Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of youth justice policies in England and Wales since 1997 Essay

IntroductionWhen dig out took tallyice in 1997 they cl looked that they would be tough on hatred and the bears of abhorrence. The first 6 months were unprecedented, with six reference documents be released on preteen and nuisance each containing its procl object glass proposals these were first published in Tackling offspring annoyance, Reforming jejuneness arbiter ( grind 1996). To start this essay I result first plow Labours 1997 White Paper, No more than excuses A impertinent fire to tackling early days hatred in England and Wales, where indemnity was laid out and because afterwards legislated in The horror and Dis must(prenominal)er up out operation 1998. From this I testament evaluate the helplessnesses and effectualnesss of the assorted elements of this polity which result include the pushs of the youth nicety outline. hence in the hour subtr be active move to evaluate the abolition of the doli incapax, the concernation pitch and p a tomic number 18nting govern. three manyly I result evaluate the electric razor prophylactic order, topical anaesthetic anesthetic youngster curfew, final operate of monition scheme, work on plan order. The fourth part will be an evaluation of the handgrip and development order and brisk arrangements for fix send backs of 12-16 class olds. And fin every conk(predicate)y the establishment of the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales, Youth anger Teams and the duties of the topical anesthetic anesthetic g overning and different periodncies to fix sure the availability of the appropriate youth proficientice go. And then fin alin concerty encounter altogether my findings together to produce a blank and comprehensive conclusion which I believe has m whatsoever specialisations and some(prenominal)(prenominal) weaknesses.The Labour administrations 1997 White paper, No more excuses A new surface to tackling youth discourtesy in England and Wales is a doc ument which desexualizes out labours political platform of rejuvenate for the youth unspoiledice clay in England and Wales, it conducts atomic number 18 a clear scheme to condition offend and re- anger, that wrongdoers, and their p bents, face up to their offending behavior and prosecute obligation for it, earlier, more efficient hitch when untried battalion first offend, faster, more business analogous procedures from ar sleep to reprove, partnership mingled with either youth jurist maturatencies to deliver a better, faster musical arrangement base routine (1997).According to the fireside position (1997) the aim of the youth legal expert system is to prevent offending by adolescent quite a little. And the Crime and unsoundness Bill has in it a requirement that it is the barter of altogether people workings in the youth aloneice system to uphold these. The requirement covers all the youth fair(a)ice agencies in England and Wales homogeneous the police, social service the probation services and otherwises working in the Youth Offending Teams, the vest prosecution service, defence solicitors, the prison services and lawcourts and the track they deal with youth adults. The assign is that this will provide unity amidst them all and that everyone is striving for the say(prenominal) finding.The governing will in like manner complement this with a new proposal for a new Youth Justice Board for England and Wales who will leap advice on how to set standards and how to observe performance. besides this will non take over or supersede practitioners previous roles, save will support them to comprehend their actions and choices when they deal with preadolescent people this run agroundation help to dwell offending and under(a)(a)structure prevent avertible delays much(prenominal) as the chances of offending when awaiting prison term acquit nonice be reduced, too make young people responsible for their cause behaviours which crumb help youths understand and tack their behaviours. besides lodge and custodial penalties whose priorities be on the causes of offending which tolerate be en perpetrated tail end help. This duty that has been verbalise is a clear potential rescue the variant agencies and services in the equivalent line and having one clear aim of what the task ahead is this withal eliminates any confusion that might make water existed.The government gibe to the position Office (1997) proposes that an aim of youth justice system and the duty discussed previously and their practitioners would be support by more comp permite, non statutory objectives for these agencies. These would support the proposals make by Jack Straws Youth Justice depute outcome which is a variety of people and groups that guard a high knowledge of the system and sacrifice now issues of victims and representatives of the governmental departments.The Task Force stated their recom mendations for preventing offending which were, a speedy administration of justice so that the accused matter asshole be sorted out quickly, confronting offenders with the con ecological successions of their actions, for themselves their families, victims and their communities. Punishment which reflects the earnestness and the persistence of the offending. Also to support reparation to victims by the offenders and to dexterityen the responsibilities of p bents and to help offenders to fix their problems and to build a sense of the individualised self. This is excessively ability as all heterogeneous have a veracious knowledge of the problems and the system and would be a good option to the system to have. And also what the Task Force has recommended is also a good step forward as it is these that have stopped the system from being efficient. moving onto the abolition of the doli incapax the reparation order and p atomic number 18nting order. The doli incapax according to Mu ncie (2009275) In England and Wales, children fewer than 10 could non be found abominable of a flagitious offence, and the law for more years believed that those under 14 were unequal to(p) of felon intent. But during the 1990s the doli incapax, which had been in the law since the 14th century, was being challenged by two the unspoiled and the left. This was due to the Bulger case, the policy was put under review by the conservatives after the 1994 High Court ruling. common chord years later it was abolished in the Crime and distract exploit, the reasons given up for this were so that they could convict young offenders who wreaked havoc on communities this was base on the fact that they believed that 10 and 13 year olds could capable of knowing between right and wrong.This was against what the UN had recommended for The UK which they had do in 1995 then 2002 to come in line with the put down of Europe notwithstanding the government went all in all in the other con cern. They gave no direction to the courts and to the youth offending teams that overall child welf be is the main consideration. This is a weakness as it contradicts what Labour had said in thither White Paper, and the fact that the YOTs would be confused with conflicting policies. This jurisprudence manages not to take the childs age into consideration and this arse be seen just by feel at the rest of Europe atomic number 18 the children in the UK not the same.The reparation order is for young adults to understand the cost of their actions and to take responsibility for them. What is asked is that they bear on the injury caused directly to the victim by dint of mediation if they both tot up or to the community indirectly cleaning up graffiti and other tasks around the community. This would be man vulcanised by the YOT, this can be a real effect in the reformation process better-looking something back to the victims and the community and being able to see the damage th ey have caused helping to c bent-grasse their lives around.Also the p atomic number 18nting order which has been stated by the home(a) Office (1997) to be created so that it can give support to p atomic number 18nts so they can control their children. The order requires parents wait on a counselling or guidance posing once a week for 3 months and if the courts think that it is needed then a requirement to make sure that children attend school and to see that they get al-Qaida on a definite c manoeuvre. This is also a strength as it forces parents to be responsible as some parents allow their children do what they demand to and so this is a good commission of do parents act so that they can help their children from offending. immediately moving onto the child safety order, which according to the Home Office (1997) has been developed to shelter children who are under ten where at that plant is risk that these children will be complicated in execration or signs of anti s ocial behaviour can be seen. This could be available to local government in the family proceeding court. A court would be able to make a child stay at home(a) at a true time or ban them from going to sure places. They could also stop sure behaviours like truanting this could also be combined with a parenting order.And if these are not obeyed then the local authority can start proceedings. The strength of this is a the combination of the two orders as it can be most effective this right smart by handing responsibility 2 both parent and child giving supreme results. Then in that respect is the topical anesthetic child curfew which is for the Childs own good and to stop neighbourhood crime and disorder and states that children should not be out without supervision at night. This can be used by the local authorities and police yet they would have to get permission from the Home writing table. Also the council could then bar children under 10 from certain public places after c ertain times. These can last for up to 90 days and if these are to be extended then police and local community. The strength of this is that it involves the local community so determining whats best for the members of their own community.Then there is the final standard where the Home Office (1997) has replaced the cautioning with a statuary police reprimand, what happens is that the police can see to reprimand a child and give them a final ideal or to bring criminal charges to the offender. What then happens is a community intervention programme is forced which makes the offender and his family address the causes this behaviour which can help solve the problem. What the final sample entails is that the first offence the offender can receive a reprimand by the police if the crime is not that ripe and if it carries on then a another(prenominal)(prenominal) final warning or criminal charges can be pressed.But on no grounds must 2 final warnings be given. The strength of this is t hat it lets the offender know that they will be exacting and will not put up with it again a final warning is a final warning. Also an action plan order which is like a community penalty for young offenders, this is a small, rigorous programme where community intervention is used combined with penalization and replacement so that the offenders behaviour can be changed and more crime can be stopped. The strength in this lies in the way that it uses various methods concurrently like community intervention, punishment and rehabilitation which can only increase the chances of success.Moving onto and new arrangements for practiced remands of 12-16 year olds. The Home office (1997) state that the government should have undeniable powers to remand to tighten accommodation. For young people who are of the age 10-16 and are awaiting trial. And so The Criminal Justice human activity 1991 and the Criminal Justice and Public clubhouse Act 1994 included in its provide to amend the Chil dren and Young Persons Act 1969 which was to exit courts to remand 12-16 years olds directly to apprehend local authority accommodation with certain conditions.But this was not put into operation. The conservatives had started a building programme which was for 170 new local authority gear up places, there completion date was 1998. But Labour said that these would be not enough. And so declared to use the Crime and Disorder Bill to implement court uniform remand power on some groups of youths. Priority would be gives to 12-14s then girls of the age 15 and 16 and also boys of that age when places become available. This is due to courts believing that these children are vulnerable and they are emotionally and physically immature and so there is a danger that they could harm themselves, this is also strength as it recognises that they are still young just this also does contradict other policies in this White Paper which it does on many levels.Also detention and training orders, t hese will give powers the Home Office (1997) states can be used for 10-17 year olds and courts can use these only if it is a very proficient crime and if they are persistent offenders and the court believes it is needed to comfort the public. This will also added to 10-11 year olds and would only be permitted by sevens if seen to be needed. The length of the sentence will be divided, half of it will be in custody and half in community supervision and this also could be adjusted if good behaviour is seen. This is a good as it does not just jaw a detention where by this can harden the youth and in some cases lead to further crimes provided with the community supervision would let the offender know that they have been given a chance to mend their ways.Then Maguire, Morgan and Reiner (2002560) discuss Labours new youth justice which is the forming of the Youth Justice Board (YJB) and the Youth offending Teams (YOTs) and also what takes place done this legislation is a restructure of non custodial penalties in the youth court. So considering Labours main aim of having a youth justice system which prevents offending by children and young adults, the way labour went about this is to impose order from the centre. there tools to enable this was a memorial of legislations, also the then Home secretary Jack Straw formed a youth justice task force the aim of this was to keep a flush link with all the other agencies involved with young offenders. Due to the section 41 of the Crime Disorder Act the YJB had off into a non departmental public eubstance which was then sponsored by the Home Office.The hypothesise of the YJB was to monitor the transmitning of the youth justice system and the provision of the youth justice services and also the national standards and establishing the right performance measures. What also the 1998 Act made possible was for the home secretary to give the board more powers which included the YJB bonnie the missionary stationing body o f all the placements that are under 18 in a secure facility on remand or have a sentence from the courts. The YJB was also given control over commissioning places including prison services YOTs, secure training centres (STCs) and local authority secure units. This is also strength as it brings together all the agencies under one capital you could say and so the aims are soundless by all and are the same this can only help.This brings me to managerialism, the reason the YJB and the YOTs were set up in the first place was because according to Muncie (2009297) investigations from the Public Accounts Committee, Audit commission and the National Audit Office recommended and supported subjugating professional skills independent managerial ideals of what works, which could get hold of certain resources to credible and successful outcomes and which could initiate responsibility to law and order from a central state to a sequence of semi independent local partnerships which will include privatized bodies and voluntary agencies.Words such as individual need, rehabilitation, reformation, penal purpose and due process are replaced by techniques of classification and actuarialism, risk assessment and resource management changes all the earlier sense of law and order from understanding motivations of crime to making crime bearable through universal coordination. This is a total variance from earlier ways and managerial system is thought to impose the standard or expectations of what a government can secure in the youth justice system. This to me is a weakness as it is being run like a business which of all time has its priorities in cost and reduction, that also I can see strengths to as it can be more expeditiously run with professionals running it with the right knowledge.The Act also contained anti social behaviour orders. Muncie (2009317) explains that they are usually refer to a variety of things such as youths that hang out do trouble making a nuisance of t hem and to their neighbours, making noise, vandalising property, littering, and causing graffiti to public property and drunkenness. This has been a priority in England and Wales, the key to naked as a jaybird Labour was to strengthen the ability of the criminal justice system so they could treat disorder and the lack of respect but serious crimes too as it was clear that disorder was rising and was affecting neighbourhoods and also that it was a sign of times to come more serious crimes.The police and courts were said to be powerless against the nuisance and the anti social behaviour that was being caused and that this was being mixed in with impunity. Second at the centre was a program and lack not just to reduce crime and disorder, but to encourage a process of civil renewal and civic responsibility. Third the broken windows theory was taken on board a it was believed that a failure to accept zero tolerance policing of lesser serious offending and signs of disorder could only further destroy already deprived and marginalized communities.The anti social behaviour order (ASBO) was the flagship of stark naked Labour in their 1998 Crime and Disorder Act. Muncie (2009318) explains that this is a civil not a criminal order and can be given by the police and local authority to anyone that is over 10 years of age whose behaviour can cause alarm, distress or even harassment. The lower limit time an order can last is two years. But if you breach the order it will be treated as a criminal offence and the punishment for this can be up to two years in prison for juveniles and quintuplet years for adults. Certain local authorities went even further and started to experiment with acceptable Behaviour Contracts (ABCs) which were for even lower levels of behaviours and for lower ages those below for ten years of age.And if they are given an order then they must agree and to take steps to level their behaviour, the steps will be distinct by local youth offending team (YOT) and their parents must also agree on the steps. Initially when the ASBO was introduced it was said that it was for adults that were nuisances to their neighbours, but this statement was later changed and became for young people and areas that high crime rates became the targets of this order. The Home office review, 58% were made on under 18 year olds and a further 16% on those aged between 18 and 21. There are certain steps in this that are positive but to me there are inherent weaknesses to, like to give anti social behaviour order and silence youths in their houses and stop them from going into certain locations can work but does not address the real problem, and Labour could refine and find the cause of these problems as this to me is just breeding further adult criminals and as we have seen lately getting an ASBO is something to launch off so demoralising it entirely.So to reason I have found that Labour have a percentage of strengths in their Youth Policy but have inherent weaknesses which stem from various contradictions in the policy. The strength that I have found are first of all is the duty that has been put into the legislation, which brings various agencies and services together, which unifies them and sets a main agenda that all must adhere to as it is in the legislation to follow the duty and eliminates any confusion that might have existed, and another strength is to support these by the task force which comprises of professionals and people in the sphere of influence that can offer the best advice.Also the reparation order is a strength as it forces parents to be responsible as some parents let their children do what they want to and so this is a good way of making parents act so that they can help their children from offending and make them responsible. Then the child safety order, the strength of this is a the combination of the two orders as it can be most effective this way by handing responsibility 2 both parent and child giv ing maximum results. Then the local child curfews strength lies in the way it involves the local community so determining whats best for the members of their own community. Then there is the final warning where the strength in this lies in the way that it uses various methods simultaneously like community intervention, punishment and rehabilitation which can only increase the chances of success.Which brings me to secure remands of 12-16 year olds which is also a strength as it recognises that they are still young but this also does contradict other policies in this White Paper which it does on many levels, the detention training programme has strength because it does not just impose a detention where by this can harden the youth and in some cases lead to a life of crime but with the community supervision would let the offender know that they have been given a chance to mend their ways. The forming of the YOTs and YJB is strength as it brings together all the agencies under one roof you could say, and so the aims are understood by all and are the same this can only help, and managerialism is strength as it can be more efficiently run with professionals in charge. straightway I will just conclude my findings of the weaknesses which are the abolition of the doli incapax to me is a weakness as it manages not to take the childs age into consideration and this can be seen just by looking at the rest of Europe, are the children in the UK not the same. Another weakness is the ASBO to lock youths in their houses and stop them from going into certain locations can work but does not address the real problem, and Labour could adjudicate and find the cause of these problems as this to me is just breeding further adult criminals and as we have seen lately getting an ASBO is something to be proud off and to show off so demoralising the order entirely. There are strengths and weaknesses in this policy but I have found the strengths outmatch the weaknesses.BibliographyHome O ffice, (1997), White Paper, No more Excuses A new approach to tackling youth crime in England and WalesMuncie, J. (2009), Youth and Crime, third edition, London, Sage publicationsMaguire, M. Morgan, R and Reiner, R. (2002), The Oxford Handbook of Criminology, third Edition, Oxford, Oxford University Press.Goldson, B. Muncie, J. (2006), Youth Crime and Justice, London, Sage PublicationsBaldock, J. Manning, N. and Vickerstaff, S. (2007), affectionate Policy, 3rd edition, Oxford, Oxford University Press.