Rethinking Youth Justice: Why England and Wales Must Abandon Outdated Practices
Jailing children does not make us safer – Dylan, whose name has been changed to protect his identity, recently secured his freedom after nearly two decades behind bars. His journey through the criminal justice system began when he was merely twelve years old. Alongside his brother, he approached a stranger requesting a cigarette. When the woman declined, the boys grabbed her handbag, causing her to stumble, and fled the scene. What followed was a conviction that would cast a long shadow over his life, culminating in a detention for public protection (DPP) sentence—the juvenile counterpart to the controversial imprisonment for public protection (IPP) system.
At thirteen, Dylan received this sentence, though he had no way of knowing how profoundly it would shape his future. He completed his GCSE examinations while confined, and was eventually released before reaching eighteen. For periods, he managed to thrive within the community. Yet personal setbacks, combined with inadequate housing options and unresolved childhood trauma, repeatedly triggered his recall to prison. The DPP meant he could be sent back even without committing fresh offenses, such as failing to reside in an approved hostel.
Only earlier this year did the Parole Board acknowledge that the indeterminate nature of his sentence had become the primary driver of his recalls. These returns were connected more to compliance issues than to any heightened danger he posed. Nearly twenty years after his original sentencing, Dylan achieved unconditional release. While new DPPs were eliminated in 2012, numerous legacy sentences remain active today.
England and Wales: European Outliers in Youth Justice
The Bar Council of England and Wales recently completed a comprehensive expert examination of the minimum age for criminal responsibility. Currently standing at ten years old, this threshold represents the lowest across Europe. The Council recommends elevating it to fourteen. Despite societal progress since the nineteenth century, when Charles Dickens passionately criticized the injustices facing young people, the nation continues to subject children to adult-style legal proceedings.
Under existing criminal law, a ten-year-old may be held by police after arrest and subjected to identical procedures and environments as adult suspects. Research indicates that forty-five percent of arrested children spend the night in detention, with an average confinement lasting eleven and a half hours. Furthermore, young people struggle with the cognitive requirements of legal processes, making them more susceptible to suggestion and compliance during interviews. These challenges undermine the fairness of convictions obtained against children.
The Long-Term Consequences of Early Criminalization
Even when children avoid extended licensing periods, the mark of navigating the criminal system persists throughout their lives. Statistics reveal that two-thirds of young offenders subsequently commit additional crimes. Additionally, eighty percent of adults who repeatedly offend first encountered the justice system during their childhood years. This pattern disproportionately impacts specific demographics.
Children with disabilities and those from minority ethnic communities are currently overrepresented within legal frameworks. Young people with any degree of social-care involvement face higher probabilities of receiving convictions or cautions. Those within the legal system frequently possess histories of childhood adversity, encompassing physical and sexual abuse, violence exposure, traumatic brain injuries, parental loss, or bereavement.
Recent figures demonstrate that in the twelve months ending March 2025, 1,590 children between ages ten and fourteen were convicted of offenses. Only twenty-two received immediate custodial sentences. Among 233 first-time entrants aged ten to twelve during the same period, merely one was given immediate custody. These numbers underscore the urgent need for reform, ensuring that England and Wales move beyond what many describe as a Dickensian approach to juvenile justice.
