Beyond Labels: Rewriting the Truth About Black and Brown Youth in New York

A year and a half into serving as Executive Director of Avenues for Justice (AFJ), I find myself returning repeatedly to one core principle: if we want fewer young people in detention, we have to start telling the truth about the real issues impacting their lives and factors propelling them into the criminal justice system.

Too often, the debate around youth justice focuses on stereotypes, soundbites, or scapegoating narratives. Instead of naming systemic failures, the conversation blames the very young people most harmed by those systems. If we truly care about public safety and community well-being, we must move past deficit-based language and confront the barriers that Black and Brown youth navigate every day throughout New York City.

Why Language Matters

For decades, nonprofits, including AFJ, have used language like “at-risk youth”. At first glance, these words might seem harmless or even compassionate. But I’ve grown to recognize they fail us in two important ways.

First, this language places the focus on the young person, not the system. It implies that they did something wrong and are now being given grace. That framing ignores the deeper truths: too many young Black and Brown people are born into communities facing socio-economic challenges, that remain underfunded exposing them to inadequate educational systems, violence, food insecurity, subpar healthcare, limited employment, housing options, and over-policing. Many carry trauma long before they ever encounter the courts.

Second, this language does little to educate the public. Most people outside the nonprofit world don’t even understand what “at-risk youth” means. The reality is that some of our young people are simply navigating survival in neighborhoods where opportunities are scarce and systemic barriers are high.

We need a different approach. Asset-based framing positions strengths as reasons for investment. It acknowledges resilience, creativity, leadership, and survival skills as the foundations for solutions. Instead of saying “at-risk youth,” we can say “youth navigating systemic barriers.” Instead of talking about “second chances,” we can talk about “expanding opportunity” or “course correcting”.

Words matter. Narratives matter. They shape how policymakers make legislative decisions, how donors give, and how the public understands the young people in our care. If we want to dismantle stereotypes, we must start with the language we use.

‍

 The Facts on Raise the Age (RTA)

Right now, the conversation around youth justice in New York is deeply polarized, especially when it comes to Raise the Age (RTA). Some claim RTA has fueled violence, increased crime, increased recidivism rates or allowed young people to “get off easy.” These claims are simply inaccurate.

Here are the facts:

• RTA raised the age of criminal responsibility to 18. This ensures that no 16 or 17-year-old is automatically placed in adult detention. The removal of all juveniles from adult jails and prisons remains a “historic” accomplishment of RTA!
  
  
• Serious felonies remain in the Youth Part. It is important to understand that under New York's RTA legislation, a 16 or 17-year-old accused of murder would be processed in the Youth Part of the criminal/supreme/superior court system. Seldom are serious felonies such as murder, manslaughter, assault, sexual assault, attempted murder transferred from Criminal Court’s Youth Part to Family Court. But if the case is transferred to Family Court, and the youth is found to have committed a designated felony act, they could face restrictive placement which involves initial placement in a secure facility for a period of time, followed by potential placement in a residential facility. 16 and 17-year-olds charged with misdemeanors under the penal law are considered “Juvenile Delinquents” and their cases are decided in the Family Court.
  ‍
• RTA has not caused an increase in youth violence. Youth violent arrest trends mirror adult trends. Increases are tied to broader social and economic conditions, not this law.

In other words: RTA is not the problem. The problem is what happens afterwards.

While it’s true that there are too many young people in detention facilities across the state, the real issue is not RTA itself, but how resources are distributed to support its success.

This year, the Governor’s proposed state budget includes $250M for continued RTA implementation. That represents an important commitment — but for it to make a real difference, those funds must flow more directly to impacted communities in New York City. And the process for organizations like AFJ, who are already proven alternatives to incarceration providers, needs to be more accessible and streamlined.

When funding reaches the ground in this way, it not only strengthens community-based programs, such as ours, but also fulfills the promise of RTA: safer communities, reduced incarceration, lower recidivism, more access to resources for the communities which most need it and brighter futures for youth and young adults.

Focusing on the Real Issues

Here’s the truth: Black and Brown young people in New York City are not struggling because of Raise the Age. They are struggling because they are profiled. They are struggling because they attend overcrowded and underfunded schools where teachers are doing the best they can with very few resources. They are struggling because their families live with the daily stress of generational poverty. Because their communities are saturated with violence, trauma, and too few opportunities for growth. If we want to change outcomes for young people, we have to stop blaming RTA and start focusing on the real barriers in their lives. That means investing in community-based organizations, rethinking our language, and dismantling stereotypes that do nothing to move the pendulum forward.

 A Call to Action

So where do we go from here?

• For policymakers: Streamline the process for distributing RTA funds. Ensure that the $250M allocated actually reaches organizations embedded in communities doing the daily work of keeping young people out of the system.
  
  
• For nonprofits: Examine the language we use. If our words don’t tell the truth about systemic barriers, we are unintentionally reinforcing stereotypes. Let’s choose language that honors resilience and names the real problems.
  
  
• For the public: Challenge assumptions. When you hear someone say RTA caused an uptick in crime and youth-on-youth violence, share the facts. When you meet a Participant in our program, see them as full of possibility; not “at-risk” of failure. And if you want to be part of the solution, partner with organizations like AFJ that are doing the work every day.
  
  
• For the media/press: We stand on referring to our youth as Participants. Here is the reasoning behind it: When Participants walk into AFJ’s community centers in Harlem or the Lower East Side, they see people who look like them; they see us. They are not treated as problems to solve. They are seen as individuals with potential and their voices matter. They are called Participants, not clients. And the “P” in participant is always capitalized. This language is intentional. So is AFJ’s practice behind it.

The lives of Black and Brown young people in New York City are shaped not just by the choices they make, but by the systems they are forced to navigate. If we want safer communities and more just futures, our focus must be on truth, investment, and opportunity — not stereotypes and scapegoating rhetoric.

At AFJ, we know what’s possible when young people are given services, not cells; when incarceration is the alternative, and not the norm. It’s high time our systems and our society catch up!

With sincerity,

AFJ Executive Director

Elizabeth Frederick

‍