Program outcomes in youth justice outcomes: the PLUS+ program review

This report provides a methodology to assess the outcomes of rehabilitation programs that are delivered to young offenders in South Australia. A method of assessing change is described that can be applied across a number of different programs, but is illustrated in relation to one particular program, the PLUS+ program. PLUS+ is a group-based cognitive skills program which employs cognitive-behavioural methods of problem-solving, skills-training, and self-management to rehabilitate young offenders. It is one of the most intensive and best established programs to have been implemented in South Australia. Based on a review of this program a number of recommendations are made to enhance the future delivery and evaluation of PLUS+.

The Globalisation of Crime Control: The Case of Youth and Juvenille Justice

The concept of globalization has gradually permeated criminology, but more so as applied to transnational organized crime, international terrorism and policing than in addressing processes of criminal justice reform. Based on a wide range of bibliographic and web resources, this article assesses the extent to which a combination of neo-liberal assaults on the social logics of the welfare state and public provision, widespread experimentation with restorative justice and the prospect of rehabilitation through mediation and widely ratified international directives, epitomized by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, have now made it possible to talk of a global juvenile/youth justice. Conversely it also reflects on how persistent national and local divergences, together with the contradictions of contemporary reform, may preclude any aspiration for the delivery of a universal and consensual product

Show me a bad kid and I’ll show you a lousy parent : making parents responsible for youth crime in Australian and Canadian Contexts

This article surveys literature bearing on the issue of parental liability and responsibility for the crimes of young offenders, with a particular focus on comparing different approaches to dealing with the issue in Australia and Canada. This comparative analysis of Australian and Canadian legislative and policy approaches is situated within a broader discussion of arguments about the “punitive turn” in youth justice, responsibilisation, and cross-jurisdictional criminal justice policy transfer and convergence. Our findings suggest that there are significant differences in the manner and extent to which Australia and Canada have invoked parental responsibility laws and policies as part of the solution to dealing with youth crime. We conclude by speculating on some of the reasons for these differences and establishing an agenda for additional needed cross-jurisdictional research. In particular, we argue that it would be fruitful to undertake a cross-jurisdictional study that examines the development and effects of parental responsibility laws across a larger number of different Western countries as well as across individual states and provinces within these national jurisdictions.

“Show me a bad kid and I’ll show you a lousy parent” : making parents responsible for youth crime in Australian and Canadian contexts

In this article we survey relevant international literature on the issue of parental liability and responsibility for the crimes of young offenders. In addition, as a starting point for needed cross-jurisdictional research, we focus on different approaches that have been taken to making parents responsible for youth crime in Australia and Canada. This comparative analysis of Australian and Canadian legislative and policy approaches is situated within a broader discussion of arguments about parental responsibility, the ‘punitive turn’ in youth justice, and cross-jurisdictional criminal justice policy transfer and convergence. One unexpected finding of our literature survey is the relatively sparse attention given to the issue of parental responsibility for youth crime in legal and criminological literature compared to the attention it receives in the media and popular-public culture. In Part I we examine the different views that have been articulated in the social science literature for and against parental responsibility laws, along with arguments that have been made about why such laws have been enacted in an increasing number of Western countries in recent years. In Part II, we situate our comparative study of Australian and Canadian legislative and policy approaches within a broader discussion of arguments about the ‘punitive turn’ in youth justice, responsibilisation, and cross-jurisdictional criminal justice policy transfer and convergence. In Part III, we identify and examine the scope of different parental responsibility laws that have been enacted in Australia and Canada; noting significant differences in the manner and extent to which parental responsibility laws and policies have been invoked as part of the solution to dealing with youth crime. In our concluding discussion, in Part IV, we try to speculate on some of the reasons for these differences and set an agenda for needed future research on the topic.

Developing ethical identities in young offenders through restorative justice practice in Australia

Restorative justice is firmly established in Australian juvenile justice. While the official language used to describe restorative initiatives varies across states and territories, the most common form is a meeting or conference between young offenders and their victims (most commonly known as a family group or youth justice conference). During the past decade, an impressive amount of empirical research has examined how the restorative justice process affects offenders, victims and other participants (such as supporters for young offenders and victims). Results from this line of research are remarkably consistent and show that participants generally regard restorative conferences as procedurally fair and that they are satisfied with the outcomes (eg what young offenders agree to do to make up for their offending behaviour, such as offer a sincere apology or perform work for the victim or the community). What is less common, however, is the perception among participants that restorative conferences achieve the key aim of restoration.By ‘restoration’ we refer to encounters where ‘offenders apologise, their apologies are accepted, victims offer forgiveness,and conferences conclude with a feeling of mutual good will’.

Juvenile justice and truancy legislation : The move towards parental responsibilisation in Queensland

Much current Queensland media rhetoric, government policy and legislation on truancy and youth justice appears to be based on ideas of responsibilisation – of sheeting responsibility for children’s behaviour back onto their parents. This article examines the evidence of parental responsibility provisions in juvenile justice and truancy legislation in Queensland and the drivers behind this approach. It considers recent legislative initiatives as part of an international trend toward making parents ‘responsible’ for the wrongs of their children. It identifies the parental responsibility rhetoric appearing in recent ministerial statements and associated media reports. It then asks the questions – are these legislative provisions being enforced? And if so, are they successful? Are they simply adding to the administrative burdens placed on teachers and schools, and the socioeconomic burdens placed on already disadvantaged parents? Parental responsibility provisions have been discussed at length in the context of juvenile offending and research suggests that punishing parents for the acts of their children does not decrease delinquency. The paper asks how, as a society, we intend to evaluate these punitive measures against parents?

The politicization of youth crime in Scotland and the rise of the 'Burberry Court'

In 2003, the youth justice system in Scotland entered a new phase with the introduction of a pilot youth court. The processing of persistent 16 and 17 year old (and serious 15 year olds) represented a stark deviation from a ‘child centred’ and needs-oriented state apparatus for dealing with young offenders to one based on deeds and individual responsibility. This article, based on an evaluation funded by the Scottish Executive, is the first to provide a critical appraisal of this youth justice reform. It examines the views of the judiciary and young offenders and reveals that the pilot youth court in Scotland represents a punitive excursion that poses serious concerns for due process, human rights and net widening.

Responsibilisation and Rights: Explorations in Comparative Youth Criminology

Studies of international youth justice, punishment and control are in their infancy but the issues of globalisation, transnationalisation, policy transfer and localisation are gradually being addressed. There also appears a growing demand in policy and pressure group circles in the UK to learn more about other jurisdictions in order to emulate ‘best practice’ and avoid the worst excesses of punitive populism. However, existing comparative work in this area rarely ventures much beyond country specific descriptions of historical development, powers and procedures. Statistical comparisons – predominantly of custody rates – are becoming more sophisticated but remain beset with problems of partial and inaccurate data collection. The extent to which different countries do things differently, and how and why such difference is maintained, remains a relatively unexcavated territory. This article suggests a conceptually comparative framework in which degrees of international, national and local convergence and divergence can begin to be revealed and assessed.

The Punitive Turn in Juvenile Justice: Cultures of Control and Rights of Compliance in Western Europe and the USA

Separate systems of justice for children and young people have always been beset by issues of contradiction and compromise. There is compelling evidence that such ambiguity is currently being `resolved' by a greater governmental resort to neo-conservative punitive and correctional interventions and a neo-liberal responsibilizing mentality in which the protection historically afforded to children is rapidly dissolving. This resurgent authoritarianism appears all the more anachronistic when it is set against the widely held commitment to act within the guidelines established by various children's rights conventions. Of note is the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, frequently described as the most ratified human rights convention in the world, but lamentably also the most violated. Based on international research on juvenile custody rates and children's rights compliance in the USA and Western Europe, this article examines why and to what extent `American exceptionalism' might be permeating European nation states.

Pre-sentence Report, Magisterial Discourse and Agency in Youth Courts in England

This article draws on interviews with Youth Court magistrates to examine if and how discourses, strategies and technologies of risk governance have affected Youth Court magistrates in England and Wales. The aim of the article is to detail the complex relationship between magisterial agency in decision making and youth justice policies which focus on risk control and management. The article demonstrates that, contrary to what might be assumed from the youth and risk governance theoretical literature, Youth Offending Team risk assessments form only one part of the information used by magistrates to explain young people’s presence in courts. This article concludes that magisterial decision making is framed not by formal, expert assessments of risk, but by magistrates’ claims that they are ‘knowing outsiders’, who through judicious use of information presented to them and their own life experiences are able to make objective judgements about both the risk assessments authored by Youth Offending Teams and the young lawbreakers before them.

Beyond the ‘three dogmas of juvenile justice’ : a response to Weatherburn, McGrath and Bartels

In 'Three Dogmas of Juvenile Justice', Weatherburn, McGrath and Bartels identify three 'assumptions' or 'dogmas' about youth justice, on which they claim 'juvenile justice policy in Australia currently rests'.

Recurring themes in contemporary criminal justice developments and debates

Criminal Justice in New Zealand is the first comprehensive account of the New Zealand approach to criminal justice issues to be published in this country, and it discusses the complex range of interconnected procedures involved in the system. New Zealand readers will enjoy the access to analysis and insight into the justice outcomes, procedures and how the inter-weavings affect different constituents. Highlights include statistical analysis, youth justice, the dealings and impact of media on criminal justice. The book emphasises the lack of coherent philosophy connecting the many stakeholders and describes the operation of its founding theories and procedures, including the trial process, criminal procedure, policing, sentencing and provision for victims. Tolmie and Brookbanks have excelled in their editing of this wide-ranging content, and have created an excellent resource. This book will become required reading for law students, policy analysts, sociologists, Judges and police. The book provides an account of a complex range of interconnected constituencies and procedures that together constitute the New Zealand criminal justice system.

Locating the community in restorative justice for young people in Australia

The concept of the community is a key component of restorative justice theory and practice. In restorative justice scholarship, the community is constructed, alongside the victim and offender, as having a crucial role to play in responding to crimes in a restorative way. Indeed, it is often claimed that the perceived need for the community to be involved in responding to crime was a key rationale for the emergence of restorative practices around the world. Taking the emergence of youth justice conferencing – the most commonly-utilised restorative practice in Australia – as a case study, this article argues, however, that the idea of the community was peripheral to the emergence of restorative justice in Australia. The documentary analysis from which this article stems also found that while Indigenous young people are represented as belonging to communities, non-Indigenous young people are not – at least, not beyond their ‘community of care’. As such, this article raises concerns about the disproportionate responsibilisation of Indigenous young people, families and communities.