Circles of analysis: a systemic model of child criminal exploitation
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JCS-04-2021-0016 |
| Published date | 03 November 2021 |
| Date | 03 November 2021 |
| Pages | 158-174 |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care,Vulnerable groups,Children's services,Sociology,Sociology of the family,Children/youth,Parents,Education,Early childhood education,Home culture,Social/physical development |
| Author | Craig Barlow,Alicia Kidd,Simon T. Green,Bethany Darby |
Circles of analysis: a systemic model of
child criminal exploitation
Craig Barlow, Alicia Kidd, Simon T. Green and Bethany Darby
Abstract
Purpose –Child criminal exploitation (CCE) emerges from the complex interplay between potential
targets, motivated perpetrators and conducive environments.Drawing on contextual safeguarding and
rational choice theory.The purpose of this paper is to explain the relational dynamicsthat lead to CCE in
terms of complexsystems.
Design/methodology/approach –This paper reviews the existing criminological and public health
perspectiveson CCE and compare against current assessmentprotocols used to identify child victimsof
exploitation.
Findings –Findings demonstratea conceptual and empirical flaw in existing practice.This flaw can be
understoodin terms of a failure to include both environmental conditionsand the perpetrator’s motivation
when tryingto prevent CCE.
Research limitations/implications –To correct this, this paper develops an original systemic model
called circles of analysis. Thismodel builds on contextual safeguarding to overcome this identifiedflaw
by also including perpetratormotivation to develop a Systemic Investigation,Protection and Prosecution
Strategy.
Practical implications –It is worth considering as to whether our model can be scaled up to look at
traffickingof children and adults for modern slavery,servitude, forced and compulsory labourin different
contexts and jurisdictions. Alongside this, is there capacity to build perpetrator behaviours into the
contextualsafeguarding model?
Social implications –The potential for further development and alignment with the principles of
contextual safeguarding is tantalising, and it is hoped that the contribution to this important special
edition will open up new avenues for collaboration with both academics and practitioners who are
concernedwith protecting children and combattingCCE.
Originality/value –This strategyis uniquely designed to improve how policeand social workers identify
and investigateCCE and safeguard potential victims and survivors.
Keywords Public health, Criminology, Complexity theory, Rational choice theory,
Contextual safeguarding, Child criminal exploitation
Paper type Research paper
Introduction: a new model for understanding child criminal exploitation
In this paper, we argue that despite the UK’s robust and world-leading set of child-
safeguarding systems, along with knowledge and expertise supported by strong and
sophisticated civil and criminal legislation, efforts to protect children and prevent
exploitation are undermined by false assumptions and reductive responses (Broad, 2018).
Contextual safeguarding has enabled both policy and practice to recognise the
vulnerabilities and threats to health, welfare and development that are faced and
experienced by older children and adolescents to include extra familial relationships and
social networks within different domains. This has been a major contribution to improving
child safeguarding. We build on this by addressing the motivation and characteristics of
those who perpetrate and participate in the recruitment, control and criminal exploitation of
children in various contexts (Longfield, 2019).
Craig Barlow is based at
the Wilberforce Institute,
University of Hull, Hull, UK
and St Mary’s University
Twickenham, UK.
Alicia Kidd is based at the
Wilberforce Institute,
University of Hull, Hull, UK.
Simon T. Green is based at
the Faculty of Arts, Culture
and Education, University
of Hull, Hull, UK.
Bethany Darby is based at
the Department of
Criminology and Sociology,
University of Hull, Hull, UK.
Received 8 June 2021
Revised 15 July 2021
Accepted 13 October 2021
This paper is based upon
original doctoral research by
the lead author which was
funded by the Wilberforce
Institute. There has been no
additional funding for this
paper.
PAGE 158 jJOURNAL OF CHILDREN’S SERVICES jVOL. 17 NO. 3 2022, pp. 158-174, ©Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 1746-6660 DOI 10.1108/JCS-04-2021-0016
Child criminal exploitation (CCE) refers to the selection, recruitment and control of a child in
order for the child to commit crimes for and on the behalf of another. The exploitation of the
child is dependent upon an imbalance of power in favour of the perpetrator (Beckett and
Warrington, 2014) who controlsthe child in order that they commit crimes “by proxy.”
Whilst not a new phenomenon, CCE has proliferated in recent years, becoming a major
cause for concern in relation to children’s safety and welfare. Although more recent, CCE
mirrors the rise in concern about child sexual exploitation (CSE) that followed several high-
profile controversies (e.g. Rotherham 1997–2013; Oxfordshire 2004–2012), however, to
date, responses to CCE have been inconsistent and often contradictory (Longfield, 2019;
Children’s Society, 2019). Despite domestic legislation designed to protect the welfare of
children; international conventions to prevent trafficking, slavery, servitude, forced labour
and exploitation of children; and internationally agreed non-prosecution principles
concerning victims of traffickingthat have been forced to engage in criminality, children and
vulnerable adults are continuing to be arrested, charged and prosecuted rather than
protected and supported towards safety and recovery (Burland, 2017b). Consequently,
those that are motivated to exploit children by using and controlling them to commit crime
remain undetected and freeto continue their poly-criminal enterprises with impunity.
CCE is not a single event crime with a simplelinear causal pathway by which victims can be
identified by fixed lists of indicators and “risk factors.” CCE must be understood as a
pattern of behaviour or events that emerge from the relational dynamics between children,
motivated perpetrators and the environment that they both share over time (Desai et al.,
2002;Hart et al.,2003;Finkelhor, 2008;Douglas et al.,2013;Beckett and Warrington,
2014). By understanding this in terms of complexity, we propose an innovative new
approach: The Systemic Investigation Protection and ProsecutionStrategy (SIPPS) for CCE.
This approach was originally developed by the lead author, along with Caroline Haughey
QC in 2014 as an approach to organising and testing evidence in cases of modern slavery.
This was an extremely complex trafficking case concerning a 48-count indictment with
offences ranging from trafficking to rape to misconduct in public office and blackmail. One
of the victims was a particularly vulnerable 21-year-old female who had been locked in a
room for a period of about fourmonths and repeatedly raped by the main defendant.
The evolution of SIPPS began with a review of the accounts of the complainant and main
defendant. Advice was provided to the prosecuting counsel on the means by which she
could most effectively cross-examine both. This advice addressed each issue that gave
counsel cause for concern and the subsequent conviction of the defendant led to him
receiving a 38-year sentence.This case pre-dated the current vulnerable witnessguidelines
and the SIPPS approach is credited by Caroline Haughey QC with ensuring the victim’s
engagement across two trials.
SIPPS was refined and formalised for use in assessing risk for CSE (Barlow, 2017) and is
primarily deployed to map the aetiology and complexity of CCE as an emergent pattern of
behaviour and its potential harmful impact on children. This strategy is grounded in
complex systems theory which advances traditional systems theoryby explaining that there
are agents of the system who behave in ways that affect one another. According to
complexity theory, a system builds upon structures that self-organise by interacting with
their environments. They are flexible and adaptive in changing circumstances and can
transform small-scale (micro-state) irregularities into large-scale (macro-state) patterns. This
makes them robust and resilientover time (Hassett and Stevens, 2014).
The circles of analysis model represents the pattern of criminal exploitation that emerges
from the interactions between the child target for exploitation and their environment, the
motivated exploiter and the environment and the interactions (relationship) between the
targeted child and the motivated exploiter (Jennings, 2014). The model integrates
criminological theories of victimology and criminogenesis, offering these as a theoretical
VOL. 17 NO. 3 2022 jJOURNAL OF CHILDREN’S SERVICES jPAGE 159
To continue reading
Request your trial