Various theories have been put forward in recent decades to account for the reported worsening level of youth violence and alienation. There is a great deal of concern over this phenomenon but little consensus on what can be done about it. Among the current theories are these:
“It’s an exaggeration – aren’t older generations always complaining?” It is difficult to obtain comparable figures for the situation 30 to 50 years ago, and compare those with today. Is it the media that are exaggerating what has always been endemic in British society - a low level of teenage violence? The statistics that are available claim higher levels not only of violence but also of the kinds of vandalism that were not evident in earlier decades. Is it merely that more violence and vandalism are reported? Current evidence, in contrast, indicates that many people do not report this kind of problem.
“The police are overstretched and there is no longer a `community bobby` in every neighbourhood?” The paperwork required in an increasingly bureaucratic society is a significant problem for all the services, and there is little likelihood of a return to meaningful levels of neighbourhood policing. The numerous demands made on the police have to be prioritised, so that only the most urgent or the most high profile cases get adequate attention. The State's emphasis on achieving 'targets'has led to an increase in arrests and cautions for very minor offences, taking up time that they claim could be better spent on more serious cases. The police are also unhappy about the fact that many of those whom they arrest for violence or vandalism are given what is claimed to be a “slap on the wrist” - a caution, a short community service sentence, or a suspended sentence.
“The judges and magistrates tend to be too lenient in their handling of young people who are prosecuted for violence?” This has long been an area of strong debate, with much of the public believing that the Courts are too ‘soft’ and claiming that crimes involving violence are too lightly handled, whereas crimes involving property and fraud are treated more severely than seems justified. It is difficult to achieve clarity on this issue, as it would require researchers to observe a number of trials and also be aware of the official sentencing guidelines given to the judiciary.
“Government Ministers are at fault because their judicial and other related policies tend to put the rights of criminals before the latter’s responsibilities to society?” This argument was put strongly by a senior judge, when handing down sentences for one of a series of murders committed by gangs of youths on uninvolved bystanders. It has long been argued that there is today such a strong focus on the human rights of those being prosecuted that the rights of the victims and of society itself are given too little attention. Again this is a debatable matter, because a narrow focus on the background of any of those involved can offer valid explanations for their behaviour, however unjustified their actions.
“The views of young people themselves are seldom taken into account in a society where only limited responsibility is given to young people in any walk of life?” It can be argued that if young people were given more power to control their own environments, they may well act far more strongly against those of their peers who offend. The problem here is that in a situation where young people are entrusted with only limited control over their lives and environments, the expectation of the older generation is that young people need to demonstrate an ability to take responsibility before this can be granted to them. That is a chicken and egg situation, unlikely to be resolved without major research. What studies have been undertaken, for example on how successful ‘free schools’ are in helping their troubled youngsters to succeed at school and in adult life, are strongly influenced by the somewhat anarchic philosophy of those who set up such schools and the untypical students whose parents send them there in the hope of reformation. Until research is done into giving youngsters responsibility within normal institutions, it will be difficult to reach any conclusions.
“The quality of parenting lies at the heart of this problem, with a significant minority of parents failing to provide the right environment within an individualistic society where there is little community support for families in difficulty?” It is hard to question this hypothesis, given the evidence of the large numbers of British children who grow up in single-parent families (one of the largest proportions in the world), the financial and welfare benefit pressures on both parents to take up full-time employment and leave their children to be minded by others, the failure of society to ‘celebrate’ child birth and child-rearing in the way this occurs in many other countries, and the alienation felt by many disempowered parents, knowing that when the inevitable challenges of child-rearing occur, they will have little support from their peers and a much lower level of support from the professional services than was available 30 to 50 years ago.
It is easy to hypothesise about the problems related to the minority of ‘wayward youth’ in our society. The challenge is whether society can recognise its current shortcomings and is willing to put resources into supporting all parents at the levels needed by individual families, or whether increased State benefits will continue to cloud our understanding of what families, parents and children really need.
Ref. empowerment 007, ECDC. Sources: : Daily Telegraph, 18.01.08 and other media reports on the problems of youth crime and alienation.
Copyright: ECDC/PCEO Bristol UK 2008 Return to ArchiveTo print article Hold Ctrl Click P