Autism and the Criminal Justice System 

People with autism spectrum disorder have potential social or communication differences and sensory sensitivities that can put them at higher risk when they become involved with the justice system, according to researchers.

Now, by looking at the different points at which someone interacts with the criminal justice system, a new policy brief identifies many opportunities to intervene, support and potentially remove autistic people from criminal justice interactions.

The A.J. Drexel Autism Institute at Drexel University researched ways to enhance interactions between autistic people and the legal system with funding from the International Society for Autism Research (INSAR), hosting a number of austistic people, criminal justice experts, and policy makers as part of a Global Autism and Criminal Justice Consortium to generate recommendations.

The policy brief, “Autism and the Criminal Justice System: Policy Opportunities and Challenges,” outlines recommendations for the criminal justice system to improve outcomes and exitways for autistic individuals..

“This…is an important first step to ensuring equitable access to justice for autistic individuals,” said Lindsay Shea, leader of the Policy and Analytics Center in the Autism Institute, in the institute’s announcement.

“Future research is needed at each stage of the criminal justice system that identifies evidence-based practices and focuses on solutions.”

Overall, ISAR’s brief recommends six major recommendations across the criminal justice system to improve outcomes for justice-involved autistic people.

To drive clinical care: 

• • Ensure that autistic victims receive trauma-informed supports.
  • Offer training for autistic individuals and their caregivers to understand available supports in the event of a criminal justice system interaction, and training centered around the lived experiences of autistic individuals for criminal justice professionals and service providers.
  • Address social determinants of health, such as housing and food security, by investing in communities and neighborhoods to develop programs that prevent criminal justice system interactions and support those with previous justice system experiences.

To inform spending priorities: 

• • Develop and ensure access to coordinated community-based services, including mental health supports, skill building, and job supports, to fortify support systems that respond to individual needs across the justice continuum including, prevention, safety, and effective transitions.
  • Substantial investment in research, resource development, and programs with evaluative components that generate economic evidence of costs and benefits.

To affirm human rights: 

• • All nations should ratify the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Additionally, the policy brief lays out a number of specific recommendations for larger goals and policy initiatives at specific touch points where autistic people may be caught up in the justice system as a victim or having been accused of a crime.

The brief’s specific recommendations are based in part on a 2021 revised version of the Sequential Intercept Model, a framework intended to help shape interventions that limit or even prevent unnecessary contact between people with serious mental illness (SMI) and the criminal justice system.

The revised SIM model, also funded by the International Society for Autism Research, established a number of “interception” for both victims and offenders,  where service providers could intervene to redirect people with autism, in particular, out of the criminal justice system.

At one intercept where both victims and offenders might find themselves, criminal or civil courts, the brief authors recommend that court systems work to better accommodate sensory needs of autistic individuals, or even offer as an accommodation a process where they can attend, as a defendant, witness, or in another role, virtually from their own space. Another recommendation is that, at the point of initial hearings or detention, governments look to implement programs that create required advocate intermediaries, like the “Appropriate Adults” assigned in the UK under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act of 1984, who are assigned as both a support and a safeguard against miscarriages of justice that might take advantage of or simply disadvantage a child or a vulnerable adult, including adults with disabilities while detained and interviewed by police.

“We hope this brief can help spark a discourse focusing on preventing root causes for offending and levying justice grounded in supporting and rehabilitating rather than punishing,” Shea said in the A.J. Drexel Autism Institute’s announcement.

The full policy brief can be read here.

Audrey Nielsen is a TCR contributor