The Child Youth and Community Tribunal (CYCT) From Justice to Welfare
description
Transcript of The Child Youth and Community Tribunal (CYCT) From Justice to Welfare
The Child Youth and Community Tribunal (CYCT)
From Justice to Welfare
Karen Brady, Children’s Convenor, UK
BAILIWICK OF GUERNSEYGuernsey, Alderney, Sark, Herm, Jethou, Lihou, Brecqhou
30 miles from France 70 miles from England 24 square miles Population of 62,915 13,168 under 20 years 8,831 children in
education
(Guernsey Facts and Figures 2012)
BAILIWICK OF GUERNSEYGuernsey, Alderney, Sark, Herm, Jethou, Lihou, Brecqhou
1.3% unemployment
Average house price £439,837
Reported crime 2094
(Guernsey Facts and Figures 2012)
History of Children’s Hearings System Scotland
Kilbrandon Report 1964Findings• Similarity between children who commit
offences and those in need of care and protection
• Most powerful and direct influences lie within the family and the home
• Juvenile court not suitable for dealing with children’s wider problems
• A process of social education is required to support and further the natural familial instincts
History of Children’s Hearings System Scotland
Kilbrandon Report 1964Recommendations
• A new decision making forum required to deal with all children in need
• Disputed factual matters would remain with the court
• The offence would have significance only as a pointer to the need for intervention
• Overriding and paramount principle is the needs of the child
History of Children’s Hearings System Scotland
Kilbrandon Report 1964
Features of the proposed system Constitution Jurisdiction Compulsory
intervention Right to appeal
The right to prosecute
Referrals Social education
services
Bailiwick Review: Key Principles
Welfare must be paramount
Within family and community
No order unless necessary
Avoidance of delay
Voice of the child
Bailiwick Review: Conclusions
Community involvement
Involving children and families
Reducing burden on Courts
Reducing costs
Target causes of crime
THE CHILD YOUTH AND COMMUNITY TRIBUNAL BASIC PRINCIPLES
• Children’s needs and deeds must be addressed together,
• Children who offend often have the same needs and background as children in need of care and protection,
• Local community is best placed to decide what should happen to its children,
• Children and their families should be active participants in finding solutions to their problems.
THE CHILD YOUTH AND COMMUNITY TRIBUNAL
KEY FEATURES
• Decision making by trained volunteers from local community
• Deals with most child protection and child offending• Legal process but less formal procedure• Children’s Convenor – “gatekeeper”• Active participation of all parties• Multiagency approach to assessment and intervention• Voluntary intervention tried and failed or unlikely to
succeed• Single order = “care requirement”
THE CHILD YOUTH AND COMMUNITY TRIBUNAL
Key Differences from Scottish Children’s Hearings System
• Explicit welfare principles• Entry age limit = 18• Children’s Convenor Meeting• Standard of proof - balance of probabilities• Age of criminal responsibility = 12• No criminal consequences• Secure accommodation• Long term or permanent removal from
family reserved to the Court
THE CHILD YOUTH AND COMMUNITY TRIBUNAL
Experience and Observations
THE CHILD YOUTH AND COMMUNITY TRIBUNAL
Experience and Observations
THE CHILD YOUTH AND COMMUNITY TRIBUNAL
Experience and Observations
THE CHILD YOUTH AND COMMUNITY TRIBUNAL
Observations
The Children’s Convenor Meeting
• Legal representation/protection of rights
• Enlightenment and understanding• Direct & effective engagement
THE CHILD YOUTH AND COMMUNITY TRIBUNAL
Observations
Young people who commit offences• 2 key adaptations• 4 key facts (McAra & McVie, 2010)
Persistent serious offending is associated with victimisation and social adversity
Early identification of ‘at risk’ children is not an exact science
Critical moments in early teenage years are key to pathways out of offending
Diversionary strategies facilitate the desistance process
THE CHILD YOUTH AND COMMUNITY TRIBUNAL
Observations
Young people who commit offences• Multi agency discussion
320276
221222 204 175
2010 2011 2012
Children Referred on Offence GroundsReferrals Individual children
THE CHILD YOUTH AND COMMUNITY TRIBUNAL
Observations
Young people who commit offences2012
• 50% of offences were jointly reported• 35% were retained for prosecution• 63% of jointly reported aged 16 and over
THE CHILD YOUTH AND COMMUNITY TRIBUNAL
Observations
Speed of Decision Making 2012
Average time from referral to Convenor decision (working days)
Average time from referral to CYCT decision (working days)
All Referrals 36
Offence Referrals 20
All Referrals 123
THE CHILD YOUTH AND COMMUNITY TRIBUNAL
Observations
Culture, systems and practice
• “Integrated social education”• Referral practice• Thresholds• Language
Has the transition to a welfare based model been achieved?
• Supportive culture
• Transformational change
• Framework of law, social policy and professional practice
• Patience and persistence!
Yes, however.....