The age of criminal responsibility: developmental science and human rights perspectives
| Date | 17 June 2011 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/17466661111149385 |
| Published date | 17 June 2011 |
| Pages | 86-95 |
| Author | Elly Farmer |
| Subject Matter | Education,Health & social care,Sociology |
The age of criminal responsibility:
developmental science and human
rights perspectives
Elly Farmer
Abstract
Purpose – The minimum age of criminal responsibility (MACR) was set at ten years old in 1963. Since
then a deeper appreciation of children’s rights and understanding of their unique capabilities and
experiences has been gained. This paper seeks to examine the implications of these developments for
our understanding of this MACR.
Design/methodology/approach – Research is reviewed that illuminates questions about children’s
culpability,their competence to participate in the criminal justice system (CJS) and the consequences of
criminalising them at a young age. Recent understandings of how children’s rights apply to the MACR
are also summarised.
Findings – Developmental science and human rights perspectives are inconsistent with a MACR no
younger than 12 years.
Originality/value – The paper is one of the first to extensively apply developmental science research to
the MACR. The author finds that although a just and rehabilitative CJS may be achievable in the case of
most adolescent defendants, this is an unrealistic goal for younger children who instead require a
welfare-basedsystem that addresses underlying causes of antisocialbehaviour, facilitates accountability
and ensures child protection.
Keywords Criminal justice, Human rights, Youth
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
The recently published Government Green Paper, Breaking the Cycle (Ministry of Justice,
2010, p. 67), states that:
The purpose of the youth justice system [YJS] is to prevent offending by children and young
people [. . .] while safeguarding their welfare.
In Time for a Fresh Start, the Independent Commission on Youth Crime and Antisocial
Behaviour (2010) sets out sensible proposals designed to enable the YJS to meet more
effectively these aims at the same time as achieving justice for victims and communities.
It does not, however, challenge the current low minimum age of criminal responsibility
(MACR) in England and Wales, which at ten years is the lowest in Europe.
Over the past two decades, considerable progress has been made in mapping the
neuropsychological and social development of children and adolescents. The emerging
picture of adolescence is of a period in which individuals may be near mature levels of
competency in some areas while far from these in others. This developmental understanding
is of direct relevance to three salient questions that any attempt to improve the YJS must
address (Steinberg, 2009): how culpable are young people for the unlawful behaviour they
engage in; how competent are they to participate in the YJS as individuals alleged of a
crime; and what is the impact of involving them in the criminal justice system?
PAGE 86
j
JOURNAL OF CHILDREN’S SERVICES
j
VOL. 6 NO. 2 2011, pp. 86-95, QEmerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1746-6660 DOI 10.1108/17466661111149385
Elly Farmer, National
Clinical Assessment &
Treatment Service
(NSPCC), London, UK.
The author would like to thank
Dr Eamon McCrory,
Dr Eileen Vizard and
Bradley Platt for their invaluable
support in writing this paper.
To continue reading
Request your trial