Introduction

Tensions in our approach to children and young people who offend are by no means new and over the last 50 years or so these have been expressed in a variety of epithets, which, while headline grabbing, have not always been helpful. ‘Social welfare’ versus ‘justice’, ‘deprived’ versus ‘depraved’, ‘deeds’ versus ‘needs’ and ‘care’ versus ‘control’ are just a few examples of how this debate was framed in the post-war years, particularly the 1960s and 1970s. The tension remains today but the reformed youth justice system reflects a belief that different approaches can be used and that there is no one ‘right’ answer that excludes all others. Multi-agency Youth Offending Teams (YOTs) have to look both to criminal justice and welfare services to provide a cogent response to the complexities of youth offending. In addition, since 2007, the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales (YJB) has been jointly sponsored by the Ministry of Justice and the Department for Children, Schools and Families, reflecting the importance of this twin-track approach at the highest level.

Public protection in youth justice: key principles

Public protection is integral to youth justice practice

It is important that public protection in a youth justice context is seen as integral to wider approaches to working effectively with children and young people, rather than somehow separate and unconnected. Managing Risk in the Community (Wilkinson and Baker, 2005) encouraged managers and practitioners to distinguish clearly between risk (likelihood) of reoffending, risk of serious harm to others and vulnerability. While public protection is usually rightly equated most with preventing risk of serious harm to others, it must of course always be remembered that there should be a public protection pay-off through local youth justice providers’ statutory responsibility to prevent offending by children and young people. Moreover, young people themselves are part of the public (although perhaps not always seen as such) and therefore YOTs’ attempts to work with others to minimise risks of vulnerability to young people themselves cannot sensibly be conceived of as unrelated to public protection.

The YJB has responsibility to advise ministers on National Standards for Youth Justice. These are currently being revised, with the intention that they are clearly described for youth justice staff as ‘must dos’ and that considerations of public protection are threaded throughout.