Dear Editor,
“Considerations for the Management of the Juvenile Rehabilitation Centre”
About eight years ago, the Zenaida Haven Juvenile Rehabilitation Centre became operational under the Department of Probation. Ever since its establishment, the facility has done exceptionally well at providing therapeutic services for the vulnerable young male offenders on the island.
Today, I wish to recognize the outstanding work done by the past and present supervisors, care staff, housekeeper, security firm, Social Workers, Probation Officers, and community organizations with our male juvenile offenders. They have demonstrated exemplary professionalism amidst disaster, internal conflict, “call out” and the manifestations of strange adolescent behaviors as they execute their daily duties. Globally, there is a limited sense of appreciation for the work done with children in residential facilities. It is hoped that my praise will serve as a means of motivation for this particular group of people.
Soon, the management and staff will be celebrating its ninth anniversary. As a concerned parent, I wish to offer some considerations for the management of the facility. We do not often hear about the experiences of residents and staff. Some might argue that it is unethical for the team to write about their experiences at the facility. Another will say that the administrative process of complaints and conflict resolution is not transparent and satisfactory. Whatever the reason, I support the need for yearly departmental audits to examine the influence of HODs across the APS on the morale of staff and services offered to the public. As such, I have made a few observations and seek to inform you about the same, and hope that the Senior Management of the Department of Probation will become reflective as it charts the way forward for the residential facility.
First, I struggle with the reality that many employed within this facility are new to working with young people and have limited professional training. Apparently, the experience has been likened to “put in the deep end.” Whether they swim or sink is dependent on their resourcefulness, adaptability and support they receive from colleagues or the pressures from young people themselves.
Secondly, although managers of residential centers tend to be more qualified and experienced, the support they receive is often little by way of induction when they assume duty at the center. Consequently, Zenaida Haven has changed almost seven supervisors within eight years. Similarly, the turnover of staff at this facility is of great concern. As a parent, I am worried about this pattern and its triggers. A systemic dysfunction appears to be the only explanation, and management needs to be reflective of its role in the high staff turnover at the facility. The departure of highly skilled supervisors and senior care workers is of great concern to the type of interventions formulated for the young people.
Thirdly, I bring to your attention the need for consideration into the psychosocial needs of staff who often work double shifts and cannot maximize their lunch break due to understaffing. Such practices do not contribute to the health and wellbeing of staff and will affect their output. Further, I have become concerned during the last eight months about how young people are placed at this institution. I believe that the juvenile justice system outlines a judicial process for such. A recent placement has brought much anxiety to the residents and staff. Best practice would suggest that safeguarding of children’s rights and consultation with all stakeholders allow for a transition especially when placements occur.
Fourthly, there is a need for expansion to facilitate the implementation of programmes and not suppress the freedoms of young people. It is possible as my experience has been, for a disruptive resident to adversely affect the functioning of the center which will affect other young people’s ability to interact or even participate in planned activities. Concern arises as other residents are sent to their rooms due to such disturbances.
Fifthly, residents have consistently expressed safety issues with the van used for transporting them. The time has come for the authorities to procure a vehicle that will not put both residents and staff at risk. Corporate Anguilla can be approached to assist in this procurement.
Finally, the department needs to find a way to involve parents in the process carefully. Parents can offer much in the form of emotional support and advocacy for staff and residents. Additionally, they can support other parents whose children are delinquent, and assist with policy formulation and the identification of risks associated with a dominant female team providing care for a male population. Similarly, it would be a worthwhile investment to remove the stigmatization of our young men by developing or merging delinquent females into the system. In the same way, the department needs to be more creative at attracting male care staff to work at the facility.
I congratulate the Zenaida staff for the progress they have made, and equally thank the young people for their cooperation in the process. Although Anguilla has made a significant stride in its approach to juvenile justice and rehabilitation, there is still much work to be done. I hope that in its ninth year, the powers that be seek to establish an independent Juvenile Justice Committee to monitor, evaluate, conduct inspections and manage complaints outside of the current established system. And further collaborate with the legal fraternity to provide consistent representation for young people, to reduce the extended period youths spend on remand.
Jude Daniels
