Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T01:22:53.119Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘It was about trust’– Practitioners as policy makers and the improvement of inter-professional communication within the 1980s youth justice process

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Mark Telford  and
Sotirios Santatzoglou
Mark Telford
Affiliation:
Law School, University of Southampton
Sotirios Santatzoglou
Affiliation:
Law School, Keele University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The study of criminal justice policy making is generally approached from the perspective of structural variables (eg social, cultural or economic), or, if inclined towards agency-led approaches, on the policy making activities of ‘elites’. The potential of practitioners to shape policy has been relatively neglected. This paper explores a striking example of practitioner-led criminal justice policy transformation: the decline in the use of custody for juveniles in England and Wales in the 1980s. The focus of the study is on the communicative origins of a philosophical turnaround in youth justice localities through the empowerment of youth justice practitioners. Drawing on empirical sources (including reflective interviews with key participant-observers) the paper explores, in depth, the occurrence and the meaning of local structural transformations. It is argued that the emergence of trust relations between participants in local youth justice processes was the key development behind the transformation of the state of penal culture towards one of ‘communicative rationality’ which, in turn, enabled the dramatic reduction in the use of custody. It is suggested that proponents of more moderate penal policy could draw valuable lessons from this episode.

Type
Research Article
Information
Legal Studies , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , March 2012 , pp. 58 - 77
Copyright
Copyright © Society of Legal Scholars 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Garland, D The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001)Google Scholar; Simon, J Governing Through Crime: How the War on Crime Transformed American Democracy and Created a Culture of Fear (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007)Google Scholar; Wacquant, L Prisons of Poverty (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2009)Google Scholar.

2. Tonry, M (ed) Crime, Punishment and Politics in Comparative Perspective (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007)Google Scholar; Lacey, N The Prisoners' Dilemma: Political Economy and Punishment in Contemporary Democracies (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pratt, J ‘Scandinavian exceptionalism in an era of penal excess, part I: the nature and roots of Scandinavian exceptionalism’ (2008) 48 Br J Criminol 119 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3. Loader, I ‘for penal moderation: notes towards a public philosophy of punishment’ (2010) 14 Theoretical Criminology 349 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4. Lacey, above n 2.

5. Green, D When Children Kill Children: Penal Populism and Political Culture (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lacey, above n 2; Rutherford, A Transforming Criminal Policy (Winchester: Waterside Press, 1996)Google Scholar; Tonry, M Thinking About Crime: Sense and Sensibility in American Penal Culture (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004)Google Scholar.

6. Bourdieu, P The Logic of Practice (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1992)Google Scholar.

7. Rutherford, A Criminal Justice and the Pursuit of Decency (Winchester: Waterside Press, 1993)Google Scholar.

8. Baldwin, J and McConville, M Negotiated Justice (London: Martin Robertson, 1977)Google Scholar; Herbert, A ‘Mode of trial and the influence of local justice’ (2004) 43 Howard J Crim Just 65 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hood, R Sentencing in Magistrates' Courts: A Study in Variations of Policy (London: Stevens and Sons, 1962)Google Scholar; Hucklesby, A ‘Court culture: an explanation of variations in the use of bail by magistrates' courts’ (1997) 36 Howard J Crim Just 129 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Raine, JW Local Justice – Ideals & Realities (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1989)Google Scholar; Tarling, R ‘Sentencing practice in magistrates' courts revisited’ (2006) 45 Howard J Crim Just 29 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9. Paterson, F and Whittaker, C ‘Criminal justice cultures: negotiating bail and remand’ in Noaks, L, Dobash, R and Dobash, R (eds) Contemporary Issues in Criminology (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1995) p 261 Google Scholar.

10. Lipsky, M Street-level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in the Public Services (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1980)Google Scholar.

11. Faulkner, D ‘Government and public services in modern Britain: what happens next?’ (2008) 79 Political Quarterly 232 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12. Mintzberg, H ‘Crafting strategy’ (1987) July–August Harvard Business Review 66 Google Scholar.

13. Bourdieu, above n 6, p 4.

14. Ibid, p 8.

15. May, T Social Research: Issues, Methods and Process (Buckingham: Open University Press, 3rd edn, 2001) p 132 Google Scholar.

16. Carr, EH What is History? (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 2nd edn, 1987) p 23 Google ScholarPubMed.

17. Hartley, LP The Go-Between (London: H Hamilton, 1953) p 3 Google Scholar.

18. Carr, above n 16, p 30.

19. Stake, R The Art of Case Study Research (Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1995) p 114 Google Scholar.

20. Allen, R ‘out of jail: the reduction in the use of penal custody for male juveniles 1981–1988’ (1992) 30 Howard J Crim 30 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; C Ball ‘Young offenders and the youth court’[1992] Crim LR 277; Gelsthorpe, L and Morris, A ‘Juvenile justice 1945–1992’ in Maguire, M, Morgan, R and Reiner, R (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994)Google Scholar; Godfrey, D ‘Lost in the myths of crime: the use of penal custody for male juveniles, 1969–1993’ (1996) 35 Howard J Crim Just 287 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Newburn, T ‘Youth, crime, and justice’ in Maguire, M, Morgan, R and Reiner, R (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2nd edn, 1997)Google Scholar; Pitts, J ‘the end of an era’ (1992) 31 Howard J Crim Just 133 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rutherford, A Growing Out of Crime: The New Era (Winchester: Waterside Press, 1992)Google Scholar; Smith, D ‘ “out of Care” 30 years on’ (2010) 10 Criminology and Criminal Justice 119 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21. Unless otherwise stated all statistics are derived from Home Office Criminal Statistics, England and Wales (London: HMSO, 1980–1990).

22. There is an argument that the decline in youth custody during the decade was attributable to demographic trends but as Pitts has pointed out, the numbers of children and young people in the relevant age range of the population decreased by 25% in the period 1979 to 1989 but the falls witnessed in the use of custody for these groups during the same period was much greater (Pitts, above n 20, p 136). Similarly, Newburn argues that while the demographic trends should not be disregarded they cannot explain the decline in the use of custody (Newburn, above n 20, p 644).

23. Downes, D and Morgan, R ‘No turning back: the politics of law and order into the millennium’ in Maguire, M, Morgan, R and Reiner, R (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2nd edn, 1997)Google Scholar.

24. Home Office Young Offenders Cmnd 8045 (London: HMSO, 1980)Google ScholarPubMed.

25. NACRO A Review of the Submissions on the Government White Paper on Young Offenders (NACRO, 1981) p 2.

26. Morris, A and Giller, H ‘Young offenders: law, order and the child-care system’ (1981) 20 Howard J Crim Just 81 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

27. Cohen, S Visions of Social Control: Crime, Punishment and Classification (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1985)Google Scholar; J Pratt ‘The punishment of juveniles and the commodification of time’ in S Jones (ed) British Criminology Conference Proceedings (Bristol: Bristol and Bath Centre of Criminal Justice).

28. Tutt, N ‘a decade of policy’ (1981) 21 Br J Criminol 246 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

29. McEwan, J ‘the Criminal Justice Act: justice, welfare or confusion?’ (1983) 46 MLR 178 Google Scholar.

30. Bottoms, AE ‘Reflections on the renaissance of dangerousness’ (1977) 16 Howard J Crim Just 70 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

31. Pitts, J The Politics of Juvenile Crime (London: Sage, 1988)Google Scholar.

32. Department of Health and Social Security Intermediate Treatment Initiative LAC 1983(3).

33. NACRO Seizing the Initiative: NACRO's Final Report on the DHSS Intermediate Treatment Initiative to Divert Juvenile Offenders from Care and Custody: 1983–1989 (NACRO, 1991) pp 5, 64, 67.

34. Ibid, p 10.

35. Home Office Cautioning Guidelines HOC 14/85.

36. H Giller and N Tutt ‘Police cautioning of juveniles: the continuing practice of diversity’[1987] Crim L R 367.

37. Home Office Punishment, Custody and the Community (London: HMSO, 1988)Google Scholar.

38. See eg Virginia Bottomley, Minister of State for Health, quoted in NACRO Reducing Custody for Juveniles: The DHSS Intermediate Treatment Initiative, Report of the Department of Health and Social Security's Conference held on 3 February 1989 (NACRO Juvenile Crime Section, 1990) p 2.

39. Rutherford, above n 20, pp 112–120.

40. The Children's Society Penal Custody for Juveniles – The Line of Less Resistance, Report of the Children's Society Advisory Committee on Penal Custody and Its Alternatives for Juveniles (The Children's Society, 1989) p 8.

41. NACRO Progress Through Partnership (NACRO Juvenile Crime Section, 1989).

42. Parker, H, Sumner, M and Jarvis, G Unmasking the Magistrates (Milton Keynes: Open University Press, 1989)Google Scholar.

43. Dunbar, I and Langdon, A Tough Justice: Sentencing and Penal Policies in the 1990s (Oxford: Blackstone Press, 1998) p 78 Google Scholar.

44. Rutherford, A ‘Editorial’ (1987) 5(4) Criminal Justice – The Magazine of the Howard League 2 Google Scholar.

45. Rutherford, A ‘the mood and temper of penal policy: curious happenings in England during the 1980s’ (1989) 27 Youth and Policy 27 at 28Google Scholar.

46. Rutherford, above n 20, p 19.

47. We are acutely aware that developments in academic criminology and in national non-governmental organisations undoubtedly played a role in the transformation of youth justice: for example, in the first part of the 1980s, the ‘Lancaster School's’‘systems management’ approach popularised a methodology of a new anti-custodial youth justice professional practice (see Cavadino, M, Crow, I and Dignan, J Criminal Justice 2000: Strategies for a New Century (Winchester: Waterside Press, 1999) pp 181–182 Google Scholar); and organisations such as NACRO, NITFed (National Intermediate Treatment Federation) and the AJJ were crucial in communicating the anti-custodial, diversionary messages code-named as the ‘new orthodoxy’ (see Bottoms, A et al Intermediate Treatment and Juvenile Justice (London: HMSO, 1990) p 6 Google Scholar). Together with the central government initiatives we have identified, these comprised what we see as the external policy dynamics, which paved the way for the diversionary transition which we see, nevertheless, as being primarily rooted in the local practice settings we explore in this paper.

48. Burney, E Sentencing Young People: What Went Wrong with the Criminal Justice Act 1982 (Aldershot: Gower, 1985) p 90 Google Scholar.

49. Parker et al, above n 42, p 173.

50. Rutherford, above n 44, p 2.

51. Ball, C ‘a lost opportunity?’ (1992) 10 Criminal Justice Matters 1 at 6CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

52. Hucklesby, above n 8, pp 140–141.

53. Ibid, p 141.

54. Herbert, above n 8, p 66.

55. Paterson, F and Whittaker, C Operating Bail: Decision Making Under the Bail etc (Scotland) Act 1980 (London: HMSO, 1984) p 3 Google Scholar.

56. Anderson, R Representation in the Juvenile Court (London: Routledge, 1978)Google Scholar; McCabe, S and Treitel, P Juvenile Justice in the United Kingdom: Comparisons and Suggestions for Change (New Approaches to Juvenile Crime, 1983)Google Scholar; Parker, H et al Receiving Juvenile Justice (Oxford: Blackwell, 1981)Google Scholar; Thorpe, D et al Out of Care: The Community Support of Juvenile Offenders (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1980)Google Scholar.

57. Rutherford, above n 44 at 2.

58. D Jones ‘The successful revolution’(1989) March 30 Community Care i–ii.

59. Hester, R ‘Malvern revisited – a personal view’ (1987) September AJJUST 14 at 15–16Google Scholar; Hunnybun, K ‘a review of principal speakers – the Ajj Annual Conference in Place of Custody – Malvern 1988’ (1987) October AJJUST 1 at 3Google Scholar.

60. See, eg Allen, above n 20; Pitts, above n 20; Rutherford, above n 20; Gelsthorpe and Morris, above n 20; Bottoms, A and Dignan, J ‘Youth justice in Great Britain’ (2004) 31 Crime and Justice 21 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Newburn, above n 20.

61. Hester, above n 59, p 16.

62. Bottoms et al, above n 47, p 64.

63. Gibson, B ‘Social workers in court’ (1988) 18 AJJUST 32 at 32Google Scholar.

64. NACRO, above n 38, p 36.

65. Pratt, J ‘Corporatism: the third model of juvenile justice’ (1989) 29 Br J Criminol 236 at 250CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

66. Hunnybun, above n 59, p 1.

67. Bowden, J and Stevens, M ‘Justice for juveniles – a corporate strategy in Northampton’ (1986) 150 Justice of the Peace 326 Google Scholar.

68. NACRO, above n 38, pp 36–37.

69. C Ball ‘Reports for the juvenile court’ in NACRO School Reports in the Juvenile Court – A Second Look: Report of a NACRO Working Party (NACRO, 1988) p 17.

70. Pratt, above n 65, p 241.

71. Ibid, p 252.

72. While it is certainly the case that inter-agency cooperation was promoted by both the Government (see Bottoms et al, above n 47, p 65), the coordinator of the IT initiative, NACRO (see eg NACRO Community Alternatives for Juvenile Offenders – Development Kit (NACRO, 1982) pp 2–4; NACRO, above n 41) and a number of prominent academics, the evidence from the 1980s predominantly demonstrates the occurrence of an organic development of cooperation.

73. Paterson and Whittaker, above n 55.

74. Anderson, above n 56; Parker et al, above n 56.

75. J Dixon and F Gosling ‘Developing a local strategy’[1985] 5 Initiatives: Newsletter of the NACRO Juvenile Offenders Team 3 at 4.

76. Lyon, K ‘Partnership in a local juvenile justice system: the case for marginality’ in Reiner, R and Cross, M (eds) Beyond Law and Order: Criminal Justice Politics and Policy into the 1990s (London: Macmillan, 1991) p 195 Google Scholar.

77. NACRO Project Development Survey-DHSS Initiative, Juvenile Offenders Team (NACRO, 1985) pp 4–5.

78. Y Burgin ‘Information received by the court’ in NACRO Report of a NACRO Working Party: School Reports in the Juvenile Court – a Second Look (NACRO, 1988) p 21.

79. C Stanley ‘The initiative in Kent’[1985] 3 Initiatives: Newsletter of the NACRO Juvenile Offenders Team 4.

80. Ibid.

81. S Wade The Development of the Juvenile Justice Service in Hampshire (1987 to 1991), the Effect on the Criminal Justice Process, and the Implications for Establishing Radical Practice in Statutory Organisations (MPhil, Faculty of Law, University of Southampton, 1996).

82. Ibid, p 69.

83. Bowden and Stevens, above n 67, pp 326–327.

84. Northampton Juvenile Liaison Bureau The First Annual Report from the Northampton Juvenile Liaison Bureau for 1984 (Northamptonshire Juvenile Liaison Bureau, 1984) p 31 (emphasis added).

85. D Jones ‘The need for credibility’[1985] 5 Initiatives: Newsletter of the NACRO Juvenile Offenders Team 1 at 1.

86. Strauss, A Negotiations: Varieties, Contexts, Processes, and Social Order (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1978) p 55 Google Scholar.

87. Pratt, above n 65, p 240.

88. McCabe and Treitel, above n 56.

89. Anderson, above n 56.

90. M Sumner et al ‘The impact of school reports on sentencing’ in NACRO School Reports in the Juvenile Court: A Second Look Report of a NACRO Working Party (NACRO, 1988) pp 10–12.

91. Allen, R ‘from juveniles to young adults: time for change?’ (1989) 20 AJJUST 20 Google Scholar.

92. Jones, above n 85, p 1; Eagle, R and Holland, L ‘Ser recommendations: a guide to practice’ (1987) 13 AJJUST 10 at 11Google Scholar.

93. Wade, above n 81, p 50.

94. Blackmore, J ‘Intermediate treatment: a realistic alternative to custody’ (1987) 5 Criminal Justice – The Magazine of the Howard League 3 Google Scholar; NACRO, above n 33, p 43.

95. See eg J Errington ‘Tracking’ (1984) 1 Initiatives: Newsletter of the NACRO Juvenile Offenders Team 3; Goggins, P ‘Planning a day programme’ (1985) 3 Initiatives: Newsletter of the NACRO Juvenile Offenders Team 3 Google Scholar.

96. Harris, R ‘the life and death of the care order (criminal)’ (1991) 21 British Journal of Social Work 1 Google Scholar.

97. Gouldner, A Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy (New York: Free Press, 1984) p 85 Google Scholar.

98. Anderson, above n 56, p 28.

99. NACRO, above n 38, p 36.

100. Jones, above n 58, p ii.

101. Ibid.

102. Wade, above n 81, p 4.

103. AJJUST October 1989, p 25.

104. J Habermas Theorie des Kommunikativen Handelns (Suhrkamp, 1981).

105. Mathiesen, T ‘Television, public space and prison population’ (2001) 3 Punishment & Society 3 at 39CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

106. Ibid.

107. Bourdieu, above n 6, p 65.

108. Lacey, above n 2, p 189–190.

109. Ibid, p 195.