Risk of Criminal Justice System Interactions in Young Adults with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Findings From a National Birth Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: To examine criminal justice system (CJS) interactions and pathways through the justice system for young adults with ADHD compared to young adults without ADHD. METHOD: Nationwide 3-year birth cohort study using linked health and CJS data. Cox proportional hazards models were employed to examine associations between ADHD and police proceedings, court charges, court convictions, and incarcerations. RESULTS: Young adults with ADHD were significantly more likely to interact with the CJS including police proceedings (hazard ratio [HR], 2.1 95% CI [2.0, 2.2]) court charges (HR, 2.2 95% CI [2.1, 2.3]), court convictions (HR, 2.3 95% CI [2.2, 2.4]), and incarceration (HR, 4.8 95% CI [4.3, 5.4]). CONCLUSIONS: Young adults with ADHD are overrepresented at all stages of the CJS. Results highlight the importance of early identification and responsivity to ADHD within the CJS and suggest that the NZ justice system may require changes to both areas to ensure that young individuals with ADHD receive equitable access to, and treatment within, the CJS.

Criminal justice system interactions among young adults with and without autism: A national birth cohort study in New Zealand.

LAY ABSTRACT: Sensationalist headlines and highly publicised criminal cases lead many in the public to believe that people with autism are more likely to engage in criminal behaviour. However, recent studies present an unresolved debate, and indicate this may not necessarily be the case. The aims of this study were to examine the prevalence of criminal justice system interactions among young adults with and without autism, and determine whether offence types differ between these groups. We tracked a national birth cohort until their 25th birthday, detecting criminal justice system interactions from age 17 onwards. Linked health and criminal justice system data were used to identify those with autism and detect interactions with the criminal justice system. We found that young people with autism interacted with the criminal justice system at lower rates compared to those without autism. However, there were considerable differences in the types of offences these young people were charged with. For example, among those charged with an offence, people with autism were more likely to be charged with a serious offence, punishable by 2 or more years in prison. We conclude that although young people with autism are not over-represented in the criminal justice system, disparities in offence types and incarceration rates among those charged with an offence suggest the importance of identification and appropriate response to autism within the criminal justice system.