Abstract
This chapter sets out a proposed organisational structure for youth justice. Based upon John Rawls’ justice as fairness and applied principles of social justice that have been developed from this, the proposed structure takes a socially just approach to criminal justice work. Arguing that for any organisational structure to be effective, the underlying aims and principles need to be clear and specific, this chapter outlines how this could be applied within youth justice. Taking a needs-based focus, the proposed principles and aims prioritise supporting young people to desist from crime, recognising research in this field, and the context of criminal behaviour within young people. Applying the SST process outlined in Chap. 3, an idealised organisational structure for youth justice is presented. The proposed structure is transparent, has in-built accountability measures, and clarifies the roles and responsibilities at each level of the structure. The proposed structure is aimed to allow youth justice to allow young people to receive social justice, but also to operate in a way that is socially just to practitioners, professionals, and society.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Baker, K. (2005). Assessment in youth justice: Professional discretion and the use of asset. Youth Justice, 5(2), 106–122.
Barry, M. (2000). The mentor/monitor debate in criminal justice: ‘What works’ for offenders. British Journal of Social Work, 30(5), 575–595.
Barry, M. (2010). Youth transitions: From offending to desistance. Journal of Youth Studies, 13(1), 121–136.
Bateman, T. (2014). ‘Catching them young’ – Some reflections on the meaning of the age of criminal responsibility in England and Wales. Safer Communities, Emerald Group Publishing Ltd., 13(3), 133–142.
Briggs, D. B. (2013). Conceptualising risk and need: The rise of actuarialism and the death of welfare? Practitioner assessment and intervention in the youth offending service. Youth Justice, Sage: London, 13(1), 17–30.
Cavadino, M., & Dignan, J. (2005). Penal systems: A comparative approach. London: Sage.
Cavadino, M., & Dignan, J. (2007). The penal system: An introduction. London: Sage.
Checkland, P. (1999). Systems thinking, systems practice. Chichester: John Wiley.
Checkland, P. (2000). Soft systems methodology: A thirty year retrospective. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 17, 11–58.
Checkland, P., & Tsouvalis, C. (1997). Research paper reflecting on SSM: The link between root definitions and conceptual models. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 14(3), 153–168.
Consiglio, C., Borgogni, L., Di Tecco, C., et al. (2016). What makes employees engaged with their work? The role of self-efficacy and employee’s perceptions of social context over time. Career Development International, 21(2), 125–143.
Creaney, S. (2012). Targeting, labelling and stigma: challenging the criminalisation of children and young people. Criminal Justice Matters, 89(1), 16–17.
Goldson, B. (2000). Children in need or young offenders? Child and Family Social Work, 5(3), 255–265.
Goldson, B. (2013). ‘Unsafe, unjust and harmful to wider society’: Grounds for raising the minimum age of criminal responsibility in England and Wales. Youth Justice, 13(2), 111–130.
Hall, S. (2011). The neo-liberal revolution. Cultural Studies, 25(6), 705–728.
Henry, S. (2009). Social construction of crime. In J. Miller (Ed.), 21st century criminology: A reference handbook (pp. 296–305). London/Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Holdaway, S., Davidson, N., Dignan, J., et al. (2001). New strategies to address youth offending: The national evaluation of the pilot youth offending teams. London: Home Office.
Khan, L., & Wilson, J. (2010). You just get on and do it: Healthcare provision in youth offending teams. London: Centre for Mental Health.
Kukathas, C., & Pettit, P. (1990). Rawls: A theory of justice and its critics. Key contemporary thinkers. Cambridge: Polity.
Lane, D. C., & Oliva, R. (1998). The greater whole: Towards a synthesis of system dynamics and soft systems methodology. European Journal of Operational Research, 107(1), 214–235.
Mallett, C. A. (2009). Disparate juvenile court outcomes for disabled delinquent youth: A social work call to action. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 26(3), 197–207.
Maruna, S. (1997). Desistance and development: The psychosocial process of ‘going straight’. In The British Criminology Conferences: Selected Proceedings (pp. 15–19). Belfast: Queens University.
McAra, L., & McVie, S. (2007). Youth justice?: The impact of system contact on patterns of desistance from offending. European Journal of Criminology, 4(3), 315–345.
McVie, S. (2005). Patterns of deviance underlying the age-crime curve: The long term evidence. British Society of Criminology e-journal, 7, 1–15.
Molyneux, J. (2001). Interprofessional teamworking: What makes teams work well? Journal of interprofessional care, 15(1), 29–35.
Muncie, J. (2014). Youth and crime. London: Sage.
Nicol, R., Stretch, D., Whitney, I., et al. (2000). Mental health needs and services for severely troubled and troubling young people including young offenders in an N.H.S. region. Journal of Adolescence, 23(3), 243–261.
Nozick, R. (1993). The nature of rationality. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Parker, R., & Bradley, L. (2000). Organisational culture in the public sector Organisational culture in the public sector: Evidence from six organisations. The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 13(2), 125–141.
Phoenix, J., & Kelly, L. (2013). ‘You have to do it for yourself’: Responsibilization in youth justice and young people’s situated knowledge of youth justice practice. British Journal of Criminology, 53(3), 419–437.
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rawls, J., & Freeman, S. R. (1999). Collected papers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Souhami, A. (2009). Transforming youth justice. London: Routledge.
Townsend, E., Walker, D.-M., Sargeant, S., et al. (2010). Systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions relevant for young offenders with mood disorders, anxiety disorders, or self-harm. Journal of Adolescence, Elsevier Ltd, 33(1), 9–20.
Vandenbroeck, P., Dechenne, R., Becher, K., et al. (2014). Recommendations for the organization of mental health services for children and adolescents in Belgium: Use of the soft systems methodology. Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands), Elsevier Ireland Ltd, 114(2–3), 263–268.
Webb, S. A. (2016). Professional identity and social work. In 5th International Conference on Sociology and Social Work: New Directions in Critical Sociology and Social Work: Identity, Narratives and Praxis (pp. 1–23). Glasgow: Glasgow Caledonian University.
Webster, C. (2006). Predicting criminality? Risk factors, neighbourhood influence and desistance. Youth Justice, 6(1), 7–22.
Wilson, B., & Van Haperen, K. (2015). Soft systems thinking, methodology, and the management of change. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Youth Justice Board. (2017). Youth justice statistics 2015/16.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Urwin, J. (2018). A Better Structure. In: A Return to Social Justice. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73043-1_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73043-1_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-73042-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-73043-1
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)