order that the youth be evaluated by a mental health
professional to assess the youth’s competence. These
assessments differ considerably from general mental
health evaluations in that they focus on youths’
competence-related capacities as opposed to general
mental health issues. In addition, juvenile competence
assessments require procedures that differ somewhat
from adult competence assessments. Specifically,
juvenile evaluations should carefully assess youths’ devel-
opmental maturity and consider contextual issues that
are unique to adolescents, including possible care-
taker involvement in legal proceedings.
As described by the leading expert in this field,
Thomas Grisso, a key goal of juvenile competence
evaluations is to describe the youths’ functional legal
capacities. In particular, competence reports should
describe youths’ understanding of important aspects
of legal proceedings (e.g., understanding of the role of
judges and attorneys), appreciation of the significance
of legal proceedings (e.g., appreciation of the possi-
ble penalties that could be applied to them if found
guilty), ability to communicate with counsel (e.g., the
ability to disclose important information about their
cases to their attorneys), and legal reasoning (e.g., the
ability to weigh various plea options).
In evaluating youths’ functional legal abilities,
evaluators should consider how a specific youth’s
legal capacities match with the nature of his or her par-
ticular case. A finding of incompetence occurs when
there is a significant mismatch between a particular
defendant’s legal capacities and the demands created
by his or her particular case. For instance, if a youth
who is charged with aggravated assault is going to be
tried in adult court, where he or she will likely have to
testify for lengthy periods of time, it will be important
that the youth have the capacity to testify rele-
vantly, an understanding of the transfer process, and
an appreciation of the types of penalties that may be
given to him or her in adult court. In contrast, if this
youth’s case was being handled in juvenile court and
he or she had decided to accept a plea bargain instead
of standing trial, it would not be as critical that he or
she have a high level of testifying capacities, but it
would be essential that he or she have a good under-
standing of plea bargains.
If a youth is found to have significant legal deficits
in one or more the relevant areas (e.g., understanding,
appreciation, communication with counsel, reasoning),
the evaluator should attempt to provide information on
possible causes of these legal deficits, such as whetherthe legal deficits appear to stem from a particular men-
tal disorder and/or developmental immaturity. In addi-
tion, if a youth is found to have legal deficits, evaluators
should offer opinions and recommendations regarding
possible interventions to address these legal deficits.
Until recently, there have been no tools specifically
for assessing youths’ legal capacities. However, in
2005, Grisso developed a guide, called the Juvenile
Adjudicative Competency Interview, to help structure
assessments of youths’ competence. The Juvenile
Adjudicative Competency Interview is not currently
a standardized instrument but instead functions as
a guide to help ensure that clinicians consider key
developmental and legal issues in assessing juveniles’
adjudicative competence.
While some instruments that have been developed
for adult defendants may have relevance to juvenile
competence evaluations, caution is needed in applying
adult instruments to youth; instruments that have been
found to be reliable and valid with adults cannot be
assumed to be reliable and valid with adolescents.
Research has provided some preliminary support for
the psychometric properties of the Fitness Interview
Test–Revised when used with adolescents. Also, a
number of evaluators report using the Competence
Assessment for Standing Trial for Defendants with
Mental Retardation with adolescent defendants,
because its format is thought to be easier for adoles-
cents to understand. However, research has yet to
examine the psychometric properties of this tool with
adolescent defendants.Interventions for Remediating
Incompetent Youth
After a competence evaluation has been conducted,
the court must decide whether to find a youth incom-
petent. If a youth is found incompetent and is believed
to be remediable, the trial will be suspended until he
or she is considered to be competent. If the youth is
considered to be unremediable, then his or her charges
may be dropped and/or he or she may be referred to
alternative services, such as inpatient mental health
treatment.
At the present time, very little is known about how to
remediate youth who are found incompetent to stand
trial. However, there is reason to believe that this process
may be challenging, especially when youth are found
incompetent on the basis of mental retardation and/or
developmental immaturity. Some research, using data4 ———Adjudicative Competence of YouthA-Cutler (Encyc)-45463.qxd 11/18/2007 12:41 PM Page 4