The New England Center for Investigative Reporting recently reported findings detailing disciplinary trends within the public education system of Massachusetts.

According to the analysis, almost 200,000 school days were lost to out-of-school and in-school suspensions and expulsions during the 2009-2010 school year.

The organization said that days lost to suspension or expulsions during the timeframe were equal to about 10 percent of the 172 million school days accumulated by the state’s nearly 1 million public school students.

The analysis reports that while the Boston school system is more likely to expel students permanently, the Worchester school system ultimately totaled up more lost school days due to disciplinary actions, with approximately 5,000 lost school days compared to the capital city’s estimated 2,765.

The analysis also found that more than 2,000 students, some as young as age 4, were suspended from the state’s early elementary programs, which entails pre-kindergarten to third grade classes.

North Carolina, along with New York, is one of two states to handle all 16- and 17-year-olds arrested for a criminal offense in the adult justice system. In recent years, however, there has been a call to raise the state’s age of juvenile jurisdiction from 16 to 18, in part, because of a growing national consensus that these youth are neither competent to stand trial under the same circumstances as adults nor are they as culpable for their actions. One of the challenges facing the policy change has been its cost: handling youth in the juvenile system is more expensive than in the adult system. But in examining the economic pros and cons of a policy change, policymakers need reliable information about the costs and the ensuing benefits.

Vera’s Cost-Benefit Analysis Unit (CBAU) worked with North Carolina’s Youth Accountability Planning Task Force—charged by the General Assembly to examine whether the state should raise the age of juvenile jurisdiction—to assess the costs and benefits of the policy change from the perspectives of taxpayers, victims, and youth. Specifically, CBAU analyzed the task force’s proposal to transfer 16- and 17-year-olds arrested for misdemeanor and low-level, nonviolent felony offenses to the juvenile system, while keeping youth arrested for violent felonies in the adult system.

A recent report by the W. Haywood Burns Institute indicates that while California’s current corrections policies appear to be race-neutral, data shows that many young people of color are being incarcerated at higher rates than white youth for non-criminal acts rather than being treated for mental health and behavioral health needs. The report, titled “Non-Judicial Drivers into the Juvenile Justice System for Youth of Color,” highlights multiple studies that point to the same conclusion:

“Using locked cells to change the behaviors of teenagers is ineffective, expensive, and more likely to increase crime.”

The Burns Institute highlights the “non-judicial drivers” that result in high rates of incarceration among youth of color. An example of a non-judicial driver is school referrals for disorderly conduct accounting for 40 percent of annual juvenile arrests in California. The authors also highlight cases where low-risk youth with high mental health needs are placed in long-term detention with no treatment of the underlying trauma that is contributing to their delinquent behavior.

A New Mexico federal court judge recently received a complaint citing the following facts: a 13-year-old boy repeatedly belched in class. While this was amusing to his pals, the teacher found it disruptive.

Unable to get the 13-year-old to stop, the teacher called the school resource officer. The officer refused to arrest the boy for belching, but the teacher insisted. The officer arrested the boy.

The media indicted the officer. The boy, fearing the loss of his status as a nationally ranked baseball player, fell apart. The mother removed her son from the school.

This lose-lose scenario is not unusual. At Strategies for Youth (SFY), an advocacy and training organization dedicated to improving police/youth interactions, we hear of such cases two or three times a week.

For the adults involved, the result is frustration and defensiveness; for the youth involved, the result is trauma and distrust and the dangerous lesson that “might makes right.”

Some incidents are resolved in court; many receive big headlines but little follow-up in the media. There are often calls for investigation, questions about racial bias, and further entrenchment of adversarial attitudes that lead to expensive and usually unhelpful extensions of anguish for most of, if not all, the parties involved.

We can do better.