as defiant or low commitment persons. The challenges in this area are wide-ranging and, in the long term, can also make it difficult for them to integrate successfully into society after serving their sentence. Dealing with the problem can help us understand what may underlie the development of developmental language disorders and how to successfully address the problems that arise, so the long-term impact of studying the topic is unquestionable. Emphasis should be placed on the psychological difficulties that arise, as research has shown that young people with DLD have higher levels of mental health problems, self-harm and drug use. We have collected several suggestions and good practices that shouldbe widely applied As implications we can highlight that the key is to diagnose at an earlier age, using effective screening procedures for reading comprehension, and to address any mental health problems that may arise. The development of literacy and oral and written language skills in juvenile offenders is essential to prevent further offending, and SLPs are therefore much needed in correctional facilities. Addressing this issue properly, and providing professional support for these adolescences, is of utmost importance for the functioning of society, because it would ensure that these young people become valuable members of society and do not become involvedin crime as adults.
Keywords: juvenile delinquents; verbal challenges; disorders; speech therapy
Introduction
It is crucial to examine the language and communication skills of young offenders, as the impact of gaps in this area is wide-ranging. There is a clear correlation between language skills development, academic achievement, and positive peer relations, all vital for long-term well-being (Beitchman & Brownlie, 2014). Since the impact of these youth's deficient language skills is wide- ranging, the problem is difficult to pinpoint and often remains undiagnosed because the screening programs are not thorough enough and therefore a thorough examination of the topic is crucial.
In our article, we introduce the features of Developmental Language Disorders and examine the key factors behind the development of language skills. We focus on the psychological difficulties that appear in the case of juvenile offenders with language disorders and highlight what difficulties these young people encounter during court proceedings, reintegration/ rehabilitation programs, and restorative justice sessions. Finally, we summarise the solutions proposed in relevant international research to improve the situation of juvenile delinquents with language disorders. This study provides ample coverage and analysis of the topic in addition to answering the research questions considering the latest scientific findings.
Developmental Language Disorders (DLD)
Accordingto the World Heal th Organization (1999), communication and interpersonal competences together are one of the five areas of globally relevant life skills. Languageis a fundamental component of everyday life, it gives a tool for getting around in our environment, itis essential for thriving in society, establishing relationships, and experiencing emotional and professional achievement (Chow & Wehby, 2019; Law et al., 2000).
Recently, an international consensus project has been launched to develop a uniform terminology usedin the case of children and adolescents with language disorders (Bishop, Snowling, Thompson, Greenhalgh, & the CATALISE Consortium, 2017). In accordance with the common approach reached by Bishop et al., this article will employ the term developmental language disorders (DLD).
The expression DLD appliesto long-term language problems that impact on a person's everyday activities and are not linked to a specific known biomedical aetiology; if a potentially associated condition, for example autism, is involved, the term "[biomedical condition] language disorder" is preferred (Bishop et al., 2017). The "developmental" description used for juveniles involved the juvenile criminal justice system is consistent with the view that the last stage of maturation of the prefrontal cortex can be placed in the mid-20s (Tamnesetal., 2017), so this population must be regarded as "work in progress" in terms of neurological development.
Inthe study, we will use the term speech-language pathologists (SLP) for professionals dealing with language disorders because this term captures the essence of the relevant work (speech and language) and indicates that these professionals, based on their training and clinical experience, are qualified to identify, evaluate and correct pathological conditions of communication.
It is worth delineating the different areas juvenile offenders with DLD encounter the most problems based on the research findings, as in their case we can talk about a very complex set of problems. Syntax, the precise use of morphemes, understanding abstract language (e.g., idioms, metaphors), the use of narrative discourse can be particularly challenging for them, while they also show grammatical immaturity compared to their non-criminal peers. These young people find it more difficult to participate in general conversation, it is more challenging for them to convey information to another person (Snow & Powell, 2004, 2005; Sangeretal., 2001, 2019), they are often unableto correctly interpret texts that are meant figuratively rather than literally, they struggle with finding words due to their poor vocabulary and often cannot find the right words to express their thoughts and feelings (Snow & Powell, 2011).
Receptive and expressive language skills are an important pair of terms, which refer to various ways of language use (Larson & McKinley, 1995). Receptive language skills refer to comprehension and reception, and expressive language skills refer to expression and speaking skills. In international literature on reading, thereis a broad consensus that receptive and expressive oral language skills constitute the basis of the development of literacy skills (reading, writing and spelling) in the first three years of primary education in the case of children of typical development (Snow, 1983; Snow, 2016) and in the case of children with developmental language difficulties (Nation, Clarke, Marshall, & Durand, 2004).
Several studies have found that juvenile offenders experience greater difficulties in receptive language skills than in expressive language skills, and receptive language skills are more impaired than expressive language skills in the case of juvenile offenders (Bryan, 2004; Bryan et al, 2007; Gregory & Bryan, 2011; Hughes et al., 2017). This might explain why language disorders are not diagnosed and not treated in this group (Sanger et al, 2002; Snow et al, 2016).
Receptive language disorders are therefore less noticeable than expressive language disorders and can result itself in forms of behaviour considered as impolite and non-cooperative, for example avoiding of eye contact, limited language use and body language, poor attention and attentiveness, elevated fidgeting, and using one-word replies in conversations (Gregory & Bryan, 2011; Martin, 2019; Snow et al., 2016; Winstanley et al, 2018). Therefore, juvenile offenders may appear to show no remorse for their crimes because of their unrecognized receptive language disorder. Expressive language difficulties can alsobe a factor in misjudgement, as the young person may not be able tocommunicatein a way that coherently creates narratives that reflect their point of view and emotions because of the difficulty in creating the complexity of the verbal language required for such tasks (Anderson et al., 2016; Snow & Sanger, 2011). Furthermore, weak expressive language abilities are found to be related to problems with affective self-regulation (Ripley & Yuill, 2005). This can be reflected in attitudes and behaviours that show a lack of interest, aggressiveness or resistance to peers (Morrison et al., 2010; Rotaru, Pretula, & Boncu, 2013). These behaviours can overwhelm the language needs of young people (Bryan et al., 2015; Hughes et al., 2017; Martin, 2019), resulting in language disorders going undiagnosed and/or left without treatment. In this context, Wolff and colleagues concluded that receptive measurement is indeed the best predictor of the level of antisocial conduct of juvenile offenders (Wolff etal., 1982).
There is now compelling international proof of the linguistic and literacy vulnerability of juvenile detainees (mainly males) (Anderson, Hawes, & Snow, 2016). There is a disproportionately large number of juvenile offenders who display poor academic results and learning deficiencies (Snowling et al, 2000; Krezmien et al., 2008), verbal language disorders (Anderson et al., 2016) and often live their lives with learning disorders (Grigorenko, 2006), and behavioural and emotional disorders (Quinn et al., 2005), but it is common knowledge that there is great variation in the population. Several juvenile offenders have been temporarily or finally dismissed from school, whichit puts them in the company of peers who have also been dismissed from school due to their antisocial behaviour (Thomberry et al, 2003).
In addition to potential lack of success in education, deficits in language and communication skills can have wide-ranging effects, including communication difficulties in peer and family relationships, a more difficult access to work, and problems in psychotherapy interventions ( Chitsabesan et al. 2007). The complexity of the situation is clearly attested to by the fact that - as was found in the longitudinal study carried out by Clegg et al. (2005) - one child in three with language development difficulties also suffers from mental health problems, which in some cases resulted ininvolvementin crime.
These emerging difficulties are perhaps not unexpected if we examine them alongside the complex biopsychosocial risks affecting this population, because the development of language skills is closely related to the familial environment and parents' education, as we have shown in detail in next chapter. What is somewhat surprising, however, is that, until recently, speech therapy as a profession has relatively neglected the communication needs of juvenile offenders.
Theoretical background: the role of socio-economic status
Juveniles suffering from DLD are typically socially and economically disadvantaged, as the vast majority of young people sent to correctional institutions come from "crime-prone communities" (Weatherburn, 2011). This phenomenon hasbeen addressed by many studies, for instance Australia (AIHW, 2017), in the United States (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (2015) and the United Kingdom (Stephenson, 2007). The socio-economic status (SES) of individuals and households is usually examined primarily in the context of parental schooling and economic variables like family incomes (Duncan, Daly, McDonough, & Williams, 2002). Willingham (2012) stressed the role of human capital and social capital alongside economic capital for families, where human capital describes the abilities or knowledge of persons, typically in terms of their level of education and social capital describes beneficial relationships in social networks, for example, those with financial or human capital.
Clearly, such assets have both genetic and environmental components and represent multiple biopsychosocial drivers of well-being and health. Indeed, such factors are interdependent, and in the complex ecology of human communities it is rather difficult to disentangle the influence of genetic endowments, social and physical environment, life experiences, parental values, ethnicity, and economic well-being on socio-economic status. However, it is clear from the literature that juveniles in the justice system worldwide are characterized by a disproportionately high level of psychosocial and economic disadvantages and indicators of the risk of unfavourablelife prospects.
The formation and development of language skills is closely related to parent-child bonding, is influenced by the socio-economic status, as well as parenting techniques and the level of education. Children in secure bonding relationships have greater competence in language skills than those in insecure relationships (van IJzendoorn, Dijkstra, & Bus, 1995). Socioeconomic status is positively related to language development, and children from lower SES families are more likely to have language disorders than their peers from higher SES families (Justice etal., 2008; Qi et al., 2003). According toresearch findings, low SES is associated with patterns of parent-child interaction, for example lack of discipline, inappropriate parenting techniques and reduced levels of effective supervision, which may be linked to crime (Sampson & Laub, 1994; Sousa et al, 2011). In addition to interaction patterns, low SES is related to parental level of education and the development of the young children's vocabulary (Qi et al, 2006), as parents with higher educational levels and more financial support typically talk more with their children than parents with less education and fewer resources (Rowe, 2012). With respect to the correlation between education and SES, we can conclude that children living with parents with lower educational levels may have a higher rate of language disorders, as they may encounter fewer new words and hear fewer complex sentences during conversations (Qi et al, 2006).
Therefore, for speech therapy as a profession, SES and the social environment are of particular importance inrelation tojuvenile offenders, as they show a close connection with the language status of children and adolescents, but at the same time, the situationis made more complex by the fact that we can have an assumable genetic component as well (Bergen, Zuijen, Bishop, & Jong, 2017). Almost three decades ago Hart and Risley (1995) reported that the children of skilled and more highly educated parents encounter richer adult language both quantitatively and qualitatively than children of working-class parents and parents living on social benefits. Similar results were obtained by other American researchers (Hoff, 2003), as well as specialists working in the United Kingdom (Locke, Ginsborg, & Peers, 2002). Chitsabesan et al.'s research in 2007 found a statistically significant correlation between poor verbal skills and low IQ values in the case of many young people who participated in their study, and neurocognitive deficits were typically associated with the low levels of language skills.
Psychological problems of juvenile offenders with DLD
Although the higher rate of language difficulties among juvenile offenders is evident, research among this population seldom provides a comprehensive overview of the wider psychological risk factors for juvenile delinquents. Researchers have now established the higher level of mental health problems (Chitsabesan et al., 2006), self-harm (Putnins, 2005) and drug use (Hammersley, Marsland, & Reid, 2003) amongjuvenile detainees.
The proportion of different types of neurological disability is higher in this population, comprising intellectual disability, traumatic brain injury (TBI), and autism spectrum disorder (ASD) (Hughes etal., 2012). Studies of youth with language disorders have alsorevealed comorbidity with mental health problems (Im-Bolter & Cohen, 2007), anxiety (Beitchman et al., 2001), and substance abuse (Beitchmanetal., 2001).
In parallel with frequent comorbidities, risk factors for example exposure to early abuse and neglect are also found to be overrepresented among juvenile offenders (Stewart, Livingston, & Dennison, 2008). This in fact poses a risk in itself, that threatens early language development and school engagement (Lum, Powell, & Snow, 2018; Snow, 2009). These factors, combined with socio-economic disadvantage and early exposureto abuse, may create a "perfect storm" that acts againstthe achievement of ideal language and reading skills. This idea was developed by Bryan, Garvani, Gregory, and Kilner (2015), who outlined a 'complex risk' model of juvenile delinquency.
Child abuse is considered in the broader framework of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) (Baglivioet al., 2014). ACEs are crucial to the language skills of juvenile offenders as they act against the development of a caring, child-centred interpersonal milieu that promotes language skills and the development of empathy, emotional self-regulation and getting emotionally attuned at the same time (Cohen, 2001; Snow, 2009). ACEs occur cumulatively and are overrepresented in the background of juveniles who appear in the correctional system, compared to the lives of them whose trajectories do not lead to formal contact with the law (Baglivio et al, 2014).
The language problems of people with DLD can have a significant impact on participation in everyday interactions with others (Bishop et al, 2017). The reason for this is that language impairments can decrease the ability to initiate and maintain social interactions with peers, which makes social interactions with other people more difficult (Im-Bolter & Cohen, 2007). Issues related to higher-level language skills, for example difficulty in narrative discourse, inadequate drawing of conclusions, and challenges in understanding texts with figurative meaning very often led to misunderstandings and problems in social relationships (Anderson et al., 2021; Im-Bolter & Cohen, 2007). Persistent communication impairments can heighten feelings of aloneness, as well as lead to increased irritability and aggression (Speech Pathology Australia (SPA), 2018), which exposes people at increased risk of comorbid psychiatric disorders, including the appearance of both internalizing (e.g., depression, anxiety) and externalizing (e.g., misconduct, ADHD, drug use abuse) mental health problems.
Many risk factors and problems related to language disorders and internalizing and externalizing mental health overlap, including genetic effects, social disadvantages and abuse (Hentgesetal., 2021; Penner et al, 2011).
In their study, Zupan et al. (2021) strove to investigate the association between internalising mental health and language disorders. As a result of their research, they concluded that the two occur comorbidly, but no significant correlation can be discovered between them. At the same time, the examination of the problem contributes to a better awareness of the potential association between language disorders and internalizing mental health problems, which can also help enhance the quality of services provided to young people. Consistent use of speech therapy could help alleviate the challenges faced by juvenile inmates with language disorders and internalizing mental disorders. Access to speech therapy services is still limited in the juvenile justice system (Martin, 2019; Snow, 2019), but some form of mental health services or counselling is usually available (Penner et al., 2011). Until speech therapy services become common practice in correctional facilities, training and educating staff on how to modify the language they use in counselling/mental health services and in day-to-day interactions with juvenile offenders canbe of great help, as well as making them moreeffective in programs organized forthem, ensuring the highest degree of commitment of young people (Gregory & Bryan, 2011; SPA, 2018).
The role of language skillsin three specific areas for juvenile offenders: legal proceedings, programmes to reduce reoffending in prison, and restorative justice meetings
Oral language competency, or adequate speaking skills, is essential for juvenile offenders to participate successfully in court proceedings, programmes to reduce reoffending in prison, and restorative justice conferences (Moseley et al., 2006).
Legal proceedings
Encounters with the court system expose young people to various experiences that draw heavily on expressive and receptive language skills (Andersonetal., 2016; Bryan et al., 2007). Language impairment can be a source of many problems for juveniles in the police, court, and justice system because it negatively affects their capability to catch what they are being charged with, to clearly explain what happened in their statements to the police, to respond questions in court and to interpret the information given to them by their legal representative (Lountetal., 2017; Johnston et al., 2016; Snow et al., 2016). Their poor social and pragmatic skills have a negative impact on their dialogue with authorities, as poor non-verbal communication (e.g., eye contact) and misunderstanding of information and signals given by the speaker can be misinterpreted as 'rudeness and wilful noncompliance' (Hughes et al, 2017).
Young people with receptive language disorders may have problems in understanding the vocabulary used in legal interviews, interrogation and during advocacy (Rogers et al., 2008; Snow, 2019), while young people with expressive language disorders may have had problems responding appropriately during verbal interactions in interrogation processes (Anderson et al., 2016; Snow, 2019).
Several studies have assessed the language skills of juvenile detainees in terms of their understanding of crucial legal vocabulary, such as the difference between 'warning' and 'punishment' (Sanger et al., 2001) or examining their comprehension of longer spoken texts (Gregory & Bryan, 2011; Winstanley et al, 2019). Snow and colleagues (2012) examined the expressive language skills of juvenile detainees. Constructing a narrative, narrating a narrative, or recounting an event is essential for successful participation in a legal proceeding; an interrogation, court testimony, or deposition all require the participant to communicate persuasively (Snow et al., 2012). Several studies have also highlighted that these skills are often lacking in juvenile offenders, which can challenge young adults (Hopkins et al, 2018; Snow & Powell, 2005). Lount et al. (2017) found thatthe young people in their sample felt helpless and frustrated during the court process as they had difficulty understanding what was happening around them, preventingthem from actively participating,
Rehabilitation programmes
Intervention and post-offender rehabilitation programmes for juvenile offenders in correctional facilities (for example cognitive behavioural therapy; interpersonal skills development; life skills programmes; conflict resolution-focused programmes) are primarily language-based, usually relying heavily on verbal language (Snow & Powell, 2012).
Adequate speaking skills are essential for effective participation in these programmes (Bryan & Gregory, 2013), as such programmes generally require participants to have speaking and listening skills above GCSE level (Davies et al, 2004). These programmes require metacognitive skills (Snow et al, 2016), and as they typically develop soft skills such as life skills (Snow et al., 2012), appropriate language skills are essential, including complex and abstract language (RCSLT, 2018). Deficits in these areas in youth are problematic because youth with language impairment may be unable to access verbally mediated therapy (Anderson et al., 2016; Bryanetal., 2007).
Bryan found that 40% of participants in these programmes had difficulty utilising the knowledge and skills acquired in anger management or drug rehabilitation sessions (Bryan, 2004). Coles and Murray pointed out that juvenile offenders may also have problems attending educational programmes required by their court order (Coles & Murray, 2015). Winstanley (2018) found that DLD was the most significant predictor of whether juveniles would re-offend, providing strong evidence that the ineffectiveness of rehabilitative interventions may compromise reintegration into society for juveniles with language impairment.
Restorative justice approaches
Low communication skills are an equally important burden in restorative justice approaches, where language skills such as conversational management, inference, and narrative discourse are particularly important.
Successful participation in restorative justice deliberations requires the juvenile offender to (1) give a coherent account of the event, including a description of the reasons for his or her actions; (2) actively listen to the victim's account of how the event affected him or her, including interpreting non-verbal (emotional) cues; and (3) respond appropriately to the victim's story (Hayes & Snow, 2013; Sanger et al., 2013; Snow & Sanger, 2011). In these sessions, the juvenile offender must acknowledge the harm, take responsibility for and explain his or her actions, and develop solutions to mitigate the harm to the victim (Martin, 2019) in challenging and stressful circumstances (Lount et al., 2017). The juvenile must listen to and understand victims' complex, emotionally overwrought narratives (Snow & Sanger, 2011), which places high demands on the offender, with increased strain on focus, attention, memory, and language processing (Snow et al, 2012; Snow & Sanger, 2011; Winstanley et al, 2019).
They need to understand and use vocabulary related to emotions (Snow et al., 2016) and be aware of specific concepts such as peer influence or victim awareness (Hopkinset al., 2018). They need to answer questions and provide information (Malhotra et al., 2013), and "formulate their ideas into a coherent narrative that is judged as adequate and authentic by the parties affected by the wrongdoing" (Hayes & Snow, 2013, p. 2).
Suggestions for solutions to deal with language disorders in juvenile offenders
Considering the high proportion of young people with DLD who commit crimes, itis crucial to screen the language skills of potentially affected young people as early as possible. It would be reasonable to carry out these tests when there is some sign of a disturbancein the young person'slife, such an indication can be the appearance of several different difficulties either with learning or building relationships with peers. Hughes and Benasich and their colleagues recommend screening for language skillsin the following situations, inorder to prevent affected young people's potential subsequent involvement in crime: among children with reading difficulties; when behavioural problems in establishing relationships with peers and communication for the first time appear; when the child is at risk of being excluded from school, and when mental health problems occur (Benasich et al., 1993; Hughes et al., 2017). Early diagnoses enable earlier and more appropriate intervention, even before dropping out of school and committing crimes, while early speech therapy services for children identified with DLD can reduce the chance of contact with the police in adolescence and early adulthood (Hughes et al., 2017; Winstanley, Webb, & Conti-Ramsden, 2018).
Unfortunately, screenings for juvenile offenders are not frequent enough, so the occurrence of previously unrecognized and undiagnosed language disorders is substantial, and therefore affected young people in many cases do not even receive adequate professional support (Beitchman et al., 1999; Snow & Powell, 2011). Another problem is that the behaviour of the young people affected due tolanguage disorders1s often misinterpreted, they are seen as defiant or low commitment persons, and behaviour problems are assumed to be the reason behind their underachievement in the classroom environment (Cohen et al, 1998; Snow & Powell, 2011).
Professional literature also highlights the need for effective reading comprehension screening procedures that lead to targeted interventions adapted to assessment profiles (Ehren & Ehren, 2001; Snow, 2016). However, several problems arise in relation to the examination of young people's language abilities. Most of the tests used were originally designed for children, and the standards of the tests do not necessarily reflect the "typical" performances of young people who are alienated from education, may attend school less often, and have limited social experiences (Bryan et al., 2007). Several authors have suggested that it would be more appropriate to use self-reports and interviews so that young people can report on their experiences and explain their emotional reactions to them (Zwiers & Morissette, 1999). Freedman and Wiig (1995) believe that self-assessment would provide useful information for the design of services and interventions for young people, moreover, accordingto some experts, they would represent an alternative to the exclusive use of standardized tests (Ehren, 2000).
It would be important to make speech therapy and language pathology services accessible to at-risk young people who do not attend school (Bryan et al., 2007), given the high comorbidity rates of DLD and reading difficulties, so the provision of speech therapy and language pathology services should be ensured by youth assistance and social and child protection organizations for the young people involved.
If young people do become offenders and are convicted, it becomes essential to develop literacy as well as oral and written language skills to prevent further offending, so there is a great need for SLPs in correctional institutions (Venardetal., 1997).
Such specialists are employed more and more often, but their involvementis not uniform in individual institutes, and can be considered rather sporadic, and the services provided by these specialists are not available in many institutions.
If SLPs work in the given correctional institution, in addition to dealing with the juveniles and providing them with therapy in addition to screening, they perform versatile tasks in order to support easier communication with the juveniles.
A great number of tools are applied to support young peoplein engaging more successfully in interactions, including training staff to facilitate communication (Bryan & Gregory, 2013; Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists [RCSLT], 2019). In addition to training staff, SLPs also play animportantrolein supporting the exchange of information with juveniles. Communication is a basic human right, and it is not fair to condemn youth to failure (e.g., for breaking the rules) justbecause they could not fully understand what the authorities expected of them at the outset. Therefore, SLPs assist in developing understanding of commonly used institutional vocabulary, including the creation of printed materials for juveniles that explain justice processes in a user-friendly manner (such as the meaning of terms used in bail conditions), youth rights, basic rules of conduct and prepare them for what to expect during their sentence.
Snow and Powell (2012) recommend that staff and counsellors reduce the verbal burden of cognitive behavioural therapy by, for example, simplifying the language used and that they alsouse visual support, that is, the routine use of communication aids, such as pictures during rehabilitation interventions.
Riley and Hayes (2018) provide advice based on their observations of restorative justice deliberations. They recommend that the facilitator avoid the use of jargon and technical terms, respond to different cultural communication styles, phrase questions in a way that encourages active behaviour and contribution from the juvenile, allow for listening, and talk about the offences and actions in a way that distances them from the juvenile. They suggest that "more emphasis should be placed on the facilitators language skills in engaging Juvenile delinquents into conversation" through strategies, e.g. "active listening, reflecting, summarising, and using silence, and that rather than expecting Juvenile offenders to produce a narrative, a framed set of questions to explore cognition and emotions may be more helpful" (Riley & Hayes, 2018, p. 109).
The role of visibility and accessibility of speech and language therapy expertise is therefore enhanced, not only during screening and therapy but also by supporting easier communication between professionals. This is also true of police and court proceedings, in addition to the time spent in prison, as young offenders need to communicate correctly during the proceedings and represent their interests. The question arises of how efficiently these juveniles with below-average language skills communicate and whether this level of language skills affects their ability to benefit from verbally delivered activities. (Bryan et al, 2007) In the next chapter, we examine the role of language skillsin three specific areas for juvenile offenders.
Conclusions
As evidenced by this study, researchin the field of language disorders is largely aimed at exploring the effects of DLD and the associated risks (Beitchman et al., 2001; Putnins, 2005; Snow, 2009). There are much fewer studies on the development of language skills, and only a few researchers investigate the effectiveness of language facilitation techniques, and the use of situational tasks aimed at improving such techniques (e.g, Starlinget al., 2012). Our study fillsa gap in research in this area, as it provides practical suggestions on what to focus on when working with adolescences delinquents with DLD in juvenile institutions. However, there is an emerging small but positive body of literature supportingthe role of speech therapy in addressing the communication needs of incarcerated youth. Gregory and Bryan (2011) in the United Kingdom and Snow and Woodward (2017) in Australia have demonstrated that such young people show a strong commitment to therapy and achieve significant communication development because of relatively short-term, moderate-intensity speech therapy interventions. In addition, the research on correctional interventions for incarcerated youth provides promising evidence that, in addition to explicit learning, the development of reading comprehension skills, reading fluency and vocabulary are crucial (Houchins, Jolivette, Krezmien, & Baltodano, 2008). In our study, we collected many suggestions and positive practices, which would be practicable to apply as widely as possible. Diagnosing language disorders at an early age and applying more effective reading comprehension screening procedures are the first step in this process, while reducing latency would be key. In practice, it would be useful to develop an understanding of the official vocabulary often used in institutions, either by creating printed materials for juvenile detainees or by simplifying the language used by professionals, and the treatment of mental health problems should not be neglected either. Furthermore, it may be worth considering the application of observations from the wider literature on juvenile offenders with DLD (Sowerbutts et al., 2021), and evidence-based interventions with young people in the criminal justice system are also needed.
The main significance of our study 1s that we have collected and analysed the most common problems and challenges faced by juvenile offenders with DLD. We have detailedthe areasin which it may be possibleto prevent juvenile offenders with DLD from reoffending after their release. With the help of research and interventions based on it, it would be possible to ensure that the developmental difficulties that arise can be remedied and that these young people become useful members of society and do not get involved in criminal activities as adults.
Ethics statement
This study was carried out in accordance with the recommendations of Code of Ethics of the University of Debrecen. The protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee for Research, Institute of Educational Studies and Cultural Management. In accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, all parents gave writteninformed consent for adolescents' participation in the study.
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Author contributions
All authors listed have made a substantial, directand intellectual contribution to the work, and approvedit for publication.
Funding
This paper was supported by the János Bolyai Research Scholarship of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (BO/00099/24/2).
References
Anderson, S. A, Hawes, D. J, & Snow, P. C. (2016). Language impairments among youth offenders: A systematic review. Children and Youth Services Review, 65(1), 195-203. https://doi.org/10.1016/ .childyouth.2016.04.004
Anderson, S. A, Hawes, D. J., & Snow, P. C. (2022). Higher order language: Risk, promotive, and risk-based protective associations with youth offending. Crime & Delinquency, 68(5), 840-866.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2017). Youth justice in Australia 2015- 16. Retrieved from https://www.alhw.gov.au/ reports/youth-justice/youth-justice-in-australia-2015-16/contents/ table-of-contents
Baglivio, M. T., Epps, N., Swartz, K., Hug, M. S., Sheer, A., & Hardt, N. S. (2014). The prevalence of adverse childhood experiences (ACE) in the lives of juvenile offenders. Journal of Juvenile Justice, 3(2), 1-23.
Beitchman, J. H., Douglas, L., Wilson, B., Johnson, C., Atkinson, L., Escobar, M. & Taback, N. (1999). Adolescent substance use disorders: findings from a follow up study of speech/language impaired and control children. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 28, 312-321.
Beitchman, J. H, Wilson, B., Johnson, C. J., Atkinson, L., Young, A., Adlaf, E., & Douglas, L. (2001). Fourteen-year follow-up of speech/language-impaired and control children: Psychiatric outcome. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 40(1), 75-82.
Beitchman, J., & Brownlie, E. B. (2014). Language disorders in children and adolescents. Boston, MA: Hogrefe
Benasich, A. A, Curtiss, S., & Tallal, P (1993). Language, learning, and behavioral disturbances in childhood: A longitudinal perspective. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 32(3), 585-594.
Bergen, E., Zuijen, T., Bishop, D., & Jong, P. F. (2017). Why are home literacy environment and children's reading skills associated? What parental skills reveal. Reading Research Quarterly, 52(2), 147-160.
Bishop, D. V M, Snowling, M. J, Thompson, P A, Greenhalgh, T, & the CATALISE Consortium. (2017). CATALISE: A multinational and multidisciplinary Delphi consensus study of problems with language development. Phase 2. Terminology. TPeerJ. Retrieved from https://peerj.com/preprints/2484/
Bryan, K. (2004). Preliminary study of the prevalence of speech and language difficulties in young offenders. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 39(3), 391-400.
Bryan, K., & Gregory, J. (2013). Perceptions of staff on embedding speech and language therapy within a youth offending team. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 293), 359-371.
Bryan, K., Freer, J, & Furlong, C. (2007). Language and communication difficulties in juvenile offenders. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 42(5), 505-520.
Bryan, K., Gavani, G., Gregory, J. & Kilner, K. (2015). Language difficulties and criminal justice: the need for earlier identification, International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 50(6), 763-775.
Centre for Youth & Criminal Justice. (2018). 4 Guide to Youth Justice in Scotland: policy, practice and legislation, (June), 1-30.
Chitsabesan, P, Kroll, L., Bailey, S. U. E., Kenning, C., Sneider, S., MacDonald, W., & Theodosiou, L. (2006). Mental health needs of young offenders in custody and in the community. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 188(6), 534-540.
Chow, J. C., & Wehby, J. H. (2018). Associations between language and problem behavior: A systematic review and correlational meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(1), 61-82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9385-7
Clegg, J., Hollis, C., Mawhood, L., & Rutter, M. (2005). Developmental language disorders-a follow-up in later adult life. Cognitive, language and psychosocial outcomes. Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, 46(2), 128-149.
Cohen, N. J. (2001). Language impairment and psychopathology in infants, children and adolescents. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cohen, N. J, Menna, R., Vallance, D. D., Barwick, M. A, Im, N, & Horodezky, N. B. (1998). Language, social cognitive processing, and behavioral characteristics of psychiatrically disturbed children with previously identified and unsuspected language impairments. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 39(6), 853-864. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-7610.00286
Coles, H, Murray, G. (2015). Key evidence-based Speech and Language Therapy Interventions for Young People in the Criminal Justice System. Retrieved from<https://yjresourcehub uk/
Davies, K., Lewis, J., Byatt, J., Purvis, E., & Cole, B. (2004). An evaluation of the literacy demands of general offending behaviour programmes. Retrieved from https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/11855/1/Evaluation of literacy demands. pdf
Duncan, G. J, Daly, M. C., McDonough, P, & Williams, D. K. (2002). Optimal indicators of socioeconomic status for health research. American Journal of Public Health, 92(7), 1151-1157.
Ehren, B. J. (2000). Views of cognitive referencing from the pragmatist's lens. ASHA Special Interest Division 1. Language Learning and Education Newsletter, 7(1), 3-8.
Ehren, B. J., & Ehren, T. C. (2001). New or expanded literacy roles for speech - language pathologists: Making it happen in the schools. Seminars in Speech and Language, 22(3), 233-244.
Freedman, E., & Wiig, E. H, 1995, Classroom management and instruction for adolescents with language disabilities. Seminars in Speech and Language, 16(1), 46-61.
Gregory, J., & Bryan, K. (2011). Speech and language therapy intervention with a group of persistent and prolific young offenders in a non-custodial setting with previously undiagnosed speech, language and communication difficulties. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 46(2), 202-215.
Gregory, J., & Bryan, K. (2011). Speech and language therapy intervention with a group of persistent and prolific young offenders in a non-custodial setting with previously undiagnosed speech, language and communication difficulties. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 46(2), 202-215. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/13682822.2010.490573
Grigorenko, E. L. (2006). Learning disabilities in juvenile offenders. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics, 15(2), 353-371.
Hammersley, R., Marsland, L., & Reid, M. (2003). Substance use by young offenders: The impact of the normalisation of drug use in the early years of the 2151 century. London: Home Office.
Hart, B., & Risley, T. K. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Baltimore, MD: Brookes. Hoff.
Hayes, H, & Snow, P. (2013). Oral language competence and restorative justice processes: refining preparation and the measurement of conference outcomes. Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, (463), 1-7.
Hentges, K. F, Devereux, C, Graham, S. A, & Madigan, S. (2021). Child language difficulties and internalizing and externalizing symptoms: a meta-analysis. Child Development, 92(4), 691-715.
Hopkins, T., Clegg, J., & Stackhouse, J. (2018). Examining the association between language, expository discourse an offending behaviour: an investigation of direction, strength and independence. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 53(1), 113-129.
Houchins, D. E, Jolivette, K., Krezmien, M. P, & Baltodano, Н. M. (2008). A multi-state study examining the impact of explicit reading instruction with incarcerated students. Journal of Correctional Education, 65-85.
Hughes, N., Chitsabesan, P, Bryan, K., Borschmann, R., Swain, N., Lennox, C., & et al. (2017). Language impairment and comorbid vulnerabilities among young people in custody. Journal of Child Psychiatry, 58(10), 1106-1113.
Im-Bolter, N., & Cohen, N. (2007). Language impairment and psychiatric comorbidities. Pediatric Clinics of North America, 54(3), 525-542.
Johnston, K., Prentice, K., Whitehead, H, Taylor, L., Watts, R., & Tranah, T. (2016). Assessing effective participation in vulnerable juvenile defendents. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 27(6), 802-814.
Justice, L. M., Mashburn, А. J., Hamre, B. K, & Pianta, R. C. (2008). Quality of language and literacy instruction in preschool classrooms serving at-risk pupils. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 23(1), 51-68.
Kilpatrick, T., Leitao, S., & Boyes, M. (2019). Mental health in adolescents with a history of developmental language disorder: The moderating effect of bulling victimisation. Autism & Developmental Language Impairments, 4, 1-12.
Krezmien, M. P, Mulcahy, C. A., & Leone, P. E. (2008). Detained and committed youth: Examining differences in achievement, mental health needs, and special education status. Education and Treatment of Children, 31(4), 445-464. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.0.0029
Larson, V. L., & McKinley, N. (1995). Language Disorders in Older Children: Preadolescents and Adolescents. Eau Claire, WI: Thinking Publications.
Law, J., Boyle, J., Harris, F., Harkness, A., & Nye, C. (2000). Prevalence and natural history of primary speech and language delay: findings from a systematic review of the literature. International journal of language & communication disorders, 35(2), 165-188.
Locke, A, Ginsborg, J, & Peers, I. (2002). Development and disadvantage: Implications for the early years and beyond. International Лита! of Language & Communication Disorders, 37, 3-15.
Lount, S. A, Purdy, S. C., & Hand, L. (2017). Hearing, auditory processing, and language skills of male youth offenders and remandees in youth justice residences in New Zealand. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 60(1), 121-135.
Lum, J. A., Powell, M., & Snow, P. C. (2018). The influence of maltreatment history and out-of-home-care on children's language and social skills. Child Abuse & Neglect, 76, 65-74.
Martin, S. (2019). The role of the speech-language pathologist in supporting young people in youth justice: a Queensland perspective. Journal of Clinical Practice in Speech-Language Pathology, 21(1), 6-10.
Morrison, A., Bickerstaff, D., & Taylor, B. J. (2010). Referrals to a learning disability social work team 1996 to 2005. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(3), 168-174.
Moseley, D., Clark, J., Baumfield, V, Hall, E., Hall, I, Miller, J. et al. (2006). The Impact of ESB Oral Communication Courses in HM Prisons: An Independent Evaluation. Research Report. London, Learning and Skills Development Agency.
Nelson, C. M, Jolivette, K., Leone, P. E, & Mathur, S. R (2010). Meeting the needs of at-risk and adjudicated youth with behavioral challenges: The promise of juvenile justice. Behavioral Disorders, 36(1), 70-80.
Norbury, C. F., Gooch, D, Wray, C., Baird, G, Charman, T., Simonoff, E. et al. (2016). The impact of nonverbal ability on prevalence and clinical presentation of language disorder: evidence from a population study. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 57(11), 1247-1257.
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. (2015). Juveniles in corrections: State comparisons. Retrieved from https://Www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/corrections/qa08611.asp? qaDate=2015&text=no&maplink#ink2
Penner, E. K., Roesch, R., & Viljoen, J. L. (2011). Young offenders in custody: an international comparison of mental health services. International Journal of Mental Health, 10(3), 215-232.
Qi, C. H, Kaiser, A. P, Milan, S., Yzquierdo, Z., & Hancock, T. (2003). The performance of low-income, African American children on the Preschool Language Scale-3. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46(3), 576-590. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2003/046)
Quinn, M. M., Rutherford, R. B., Leone, P. E, Osher, D. M., & Poirier, J. M. (2005). Youth with disabilities in juvenile corrections: A national survey. Exceptional Children, 71(3), 339-345.
RCSLT. (2018). Justice - Guidance. Retrieved from https: // wwwrcslt.org/ members/clinical-guidance/justice/justice-guidance#section-4
Riley, M., & Hayes, H. (2018). Youth restorative justice conferencing: facilitator"s language help or hindrance? Contemporary Justice Review Issues in Criminal, Social, and Restorative Justice, 21(1), 99-113.
Ripley, K., & Yuill, N. (2005). Patterns of language impairment and behaviour in boys excluded from school. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(1), 37-50.
Rogers, R., Hazelwood, L. L., Sewell, K. W., Shuman, D. W., & Blackwood, H. L. (2008). The comprehensibility and content of juvenile Miranda warnings. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 14(1), 63-87.
Rowe, M. L. (2012). Alongitudinal investigation of the role of quantity and quality of child-directed speech in vocabulary development. Child Development, 83(5), 1762-1774. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624 2012.01805.x
Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists. (2019). Justice - Overview. Retrieved from https://www.cslt.org/speech-and-language-therapy/wheresltswork/justice#section-2
Rotaru, T. S., Pretula, M., & Boncu, S. (2013). Effect of studies on attitudes towards inmates. Journal of Psychological and Educational Research, 21(2), 29.
Sampson, R. J., & Laub, J. H (1994). Urban poverty and the family context of delinquency: A new look at structure and process in a classic study. Child Development, 65(2), 523-540.
Sanger, D., Moore-Brown, B., Montgomery, J., & Larson, V. (2002). Service delivery framework for adolescents with communication problems who are involved in violence. Journal of Communication Disorders, 35(1), 293-303.
Snow, C. (1983). Literacy and language: Relationships during the preschool years. Harvard Educational Review, 53(2), 165-189.
Snow, P, & Sanger, D. (2011). Restorative justice conferencing and the youth offender: exploring the role of oral language competence. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 46(3), 324-333.
Snow, P. C, & Powell, M. B. (2004). Interviewing juvenile offenders: the importance of oral language competence. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 16, 220-225.
Snow, P. C., & Powell, M. B. (2005). What's the story? An exploration of narrative language abilities in male juvenile offenders. Psychology, Crime and Law, 11(3), 239-253.
Snow, Р. C., & Powell, M. B. (2011). Oral language competence in incarcerated young offenders: Links with offending severity. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 13(6), 480-489.
Snow, P. C. (2016). Elizabeth Usher Memorial Lecture: Language is literacy is language. Positioning speech language pathology in education policy, practice, paradigms, and polemics. [International Journal of SpeechLanguage Pathology, 18(3), 216-228.
Snow, P C. (2019). Speech-language pathology and the youth offender: Epidemiological overview and roadmap for future speech-language pathology research and scope of practice. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 50(2), 324-339. https://doi.org/10.1044/2018 LSHSSCCIS-18-0027
Snow, P. C., & Woodward, M. M. (2015). Intervening to address communication difficulties in incarcerated youth: A Phase 1 clinical trial. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 14), 392-406.
Snow, P, & Powell, M. (2012). Youth (in) justice: Oral language competence in early life and risk for engagement in antisocial behaviour in adolescence. Trends and issues in crime and criminal justice, (435), 1-6.
Snow, P, & Woodward, M. N. (2017). Intervening to address communication difficulties in incarcerated youth: A Phase 1 clinical trial. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 9507(4), 392-406.
Snow, P, Woodward, M., Mathis, M., & Powell, M. (2016). Language functioning, mental health and alexithymia in incarcerated young offenders. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 18(1), 20-21.
Snowling, M. J., Adams, J. W., Bowyer-Crane, C., & Tobin, V. (2000). Levels of literacy among juvenile offenders: The incidence of specific reading difficulties. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 10(4), 229-241. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbm.362
Sousa, C., Herrenkohl, T. I, Moylan, C. A, Tajima, E. A, Klika, J. B., Herrenkohl, K. C, & et al. (2011). Longitudinal study of the effects of child abuse and children's exposure to domestic violence, parent-child attachments, and antisocial behavior in adolescence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26(1), 111-136.
Sowerbutts, A., Eaton-Rosen, E., Bryan, K., & Beeke, S. (2021). Supporting young offenders to communicate in the youth justice system: A scoping review. Speech, Language and Hearing, 24(2), 87-104.
Speech Pathology Australia [SPA] (2018). Speech pathology in mental health: Clinical guideline, Retrieved from https://www.speechpathologyaustralia. org. au/comm on/Uploaded%?20files/A bout%20Us/Advocacy%20and%20research/Position%20statements/SPA-Speech-Pathology-in-Mental-Health-Position-Statement-2018.pdf
Starling, J., Munro, N., Togher, L., & Arciuli, J. (2012). Training Secondary School Teachers in Instructional Language Modification Techniques to Support Adolescents with Language Impairment: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, 43(4), 474-495.
Stephenson, M. (2007). Young people and offending: Education, youth justice, and social inclusion. Devon, United Kingdom: Willan Publishing.
Stewart, A., Livingston, M., & Dennison, S. (2008). Transitions and turning points: Examining the links between child maltreatment and juvenile offending. Child Abuse & Neglect, 32(1), 51-66.
Tamnes, C. K., Herting, M. M, Goddings, A. L., Meuwese, R., Blakemore, S. J, Dahl, K. E, et al. (2017). Development of the cerebral cortex across adolescence: A multisample study of inter-related longitudinal changes in cortical volume, surface area, and thickness. Journal of Neuroscience, 37(12), 3402-3412. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCL.3302- 16.2017
Thornberry, T., Lizotte, A., Krohn, M., Smith, C., & Porter, P (2003). Causes and consequences of delinquency: findings from the Rochester Youth development study. In Thornberry, T., & Krohn, M. (Eds.), Taking Stock of Delinquency: An overview of findings from contemporary longitudinal studies (pp. 11-47) New York: Kluwer Plenum.
van IJzendoorn, M. H, Dijkstra, J., & Bus, A. C. (1995). Attachment, intelligence, and language: A meta-analysis. Social Development, 4(2), 115-128.
Vennard, J., Hedderman, C., & Sugg, D. (1997). Changing offenders' attitudes and behaviour: what works?. Home Office Research Study.
Ward, T, & Stewart, C. (2003). Criminogenic needs and human needs: A theoretical model. Psychology, crime d law, 9(2), 125-143.
Weatherburn, D. (2011). Crime-prone communities. In Stewart, A., Allard, T., & Dennison, S. (Eds.), Evidence-based policy and practice in youth Justice (pp. 63-81). Sydney, Australia: The Federation Press.
Willingham, D. T. (2012). Ask the cognitive scientist: Why does family wealth affect learning? American Fducator, 36(1), 33-39.
Winstanley, E. L., Mahoney III, J. J., Lander, L. R, Berry, J. H, Marshalek, P, Zheng, W., & Haut, M. W. (2020). Something to despair: Gender differences in adverse childhood experiences among rural patients. Journal of substance abuse treatment, 116, 108056.
Winstanley, M., Webb, R., & Conti-Ramsden, C. (2018). More or less likely to offend? Young adults with a history of identified developmental language disorders, International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 532), 256-270.
Wolff, P H, Waber, D., Bauermeister, M., Cohen, C., & Ferber, R. (1982). The neuropsychological status of adolescent delinquent boys. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 23(3), 267-279.
World Health Organization. (1999). The world health report 1999-Making a difference. Retrieved from: http://www. who.int/whr/1999/en/
Zupan, B., Campbell-Woods, N., & Thompson, H. (2021). Scoping review: language assessment practices for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in Australia and guidelines for clinical practice. Australian Journal of Rural Health, 29(6), 879-895.
Zwiers, M. L., & Morissette, P. J. (1999). Effective Interviewing of Children: А Comprehensive Guide for Counsellors and Human Service Workers (Philadelphia, - PA: Accelerated Development) Retrieved from: http://www.howardl eague.org/weeklyupdates/2005updates/October05. htm
Correspondence concerning this paper should be addressed to:
*Ph.D., assistant professor, University of Debrecen, Institute of Educational Studies and Cultural Management, Faculty of Humanities, Debrecen, Hungary. Address: 4032 Debrecen Egyetem tér 1.003620/58-892-58 E-mail: [email protected]
Copyright University of Oradea, Faculty of Social and Humanistic Sciences 2025