JCPSLP Vol 21 No 1 2019

the data sets now gathered in many countries that those involved with justice services have high levels of undetected language difficulties, but if DLD is detected and interventions are provided in childhood, can this somehow later protect young people from involvement in justice and other detrimental adult outcomes? This paper suggests that it can. This research considers 84 adults aged 24 years of age who had a history of identified DLD and who had received intervention for DLD in childhood. These individuals with identified DLD reported on the following aspects of their adult life: their involvement with the police, levels of aggression, drug and alcohol consumption. A matched control of 84 adults of the same age but who had had no history of DLD also provided the same information. The researchers were interested in how the two groups compared in adulthood. The group with a history of identified DLD who had received intervention for DLD reported less involvement with the police than their age matched peers, and less risky drug and alcohol behaviours. The DLD group presented with higher levels of aggression than the age-matched peers and the discussion explores why that might have occurred, and why their earlier DLD intervention may have prevented this aggression from escalating to rule breaking behaviours that would entail police involvement. The adults in this study with DLD had been participants in the longitudinal Manchester Language Study conducted by Conti-Ramsden and colleagues since they were 7 years of age. As children, they had attended language units and so had received a high level of specialist support and adapted access to the curriculum. This high level of intervention is not always available for children and young people with DLD, which raises questions about what constitutes an effective “dose” of language intervention to create the positive distal benefits demonstrated by the data reported in this paper. As SLPs we plan short-term and long-term goals for our clients, but a case is made in this paper for allowing us to think longer term about the impact of our work, and for arguing for an earlier, greater intensity of intervention. DLD is persistent and there is no quick fix. This data makes a compelling case for investment in SLP if early identification and intervention can result in avoidance of the concerning negative life outcomes so often experienced by those involved in offending who have DLD but who have not had DLD identified earlier in life or received interventions. This paper provides a good news story for SLPs about the value we can add to people’s lives, and affirms our profession by showing that the interventions we provide in childhood may have long-term protective effects into adulthood. Not only is this is beneficial to the individuals concerned but, as the paper discusses, there are economic benefits of such interventions. Preventing young people from involvement with justice has many benefits for all, and identifying and responding early to DLD may prevent children from getting in trouble later. This good news story is one we should be shouting about as it has implications for service provision decisions regarding the populations chosen and the timing of assessments and interventions. Ensuring DLD is identified and responded to early in life means that DLD must be on the radar for those working in health, education, welfare, behaviour and mental health settings, and justice. For those who are already involved in offending, identification and interventions for DLD may have broad benefits into adulthood for those individuals

and for society. This is a paper that needs to be shared with practitioners and policy-makers outside of SLP, as a strong case supported by compelling data is made for ensuring that early intervention and interventions for DLD are provided. Martin, R. (2017). Just Sentences – more than just words . Fine Print , 40 (1), 3–8. Julia Kania “I hate reading” is the default declaration of most prison inmates. Yet behind the composite characters in our nations’ gaols are individuals whose shortcomings in literacy are often at the heart of their incarceration. The intrinsic link between education and opportunity has always featured in scholarly discussions because education quite definitely opens doors. It is likely then, that a lack education closes them. Just Sentences is a program to build and repair language and literacy skills for the inmates who are behind those closed doors. Through a clever play on words, Rosalie Martin has named her program to represent four paradigms: “mere language,” “mere time” “rightful language” and “rightful time”, and it is worthwhile to reflect on the deeper meaning of each of these descriptions. Rosalie points out that society’s crime is to permit any child in this country from reaching adulthood without enough literacy skills to manage the demands of daily life, and that justice for all only comes with equity. In the absence of equity, societal reparation is the only morally correct response. Since our prisons disproportionately house the poor and disadvantaged, people with disabilities and minority groups, pro-social interventions should be offered to those who are illiterate during their incarceration. While Rosalie clearly laments the retrospection of such an offer where crimes proceed education, she proposes a positive scenario to involve speech pathologists in the re-education of our society’s criminals. She reports that the downstream devastation caused by crime can be shifted to a more upstream experience by educating our inmates. While they serve out their sentences, something positive can be done to support societal reintegration when they are released. By reinventing an offender as an educated ex-convict rather than an uneducated reoffender, it is possible to create a new life trajectory post-incarceration where those who have served out their sentences are assisted to acquire the necessary skills to lead a productive and meaningful life without bars and without stigma. Rosalies’s final permutation of her paradigm where Just Sentences means “rightful time” best harnesses the concept that justice comes through teaching and that our reparations to non-education can redress past disadvantage and create skills and hope for a different life beyond prison. Participants of the Just Sentences program are assessed and the connections between disadvantage and crime are discussed to give the inmate some perspective. Tasks that they love which involve hard work and practice are used to highlight how all new skills are learned. Goals are forged and participants are taught to reflect about how they learn and to start journaling about their lives and experiences. They are encouraged to commit to paper their nostalgia, regrets, challenges and pleasures alongside their reflections about their new learning experiences. Remediation is individualised and takes into account what each inmate brings in terms of processing abilities, cognition, emotional triggers, history, personality, interests and communication skills.

43

JCPSLP Volume 21, Number 1 2019

www.speechpathologyaustralia.org.au