Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Troubled Affluent Youth’s Experiences in a Therapeutic Boarding School: The Elite Arm of the Youth Control Complex and Its Implications for Youth Justice

Abstract

Criminology focuses on street crime and crimes of the poor. Surveys, however, indicate that deviance among middle- and upper-class youth is widespread, and that their experience of social control is not researched, despite its importance for a more complete understanding of youth justice. This study provides insight into a mostly unregulated private troubled teen industry, relying on interviews and a survey of affluent youth sent to a therapeutic boarding school. The main sections of this article explore the wide variety of behaviors that caused youth to be sent to the program, the key aspects of their experiences, and the very mixed outcomes. (All participants graduated high school and most completed college, but many others committed suicide or overdosed.) While a degree and the lack of a criminal record ultimately benefited these privileged youth, the strong-arm rehabilitation tactics of this kind of total institution are a problematic model to use to advance youth justice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

  1. 1.

    This is a pseudonym as are all the names used to link quotations to respondents.

References

  1. Barak, G., Leighton, P., & Cotton, A. (2018). Class, race, gender & crime (5th ed.). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

  2. Behrens, E., Santa, J., & Gass, M. (2010). The evidence base for private therapeutic schools, residential programs, and wilderness therapy programs. Journal of Therapeutic Schools and Programs,4(1), 106–117.

  3. Behrens, E., & Satterfield, K. (2017). Longitudinal family and academic outcomes in residential programs. Journal of Therapeutic Schools and Programs,2(1), 81–94.

  4. Bettmann, J., & Jasperson, R. (2009). Adolescents in residential and inpatient treatment. Child & Youth Care Forum,38(4), 161–183.

  5. Bratter, E. (2011). Compassionate confrontation psychotherapy. Adolescent Psychiatry,1(3), 227–234.

  6. Bush, N., Friedman, R., Huffine, C., Huff, B., & Elberg, P. (2011). Treatment research lacks good science. Resource document. Alliance for the Safe, Therapeutic and Appropriate use of Residential Treatment. Retrieved March 17, 2017, from http://astartforteens.org/assets/files/ASTART-Treatment-Research-Lacks-Good-Science-Sept%20-2011.pdf.

  7. Chambliss, W. J. (1973). The saints and the roughnecks. Society,11(1), 24–31.

  8. Clemson, C. (2015). The prison path. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

  9. Cox, A. L. (2018). Trapped in a vice: The consequences of confinement for young people. Camden, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

  10. Currie, E. (2003). “It’s our lives they’re dealing with here”: Some adolescent views of residential treatment. Journal of Drug Issues,33(4), 833–864.

  11. Currie, E. (2005). The road to whatever: Middle-class culture and the crisis of adolescence. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

  12. Flavin, J. (2008). Our bodies, our crimes: The policing of women’s reproduction in America. New York: New York University Press.

  13. Friedman, R., Pinto, A., Behar, L., Bush, N., Chirolla, A., Epstein, M., et al. (2006). Unlicensed residential programs. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,76(3), 295–303.

  14. Giroux, H. (2009). Youth in a suspect society: Democracy or disposability?. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

  15. Goffman, E. (1961). Asylums. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.

  16. Goshe, S. (2015). Moving beyond the punitive legacy: Taking stock of persistent problems in juvenile justice. Youth Justice,15(1), 42–56.

  17. Goshe, S. (2017). The lurking punitive threat: The philosophy of necessity and challenges for reform. Theoretical Criminology,23(1), 25–42.

  18. Gowan, T., & Whetstone, S. (2012). Making the criminal addict: Subjectivity and social control in a strong-arm rehab. Punishment and Society,14(1), 69–93.

  19. Kaye, K. (2013). Rehabilitating the ‘drugs lifestyle’: Criminal justice, social control, and the cultivation of agency. Ethnography,14(2), 207–232.

  20. Khan, S. R. (2012). The sociology of elites. Annual Review of Sociology,38(1), 361–377.

  21. Kuhl, D., Chavez, J., Swisher, R., & Wilczak, A. (2016). Social class, family formation, and delinquency in early adulthood. Sociological Perspectives,59(2), 345–367.

  22. Kutz, G., & O’Connell, A. (2007). Residential treatment programs: Concerns regarding abuse and death in certain programs for troubled youth (GAO-08-146T). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

  23. Lareau, A. (2011). Unequal childhoods. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

  24. Levine, M. (2006). The price of privilege. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

  25. Luthar, S. S. (2003). The culture of affluence: Psychological costs of material wealth. Child Development,74(6), 1581–1593.

  26. Luthar, S. S., Barkin, S., & Crossman, E. (2013). “I can, therefore I must”: Fragility in the upper-middle classes. Development and Psychopathology,25(4pt2), 1529–1549.

  27. Luthar, S. S., & Becker, B. E. (2002). Privileged but pressured? A study of affluent youth. Child Development,73(5), 1593–1610.

  28. Luthar, S. S., & D’Avanzo, K. (1999). Contextual factors in substance use: A study of suburban and inner-city adolescents. Development and Psychopathology, 11(4), 845–867.

  29. Luthar, S. S., & Latendresse, S. J. (2005). Children of the affluent: Challenges to well-being. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14(1), 49–53.

  30. Luthar, S. S., & Sexton, C. C. (2004). The high price of affluence. Advances in Child Development and Behavior,32(C), 125–162.

  31. Marcus, D. (2005). What it takes to pull me through. New York: Houghton Mifflin.

  32. McCorkel, J. (2013). Breaking women. New York: New York University Press.

  33. McKay, J. (2017). So you want to run an outcome study? The challenges to measuring adolescent residential treatment outcomes. Journal of Therapeutic Schools and Programs,2(1), 63–80.

  34. Miller, A., & Toivonen, T. (2010). To discipline or accommodate? On the rehabilitation of Japanese “problem youth”. The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus,7(20), 22–26.

  35. Mohamed, A., & Fritsvold, E. (2010). Dorm room dealers. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

  36. Mohr, W. (2009). Still shackled in the land of liberty: Denying children the right to be safe from abusive “treatment”. Advances in Nursing Science,32(2), 173–185.

  37. NATSUP (National Association of Therapeutic Schools and Programs). (2017). NATSUP program definitions. Resource Document. NATSUP. Retrieved January 13, 2018, from https://natsap.org/PDF_Files/directory/2016-2017Directory.pdf.

  38. OJJDP (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention). (2018). Statistical briefing book. Resource Document. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice. Retrieved May 3, 2018, from https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/corrections/qa08201.asp?qaDate=2016.

  39. Postman, N. (1970). The politics of reading. Harvard Educational Review,40(2), 244–252.

  40. Ramey, D. (2018). The social construction of child social control via criminalization and medicalization. Sociological Forum,33(1), 139–164.

  41. Reamer, F., & Siegel, D. (2013). Teens in crisis: How the industry serving struggling teens helps and hurts our kids. New York: Columbia University Press.

  42. Reiman, J., & Leighton, P. (2017). The rich get richer and the poor get prison (11th ed.). New York: Routledge.

  43. Robbins, I. (2014). Kidnapping incorporated: The unregulated youth-transportation industry and the potential for abuse. American Criminal Law Review,51(3), 563–600.

  44. Sankofa, J., Cox, A., Fader, J. J., Inderbitzin, M., Abrams, L. S., & Nurse, A. M. (2018). Juvenile corrections in the era of reform: A meta-synthesis of qualitative studies. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology,62(7), 1763–1786.

  45. Szalavitz, M. (2006). Help at any cost: How the troubled-teen industry cons parents and hurts kids. New York: Penguin.

  46. US Government Accountability Office. (2008a). Residential facilities: State and federal oversight gaps may increase risk to youth well-being (GAO-08-696T). Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

  47. US Government Accountability Office. (2008b). Residential facilities: Improved data and enhanced oversight would help safeguard the well-being of youth with behavioral and emotional challenges (GAO-08-346). Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

  48. Whitehead, K., Keshet, M., Lombrowski, B., Domenico, A., & Green, D. (2007). Definition and accountability: A youth perspective. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,77(3), 348–349.

  49. Wilson, M. (2018).‘It’s like, who’s next?’ A troubled school’s alarming death rate. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/02/nyregion/suicide-school-overdose-deaths-ny-family-foundation.html. Accessed 2 Sept 2018.

  50. Zahn, M. (Ed.). (2009). The delinquent girl. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Heather Mooney.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mooney, H., Leighton, P. Troubled Affluent Youth’s Experiences in a Therapeutic Boarding School: The Elite Arm of the Youth Control Complex and Its Implications for Youth Justice. Crit Crim 27, 611–626 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10612-019-09466-4

Download citation