Skip to main content

Implementation of Canada’s youth justice minimum age of 12: implications for children in Canada and globally

Abstract

Youth justice minimum age thresholds vary widely and are garnering increased global attention. In 1984, legislation in Canada excluded all children under age 12 from its youth justice system, yet few studies have examined implementation of the statute. We interviewed 22 experts across Canada to understand how the law functions and to guide responses in Canada and other nations. We used an inductive, thematic analysis process. Experts reported that excluding children under 12 from Canada’s youth justice system has been effective in eliminating juvenile legal processing for children under 12, and promoting responses that identify and address the root causes of children’s disruptive behavior outside of the legal system. Experts noted that addressing key gaps in funding and community service provision can reduce service variation by geography, race or ethnicity, socio-economic status, and ability or disability status and can enhance youths’ success. Canada’s experience suggests that for optimal implementation, minimum age laws should be coupled with robust funding and sufficient service provision to achieve racial justice and health equity.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Abrams L, Jordan S, Montero L. What is a Juvenile? A cross-national comparison of youth justice systems. Youth Justice. 2018;18(2):111–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Network NJJ. NJJN policy toolkit: raising the minimum age of Juvenile Court Jurisdiction. Washington: National Juvenile Justice Network; 2021.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Tolliver DG, Abrams LS, Barnert ES. Setting a US national minimum age for Juvenile Justice Jurisdiction. JAMA Pediatrics. 2021;175(7):665–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Child Rights International Network. Minimum Ages of Criminal Responsibility in Europe. https://www.crin.org/en/home/ages/europe. Published 2016. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.

  5. United Nations General Assembly. United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx. Published 1989. Accessed 12 Dec 2021.

  6. Juvenile Delinquents Act, S.C. (1908)

  7. Young Offenders Act, S.C. (1984)

  8. Youth Criminal Justice Act, S.C. (2002)

  9. Child and Family Service Act, 1984, S.O. § 57 (1984)

  10. United Nations. Convention on the Rights of the Child: General comment No. 24. https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/HRBodies/CRC/GC24/GeneralComment24.pdf. Published 2017. Accessed 28 April 2022.

  11. Childhood Offenders Rehabilitation and Safety Act of 2021, US Congress (2021–2022), 117th Sess. (2021).

  12. Yin RK. Case study research: design and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Robinson OC. Sampling in interview-based qualitative research: a theoretical and practical guide. Qual Res Psychol. 2014;11(1):25–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hoagwood KE. Family-based services in children’s mental health: a research review and synthesis. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2005;46(7):690–713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Alexander M. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. New York Jackson, Tenn.: New Press (Distributed by Perseus Distribution); 2010. xi, p. 290.

  17. Trent M, Dooley DG, Douge J, Section On Adolescent H, Council On Community P, Committee On A. The impact of racism on child and adolescent health. Pediatrics. 2019;144(2):e20191765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Trocmé N, Knoke D, Blackstock C. Pathways to the overrepresentation of aboriginal children in Canada’s Child Welfare System. Soc Serv Rev. 2004;78(4):577–600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elizabeth S. Barnert.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Barnert, E.S., Gallagher, D., Lei, H. et al. Implementation of Canada’s youth justice minimum age of 12: implications for children in Canada and globally. J Public Health Pol (2022). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41271-022-00358-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41271-022-00358-6

Keywords

  • Minimum age
  • Minimum age of criminal responsibility (MACR)
  • Youth justice
  • Canada
  • Racial justice
  • Health equity