Recent publications

• Allen, R. (2011) Last Resort? Exploring the reduction in child imprisonment 2008-11. London, Prison Reform Trust.

• Amadi, J.  (2008) Piloting Penalty Notices for Disorder on 10- to 15-year-olds, results from a one year pilot, Ministry of Justice Research Series 19/08, London, Ministry of Justice.

• Berman, G. (2011) Prison Population Statistics, SN/SG/4334. London, House of Commons Library.

• Howard League (2011) Twisted, The Use of Force on Children in Custody. London, Howard League.

• Jacobson, J., Bhardwa, B., Gyateng, T., Hunter, G. and Hough, M. (2011) Punishing disadvantage, a profile of children in custody. London, PRT.

• Muncie, J. (2011) ‘Illusions of Difference, Comparative Youth Justice in the Devolved United Kingdom’ Br J Criminol Vol 51, 40-57.

• NACRO (2011) Reducing the Number of Children and Young People in Custody. London, NACRO.

• Office of the Children’s Commissioner (with User Voice) (2011) Young people’s views on restraint in the secure estate. London, Office of the Children’s Commissioner.

• Sentencing Guidelines Council (2009) Overarching Principles – Sentencing Youths, Definitive Guideline. London, SGC.

• Summerfield, A. (2011) Children and Young People in Custody 2010–11, An analysis of the experiences of 15–18-year-olds in prison, HM Inspectorate of Prisons/Youth Justice Board. London, TSO.

• Youth Justice Board (2010) National Standards for Youth Justice Services, B420. London, YJB.

• Youth Justice Board / Ministry of Justice (2011) Youth Justice Statistics 2009/10 England and Wales Statistics bulletin. London, YJB. 

• Wilson, E. and Hinks, S. (2011) Assessing the predictive validity of the Asset youth risk assessment tool using the Juvenile Cohort Study (JCS) Ministry of Justice Research Series 10/11. London, Ministry of Justice.

International comparisons

• Bouhours, B. and Daly, K. (2007) 'Youth Sex Offenders in Court' Punishment and Society Vol 9(4) 371-394. [This article reviews a study of 385 sexual offence cases dealt with in South Australia 1995-2001 and analyses the ways in which judges balance the seriousness and danger of the offending with the youthfulness of the offenders.]

• Goldson, B. and Muncie, J. (2006) 'Rethinking Youth Justice: Comparative Analysis, International Human Rights and Research Evidence', Youth Justice 2006 Vol 6: 91-106.

• Howard League (2008) Punishing Children. A Survey of criminal responsibility and approaches across Europe, London: Howard League.

• The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) (2010) Youth's Needs and Services: Findings From the Survey of Youth in Residential Placement (available online at ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/publications/PubAbstract.asp?pubi=249735, accessed 10.11.2010)[This is the first US national study to gather information on youth in custody by surveying detained offenders. The second in a series, the bulletin reports on the survey's findings on youth in custody's needs and the services they receive.]

• Ofsted (2010) Transition through detention and custody, Arrangements for learning and skills for young people in custodial or secure settings, Ofsted, London (www.ofsted.gov.uk/publications/090115)

• The US Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) (2009) Characteristics of Juvenile Suicide in Confinement. (http://www.ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/publications/PubAbstract.asp?pubi=235973 )

Pre-'punishment' court orders and contracts

• Arthur, R. (2005) 'Punishing Parents for the Crimes of their Children' Howard Journal Vol 44(3) 233-253.

• Burney, E. and Gelsthorpe, L. (2008) ‘Do we need a naughty step? Rethinking the parenting order after ten years’ The Howard Journal Vol 47(5) pp 470-485.

• Burney, E. (2005) Making People Behave: Anti-Social Behaviour, Politics and Policy, Cullompton, Devon: Willan Publishing.  [For a review of this useful book see: Wilson, D. (2006) Book Review: Making People Behave: Anti-Social Behaviour, Politics and Policy, Youth Justice 2006 6: 161-162.]

• Home Office (2006) Tackling Anti-Social Behaviour National Audit 'Value for Money' Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, HC 99 2006-7.

• For latest ASBO statistics: http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs11/asbo2009.xls

• Ramsay, P. (2009) ‘Why Is it Wrong to Breach an ASBO?’ , LSE Legal Studies Working Paper No. 20/2009 (Available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1491611)
  The abstract reads as follows:
  “This article reviews the case law on the offence of breach of an ASBO and offers a theory of the public wrong identified by the courts as the reason for punishing people who commit the offence. It argues that the wrong that unifies all breaches of an ASBO is the insecurity caused by defendants’ failure to address their disposition to cause insecurity in others. The greater is the insecurity that they are thought to have caused as a consequence of their failure, the more serious is the wrong and the more severe is the sentence to which they are liable. It is argued that this public protection theory gives a better account of the positive law than two competing accounts, namely the theory that the offence is simple defiance of the court’s authority and the theory that breach of an ASBO is a ‘composite offence’ intended to aggregate many minor wrongs for the purposes of sentencing. Some of the problems and questions raised by the public protection rationale for punishment are briefly considered.”

• Respect Task Force (2007) Tools and powers to tackle anti-social behaviour, London: Home Office.

Community programmes

• Burnett, R. and Roberts, G. (eds) (2004) What Works in Probation and Youth Justice: Developing Evidence-Based Practice, Willan.

Detention:

• Challen, M. and Walton, T. (2004) Juveniles in Custody: A unique insight into the perception of young people held in Prison Service custody in England and Wales, London: Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Prisons.

• Goldson, B. (2006) 'Damage, Harm and Death in Child Prisons in England and Wales: Questions of Abuse and Accountability' The Howard Journal Vol 45(5) 449-467. [In the context of current United Nations concern about violence against children this article examines the treatment and death of children in prison service establishments.]

• Douglas, N. and Plugge, E. (2007) 'The health of young women in custody: emerging concerns and a case for advocacy' Childright CR 238, 14-17.

• NACRO (2007) 'The detention and training order', Youth Crime Briefing, June, London, NACRO

• Prison Reform Trust (PRT) Children: Innocent Until Proven Guilty
  This report from the Prison Reform Trust (PRT) reveals that three quarters of under-18 year olds locked up on remand do not subsequently receive a jail sentence but are either acquitted or given a community sentence. The report can be downloaded here www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk

• Smallridge, P. and Williamson, A. (2008) Independent Review of Restraint in Juvenile Secure Settings. London, Ministry of Justice/Department for Children, Schools and Families. 

Public opinion

• Roberts, J. and Hough, M. (2005) 'Sentencing Young Offenders: Public Opinion in England and Wales' Criminal Justice Vol 5(3) 211-232.

Risk and exclusion

• DfES (2004) Offenders of the future? Assessing the risk of children and young people becoming involved in criminal or antisocial behaviour, Research report.

• Gray, P. (2007) 'Youth Justice, Social Exclusion and the Demise of Social Justice' The Howard Journal Vol 46(40 401-416.

• House of Commons Home Affairs Committee (2007) Young Black People and the Criminal Justice System, HC 181-1. London, Stationery Office.

• McAuley, R (2006) Crime, Youth and Social Exclusion. Cullompton: Willan.

• Social Exclusion Unit (2004) Mental health and social exclusion.

• Youth Justice Board (2004) Differences or discrimination. Minority ethnic young people in the youth justice system

• Youth Justice Board (2008) Evaluation of the Youth Inclusion Programme - Phase 2 (Summary) (B370)
  [Phase 2 ran 2003-6. Each project dealt with a core 50 arrestees with the number of previous offences varying from 9 to 406. The report concluded that ‘The programme experienced mixed fortunes in terms of its four targets’ but that ‘figures do not convey anything about the complexity of the problems faced by the young people, or the quality of their relationships and the support offered by the programme staff’.]

Rights of young offenders

• CRAE (2004) State of Children's Rights in England 2004.

• Gillespie, A. (2005) 'Reprimanding Juveniles and the Right to Due Process' MLR vol 68(6) 1006-1015.

• Hollingsworth, K. (2007) 'Judicial approaches to children's rights in youth crime' CFLQ Vol 19(1) 42-59. [This article focuses on three recent English cases and highlights the lack of judicial consistency in relation to children's rights under the ECHR.]

• Parry, R.G. (2006) 'Protecting the juvenile suspect: what exactly is the appropriate adult supposed to do?' CFLQ Vol 18(3) 373-396. [This article discusses the role of the appropriate adult at the police station when a young person under the age of 17 is being detained and questioned. It questions whether the role is adequate to achieve its stated aims of protecting the suspect and upholding his or her rights.]

• UK Government Periodic Report to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child: http://www.everychildmatters.gov.uk/resources-and-practice/IG00249/