Youth crime and justice: Key messages from the Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime (original) (raw)

The Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime: Key Findings at Ages 12 and 13 www

2001

The rise in crime is one of the most striking social changes since the Second World War. Police recorded crime rose dramatically between 1950 and the mid 1990s in all developed countries (except Japan) and, because of the shape of the age-crime curve, this is to a large extent the result of an increase in misconduct and ordinary crimes committed by young people . This increase in problem behaviour among young people has also been paralleled by post-war increases in other psychosocial disorders during the teenage years, such as suicide, eating disorders and personality dysfunctions . These major societal changes have meant that youth crime, and indeed issues in relation to young people in general, have become a salient political issue

Alternative models of youth justice: lessons from Scotland and Northern Ireland

Journal of Children’s Services, 2011

Purpose Widespread criticism of the youth justice system in England and Wales has resulted in calls for it to adopt a restorative paradigm. This article reviews the historical development of youth justice in neighbouring Scotland and Northern Ireland. Design/methodology/approach The historical development of youth justice in Scotland and Northern Ireland is reviewed with a view to learning lessons from these two very different models, compared to the current model in England and Wales. Findings It is argued that those tasked with reforming the system in England and Wales must understand the underlying political, cultural and social contexts in which alternative models have developed and satisfactorily resolve the conflicting needs and rights of the offender versus those of the victim, community and wider public. Originality/value Transfer of policy and practice from other jurisdictions requires careful consideration of their political, cultural and social contexts but England and Wales may benefit greatly from adopting restorative practices similar to those in Northern Ireland. However, successful implementation will depend on political will and institutional infrastructure.

The Politicization of Youth Crime in Scotland and the Rise of the 'Burberry Court

Youth Justice, 2006

In 2003, the youth justice system in Scotland entered a new phase with the introduction of a pilot youth court. The processing of persistent 16 and 17 year old (and serious 15 year olds) represented a stark deviation from a 'child centred' and needs-oriented state apparatus for dealing with young offenders to one based on deeds and individual responsibility. This article, based on an evaluation funded by the Scottish Executive, is the first to provide a critical appraisal of this youth justice reform. It examines the views of the judiciary and young offenders and reveals that the pilot youth court in Scotland represents a punitive excursion that poses serious concerns for due process, human rights and net widening.

2001 Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime_early findings age 12-13

Where has all the Youth Crime Gone? Youth Justice in an Age of Austerity

Children & Society, 2014

Youth justice under the Coalition government in England and Wales has been characterised by considerable gains-falling youth crime, increased diversion and substantial reductions in child imprisonment-that would generally be associated with a progressive agenda. Focusing on youth justice policy in England and Wales, this article suggests that the tensions implicit in a government of the new right delivering outcomes that demonstrate an increased tolerance to children who offend, can be explained by the logic of austerity. That same logic brings with it other policy measures that are potentially less compatible with children's wellbeing. The youth crime of today is not what it used to be Youth crime in England and Wales under the UK Coalition government is not what it was, in at least two senses. First, there is significantly less of it. In 2012, 47,019 children below the age of 18 years received a formal pre-court disposal 1 or conviction for an indictable offence compared with 73,712 in 2010 when the new administration came to power, a decline of almost 36% (Ministry of Justice, 2013). 2 Second, youth crime is no longer the 'hot' political issue that it once was. From the early 1990s to the mid-2000s, youth justice constituted the locus of what has been referred to as a 'partisan 'arms race'' (Centre for Social Justice, 2012:26) wherein the main political parties vied to demonstrate their tough credentials to the electorate (Pitts, 2003). This 'punitive turn' is generally understood as a manifestation of an internationally changed orientation towards crime and offenders whose origins lie, over the longer term, in social and economic changes associated with late modernity (Garland, 2001). There were, of course, significant differences between adult justice systems and those that deal with children, and between the UK and other Western jurisdictions, but while it stood in the vanguard, England and Wales thus not totally exceptional in this regard, although direct policy transfer was more likely with the United States than with European neighbours (Muncie, 2008). New Labour's engagement in this process was an enthusiastic one: during the 1997 election campaign, one of the party's 'five pledges' to the public was to ensure swifter punishment for 1 Formal pre-court disposals comprise: reprimands, final warnings, youth cautions and youth conditional cautions 2 Although the focus of this article is England and Wales, youth crime has also fallen sharply in many other Western jurisdictions for reasons that are not entirely understood

Young Offenders: Children in Need of Protection*

Law & Policy, 2004

In an influential report, published in 2002, the Institute of Public Policy Research (IPPR) judged the criminal justice system in England and Wales to be an unsuitable response to juvenile offending (Sparks and Spencer 2002). The Institute for Public Policy Research is a leading centre for New Labour intellectuals. Their report is based on an eighteen month "Crime Forum", which brought together academics, senior police, prison officers and other criminal justice practitioners. This report asserted that the children who are most likely to become persistent offenders are also most likely to have childhood experiences of victimisation and to have educational 1 difficulties. The IPPR advised that if the statutory principal aim of the youth justice system "to prevent offending by children and young people" 1 is to be realised, then consideration needs to be given to the home circumstances and the quality of life of young offenders. The report recommended that the government should establish a new "unified" system, based on the Scottish Reporter system, for assessing the nature of intervention needed by young offenders. This system would receive referrals from police, schools and parents and have the authority to require that services be provided. This article will examine the Scottish juvenile justice system and assess its advantages and disadvantages. For comparative purposes the youth justice system of France will also be considered as this model also endeavours to tackle juvenile offending within the context of the juvenile"s life circumstances. The youth justice system of England and Wales will then be studied in order to establish whether the IPPR"s recommendations are appropriate, and accordingly whether there is a need for the introduction of a wholly new approach to tackling youth crime in England and Wales. B. YOUTH JUSTICE IN SCOTLAND The origins of the Scottish system of juvenile justice date back to the report of the Kilbrandon Committee (Kilbrandon Committee 1964). The Kilbrandon Committee believed that in terms of the child"s actual needs, the legal distinction between juvenile offenders and children in need of care or protection was very often of little practical significance. Kilbrandon asserted that juvenile offending behaviour was generally indicative of a failure in the young person"s upbringing. 2 The committee argued that more often than not the problems of the "child in need" and the "delinquent child" can be traced to shortcomings in the normal upbringing process in

Youth offending and youth transitions: the power of capital in influencing change

Critical Criminology, 2007

Neither the literature on offending nor that on desistance adequately explains the short-term nature of youth offending, young people's propensity to desist from offending as they reach early adulthood and the importance of youth transitions in helping or hindering young people's access to legitimate and conventional opportunities and responsibilities. It is suggested in this article that the three phases of offending-onset, maintenance and desistance-run parallel courses with the three phases of youth transitions-childhood, youth and adulthood and that both these processes are influenced by discrepancies in levels of capital for young people at each stage. In a recent Scottish study of desistance, Bourdieu's concepts of capital are used to demonstrate the commonalities between youth offending and youth transitions and to better understand young people's search for integration and recognition-whether this be through offending or conventionality. The article concludes that the concepts of capital and youth transitions could both be employed more usefully in the field of criminology to explain the transient nature of offending in youth and the greater likelihood of desistance once legitimate and sustainable opportunities are found to spend as well as to accumulate capital in early adulthood.

Evaluating Youth Justice in the UK

American Journal of Evaluation, 2004

In the UK, following the Crime and Disorder Act of 1998, the Youth Justice Board (YJB) funded over 450 separate crime prevention schemes. The YJB in approving these various schemes stressed the importance of monitoring and evaluation. Local evaluators were appointed whose role was to report back to the funding agency and the national evaluators. We were commissioned to undertake the local evaluation of four separate schemes. This article attempts an overview of the evaluation process and identifies five crucial areas that raise questions about whether the Youth Offending Teams are the 'unqualified success' and such a fine example of 'joined-up government' that the Youth Justice Board claims . In this article, we examine the setting up process (and offer a case study of one particular scheme), issues of inter-agency work and the links between schemes and local communities; procedures and protocols and on what evidence policy was being based; the relationship between the national and local evaluators (and other stakeholders); and finally, the feasibility of achieving the scheme's ambitions given the duration of the funding and the resources available.

The Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime

2011

Change in population size (%)-0.4% +4.4% +28.2% +0.7% Parental consent Given the age of the cohort members, it was necessary to contact parents in advance of fieldwork to inform them about the study and seek their consent. There was concern that an opt-in method would yield a low response rate, particularly among certain sections of the population, which would significantly skew the characteristics of the cohort and undermine the validity of any survey results. As it was crucial that the cohort should comprise as complete and representative population of young people as possible, the various agencies involved in the study agreed that an opt-out consent method should be adopted. However, assurances had to be given that the Education Department child protection guidelines would be stringently followed and that participation would not be detrimental to the cohort members. Prior to sweep one fieldwork, a letter was issued to all parents explaining the objectives and coverage of the study, the implications of participation and stating that their child could be opted-out of the study by returning a tear-off slip to the school. It was not considered necessary to repeat this exercise each year. However, an updated letter was sent to the parents of all new pupils who joined the cohort in sweep two. Cohort members also had the opportunity to opt out of the study during fieldwork and, in a few rare cases, school staff took the decision to opt pupils out if participation at that time was not felt to be in their best interests. * All 5 were unable to comprehend the questionnaire. ** 8 of the 11 were unable to comprehend the questionnaire. CHAPTER 2: CHARACTERISTICS OF THE COHORT CHAPTER 3: DELINQUENCY AND RISK BEHAVIOURS 1 The remaining 53.3 per cent said they had never had a whole drink, a much higher proportion than the 22.6 per cent who had never tried. 2 At sweep 2, the comparison is between those who had a drink at least once a week, and those who had not had a drink in the past year (as opposed to those who had never tried alcohol at sweep 1). 3 The ordering of the frequency items makes a difference to the result. To obtain the closest correlation, 'special occasions' is treated as the least frequent item, below 'hardly ever'. 4 A rare behaviour cannot powerfully predict a more common one. 1. 'All' is those answering the introductory question 'Have you ever tried an illegal drug?'. 2. 'Drug users' are those answering 'yes' to this question.

Youth crime and justice: Key messages from the Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime (original) (raw)

Related papers