The Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility: The Need for a Holistic Approach

Brown, Aaron; Charles, Anthony

doi:10.1177/1473225419893782

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The age at which minors can be punished is controversial in different political countries ( O’Brien and Fitz-Gibbon, 2017 ; Noroozi et al, 2018 ; Brown and Charles, 2019 ; Pillay, 2019 ; Schmidt et al, 2020 ). We employed a quantitative analysis of research methods, focusing on whether age can be used as a basis for measuring criminal responsibility, while also paying attention to the minimum age of criminal responsibility for violent crimes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychometric Challenges in the Measurement of Constructs Underlying Criminal Responsibility in Children and Young Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study

Shang

et al. 2022

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At present, many countries have lowered the minimum age of criminal responsibility to deal with the trend of juvenile crime. In practical terms, whether countries advocate for lowering the age of criminal responsibility along with early puberty, or regulating the minimum age of juvenile criminal responsibility through their policies, their deep-rooted hypothesis is that age is tied to adolescents’ psychological growth, and, with the rise in age, the capacity for dialectical thinking, self-control, and empathy gradually improves. With this study, we aimed to test whether this hypothesis is valid. The participants were 3,208 students from junior high school, senior high school, and freshman in the S province of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). We subjected the gathered materials to independent-samples t-tests, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), linear regression analysis, and Bonferroni post hoc test. The influence of the age variable upon dialectical thinking, self-control, and empathy was significant (p = 0.002, p = 0.000, p = 0.072), but only empathy was positively correlated with age variable (B = 0.032); dialectical thinking ability (B = −0.057), and self-control ability (B = −0.212) were negatively correlated with the age variable. Bonferroni post hoc test confirmed these findings. Therefore, we concluded the following: (1) Juvenile criminal responsibility, based on the capacity for dialectical thinking, self-control, and empathy, is not positively correlated with age. (2) Age is not the only basis on which to judge a juvenile’s criminal responsibility. (3) More research that directly links age differences in brain structure and function to age differences in legally relevant capacities and capabilities(e.g., dialectical thinking, self-control, and empathy) is needed. (4) Political countries should appropriately raise the minimum age of criminal responsibility and adopt the doli incapax principle in the judicial process.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychometric Challenges in the Measurement of Constructs Underlying Criminal Responsibility in Children and Young Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study

Shang

et al. 2022

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In other words, while the recent General Comment No.24 encourages setting a higher age at 14 years, the age of twelve years would not be so low as to render it unacceptable. Many countries, including Belgium, Ireland, Netherlands (Brown & Charles, 2021) and Scotland (Age of Criminal Responsibility (Scotland) Act 2019) have their MACR set at twelve years. Furthermore, Article 17.1 of the Beijing Rules recognised that in dealing with juvenile offenders, apart from the needs of the juvenile, the authorities could also take into account the gravity of the offence and the needs of society.…”

Section: The Call For a Lower Macr In Chinamentioning

confidence: 99%

Can lowering the minimum age of criminal responsibility be justified? A critical review of China's recent amendment

Wong

2024

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Call For a Lower Macr In Chinamentioning

confidence: 99%

Can lowering the minimum age of criminal responsibility be justified? A critical review of China's recent amendment

Wong

2023

Howard J Crime Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2021, China amended its law on the minimum age of criminal responsibility (MACR), lowering the MACR of two specified offences to twelve years. As a result, China now has three different levels of MACR for different offences. Based on the position in China, this article argues that while lowering the MACR against the international trend can be justified as a necessary measure to tackle serious crimes committed by children, creating different levels of MACR based on the types of crime is wrong in principle. This article further considers the classic dilemma in setting an absolute MACR, which results in either freeing the guilty or convicting the innocent. It is argued that setting a relatively low MACR accompanied by robust safeguards of doli incapax, child immaturity defence, diversion and wider sentencing options would allow a better assessment of children's culpability and better serve the interests of justice. It is also suggested that lowering the MACR will not unjustifiably undermine children's rights if the juvenile justice system could ensure only those truly culpable could be convicted and that the option of prosecution is reserved as a last resort.

show abstract

The Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility: The Need for a Holistic Approach

Cited by 8 publications

References 35 publications

Psychometric Challenges in the Measurement of Constructs Underlying Criminal Responsibility in Children and Young Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study

Psychometric Challenges in the Measurement of Constructs Underlying Criminal Responsibility in Children and Young Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study

Can lowering the minimum age of criminal responsibility be justified? A critical review of China's recent amendment

Can lowering the minimum age of criminal responsibility be justified? A critical review of China's recent amendment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About