Open Access Publisher and Free Library
06-juvenile justice.jpg

JUVENILE JUSTICE

JUVENILE JUSTICE-DELINQUENCY-GANGS-DETENTION

Posts tagged young adults
Out of Court Resolutions and Young Adults 

By Carla McDonald-Heffernan

  The purpose of this briefing is to provide practitioners with practice principles to improve the use of out of court resolutions for young adults, aged 18–24. These good practice principles are developed in this paper through an exploration of the evidence context, current policy, case studies and lived experience research. Evidence context Young adults represent a group with increased potential for desistance, as per the age–crime curve, if the right support is in place, and if they are protected from unnecessary criminalisation. The literature highlights that this group is still in the process of maturation, with brain functions still in development, resulting in a lack of impulse control, greater susceptibility to peer influence and decreased ability to consider consequences. Social factors in this transitory period of life also mean that relationships, education pathways, employment and finances can be unstable. These elements contribute significantly to a young adult’s likelihood of offending, and thus effective support in addressing these needs and challenges lowers the likelihood of recidivism. The literature around effective practice for young adults in the justice system emphasises the importance of several key approaches. Trust and relationship-building, specially trained practitioners, provision of holistic support that includes skills and basic support through multi-agency working, and interventions tailored to intersectional needs are all central to effective practice. Policy context Out of court resolutions (OOCRs) aim to provide a proportionate response to low-level offending. The past decade has seen conditional cautions make up a growing proportion of OOCRs, a shift which has coincided with forces moving towards the two-tier OOCR framework. Conditional cautions can include rehabilitative, reparative and punitive conditions. The practice around conditional cautions differs significantly between adults and children. Needs assessments are carried out less often for adults, and the type of conditions imposed on adults is determined by the police rather than through a multiagency process. As a result of the discretion available, practices around adult conditional cautions varies significantly between police forces. Case studies The case studies explored in this briefing are examples of good practice approaches to working with young adults in the justice system. The Gateway Project is a conditional caution programme developed specifically for 18–24-year-olds. It provides useful insights into key features that create effective conditional cautions for this group including external ‘navigators’ who carry out needs assessments and adopt mentorship roles, peer group courses focused on behaviour, and tailored support. The Devon and Cornwall Enhanced Prosecution Scheme highlights the centrality of partnerships with service providers and third-sector organisations to implementing personalised interventions for young adults. The Newham Youth to Adult Probation Hub accentuates the benefit of multi-agency working and services such as mentoring, speech and language therapy and basic provisions of food and clothing in supporting young adults out of offending.

London: Centre for Court Innovation,  2025. 23p.

Adultifying youth custody: Learning lessons on transition to adulthood from the use of youth custody for young adults

By Alliance for Youth Justice

Young people turning 18 while in the secure estate face a tumultuous transition between youth custody and adult prisons. The secure estate for children is, in theory, focussed on meeting the distinct needs of under 18s. The vast majority of young adults on the other hand are held in adult establishments where there is very little evidence of any provision designed with their distinct needs in mind. Young people transferring from youth to adult custody face a frightening cliff edge, and getting the transition right is critical to ensuring the safety, wellbeing, and rehabilitation of young people entering adulthood. The children’s secure estate has had long-standing arrangements to retain some young people aged 18 and over to finish out their sentence or aid smooth transitions. Two years ago, however, an interim policy change in response to a capacity crisis in adult prisons led to a rapid and significant increase in the number of over 18s held in the children’s secure estate, with concerning impacts on children, young adults, and the establishments themselves. The children’s secure estate has spent years stumbling from crisis to crisis, struggling to cope with the children in its care, and it was unprepared for this policy change imposed on it without due notice. The government’s decision to temporarily shift the presumed date a young person transitions from youth to adult custody from the 18th birthday to 19th birthday led to over a third of those held in the majority of Young Offender Institutions (YOIs) being over 18s, for the majority of 2023/24. Alongside the implementation of this policy, conditions in YOIs have been dire, putting the safety and wellbeing of children and young people at risk. Guard dogs and stun grenades have been used against children, a fifth Urgent Notification in five years was issued, a failing YOI has now been closed, and both the previous and current Government have been labouring over a decision to rollout PAVA incapacitant spray to staff. The Ministry of Justice carried out a review of the interim policy to determine its end date, focussed on tangible short-term impacts on areas like violence and safeguarding. The review has yet to be published but its findings led Ministers to confirm the policy would end from October 2024 in order that the children’s estate can “return to maintaining an unwavering focus on the specific needs and vulnerabilities that children present.” Beyond the short-term impact explored by the Ministry of Justice review, and its immediate implications for the policy’s end date, there is also a need to consider the full longer-term impact and implications. Learning must be gathered with regards to the adultifying of a children’s estate that already struggles to treat children as children, and how policy decisions have impacted children’s rights to a distinct youth justice system and ensured young adults’ needs are met. This briefing seeks to take a broad view of the impacts, on children and young adults, of the significant change in the population of YOIs. It aims to illustrate not just the impacts here and now, but consider wider implications and risks. These include the opportunity cost of the positive change that could have been achieved during this time, and the potential for a slippery slope towards the government increasingly adultifying youth custody and viewing the children’s system as back-up for a failing adult justice system. It considers the vital need for distinct treatment of children, and raises concerns that despite policymakers agreeing that a specific approach for young adults in custody is clearly needed, change is happening in the wrong direction. Rather than implementing much-needed improvements and distinct support for young adults, conditions and treatment in the children’s estate are at risk of being dragged closer to that in adult prisons. By bringing together perspectives from both the youth and adult justice systems, this briefing carefully considers what recent developments mean for the future of custody for children, and what lessons can be learnt for improving custody for young adults. A new government has an important opportunity to set out ambitious visions and plans for both.

London: Alliance for Youth Justice, 2025. 52p.