Social Policy and Youth Justice - Coursework Example

Social Policy and Youth Justice Introduction With advancement in the of modernization of the world, one after another innovative and riveting social policy approaches have been presented over past decades for development and welfare purposes. Though all such approaches tend to largely focus on world crisis and social disability issues and work to enhance the intricate process of service provision, yet not one social approach could be labeled all-inclusive, foolproof, or suitable for all times. This is because amendments have to be made time to time in order to make a welfare approach properly relate to the highly dynamic and structured process of providing services. This essay is primarily based on contemplating different policy approaches namely welfare, neo-liberal, new labor, and coalition approach and reviewing relevant literature as a way of finding out what it has to say on the function of such approaches and how they have contributed on individual bases in affecting the nature of service provision. The principal area discussed in the paper in relevance to these policies will be youth justice and the essay basically aims at scrutinizing how one policy after another over the past many years worked to inculcate structure, solidarity, and stability in the youth justice system. There are even some issues reported concerning the relationship between these social policies and juvenile justice which will be assessed concisely. Moreover, the ideology and outcomes of each policy will also be evaluated to analyze the nature of influence exerted on different groups in multiple ways. Welfare Approach Welfare approach is widely considered to be a very patent and thoughtful suggestion towards betterment of juvenile justice policy. The welfare model was basically designed to foster normal and proper development of youth in the world because the ideology behind the model suggests that juveniles who tend to engage in reckless endangerment in their early years are at high risk of transforming into hardcore criminals as adults (AIHW 1998, p. 4). This is why it is the ultimate responsibility of the state authorities to ensure proper development of youth. The commentators and proponents of the welfare approach strive to restore the rights of the young people to keep them away from crime and help them become better citizens. A survey of youth justice services in the Australia suggests that the philosophy underpinning the welfare approach is to affect the youth groups in such a way that responsible citizenship could be adequately encouraged among young offenders (Keys Young Pty Ltd 1997 cited in AIHW 1998, p. 8). The welfare approach also serves to encourage families to remain highly concerned with their children even when they become adults. The welfare approach led to giving the states around the world increased authority to intrude into the youngsters’ and the concerned relatives’ lives. However, it is also proposed that such an intrusion also propelled considerable youth injustices in different times while intending to improve community services. Literature suggests that people have had concerns, criticisms, and issues regarding the welfare model from the mid-1960s and most of them are based on inability of this model to ensure and “promote adequate attention to the rights of young people” (AIHW 1998, p. 4). Two major areas of focus of the welfare approach are youth rehabilitation and development and more criticisms claim that focus on the area of rehabilitation is losing ground which has “increased the possibility of adult criminality” (AIHW 1998, p. 5) as is evident from the present day worldwide crime statistics. Save the criticism and concerns, it is implied that in context of young children and youth groups, the values of welfare have significantly influenced the nature of service provision over the years after being integrated into the youth justice system. The concept of welfare works to improve the youth development process through multiple ways and government strategies to engage children in interesting areas to guide them away from indulgence in crime and waywardness and inducing families to show greater concern for children are just some examples of those ways. The factor deemed responsible for enforcing the welfare concept is the Children Act 1989 which stressed all state authorities to “engage children in their areas to divert any pressures and influences that may lead them to offend” (Audit Commission 1998, p. 76 cited in Gale 2011). Neo-Liberal Approach In order to evaluate developments in youth justice and service provision, the concept of neo-liberalism is also worth discussing. The advocates of neo-liberalism claim that early interventional strategies like identifying anti-social behavior and offense tendencies in juveniles constitute the background of this approach. They also claim that children who are at high risk of engaging in offense and crime particularly belong from the populations of “street children, the disadvantaged, the impoverished, migrant children, the destitute and so on” (Muncie 2005, p. 41) who gradually during the course of life become easy victims of the increasing distances between the rich and poor in the society. Neo-liberalism is deemed responsible for increasing similarities between criminal justice systems across different western societies. Research suggests that “the decades since the 1970s have seen a period of authoritarian drift and neoliberal styles of governing” (Carrabine 2008, p. 15) which set in contrast with welfare principles. The impact of neo-liberal approach on youth rights is huge as for example, it has helped the states tremendously in fighting against youth prostitution. It has also aided in controlling the rate of crime and deviance in different youth groups by reinforcing balanced relationships. But, it is also claimed that for the last two decades, juveniles benefiting from neo-liberalism are a minority because for the majority, it only tends to deepen the suffering because it is attacking the youth welfare programs by condemning them which interferes with youth rights. Protection and progress to children is denied by neo-liberalist political ideas because it makes the rich richer and the poor poorer (Martinez & Garcia 1996). However like other policies, neo-liberal responses also fail to resolve issues involved in juvenile crime and delinquency to a certain extent. This approach has also remained involved in certain controversies surrounding the youth justice system over the past many years though like others, restoring youth justice by identifying wrong behaviors in juveniles and making them take responsibility for their actions is its mainstream ideology. Still, a great number of critics claim that youth justice strategies and decisions implemented worldwide are increasingly influenced by neo-liberal theories now than any other social approach. Both relatives and other people are encouraged by such social programs operating under neo-liberalist ideas to relate more with juveniles who are high risk as a way of keeping them far from social isolation and improper development. Such programs and strategies include efforts which directly address criminal tendencies in juveniles to design proper interventions later. However, the neo-liberal concept pays less attention to the social contexts of crime and offense and focuses more on designing interventions by raising awareness in the families and communities about the roles they can play in ensuring healthy development of youth. The impact of neo-liberalism on youth justice development in the UK is also significant. This concept stresses the government to be less involved in social programs which try to ensure good development by making the youth depend on welfare. It instead stresses that the states should take effective actions because they are also to be blamed for youth offense as in this matter youth alone should not be blamed. New Labor Approach The growing incidence of youth crime has raised concern for all states around the globe for which purpose the new labor approach has rapidly become a top priority as suggested by research. It is claimed that the most significant purpose and high priority of new labor approach is to tackle the issue of youth crime in the most effective manner. Juvenile crime statistics before 1997 show that majority of the crimes were committed by young men who start engaging in offensive activities in their teen years which serves to ground the fact that making efforts to make youth prone to crime interested in constructive areas as early as possible is very important as this can effectively keep them away from becoming hardcore criminals. Though this is exactly the purpose of new labor concept to address youth crime in order to strengthen and solidify youth justice system, truth is that “not all of its reforms have been welcomed” (Batty 2005). New labor’s strategy for youth justice system has been extensively evaluated over the years since its introduction. Still, it is claimed that “criminal justice reform has certainly been at the heart of New Labour’s public policy agenda” (Solomon 2009, p. 43). During the years between 1997 and 2001 new labor policy focused more on “a root and branch reform of youth justice” (Solomon 2009, p. 43) to distract the youth from offense but after that during period between 2001 and 2008, a series of wide ranging youth justice policy reforms have been introduced. It is also suggested that most of the new labor oriented strategies are based on “anti-social behaviour, policing, community safety, prisons and probation and violent crime” (Solomon 2009, p. 43). General consensus is that the central feature of this ideology is largely related to strict lawmaking and supervision of juveniles. Research also claims that a range of reforms for young offenders were introduced by new labor ideology in England and Wales in 2000 which seek to promote child safety orders based on assigning a social worker to any child under 10 identified with antisocial disorder. Also, these reforms work to identify as many as possible under 10 children wandering aimlessly on the streets late at night. Final warnings are also given to such children to tackle their unbalanced behavioral tendencies and strict supervision and surveillance programs are also arranged (Batty 2005). Coalition Approach The coalition approach to ensure better youth development, restricted youth crime, and improved service provision seeks to design and implement multiple strategies directed at preventing incidence of crime, offense, and delinquency in the youth. Like other youth justice social policies, this ideology is also based on evaluating the key risk factors which lead to offense in context of juveniles. Furthermore, community engagement is also emphasized by this approach because the more such juveniles interact with the community, the better as such an attitude helps in controlling the expanding premises of social isolation which negatively interferes with healthy youth development. It is suggested by research that “the coalition approach to preventing crime will encourage partnership working with individuals, communities, and local and national agencies” (Parliamentary copyright 2011). This concept has tremendously helped the state authorities in adequately addressing the tough process of service provision to the youth by introducing a National Citizen Service social program which is also one of its key initiatives. This program seeks to provide “16 year olds with an opportunity to develop the skills needed for active, responsible citizenship and community involvement” (Parliamentary copyright 2011). Children and youth around the world have an absolute right to the glorious opportunity of participating in such social programs which train youngsters to become active and responsible citizens by increasingly interacting with the community. It is also worth mentioning that “the Coalition Government is committed to preventing the damage caused by drinking and drug use” (Parliamentary copyright 2011). Instead of getting more and more underprivileged children hooked on welfare programs for long periods, the governments should focus more on promoting such character building social programs as is stressed by the coalition concept. This concept is committed to cut crime among different youth groups which is highly thoughtful and critically important because by cutting crime, better youth development is directly affected in a positive manner. It is an indisputable reality that violence exerts a very bad influence on children’s developmental process and may even disrupt it forever if proper initiatives are not taken by the state at the right time. Another commendable area introduced by coalition approach to improve service provision for the betterment of youth is related to neighborhood policing which is also based on restricting crime and anti-social behavior which play a major role in instigating offense among youth. References Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) 1998, Juvenile justice and youth welfare: a scoping study, Elect Printing, Canberra. Batty, D 2005, Youth justice: the issue explained, The Guardian, viewed, 04 January, 2012, Carrabine, E 2008, Youth Justice in the United Kingdom, viewed, 04 January, 2012, Gale, TJ 2011, Should the Youth Justice System be based on Values of Punishment, Welfare or Both?, Crimspace, viewed, 04 January, 2012, Martinez, E & Garcia, A 1996, What is Neoliberalism?: A Brief Definition for Activists, CORPWATCH, viewed, 04 January, 2012, Muncie, J 2005, The globalization of crime control – the case of youth and juvenile justice: Neoliberalism, policy convergence and international conventions, Theoretical Criminology, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 35-64. Parliamentary copyright 2011, The Governments Approach to Crime Prevention: etc - Home Affairs Committee, viewed, 04 January, 2012,   Solomon, E 2009, New Labour and Crime Prevention in England and Wales: What Worked?, IPC REVIEW, vol. 3, pp. 41-65. Read More