Youth custody: the history

The number of children in custody in England and Wales has risen in recent years and is now the highest in Western Europe (Council of Europe, 2004). In July 2008, when this volume was completed, the numbers of young people held in the secure estate stood at 3,006 (YJB, 2008a). Overall, the rise in imprisonment is due to courts adopting a more punitive approach, locking up proportionately more children and for longer (Solomon and Garside, 2008). Both the public and media have driven the political agenda, reinforcing messages that youth crime, in particular, knife and gun crime, is out of control and should be dealt with by harsher sentences. And, despite recent sentencing guidelines, the new Lord Chief Justice has spoken of an ‘epidemic’ of knife crime requiring the ‘most severe sentences’. These comments, like previous remarks linked to street robbery in 2001, are likely to lead to even tougher sanctions and use of custody for young people (The Guardian, 8 July 2008).

Although there have been attempts by the Youth Justice Board (YJB) to regulate the increase in youth custody by introducing alternative community packages such as the Intensive Supervision and Surveillance Programme (ISSP), this has not led to the reduction in custody anticipated by earlier commentators (Audit Commission, 2004). Nowhere have the figures been more stark than in the rapid rise of indeterminate sentences imposed on those young people under 18 years of age between 2006 and 2007, where numbers doubled during the year (YJB, 2008b). And, in terms of reducing further offending, prison has very little impact at all, with reoffending rates for young people leaving custody at 67% (YJB, 2008b). Furthermore, it is well documented that those young people returning to the community invariably face problems in accessing mainstream services and are often unable to sustain intentions to lead law-abiding lives (Audit Commission, 2004; HM Government, 2008b). These facts require probing if we really want to deal with the issue of youth offending across England and Wales. We fully accept that sanctions, including the proportionate use of custody, are necessary to curb violent and high-risk behaviour by young people, but we ask the question whether the rapid rise in the use of custodial sanctions is the most effective way of reducing youth crime.