Youth Violence: Are ASBOs Enough?

Recently, the problems of "youth crime and violence", and the danger it poses to law and order and to the security of lives and property, has become a national concern. The situation is gradually drifting into a state of "learned helplessness" for youth offending professionals and policy makers.

Youth behaviour is, to a large extent, just as much a  function of environment as it is personality: both pre-natal and post-natal environments that youth are exposed to have some significant impact on their behaviour. It is for this reason that society, as a developmental environment, needs to be examined.

Applying criminological theories to youth behaviour can be particularly useful in providing some explanation for youth violence. Many youth criminology theories hold that youth offending behaviour is due to age, rational choice (perhaps for economic or hedonistic gain), missed opportunities (inability of modern youth to achieve goals and aspirations), peer influence due to lack of self assertiveness and, very importantly, the lack of socialisation by family, religion or identifying group. Some criminologists argue for an inevitable “boys will always be boys” position, whilst others believe that the escalation of youth offending behaviour is due to the media's construction and perpetuation of youth violence.

My own understanding is that modern society is failing young people largely because of inadequate socialisation or misguided moral reasoning. For instance, in a study conducted by Ken Bell to ascertain sources of morality, attitudes and values among youth in Los Angeles, he found that in 1980, home, school, peers, television and the church were identified in a ranking order of importance. In a repeat survey in 1996, the order had changed to peers, television, school, home and the church.

In addition to ineffective state institutions, there is a growing lack of the personal responsibility of parents, who often tend to outsourse blame for their children's anti-social behaviour. Whereas single parenting or uncommitted parenthood itself is not the problem, it is supposed that many put the success of their careers far above parenting. Parents often become uninvolved in the social, emotional and psychological developments of their children; only very few children would not derail in such circumstances.

Putting neglected children into the hands of the state is out of the question. As well as being a gross violation of human rights, the behavioural outcome of children brought up in care homes is not encouraging. Secretary of state for justice, Jack Straw, stated "if you go to jails for young people, you will find that far too many of the youngsters there, who have been locked up for committing crimes, have been in care. It is very depressing and we have got to do something about it".

My advice to Jack Straw would be to encourage our youth to develop a culture of responsibility early in life. The government is not solely to blame when a crime prevention policy fails; we must all take some responsibility. Expecting a single policy such as the ASBO to fix these problems is vastly ambitious and unrealistic.