Quote:Ending prison for teens might seem like a pipe dream in the age of Donald Trump. But when it comes to girls, who are less likely than boys to commit violence, this fantasy could be closer to reality than you’d think. Maine, Vermont, New York City, and parts of the San Francisco Bay Area also have seen long stretches without a single girl in long-term incarceration. In California, stopping girls’ imprisonment altogether is now “well within reach for the state,” according to the nonprofit Vera Institute of Justice, which works with jurisdictions across the country to get kids out of detention. “It’s hard for a lot of communities, let alone government leaders, to imagine that zero is achievable. We know that it is,” says Hannah Green, who helped lead Vera’s Ending Girls’ Incarceration Initiative until last year.

What these places have in common is a radical shift in thinking about how to keep kids out of prison. Juvenile diversion programs have existed for decades, often in the form of special courts that order children to go through drug rehab or counseling or anger management programs as alternatives to incarceration. But those courts tend to follow a “medical model,” in which adult experts like judges diagnose the individual flaws that made a child act out—addiction, maybe, or too much aggression—and propose a solution. Kids who don’t comply are often locked up.

Radius and other reformers instead champion the “advocacy model,” which views girls as experts on their own lives and what they need to thrive. The key, says Lindsay Rosenthal, the founding director of Vera’s decarceration initiative, is “not just assuming” what’s driving girls’ arrests, but asking them which resources they need to stay out of detention—and “really listening” to their answers.

From Hawaii to New York, the advocacy model is keeping girls out of prison. It’s saving money. It’s improving public safety. All of which raises the question: What if we expanded it to other people, too?