EDITORIAL : Current Directions in Youth Justice and Young Offender Programming

Abstract

of 14 or 15 is incapable of forming a guilty intention 1 ), allocating personal responsibility for criminal offenses is far from simple when we consider the behavior of those who are under the age of majority. There are those, for example, those who regard young offenders as vulnerable young people who are ‘at risk’ of encountering a wide range of problems across different domains of life. It follows that young offenders, particularly the younger age group, should be offered compassion and support, and that programs should be made available that address a broad range of social and emotional needs. Others, however, regard the offense that the young person has committed as a more appropriate focus, and are mindful of issues of due process and the need to both punish those who break societal rules and deter others from behaving in similar ways. It follows that interventions for young offenders should seek to reduce the harm caused by the young person to the community through intervening in ways that reduce the risk of further offending taking place. Of course, the decision to imprison is one that is made by the courts, and few would disagree with the need to offer programs that meet the basic physical, social, emotional, educational and vocational needs of young people who are separated from their families by incarceration. Custodial administrators have a clear duty of care to keep those young people in their charge safe and healthy, and whenever possible to facilitate their transition from adolescence into responsible adult members of the community. In the first paper of this special issue, Sharon Casey provides an overview of criminological and psychological theories of crime. She argues that service provision in this area should, first and foremost, be informed by an understanding of child development and how developmental factors influence offending. These themes are expanded upon in the following two papers. In the first of these, Vanessa Coppins, Sharon Casey, and Alan Campbell consider the notion of the ‘best interests of the child’ and how this reflects on the treatment of young