Legal Counsel, Moral Expectations, and Youth with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities: Economies of Worth in Youth Courts

TL;DR

This paper examines how the Canadian youth justice system fails to accommodate youth with intellectual and developmental disabilities, based on interviews with legal professionals.

Contribution

The study introduces a novel analysis of legal professionals' interpretations using a situated moral judgment framework.

Findings

Legal professionals report systemic failures in accommodating youth with disabilities.

Vague legal provisions hinder proper support for vulnerable youth.

Interviews reveal tensions between legal obligations and practical realities in youth courts.

Abstract

The Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) is the law that governs the Canadian youth justice system and applies to young people between the ages of twelve and seventeen. The YCJA's Declaration of Principle broadly states that measures taken against young people should consider their “special requirements.” Such vague provisions have led young people with mental health issues and intellectual and developmental disabilities to not receive much-needed and legally required accommodations. Based on interviews with 38 legal professionals, we analyze their interpretations of the failure of the youth justice system to accommodate youth with intellectual and developmental disabilities in conflict with the law. We draw from Boltanski and Thevenot’s model of situated moral judgment to understand crown attorney and defense counsel's reflections on, and criticisms of, their work environments in relation to the positioning of young people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.