NCJ Number
189216
Journal
British Journal of Criminology Volume: 41 Issue: 2 Dated: Spring 2001 Pages: 362-380
Date Published
2001
Length
19 pages
Annotation
This article raises questions about the methodology, assumptions, political agenda, and conclusions of the British Audit Commission's recent reports on youth justice in England and Wales.
Abstract
The Audit Commission's two reports on youth justice, "Misspent Youth" (1996) and "Misspent Youth" (1998), have been influential in the development of youth justice policy in England and Wales over the past 4 years. Much of the material in these reports, however, is questionable. The reports show a lack of understanding of the complexity of youth justice and the youth justice criminal system. Often the reports present simplistic figures. They engage or ignore political and legislative issues to suit their purposes; for example, the 1998 report offers a noncritical commentary on what was then the Crime and Disorder Bill; it did not analyze the likely costs, efficiency, or effectiveness of the legislation. The reports regularly select evidence that supports their arguments while ignoring alternative views. Overall, the Commission's reports lack a clear understanding of the youth justice process, confuse individual offenders with individual charges, confuse average and marginal costs, and make judgments that are not adequately based on the evidence presented. Some of the conclusions and recommendations are more political than actuarial, and there seems to be a close relationship between the authors of the reports and the Labour government. There is an undercurrent of objectification and dehumanization of youth throughout the reports. 62 references