Youth Justice News
| Author | Tim Bateman |
| Published date | 01 April 2020 |
| Date | 01 April 2020 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/1473225419895404 |
| Subject Matter | News |
895404YJJ0010.1177/1473225419895404Youth JusticeBateman
research-article2019
News
Youth Justice
2020, Vol. 20(1-2) 170 –180
Youth Justice News
© The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
https://doi.org/10.1177/1473225419895404
DOI: 10.1177/1473225419895404
journals.sagepub.com/home/yjj
Tim Bateman
The Fall in the Number of Children in the Youth Justice System
in England and Wales Is Indicative of a ‘Shift Towards a More
Child-Centred Approach’
Perhaps the most significant feature of the youth justice system in England and Wales
over the past decade is the extent to which it has contracted. Drawing on statistics pub-
lished by the Youth Justice Board, a report published by Crest Advisory, a criminal justice
consultancy, in November 2019, notes that, between March 2008 and March 2018, the
number of proven offences committed by children fell from 277,986 to 77,349, a reduc-
tion of 75 per cent. There have been declines across all offence types, but they are particu-
larly marked for less serious offences: recorded of incidents theft and handing stolen
goods, for example, fell by 85 per cent over the period and criminal damage by 81 per
cent. (The report in fact cites the highest decline as being for breach of statutory orders, at
87 per cent, but the extent of this reduction is likely to be explicable, at least in part, as a
function of shifts in recording practice since breach of a community order or custodial
licence is not formally a new offence.)
By contrast, the decrease for violence against the person and sexual offences was sub-
stantially more modest, at 63 and 25 per cent, respectively. Knife and offensive weapons
offences display a slightly different picture with a steep decline to 2014, followed by
annual rises in each of the subsequent years; overall however, in 2018, the level of such
offences was 30 per cent lower than in 2009 despite the recent increases.
The report points out that these headline figures have been matched by a similar pattern
across each stage of the youth justice system: arrests of children fell by 78 per cent between
2008 and 2018; the number of children entering the system for the first time (so-called
first time entrants [FTEs]) by 86 per cent; youth cautions by 91 per cent; and the popula-
tion of the custodial estate for children by 70 per cent. This latter contrasts with an 8 per
cent rise in the adult prison population over the equivalent period.
While the direction of travel is evident across the whole of England and Wales, geo-
graphical variation remains considerable. Thus, the arrest rate for children in the year
Corresponding author:
Tim Bateman, School of Applied Social Studies, University of Bedfordshire, University Square, Luton LU1 3JU, UK.
Email: tim.bateman@beds.ac.uk
Bateman
171
Table 1. Population of the children’s secure estate by primary offence type: 2013 and 2018.
Offence type
Proportion of total population
Percentage point
(number of children)
change: 2008–2013
2013
2018
Violence
23% (354)
41% (362)
+ 18
Robbery
31% (474)
21% (184)
–10
Domestic burglary
16% (243)
10% (87)
–6
Drugs offences
4% (62)
6% (58)
+ 2
Sex offences
5% (79)
8% (76)
+ 3
Breach
7% (115)
2% (22)
–5
Other
14% (217)
12% (105)
–2
ending March 2018 was highest in London, at 19.7 per 1000 children aged 10 to 17 years;
at the other end of the spectrum, in the South West region, the equivalent figure was 8.9.
Moreover, the extent of contraction in the youth justice system differs sharply from one
area to another: while all youth offending teams have shown a fall in the rate of FTEs per
1000 children aged 10–17 in the local population, the rate of decline ranged from 67 to 95
per cent in the 10 years from 2008.
The report argues that these trends have left behind a smaller but ‘more complex cohort
in terms of vulnerability / need and more serious in its offending’. As regards the custodial
population, for example, there has been a shift in the primary offence for which children are
imprisoned. As indicated in Table 1, over the past 5 years, there has been a rise in the propor-
tion of children in the secure estate who are incarcerated for violence against the person,
from 23 to 41 per cent, an increase of 18 percentage points. There were smaller increases for
sexual offences and drug-related crimes. Conversely, there was a 10 percentage point fall for
robbery over the same period and a smaller reduction, of 6 percentage points, for domestic
burglary. Violence against the person is the only offence to register a rise in the actual num-
ber – as opposed to proportion – of children deprived of their liberty.
The report also cites indicators of growing need among the youth justice population more
generally. Between 2009/2010 and 2015/2016, for instance, the assessed emotional and
mental health needs of children on youth offending team’s (YOTs’) caseloads grew consid-
erably. Worryingly, these dramatic shifts have been accompanied by increased levels of
disproportionality as the overrepresentation of Black, Asian and other ethnic minority
(BAME) children has become more pronounced. For example, the proportion child arrests
that involved children from a BAME background rose, between 2008 and 2018, from 16 to
29 per cent.
The authors of the report proceed to attempt to explain the changes outlined in the
above overview. Most stakeholders interviewed for the research considered that alterna-
tions in police practice, largely in response to the ending of a target, introduced in 2002,
to ‘reduce the justice gap’ between the number of offences reported to the police and those
that result in a formal sanction (the so-called ‘offences brought to justice’ target) (OBTJ)
was the most significant factor. The report acknowledges the potential net-widening
impact of the target since it provides an incentive for police:
172
Youth Justice 20(1-2)
to give formal responses for low-level crimes in order to meet the target, which may have
previously resulted in an informal outcome.
A note of caution is, however, registered since the fall in FTEs commenced 1 year
before the ending of the target in 2008. The authors accordingly look for other drivers of
the change in trajectory. These include the introduction of a target in 2005 by the Youth
Justice Board explicitly focused on the reducing the number of FTEs. Another ‘key factor’
is said to a ‘growing emphasis on diversion by YOTs (and the police)’ and the correspond-
ing emergence of diversionary programmes such as triage.
While it is likely that each of these factors might have had an independent effect on the
level of FTEs, it is perhaps surprising that the report does not make the case that they were
also closely interconnected. The government first adopted the FTE target in 2008, in the
Youth Crime Action Plan published that year, arguably with a greater impact than the
earlier endorsement by the Youth Justice Board. The Plan also introduced triage in 69
pilot YOT areas as a mechanism that might enable the implementation of...
To continue reading
Request your trial