Abstract
In Falling Back: Incarceration and Transitions to Adulthood among Urban Youth, Jamie J. Fader provides an insightful critique of a Pennsylvania reform school for delinquents and the difficulties encountered when these young men re-enter the community. Fader’s comprehension of these issues was developed when working as an evaluator for Philadelphia’s juvenile justice programs (1997–2002) and then enhanced by a three-year ethnography (2004–2007) that followed the lives of 15 youths of color, 14 of whom were African American and one Latino. The book is organized into seven chapters that chronologically move from the point of the juvenile facility to the adulthood challenges of greater levels of responsibility. The young men encounter various difficulties of obtaining employment, maintaining romantic relationships, becoming fathers, and navigating the blurred lines between legitimate employment and illegitimate hustles. Three important areas of analysis establish Fader’s book as a contribution to our understanding of juvenile justice, re-entry, and the structural divisions between whites and blacks. The first contribution is a critique of the Mountain Ridge Academy reform school and its philosophy; second, the difficulties youth encounter when transitioning back into the neighborhood; and third, the overall theme of describing two Philadelphias: the separate and unequal division between middle-class whites and poor blacks.
Fader’s study begins inside the Mountain Ridge Academy reform school. The facility is located on a 90-acre campus, in the middle of a dense forest, five hours west from Philadelphia. The program emphasizes a philosophy of reform based on countering “criminal thinking errors” that include a number of socially-constructed problems such as criminal pride, failure to endure adversity, the “I can’t” attitude, victim stance, and a lack of long-term expectations, to name a few. She describes how the counselors, teachers, and staff challenge the youth to change their thinking, but mid-1970s criminal personality theory was ill-designed to meet the needs of an urban and primarily racial and ethnic minority population. The employees of the facility, all of whom were white with rural backgrounds, predicted failure for the young men if they did not attain or uphold conventional values. In addition, cultural assaults were initiated against the young men for admiring topics perceived as black or urban. I found Fader’s critique of how to rehabilitate juveniles to be excellent, after having witnessed first-hand the difficulties youth encountered in struggling to adapt to a similar philosophy of reform (Durán 2011). In Fader’s book, the youth did their best to adjust to a program that defined the very skills they grew up learning for survival as problematic. The young men did appreciate some features of the program such as the structure and educational support to attain a high school diploma or G.E.D. The graduation ceremony depicted the staff efforts to provide a different alternative; however, as emphasized by Fader, the program was unable to achieve realistic outcomes for success because it existed in a completely foreign environment and one dependent upon an inaccurate rational action explanation.
Many criminological studies only provide a brief snapshot into the lives of urban youth, but what makes this study unique is the attempt to follow the lives of these youth from the point of incarceration at the age of 17, 18, and 19 to the difficulties faced upon release which continue to the age of 25. The young men report improved coping skills, conflict resolution, and communication skills obtained from the reform school. However, the focus on “criminal thinking errors” does not necessarily improve the odds for successful reintegration with family members or romantic relationships. Finding a job was difficult, due to various pre-screening forms and negative images against blacks and urban males. If work was attained, it often lacked stability or the ability to provide a living wage. These obstacles pushed the young men to navigate various illegitimate hustles to provide additional economic support. Unfortunately most of the young men were re-arrested within a period of three years and their adult status led to enhanced levels of punishment. The re-entry plans were not able to ensure the young men’s interest in continuing their education or sustain viable “turning points” that would allow a life removed from crime.
The final substantial point made by Fader is the occasionally direct, but more strongly indirect, contrast between the two Philadelphias: one black and the other white. Fader primarily concentrates on the all-white staff at the reform school and the mostly minority urban environments of “hidden Philadelphia.” However, the author’s personal characteristics which she described as a “newsy” (nosy) white lady who is a “blond-haired, blue-eyed, highly educated, middle class woman” (p. 7) provide the most important contrast for helping readers grapple with these unexplained forms of inequality. In her years following these mostly young men, she witnesses hurdles encountered that only an analysis of a structurally stratified society of class, gender, and race could explain. The youth were programmed to think better but it was not enough to change their circumstances. In the Ivy League world of Fader, the young men could present to her classes but never dare to navigate the social world of white spaces where they continued to feel unaccepted. People of color are disproportionately overrepresented in the juvenile justice and criminal justice system whereas at the same time underrepresented in the white spaces of academia. Contrary to some ethnographic researchers who have found greater access to the lives of individuals of the same gender or race and ethnicity, Fader strives to provide insight into young males in a context that sounds vastly different from her own standpoint. It is the reflexivity of sharing her personal story and comparing it with the young men that develops this researcher distance into a strength. The conversation moves into the important direction of outlining how the white social world compares to the lives of these young black men and how life chances are altered by the color line from an early age.
Fader’s book has an important story to tell because it should be acknowledged that someone who lives and works in these white spaces can often play a larger role initiating a discussion for policy change and suggestions for improvement. Change requires people on the other side of the “hidden Philadelphia” to understand why reform schools alone cannot produce lower levels of recidivism. The critique of “criminal thinking errors” is powerful as well as outlining the broad array of challenges these young men encounter when reintegrating into the community. The stories of the 15 youth who contributed to this project, especially the voices of “Sincere” and “James,” allow readers to grapple with important issues that require a much-needed continued dialogue. For these reasons, I believe Fader’s book provides an important addition to the literature.