The Challenge of Antisocial Behaviour: New Relationships between the State, Children and Parents

Governing Neighbours: Anti-social Behaviour Orders and New Forms of Regulating Conduct in the UK

“…Parenting Orders, introduced in the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and strengthened in the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003, represent a further extension of governance into the sphere of private communal interactions, based on an understanding of the breakdown of 'organic' familial relations, necessitating 'a role for politics where families have failed' (Field, 2003). The orders, made by Magistrates Courts, set out a list of required actions by parents, but in relation to their regulation of their children's conduct, so that the duties and obligations of parents become under the gaze of the state in new ways (Cleland and Tisdell, 2005). Parenting Orders again blur the distinctions between civil and criminal law as the breach of a civil parenting order is a criminal offence.…”

“…Thus in the governance of conduct, the triangle of state, parent and child becomes a square with the addition of community, with parents given enhanced responsibilities, accountable to communities, for the behaviour of their children (Cleland and Tisdell, 2005). As with other measures discussed here, the contractual basis of Parenting Orders defines responsibilities upon the state, so that such orders should only be issued where parents have been previously offered appropriate supportive interventions (Scottish Executive, 2003) and after orders are in place provision will be made for counselling or guidance sessions which parents are required to attend (Cleland and Tisdell, 2005).…”

Policy Change under Devolution: The Prism of Children's Policy

“…The Scottish Executive followed the English example in introducing legislation to address antisocial behaviour by young people and restrict their association in groups. These changes were seen by many as antithetical to the principles underpinning the children's hearings (Cleland and Tisdall, 2005;McAra, 2006), creating very different relationships between the state and children, and the state and parents. New orders borrowed from England were somewhat softened in application by the Scottish Executive.…”

Criminal Parental Responsibility: Blaming parents on the basis of their duty to control versus their duty to morally educate their children

“…Other-less specific-acts in which the control duty of parents is emphasised are the Children Act in Ireland (Buckley & O'Sullivan, 2007) and the Antisocial Behaviour etc. (Scotland) Act 2004 (Cleland & Tisdall, 2005). The rationale of such proposals is clear: children lack the capacities required to control themselves.…”

“…Proponents as well as opponents of criminal parental responsibility usually interpret the duty to prevent others from being harmed by children's behaviour as the duty to control, supervise or guard children (e.g. Kroll and Barrett, 1995; Graham, 2000; Cleland and Tisdall, 2005). A well‐known example is the Parental responsibility ordinance of St. Clair Shores , effectuated in 1994, which rules that parents are required to exercise ‘reasonable control to prevent the minor from committing any delinquent act’ which entails ‘ensuring a home free of illegal firearms and drugs, staying informed of the curfew ordinance, requiring that the child go to school, arranging supervision if the parent is absent, taking precautions to keep the child from committing property destruction, forbidding the child to keep stolen property, and seeking help from the government to control the child if necessary’ (Scarola, 1997, pp.…”