There are two strong reports out today arguing
for radical change to the use and practice of custody for children in England
and Wales. The End Child Imprisonment Campaign (ECI) has called for the
immediate closure of Young Offender Institutions and Secure Training Centres as
it launches its "Principles and Minimum Expectation for Children Deprived of their Liberty".
The Parliamentary Human Rights Committee wants to see action to reduce the need
for restraint and separation, in all secure settings.
But it’s a third report- an inspection of the Young Offender Institution at Cookham Wood in Kent that shows the fundamental absurdity
of locking up children in custody. Young people are brought together from
across Southern England into an establishment where “complex and dynamic
keep-apart restrictions that sought to keep numerous individuals away from each
other had a serious detrimental impact on the services provided to young people
and arguably the culture of the institution”.
In truth, there is a limited amount of new
information or argument in any of the reports- how can there be when the shortcomings and contradictions of locking up children are so well known? If the parliamentarians
are right that there are about two and a half thousand children in one type of detention
or another in England and Wales, those on remand or under sentence – 834 at the end of February- nowadays account for only a third of them. As the ECI report
says “the restriction of liberty is harmful to children, irrespective of their
circumstance”, so more credit should arguably be given to youth justice
practitioners for driving down the numbers in penal custody over the last ten
years; and more attention should be given to the children locked up for other reasons
and in other types of institutions.
Curiously, the End Child Imprisonment Coalition make no mention of the proposed Secure School which is due to open in Autumn 2020, a stone’s throw from Cookham Wood. Will it be part of the answer to phasing out prison custody or, like STCs, simply end up adding to the problem? The new school will be more than twice the size of ECI’s proposed maximum of 30 places; and it won’t be close to home for most of its residents. Whether it will meet other child care principles remains to be seen, perhaps soon - bids to run it were due in by 1st of February.
Curiously, the End Child Imprisonment Coalition make no mention of the proposed Secure School which is due to open in Autumn 2020, a stone’s throw from Cookham Wood. Will it be part of the answer to phasing out prison custody or, like STCs, simply end up adding to the problem? The new school will be more than twice the size of ECI’s proposed maximum of 30 places; and it won’t be close to home for most of its residents. Whether it will meet other child care principles remains to be seen, perhaps soon - bids to run it were due in by 1st of February.
Secure Children’s Homes are generally
considered the most acceptable form of closed facility. They provide very
much better levels of care than YOIs and STCs but even so are not immune from
the deep- seated flaws common to all institutions. Recent inspections have found
in one a particularly high number of sanctions of single separations for some
young people “resulting in significant periods where young people would have
been in their rooms on their own”. In
another managers did not consistently critically assess the threshold for the
use of physical restraint to make sure that this is required to protect young people, or
others, from harm.
The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse
(IICSA) found 242 allegations made in secure children’s homes between 2009 and
2017- lower in absolute terms than were found in in YOIs (440) and STCs (297)
but not necessarily when population is considered. IICSA reported
on the number of incidents of alleged sexual abuse as a percentage of the
average population of STCs in 2016 but when I asked them to provide the
equivalent data for each of the three types of secure institutions - STC, YOI
and SCH- ideally for each of the years 2009-2017 or for the whole period, disappointingly
they said they were unable to do so.
What all this suggests is that a much more vigorous
strategy- and some fresh thinking - is needed to keep children out of
institutions of all sorts. End Child Imprisonment want a system in which children
should only be deprived of their liberty when they pose a serious risk to
themselves or others, and there are genuinely no alternative options for
mitigating that risk in the community. There are dangers of unintended
consequences in a purely risk- based approach and some high threshold relating
to harm already caused will be essential to prevent net widening. Where the
Campaign is undoubtedly right is that “the duration of any episode of detention
must be as short as possible”.
To achieve that, what’s needed is a recasting of secure custody not as any kind of end in itself but as a very short term means of planning community- based interventions. This should certainly be the approach for the 300 young people currently serving Detention and Training Orders and many of the 250 on remand. A different approach might be needed to those serving longer term sentences for grave crimes – particularly those who will be transferred into the adult estate when they reach 18.
To achieve that, what’s needed is a recasting of secure custody not as any kind of end in itself but as a very short term means of planning community- based interventions. This should certainly be the approach for the 300 young people currently serving Detention and Training Orders and many of the 250 on remand. A different approach might be needed to those serving longer term sentences for grave crimes – particularly those who will be transferred into the adult estate when they reach 18.
Back at Cookham Wood YOI, the inspectors found some
young people, because of keep-apart restrictions, spent almost as much time
each day being escorted to and from activity as they did in the activity. In
their view “there needed to be some new thinking about how to challenge this
restrictive culture and the causes of it”. They are certainly right about that.
We also need to examine the utility of transferring 18 year olds to the adult estate. Without getting into a long debate here, I'm certain that mixing with the criminal classes at age 18 is not good for the kids and it certainly is not good for the adults!
ReplyDeleteAgree with you absolutely.
ReplyDelete