Understanding the Shift in Youth Justice
Over the past three decades, significant research advancements have enhanced our comprehension of the factors that assist children in moving away from offending behaviours. Studies focusing on child development, desistance, identity, relationships, community participation, and the implications of interactions with the justice system have reached a consensus. They indicate that prioritising the positive development of children not only diminishes offending rates but also contributes to safer communities, ultimately resulting in fewer victims.
Integrating Evidence into Practice
To synthesise this wealth of evidence, the Youth Justice Board (YJB) established the ‘Child First decision-making framework’. This initiative aims to render research findings accessible and applicable for practitioners working on the front lines. The framework promotes the adoption of evidence-based policies and practices, encapsulated in four easily memorable tenets represented by the acronym ‘ABCD’:
A – As children: This principle emphasises prioritising the best interests of children, acknowledging their unique needs and potential. All efforts should be child-centric, developmentally informed, and address structural barriers while fulfilling responsibilities towards children.
B – Building pro-social identity: This tenet advocates for recognising and enhancing children’s strengths, fostering a pro-social identity that supports sustainable desistance, resulting in safer communities with fewer victims. All initiatives should be constructive, future-oriented, and grounded in supportive relationships that empower children to realise their potential.
C – Collaborating with children: Active participation and engagement of children are paramount. Practitioners should work collaboratively with children and their caregivers, ensuring that their voices are heard.
D – Diverting from stigma: The framework promotes a childhood free from the justice system through preventative measures, diversion, and minimal intervention. All strategies should aim to reduce the criminogenic stigma associated with system contact.
Early criticism of previous ‘risk-focused’ approaches to youth offending suggested that children should be seen primarily as children rather than offenders. This critique spurred significant reform, culminating in a comprehensive review of contemporary youth justice research by Haines and Case in 2018.
Addressing Structural Inequalities
While the Child First framework emerged from this research, it is essential to acknowledge ongoing challenges. Critics, such as Burns and Smithson, argue that the framework might merely serve as a superficial solution, obscuring persistent structural inequalities. Children entangled in the youth justice system are often among the most disadvantaged and vulnerable members of society, typically originating from challenging backgrounds that hinder their educational and social development.
The evidence underscores that these adversities are even more pronounced for children with care experience and those from Black or Mixed heritage backgrounds. Addressing these issues must remain central to any discourse regarding the functionality of the youth justice system.
However, the existence of these structural challenges does not imply that the Child First framework has obscured or legitimised them. Youth justice services (YJSs) cannot single-handedly dictate policies on welfare, housing, or education. Nonetheless, they can identify the repercussions of such policies, challenge them where possible, and refrain from perpetuating them through their own practices.
The Child First framework should be evaluated in terms of its influence on how children are perceived and treated, whether interventions are tailored to individual needs, and whether collaboration with children is genuine and meaningful. Furthermore, it is crucial to ensure that adults uphold their obligations to respect children’s rights.
Recognising Regional Differences
An evaluation of the Child First framework must also account for the distinct approaches taken in England and Wales. Wales has consistently adopted a children’s rights perspective in youth justice, being the first UK nation to appoint a Children’s Commissioner and lead in trauma-informed practices. Evidence suggests that diverting children from the formal criminal justice system and towards supportive interventions is the most effective method for reducing crime. In Wales, nearly two-thirds of outcomes involving youth justice services have been diversionary.
Practising Evidence-Based Changes
In 2022, the YJB revised its case management guidance to assist services in implementing national standards rooted in the Child First evidence base. This update, developed through extensive collaboration with practitioners, policymakers, academics, and children, marks a significant shift from a risk-oriented focus to a constructive model that empowers children to positively contribute to their communities.
The operationalisation of the Child First evidence base has transformed the methodologies employed by statutory inspection bodies. While traditional frameworks prioritised risk management and procedural compliance, the contemporary inspection model now aligns with the principles of Child First, evaluating the authenticity of child co-production in sentence planning and the effectiveness of Out-of-Court Resolution pathways in diverting children from formal court processing.
Recent inspection outcomes indicate that services that genuinely integrate the Child First framework experience higher levels of engagement, improved multi-agency collaboration, and better long-term desistance results.
Research Insights and Practitioner Feedback
Last year, independent research conducted by Crest Advisory aimed to explore the application of the Child First framework within youth justice services. The findings revealed that 86% of practitioners believed that clear guidance facilitated the implementation of the framework, challenging critiques regarding its operational clarity.
Participants in Crest’s study typically reported positive relationships, feeling understood, and actively involved in the process. While inconsistencies in practice and barriers between agencies were noted, there was confidence in the application of the four tenets, particularly in community settings. Efforts are ongoing to ensure that the principles of Child First are also embedded within court processes, enhancing the child-focused nature of these experiences.
Crest’s research culminated in recommendations for future improvements and addressing variations in implementation, reflecting the dynamic evolution of the Child First framework and the openness to constructive criticism.
Wider Systemic Changes Required
While the YJB cannot directly address structural issues, significant progress has been made in collaboration with partner agencies to entrench the tenets of the Child First framework. The establishment of the Child First Toolkit serves as a practical resource to foster a broader understanding and implementation of the evidence base. This includes integrating specialists, such as mental health professionals and therapists, directly into youth justice teams to facilitate early, non-stigmatising support.
Recent developments in policing illustrate that the Child First framework has sparked meaningful changes. The Child First Custody Pilot (CHIRP) evaluated the integration of Child First training with enhanced scrutiny of detention practices, yielding positive shifts in professional conduct and a reduction in child detentions, although further improvements are still needed.
Minimising formal justice system contact is crucial, and ongoing collaboration with the National Police Chief’s Council has led to the creation of a revised Child Gravity Matrix, which informs police decision-making when engaging with children. While challenges persist in building trust between the police and families, there is growing support for child-centred policing.
Integrating Services for Better Outcomes
The critique by Burns and Smithson regarding the fragmented nature of services in England highlights the need for a more cohesive approach to youth justice. Unlike Wales, where education, welfare, and justice are more integrated, England’s national responsibilities remain siloed across different government departments. However, local youth justice services have increasingly sought to bridge these gaps, establishing multi-agency partnerships that address the holistic needs of children.
Youth justice services have been designed as statutory partnerships, and the Child First framework has reinforced the importance of integrating services around the individual child. This integration allows practitioners to access specialised support without burdening children and families with navigating multiple disconnected services.
While service integration is not uniform and challenges remain, local efforts to organise support around children are commendable and illustrate a commitment to addressing their needs.
Future Directions and Ongoing Challenges
The long-term trajectory of the youth justice system appears promising. The YJB’s recent data indicates a significant increase in diversions from formal outcomes, with fewer children entering the youth justice system. This downward trend reflects a broader commitment to prevention and community-based responses rather than punitive measures.
The effectiveness of the Child First framework is particularly evident when contrasted with the adult justice system. Noteworthy insights from independent reviews indicate that the principles of prevention and a multidisciplinary approach adopted in youth justice could serve as valuable lessons for the adult system, where custody should always be a last resort.
Challenges remain, particularly in ensuring consistent national implementation of the Child First evidence base across partner agencies. Addressing external factors such as poverty, housing instability, and limited social services is crucial for enhancing the support available to children in contact with the justice system.
Furthermore, it is essential to clarify that the Child First framework does not contradict the rights of victims. The evidence base underscores the importance of achieving positive outcomes for children, victims, and communities alike. Understanding the complexities of brain development and trauma is vital for reducing reoffending and ensuring community safety.
As the YJB transitions into a national continuous improvement body, the focus on evidence-based practice will intensify. The achievements of the youth justice sector over the past decades are commendable, and there remains a strong commitment to reducing offending through collaborative efforts and evidence-led practices.
Concluding Thoughts on Progress and Accountability
While academic critique is essential for accountability, dismissing the Child First framework as merely a ‘magic concept’ overlooks the substantial progress achieved in frontline practices. This practical, evidence-led approach has contributed to historic reductions in child crime and custody rates.
By bridging implementation gaps across various statutory partners, bolstering the evidence base, and supporting victims, we can ensure that every child engaged with the justice system has the opportunity to cultivate a positive future. This, in turn, will lead to fewer victims and safer communities.