Beyond pre‐emptive criminalisation: towards a child‐friendly youth justice

Abstract

PurposeFirst, it is the intention of this paper to explore the impact of riskfocussed intervention on the lives of young offenders and young people defined to be 'at risk' of crime. Second, the paper considers 'alternative perspectives' and the prospect of a youth justice predicated upon the principles of informal justice, child-friendly values and the notion of inclusion. Design/methodology/approachThe first part of the paper reviews the theory and literature on earlypreventative intervention in the youth justice system. The second part of the paper explores 'alternative perspectives', drawing on restorative justice, restorative approaches and diversionary measures. FindingsThe paper presents three general findings. First, young people can be subject to youth justice intervention without a 'presenting problem' or offence committed. More pertinently this form of pre-emptive criminalisation violates the child's human rights, due-process and legal safeguards. Second, young people who are drawn into the net of formal youth justice intervention can suffer from the stigmatising and labelling effects of being criminalised. Third, there is a pressing need for youth 2 justice policy and practice to be transformed in order to allow for the implementation of more informal, diversionary and restorative measures. Originality/valueThe paper has great value for students of youth justice, and policymakers, especially the conservative-liberal democrat government who wish to cut costs, introduce Restorative Justice on a large scale and appear to be in favour of diverting young people away from formal youth justice intervention.

Framing ‘drug prevention’ for young people in contact with the criminal justice system in England: views from practitioners in the field

“…This is based on negative perceptions of young people as presenting future dangers or threats; however, they are at the same time framed as 'vulnerable' and in need of support and help. Risk-based practice and targeted interventions are popular with policy makers because they involve early intervention and can be viewed as 'protecting the public' (Creaney, 2013).…”

“…Similar to the findings of Foster and Spencer (2011), this was viewed by some practitioners as problematic in that it stigmatizes and labels young people early on in their lives. Here, the concepts of 'pre-crime' or a claim about a future not yet known (Zedner, 2007) and 'pre-emptive criminalisation' (Creaney, 2013) are useful in understanding how these groups of young people are categorized and classified. As Turnbull and Spence argue (2011: 940), "…'risk' provides the justification for pre-emptive intervention, surveillance and control".…”

The benefits of participation for young offenders

“…In turn, practitioners have experienced difficulties delivering innovative, engaging methods of intervention and creative child-friendly forms of practice (Creaney, 2013).…”

Disorderly analysis: how might we best understand the riots in August 2011?

“…However, within youth justice -or criminal justice more broadly -there is political and public ambivalence towards whether children who offend deserve or should be provided with the opportunity to have a say on the purpose of their intervention (Creaney 2014). An approach that emphasises the welfare needs and promotes the human rights of young people should be promoted, where young people are encouraged to become involved in decision making processes (Creaney, 2013). Again, this would, in accordance with social democratic perspectives, reduce the chances of young people being further marginalised, and allow stereotypes to be challenged -particularly where young people are 'blamed' for their situation (Smith, 2008).…”