Criminology: Youth Justice System and Theories of Youth Offending

Running Head: Criminology
Criminol
ogy
Student Name:-

Criminology
Contents
PART A: GENERAL PRINCIPLES of youth justice.................................................................2
1. Two distinct philosophies have dominated youth justice theory and practice namely “justice” and
“welfare” approaches:.................................................................................................... 2
2. Which two theories of theoretical criminology best explain the causes of youth offending?...........3
PART B – CASE STUDY................................................................................................ 5
3. In the Case of Shaun, which perspective is the most appropriate, the justice or
the welfare approach? Explain your choice.............................................................5
4. When Shaun was arrested and taken to the police station, what legal rights would he have been
entitled to?.................................................................................................................. 6
5. Risk Assessment, Conclusion and Sentence Proposal of the report provided......6
Section 4 Risk Assessment................................................................................. 7
Section 5 Conclusion and Sentence Proposal.....................................................7
Reference:.................................................................................................................. 9
1

Criminology
PART A: GENERAL PRINCIPLES of youth justice.
Youth justice has an important part in the criminal justice system. Youth justice system is facing a broad
range of challenges in the last few years. Youth offending team and custodial establishment played a
significant part in the development of practice within the youth justice system. We cannot accuse only the
government for lacking legislative zeal in the field of youth justice.
The National Association is the organization of the youth justice system. This association exclusively
campaigns for the children’s rights and justice which is troubled by the law. It seeks to promote the
welfare of the children and to advocate the children violating the law in England’s youth justice system.
(Youth Justice Statistics, 2019).
1. Two distinct philosophies have dominated youth justice theory and practice namely
“justice” and “welfare” approaches:-
There has been a conflict between the welfare and justice approach. Welfare approach priorities
the welfare of juvenile and the young people who is in the anxiety with the law and the principle
of Justice Approach is that the justice is an essential legal safeguard for ensuring the rights of
children in contradiction of inconsistent or irrational methods of sentence.
The New Labour government is setting up a youth justice board and the youth offending team for
the justice and welfare of youth. It is also restructuring the non-custodial punishment for the
youth available to youth court that have intensified community programmers in some quite
innovative efforts to reduce youth offence.
The best recognized distinction in every model is justice and welfare approach of the youth
justice system around the world. In every model of the youth justice system they mark out the
differences of these two basic approaches.
The welfare approach emphasizes paternalism and protection which believes in the treatment of
the youth offenders rather than giving any rigorous punishment or formal justice. Because
children are on the stage of immaturity they cannot take decision on their own basis, the level of
2

Criminology
their thinking cannot be regarded as rational and self-responsible, but relatively their offences or
any illegal actions are the creation of the environment where they are living. All illegal action of
the youth offender is the attribution of dysfunctional element of the environment of that youth.
Welfare approach believes that it is the duty of the justice system to ascertain the real social
cause of the offences and preserve these fundamental social cause of offence instead of
punishing them for the offence itself without identifying the root and cause of the offence.
The common criticism of this model is that every individual is responsible for one’s own action
and this theory is undermining this idea. It has been also criticized for compulsory intervention
without trail and indeterminate treatment these practices encourage state dependence, and
destroy an individual’s rights. Young person’s responsibilities increase with the increasing rights
of young person. If the citizenship is the right or the young person in same case if they do any
illegal act then they must accept the responsibility of their actions...it was stated by Hazel
(2008).
The justice methodology is in the favour of sentencing and prescribed justice and in sentencing.
This theory believes that making offender accountable for their crimes is the best idea for
reducing the crime in the society. All individuals including children are fully responsible and
reason agents for their own actions and so that they should be responsible before the law. The
charge of the justice system in this approach is to consider the degree of the culpability of the
offender’s then punishing them according to their involvement and seriousness of their offending
behavior. Fundamental to this model are the inverse concepts of rights and responsibilities.
Every individual is responsible for their own action and their human rights would be endangered
by legal system while confirming the all involvements with full legal process. Justice approach
was not in favour of treating the individuals for their action rather it believes in awarding
sentence to them for their offences or criminal actions. (Pickford, 2012)
2. Which two theories of theoretical criminology best explain the causes of youth offending?
3