The welfare of children in the criminal justice system The Children Act (1989) stated that the child's needs are of ‘paramount’ importance and introduced a welfare checklist to assist in determining what is in the child's ‘best interest’. To what extent can the needs of children and young people remain the ‘paramount consideration’?

Contested views: what do you think? Some have argued that the ‘paramountcy principle’ does not apply to young offenders because it only relates to the child’s upbringing (Harrison 2011). When considering the needs of children in contact with the criminal justice system there can be disagreement about what is in their ‘best interest’ (Thomas 2002). Despite this many have argued that the ‘paramountcy principle’ in its simplest form should be at least a commitment to divert young people away from the criminal justice system (Robinson & Crow 2009).

Conflicting Media Representations The negative portrayal of young people within the media can be linked to what Cohen (1972) described as a ‘moral panic’. Young people have become the subject of societal anxiety at the same time as being represented as vulnerable and in need of protection.

Acting in the child’s ‘best interest’ can be difficult because of the growing emphasis placed on managing the risk that young people represent within what has been described as a ‘precautionary logic’ (Arnoldussen 2009). This has led to increased intervention in young people’s lives, especially if they are viewed as being ‘problematic’.

The Crime & Disorder Act (1998) has been associated with the concept of ‘net widening’ (Cohen 1985) because it led to younger children finding themself involved with the criminal justice system and this increased the likelihood that in time they might be viewed as ‘persistent offenders’ leading to custodial sentences. (Goldson 2009)

It is important to consider if the youth justice system can act in the ‘best interest’ of the child’ within a system that identifies them as ‘offenders’. (Convey et al. 2008)

Arthur (2008 p.117) suggested that… “the welfare of the child is unavoidably degraded [within] punitive and correctional interventions”

Alternative Approaches The youth justice system in Belgium has been heralded as… “one of the most welfare orientated in Europe” because their ideology is based on the assumption that, “children have to be protected and re-educated rather than punished”. (Christiaen & Nuytiens 2009 pp )

Finland Under the Child Welfare Act (2008) in Finland there is the provision of what has been termed, ‘special care’ that deals with children’s offending based on a system of restricting a young person’s activity but some propose that this approach restricts the rights the child or young person (Pösö et al. 2010, p.245)

Wales The approach to young offenders in Wales is committed to viewing them first and foremost as a child (Hoffman & MacDonald 2011). This approach recognises that the child always maintains a number of rights so their offending is relegated to second place and the focus is placed on diverting the young person away from the criminal justice system wherever possible (Hoffman & MacDonald 2011)

Scotland The Scottish youth justice system also has some parallels with the practice is Wales since the Social Work (Scotland) Act (1968) there was the introduction of the Children’s Hearing System. (Morgan & Newburn 2012) This system takes a holistic approach that considers the offending behaviour in conjunction with the welfare needs of the child in order to make decisions about what response is needed. (Crawford & Newburn 2003)

Is this a better approach? Although the Scottish Hearing system appears to be a far more ‘child-friendly’ approach there are some limitations because there is a requirement that the young person admits their guilt in order to be dealt with in this way and this can deny them the opportunity to challenge the charge against them (Morgan & Newburn 2012)

Another critique has been that the Scottish Hearings system is based on the premise that children and young people have made a rational choice to engage in offending behaviour, paying very little attention to the wider social issues that might have contributed (Barry 2013).

Social Needs A number of steps can be taken to improve the treatment of children within the criminal justice system one is a commitment to “decriminalise social need” by providing appropriate welfare support where appropriate. (Goldson 2009, p.519)

Case study: The Jamie Bulger case The increasing concern that there is a ‘crisis of childhood’ can be linked to the murder of Jamie Bulger and it has resulted in harsher treatment of children between the ages of years because of the removal of the presumption of ‘doli-incapax’.

Murderers or Children? By drawing on the murder of Jamie Bulger in England and comparing that to the murder of Silje Redergard in Norway, it is notable that there were very different responses from the child’s family, the public, and the state.

The media coverage at the time of the murder, and during the trial, frequently portrayed the two 10 year old boys as ‘evil’, leading to widespread displays of public anger (Asquith 1996). Silje Marie Redergard in Norway in 1994 was killed by two 6 year-olds boys but they were not held as responsible for her death because of their age (Green 2008).

References The Children Act (1989) Cohen (1972) (Arnoldussen 2009) (Goldson 2009) The Crime & Disorder Act (1998) (Convey et al. 2008) Arthur (2008 p.117)

(Christiaen & Nuytiens 2009 Pösö et al (Hoffman & MacDonald 2011) (Morgan & Newburn 2012) (Crawford & Newburn 2003) (Barry 2013) (Asquith 1996). (Green 2008).