Speaker: Hsu Chia-Ling (Juvenile Investigator and Probation Officer)
Time: February 20, 2024
Venue: Taipei Bar Association
Event: Regulations and Counseling Practices for Campus Drug Prevention—Event Sidelights from the Taipei Bar Association Rule of Law Education (1)

Interaction Between Juvenile Justice and Schools

(1) Experiences in Campus Anti-Drug Education

   The issue of drugs has changed dramatically over the nine years I have served as a juvenile investigator. In the past, juveniles more commonly used amphetamines, but this has gradually evolved into the use of mixed Category 2 and Category 3 emerging drugs. Sometimes juveniles do not even know what substances they are consuming, caring only about how the high feels, or they peddle coffee packets by claiming they are "good stuff from northern Taiwan." Therefore, anti-drug education must constantly be adjusted to align with the real-life experiences of juveniles.

    Here, I would like to first introduce the book *Drug-Using Juveniles: Campus Regulations and Counseling Practices Written for Teachers*, which explores several aspects of juvenile drug use. What makes this book interesting is that its authors come from diverse backgrounds—such as frontline social workers, university professors, probation officers, and guidance counselors in correctional schools. Each describes the general landscape of juvenile drug use from their own perspective, offering basic knowledge of drug use, the process of encountering drug-using juveniles, the entire legal network constructed to protect juveniles from reporting under the Protection of Children and Youths Welfare and Rights Act to entering the Juvenile Delinquency Prevention Council, and even after juveniles are referred to the court. Information on all of this can be found in this book. Today, I would like to share my thoughts on the interaction between juvenile justice and schools, divided into two parts: first, sharing experiences of conducting anti-drug education on campuses, and second, the cooperation between juvenile courts and school systems.

    The first is the experience of conducting anti-drug education on campuses. The work of a probation officer focuses more on how to plan courses for juveniles under protective measures and how to help a juvenile quit drugs. But speaking of campuses, we must first establish a sense of problem awareness—what kind of anti-drug education do schools need? What should be taught? In what format? Are the methods for educating elementary school students and high school students the same? After an educational advocacy session, in what ways do we hope parents and teachers will view children who use drugs? And which teaching materials or narratives might produce counterproductive results?

   Examining existing anti-drug education curricula, most themes revolve around familiarizing children with "emerging drugs," "the harms of drugs," and "the environmental risks or victimization associated with drug use," while describing the "legal criminal liabilities of drugs" in stark terms to achieve a deterrent effect. In reality, however, the criminal penalties handed down to users in practice are not particularly high. Anyone with even a rudimentary concept will not believe it, so it remains essential to let children understand actual circumstances and discuss existing diverse dispositions, such as suspension of prosecution with addiction treatment, observation and detention, and so on. Furthermore, the legal procedures applicable to juveniles differ from those for adults, making further explanation necessary.

Other teaching modules include: "drug refusal skills," "how to identify drug users," "addiction is actually a brain disease," "counseling drug-using juveniles," and "anti-drug board games and promotional skits." However, these areas involve a wide range of fields, potentially encompassing medicine, law, and psychology, making it difficult to cover everything at once. A single lecturer may also lack sufficient diverse backgrounds to teach them comprehensively. I am merely extracting some common themes here so that everyone can evaluate where to place the emphasis during advocacy.

There are many anti-drug education resources scattered across the internet. If you are preparing lessons, I recommend using teaching materials produced by government agencies, which pose fewer copyright issues regarding usage. Examples include the "Ministry of Education Student Substance Abuse Prevention Resource Network," the "Ministry of Justice Anti-Drug Main Base," and the "Food and Drug Administration of the Ministry of Health and Welfare Anti-Drug Resource Zone." These websites contain numerous anti-drug publications and manuals. If the audience consists of teachers, reading the *Chunghui Group Guidance Work Manual 2.0* will provide a better understanding of how schools respond to drug issues. For parents, I recommend the book *Love Without Fear, Flipped Life*, which discusses the symptoms children may exhibit, how parents can adjust their mindset, and how to find resources. Next is the teaching material *Campus Drug Prevention Gatekeeper*, a lesson plan commissioned by the Ministry of Education and produced by educational university scholars, which allows parents and volunteers to undergo training and help teach students. We can also reference the design concept of this teaching material. As for the Ministry of Health and Welfare's anti-drug zone, it features many exquisite slide presentations suitable for short-term advocacy. Additionally, every city and county has a Drug Abuse Prevention Center, and the local partner NGO groups or implemented programs vary, which can be used to connect local resources and better meet the needs of the audience. For more academic data, you can visit the "Chung Cheng University Drug Abuse Prevention Education Center," as it contains scholarly articles and anti-drug professional seminar materials, or check out the board games, VR, and physical exhibitions developed by the CTBC Anti-Drug Foundation.

    Here, I would like to share a journal article titled "Examining Drug Abuse Prevention Advocacy from the User's Perspective," which provides many practical suggestions. The study conducted structured interviews with eight adolescents without drug experience and eight adolescents with drug experience to examine the effectiveness of anti-drug advocacy. The results showed that anti-drug education produced different effects on them. For instance, traditional slogans like "Ketamine for a moment, diapers for a lifetime" and "Drugs ruin a lifetime" can probably only deter average adolescents; however, for adolescents who have already used drugs, they rely on their own experiences and thus feel that these slogans are lies. Compared to lectures, micro-films may be more engaging, yet in reality, schools often conduct lectures that yield little effect on drug-using juveniles. In addition, juveniles also felt that Q&A sessions with prizes were more engaging and encouraged everyone to participate. Therefore, this study introduced ways to create more attractive advocacy, such as inviting humorous and lively lecturers, changing advocacy models to encourage adolescents to shoot anti-drug short films so that they can collect data through the filming process and more actively understand drugs and their harms. Second, it suggested increasing persuasiveness by inviting former users with drug experience to share their experiences. We can also take a page from this by interspersing documentaries in speeches to help listeners understand their mental journeys. Third, in addition to refusal skills like the "Twelve Zodiac Sign Refusal Method and Eight Refusal Techniques," juveniles should also be taught to cultivate the ability to build positive friendships. Beyond giving juveniles the ability to stop associating with deviant classmates, it goes a step further in teaching them how to use their own influence to stop classmates from doing bad things. Fourth, instead of solely emphasizing the consequences of drug use to increase deterrence, advocacy can also highlight the negative impacts of drug use on personal finances and family affection. Finally, high-risk students and general students require different types of advocacy.

Tiered and Targeted Anti-Drug Education

    When preparing lessons, one must consider the audience's age, gender, life experience, and whether they have drug use experience, in order to understand why a given group is exposed to the risk of drug use, which makes advocacy more persuasive. For example, drivers consume drugs to stay awake, while children encounter them through temple festivals. Thinking about their needs from different angles—such as fulfilling interpersonal relationship needs—and understanding the rhetoric they may have heard helps debunk their myths. In other words, education should avoid dogmatic lecturing, increase case studies and narrative-driven presentations, and align as closely with reality as possible. Moreover, rather than dwelling solely on the severity of criminal penalties, emphasizing the treatments and time costs associated with drug use will likely be more persuasive. In short, the purpose of anti-drug education is to help the audience understand the dilemmas and pressures faced by addicts, as well as the reasons for relapse, thereby strengthening social support rather than reinforcing stereotypes.

    As for advocacy targeting adolescents without drug experience, I divide it by different age groups to consider what content to cover. The most difficult group is likely lower-grade elementary students, because their understanding of legal provisions and courts is very vague, and they rely more on parents and teachers. Therefore, the main aspects they can understand are vigilance against drugs and not accepting things from strangers. Suitable lesson plans include parent-child co-learning sheets and picture books provided by the Ministry of Education. However, for upper elementary and junior high school students who have entered puberty, they may be less inclined to listen to parental nagging and are eager for peer approval. Consequently, the focus should be on how to resist peer pressure and how to make personal emotional adjustments and choices; such a group is also more suited for board games and puzzle-solving clearance activities. As for the high school to college demographic, because they already possess relatively complete cognitive abilities, lead more complex lives, have a wider range of mobility, and may become involved in more complicated entertainment venues, it is necessary at this stage to debunk certain myths about drug abuse, raise their awareness of the risks of drug mixing, and clarify the myths and risks of drug abuse within realistic scenarios. Therefore, micro-films are the more applicable teaching material.

    If the target of advocacy is parents, they may more or less realize that their children are at risk of addiction and feel panicked due to limited information, or this may evolve into parent-child conflicts. Thus, content teaching them communication methods with children, how to recognize signs of drug use in children, and how to identify available social resources is more appropriate. This helps parents facing such problems avoid blaming their own parenting methods. For example, I once had a juvenile and their parents participate in an addiction recovery group; through presentations by doctors and psychologists and sharing in parent support groups, the parents realized that their child was not turning bad, but was sick. When parents realize in their attitude that addiction is an illness requiring companionship and support, parental motivation changes, allowing parent-child relationships to develop positively. If the target of advocacy is teachers, their primary concern is likely failing to notice matters requiring reporting or not knowing how to handle such students. Therefore, teachers can be informed about reporting regulations and how to cooperate with social workers or probation officers regarding drug-using students. Current legal policies no longer separate social welfare, schools, and the judiciary into isolated silos; children remain students even after entering the judiciary, and the three sectors should cooperate to assist the child. This is a concept I hope you can all convey in schools in the future.

    As for curriculum design and coverage for those with drug experience, one can refer to the Ministry of Justice's "Scientifically Proven Drug Offender Treatment." Currently, it is believed that anti-drug education must encompass addiction issues beyond the legal domain, such as "family and interpersonal relationships," "career development and financial management," "health education and HIV prevention," and "correct medication use and medical consultation," in order to build comprehensive knowledge and respond to needs before they can truly stop using.

   Whether adults or juveniles, everyone actually places great importance on cooperation among various administrative agencies. For instance, the Department of Labor promotes employment programs for drug addicts to prevent them from experiencing frustration in ordinary job-hunting environments, which creates pressure and leads to repeated drug use.

   The slide shows a story pieced together from 3 to 4 cases I encountered. After reading it, would anyone be willing to share their thoughts?

Participant: I feel that parents' care for their children should be timely. Furthermore, stereotypes may cause drug users to repeat the same path because they feel negated.

I wrote this story because I met a young girl who had actually changed a lot. She had been reporting for over a year and was attending school and living normally, so I asked her if she wanted to be exempted from reporting to me anymore. But the girl said she still wanted to come and report, because nobody in her current life knew about her past, and she could talk about her inner thoughts more easily with a probation officer. Therefore, I would wait every month for the girl to finish school and come share what had happened to her. The girl was extremely lively and cheerful; you could never tell she had any drug experience. But one day she came to me very dejected, saying she had heard a military instructor's anti-drug lecture stating that people who had taken drugs had ruined brains and would never change, which made the girl feel deeply wronged and prompted her to take leave from school before the end of the day.

This case is not an isolated incident. Inappropriate anti-drug education can cause harm, making those facing environments involving drug use afraid to seek help and unable to escape the risks they find themselves in. Therefore, no matter what kind of educational content is designed, while identifying the hazards of drugs and being vigilant about the severity of criminal penalties are important, we must still construct anti-drug education rooted in empathetic care, rejecting stigmatizing labels that cause secondary harm to drug users and their families, and avoiding pushing drug-using juveniles and their families into invisible abysses.

(2) Interaction Between Juvenile Justice and Schools

  Another part I wish to discuss from this book concerns the interaction between juvenile justice and schools. The work of probation officers often involves going to schools or institutions to talk with teachers and social workers about how the Juvenile Justice Act handles juvenile cases and providing clarifications. Considering that today's audience consists entirely of lawyers, I also want to supplement how assistant counsel participate in juvenile case proceedings, how they resolve doubts for teachers and parents, how the court collaborates with assistant counsel to assist in the sound growth of juveniles, and how probation officers execute protective measures.

Theoretical Foundations of Juvenile Justice—The Special Nature of Juveniles

    Amid voices arising after the New Taipei City throat-slashing case questioning why juveniles should be protected, we can approach these doubts through educational psychology theory, cognitive development theory, and the stages of moral development. For example, cognitive development proceeds from the concrete to the abstract; lecturing too young a child on reason leaves them clueless as to what you are talking about. Alternatively, moral development is divided into three stages: the pre-conventional stage where people avoid wrongdoing out of fear of punishment, the conventional stage where they comply to win approval from significant others, and the post-conventional stage, which takes time to develop into fully realized moral values. Neuroscience views it similarly: the prefrontal cortex responsible for control may not fully mature until adulthood. Therefore, these theories highlight the unique characteristics of juveniles. Their morality and judgment are relatively immature; they are vulnerable and rely on adults, yet at the same time, they possess strong malleability and are easily corrected. This malleability and special nature are reflected in the Juvenile Justice Act.

Legislative History of the Juvenile Justice Act—From Correctional Training to Protection

The Juvenile Justice Act was initially referred to as juvenile disciplinary training cases. The legislative attitude at the time reflected a dual emphasis on education and punishment, likely due to the social climate and major public safety concerns. It was not until after 1997 that it was established as a priority that juvenile protection cases must prioritize the sound growth of juveniles. Furthermore, Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 664 in 2009 clarified that placing juveniles who run away from school or home—those who have not even committed crimes—into shelter is unconstitutional. This led to major amendments in 2019, which narrowed the scope of juveniles entering the judiciary: child crimes no longer enter the judiciary, and status offenses were renamed to at-risk juveniles. These are all key points I discuss with teachers when visiting schools, moving beyond the mere notion that "juvenile crimes are minor so adults exploit them for crime" to a deeper understanding of the meaning the Juvenile Justice Act seeks to convey.

    Next, the law also stipulates many roles for assistant counsel in juvenile proceedings. The first is to protect the juvenile's procedural rights, naturally explaining how the proceedings are conducted in a way the juvenile can understand; additionally, assistant counsel should assist the court in facilitating the sound growth of the juvenile. I once heard a story shared by a parent. Initially, I suggested sending the child to reformatory education, and the judge indeed issued that ruling. However, the parent was deeply unsatisfied and wanted to file an interlocutory appeal, so they consulted a lawyer. To their surprise, the lawyer severely scolded the parent, saying, "The entire country is doing what is best for your child, and you still want to appeal? Can you manage your child if you take them home?" This wake-up call completely brought the parent around, and consequently led to clear disciplinary principles. This highlights the importance of assistant counsel. When the court and parents are in an adversarial position, assistant counsel can help both the parents and the court, acting as a bridge for communication. In fact, through discussions between assistant counsel and parents, one case was even matched with a drug rehabilitation farm, allowing the individual to farm and quit drugs during the period of conditional placement, achieving very good results. Therefore, assistant counsel actually play a tremendous role; under the framework of the Juvenile Justice Act, all participants share the common goal of helping juveniles effect change.

The Collaborative Team

    Throughout the entire process of the Juvenile Justice Act—from investigation and trial to execution—the front-end role belongs to the investigator, who is responsible for drafting investigation reports, attending court hearings, and putting forward disposition recommendations. Once the judge rules on protective measures, the execution phase begins. During this process, the juvenile court operates as a team: investigators maintain close contact and discussions with judges to respond to dynamic changes in juveniles, alongside assistance from psychological testers, psychological counselors, and assistants. The work of investigators is complex, ranging from collecting data and writing reports during the investigation phase, to conducting regular interviews and visits with juveniles during execution, including administrative liaisons necessary for resource linkage.

Generally speaking, because investigation reports contain a great deal of confidential juvenile data and family secrets, they are kept in restricted-access files, making them somewhat difficult for assistant counsel to view, and sometimes making it harder to understand the reasons behind an investigator's recommendations. This may require communication during collaborative hearings. In practice, however, what we fear most is teachers hoping investigators will recommend that judges rule on reformatory education just to avoid trouble as soon as a juvenile enters the judicial system. Such cases require careful communication. In truth, whether to place someone in shelter has strict statutory requirements, detailed in the *Detailed Rules for the Trial of Juvenile Protection Cases*, such as tendencies toward violent aggression or the necessity of isolating them from a bad environment. Investigators also need substantial supporting evidence when recommending shelter placement to a judge, such as the juvenile's school attendance status and precise counseling records, risks of associating with bad company, or a history of recidivism; decisions cannot be made based on unilateral claims alone. Moreover, "locking juveniles up" is not the ultimate goal of the Juvenile Justice Act; we hope to use the judiciary to urge juveniles to cooperate with school discipline while also making them understand the reasons why they must be placed in shelter. Only when juveniles truly understand and are willing will change genuinely occur. Therefore, this book discusses extensively how judicial procedures operate for teachers to reference, explains the execution methods for each type of protective measure, and ultimately emphasizes that a juvenile entering court does not mean they are disconnected from school and social systems; rather, it reflects their need for more resources. For example, teachers might ask why students cannot simply be sent to a drug戒治 (detoxification) institution, but in practice, the response to juveniles in such situations is usually focused on protective measures, keeping juveniles in the community as much as possible, adapting to their environment, linking resources, and flexibly applying various treatments under protective measures. Since detoxification involves a two-month program after which the person exits and it ends, it is far better to briefly isolate them from a bad environment through shelter placement, paired with three years of probation following their release, gradually adjusting resource needs according to the juvenile's growth. This may be a better approach. Therefore, we hope teachers can understand why we need to invest so many resources after understanding judicial procedures. Because behind every juvenile drug case, there are bound to be numerous causes and needs—possibly personal personality traits, or problems in the family and environment—that require cross-resource assistance. Following the promulgation of the *Regulations on the Handling of Juvenile Cases by Juvenile Courts and Related Agencies*, the court has a clear legal basis for cross-system cooperation, allowing it to act as a coordinating body to invite other agencies to jointly convene case conferences and integrate the resources needed by juveniles, such as cooperating with hospitals for addiction outpatient clinics and asking the Social Welfare Bureau to assist with case counseling and family parent-child education.

    

This book also outlines what teachers can do if students enter the judicial system. In fact, teachers can do a wide variety of things at different stages of juvenile cases. For instance, when a juvenile is detained in a juvenile detention home and absent from school, teachers can apply to the court to visit the detention home, taking this opportunity to rebuild counseling relationships while safeguarding the juvenile's right to education. The ultimate goal is to return the juvenile to school rather than reformatory education, and to subsequently discuss cooperation methods with investigators to jointly assist the juvenile's growth, truly achieving the purpose of protecting juveniles.

 

Attribution

Icons made by Freepik/Nhor Phai/Flat Icons/Smashicons/Smalllikeart/Good Ware/Becris from Flaticon

＊For compiling these event sidelights, sincere thanks go to our collaborating partners—interns Li Ting-Hsuan and Ch'en Yi-Hsuan
＊Thanks to the Taipei Bar Association for hosting this lecture event