Alcohol, drugs and crime : a study of juveniles in detention

Jeremy Prichard and Jason Payne
ISBN 0 642 53891 3 ; ISSN 1326-6004
Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology: 2005
(Research and public policy series, no. 67)

Executive summary

In 2001 the Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) commenced a major study of the drug use careers of adult male and female prisoners, and juvenile detainees in Australia. This research was funded by the Australian Government Attorney General's Department (AGD). The results of the Drug Use Careers of Offenders (DUCO) adult male study were released in 2003 (Makkai & Payne 2003) and the DUCO adult female results were released in 2004 (Johnson 2004). The primary focus of this report is on the drug and alcohol use and criminal behaviours of 371 juveniles aged 10 to 17 years who were in detention centres in all Australian jurisdictions in 2003-2004.

Although not a national census, the profile of the juveniles interviewed for this study was similar to the Australian juvenile detainee population recorded in the 2003 national census in Statistics on Juvenile Detention in Australia: 1981-2003. (Charlton and McCall 2004). One exception was that the present study interviewed a slightly higher proportion of Indigenous youths (59%) than is typically found in the nation's detention centres.

Overall, the juveniles in this study reported committing a variety of offences at a very high frequency. The majority reported chronic, persistent and multiple drug use.

Demographic and criminal offending profile

The general demographic profile of juvenile offenders in this study indicates that:

• the majority were males (93%) with an average age of 16 years;
• just over half (59%) identified as Indigenous;
• three quarters (76%) had stopped attending school before entering detention, and had left school at an average age of 14; and
• just over half (53%) were living at home with their parents prior to detention.

In terms of criminal offending, the most serious charge leading to current detention was most likely to be for a property offence (58%), followed by a violent offence (37%). In terms of self-reported offending, almost all juveniles had engaged in property offending (98%), whilst 84 per cent had engaged in violent offending.

By offence type, the lifetime prevalence was:

• 86 per cent for break and enter;
• 82 per cent for stealing (without break in);
• 80 per cent for vandalism and motor vehicle theft;
• 75 per cent for trading in stolen goods;
• 73 per cent for physical assault;
• 55 per cent for robbery; and
• 26 per cent for fraud or forgery.

The majority of juveniles in this study (88%) had also engaged in drug related offending, although more juveniles reported buying drugs (85%) than selling them (55%).

Using the self-reported regular offending data, it was possible to categorise the juvenile detainees into a three-staged hierarchical typology - regular violent offenders, regular property offenders and non-regular offenders. Comparative analysis by offender type indicates that those juveniles detainees who had progressed to regular violent offending were more serious not only in terms of their regular offending, but drug use as well. Non-regular offenders were least likely to report the use of illicit drugs and alcohol, across most drug types.

Substance use

The juveniles interviewed for this study reported substantial involvement with alcohol and a variety of illicit drugs. In the six months before entering detention, 71 per cent of youths used one type of substance regularly, and 29 per cent used more than one type regularly.

In terms of types of substances regularly used:

• 63 per cent used cannabis;
• 46 per cent used alcohol;
• 20 per cent used amphetamines;
• eight per cent used ecstasy; and
• seven per cent used inhalants.

Non-Indigenous juveniles were more likely than Indigenous juveniles to have tried amphetamines and ecstasy. Generally, however, the juveniles' substance using patterns were very similar regardless of Indigenous status. This includes use of alcohol and inhalants.

Links between drugs and crime

The results of this study provide evidence of a connection between drug and alcohol use and criminal offending. For example:

• 70 per cent of youths were intoxicated at the time of their last offence: 48 per cent were under the influence of drugs and 46 per cent were under the influence of alcohol;
• of those who reported being under the influence of drugs at the time of their offence, 75 per cent indicated that they were intoxicated by cannabis and 39 per cent by amphetamines;
• 44 per cent of burglars attributed their crimes to the need to obtain money to buy drugs;
• almost one third of youths who had been charged with assaulting others attributed the offences to being drunk or high at the time of the offence;
• compared with non-regular offenders, regular violent and regular property offenders were three times more likely to be regular users of alcohol and twice as likely to be regular users of cannabis.
• 29 per cent of regular violent offenders regularly used amphetamines, compared with 17 per cent of regular property offenders and five per cent of non-regular offenders;
• 67 per cent used one or more substances daily. Of this group, 72 per cent reported committing crime on between three and seven days each week. This rate of offending was reported by 34 per cent of youths who used substances once a monthly or less; and
• Indigenous and non-Indigenous youths used similar substances at similar frequencies, although non-Indigenous detainees were significantly more likely to have used amphetamines and ecstasy.

While the precise link between substance abuse and criminal offending is not known, the available evidence suggests that substance use exacerbates criminal offending. This study finds that regular offenders tend to begin experimenting with substances at an earlier age than non-regular offenders.

A number of youths attributed their criminal offending directly to their use of drugs and alcohol. This study uses a conservative measure of causation for juveniles who stated that the reason they committed the offence was related to drugs or alcohol. This measure is a combination of daily substance use or intoxication at the time of the current offence. In total, 33 per cent of youths causally attributed their offending to their drug and alcohol abuse. Indigenous youths were more likely to attribute their criminal offending to substance use (35%) than non-Indigenous youths (29%). The juveniles attributed their offending to substance use at rates similar to the adults interviewed for the DUCO adult male study.

Temporal order of substance use and offending

Whether substance use leads to crime, or the reverse is true, has been the subject of much debate. Much of the research focusing on male offenders has found that criminal activity tends to precede drug use, but that offending, particularly property crime, escalates as drug use increases. Comparable results were found for juveniles in this study. Crime began before substance use for half of the youths. A quarter of youths began using substances within a year of commencing criminal behaviour. The onset of regular property offending occurred within months of the development of regular substance use behaviours.

Indigenous offenders

More than half (59%) of the juveniles interviewed for this study identified as Indigenous. Comparative analysis by Indigenous status revealed that, compared with non-Indigenous juveniles, Indigenous juveniles:

• were more likely to be detained for burglary, and more likely to self-report a lifetime history of burglary;
• were equally likely to report the lifetime prevalence and daily use of cannabis and alcohol, but less likely to have used amphetamines and ecstasy;
• were equally likely to have used inhalants, but first used inhalants at a much younger age; and
• were equally likely to attribute their criminal activity to drug use.

Risk factors for drug use and offending

This study provides many opportunities to examine a range of risk factors for drug and alcohol abuse and offending. Results show that:

• about one third of juveniles had endured violent or emotional abuse, and one fifth had been left alone for long periods;
• 42 per cent of youths were not living with their parents at the time of their last offence;
• two thirds of youths reported that a member of their family was abusing substances while they were growing up;
• one in 10 youths did not continue their education past grade six, and 75 per cent ended their education in grade seven, eight or nine;
• what little schooling the youths did complete was punctuated by very high rates of truancy, with almost half of juveniles regularly suspended; and
• six in 10 youths had been expelled from school.

Policy implications

Strong connections were found between the risk factors, including childhood abuse and neglect, drug and alcohol abuse among family members and troubled school education. All are highly interrelated and important correlates of criminal offending and high frequency substance abuse. These results highlight that breaking the cycle of drugs and crime will be achieved by:

• whole-of-government approaches and inter-agency cooperation to ensure the range of factors that can lead to drug use and offending are addressed;
• the prevention of drug dependency through rapid intervention with drug users and effective drug treatment programs;
• early interventions with families, particularly with juveniles whose family members use drugs; and
• programs specifically targeted at juveniles and their personal histories and drug use patterns.

To facilitate these policy responses, it is increasingly important that criminal justice agencies employ a diverse range of detailed screening and assessments tools to identify juveniles at high risk of continued drug use and offending. Identifying daily drug use, poly-substance abuse and family substance abuse as early as possible are high priorities.

Furthermore, a key theme of this report is the need for early intervention programs, and the results highlighted here demonstrate the importance if interventions with high risk youths in the late primary school years and early high school years. Early interventions can occur in a range of different settings - at school, at first appearance in court, at police diversion, at first contact with family crisis agencies - although a coordinated effort across all these areas is likely to be the most successful.