INSTITUTIONAL CARE OF JUVENILES AND THE NORDIC MODEL OF JUVENILE JUSTICE
description
Transcript of INSTITUTIONAL CARE OF JUVENILES AND THE NORDIC MODEL OF JUVENILE JUSTICE
INSTITUTIONAL CARE OF INSTITUTIONAL CARE OF JUVENILES AND THE JUVENILES AND THE NORDIC MODEL OF NORDIC MODEL OF JUVENILE JUSTICEJUVENILE JUSTICE
High-risk Offenders under the Age of 18High-risk Offenders under the Age of 18European Conference in Oslo, Norway European Conference in Oslo, Norway
June 5-6, 2008.June 5-6, 2008.
Tapio Lappi-Seppälä Tapio Lappi-Seppälä National Research Institute of Legal PolicyNational Research Institute of Legal Policy
FinlandFinland
““Nordic Model” of Juvenile Nordic Model” of Juvenile JusticeJustice
1.1. Child protection legislation (early 1900s): Child protection legislation (early 1900s): Municipal authorities have the right to interfere Municipal authorities have the right to interfere behaviour of childrenbehaviour of children
2.2. Main emphasis in dealing with juvenile crime on Main emphasis in dealing with juvenile crime on child welfare and social servicechild welfare and social service
3.3. Fairly high age (15 y) of criminal responsibilityFairly high age (15 y) of criminal responsibility
4.4. No juvenile courts or specific juvenile codesNo juvenile courts or specific juvenile codes
5.5. Fairly few specific juvenile sanctionsFairly few specific juvenile sanctions
6.6. ->The role of imprisonment quite restricted->The role of imprisonment quite restricted
7.7. ->The role of child welfare must be acknowledged->The role of child welfare must be acknowledged
The diminishing role of The diminishing role of imprisonment in Finlandimprisonment in Finland
Social liberal critics 1960s->Social liberal critics 1960s-> Reduce the overall use of imprisonment Reduce the overall use of imprisonment Avoid the use of prison especially in younger Avoid the use of prison especially in younger
age-groups age-groups Reduce the use of puntively motivated Reduce the use of puntively motivated
placements in reformatory schoolsplacements in reformatory schools Make a clear difference bewteen care and Make a clear difference bewteen care and
coercion: no punishments under the false label of coercion: no punishments under the false label of ”treatment””treatment”
Take care of legal safeguardsTake care of legal safeguards
Court-imposed prison Court-imposed prison sentences for juvenils sentences for juvenils
1975-20061975-200615-17 y 18-20 y
1975 761 22041985 444 14421995 117 8272006 65 724
Court-imposed prison Court-imposed prison sentences for juveniles sentences for juveniles
1985-2006 (15-17 years)1985-2006 (15-17 years)Imposed prison sentences 1985-1990, 1992-2006
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
15-17 y
15-17 y 444 346 346 280 167 117 90 92 122 85 65 69 69 43 60 65 65
1985 1990 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
PRISONERS IN DIFFERENT AGE-PRISONERS IN DIFFERENT AGE-GROUPS IN FINLAND 1975-2007GROUPS IN FINLAND 1975-2007
TotalTotal 18-20 y18-20 y 15-17 y15-17 y
19751975 53005300 335335 117117
19901990 34003400 175175 3333
20002000 30003000 100100 1010
20072007 35003500 8080 55
The number of juveniles (15-17 y) The number of juveniles (15-17 y) in Finnish prisons 1975-2007 in Finnish prisons 1975-2007
(annual averages)(annual averages)
117
9386
79
52
6060
71
59
3736
46 44
30 3233
23 2120
10 11 10 7 9 8 9 913
7 8 6 6 5
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
15-17 years
TRENDS AND TRENDS AND CHANGES IN CHANGES IN
INSTITUTIONAL INSTITUTIONAL CHILD WELFARECHILD WELFARE
From punitive responses (1960s) to …From punitive responses (1960s) to …
- Best interest of the child (70s/80s)- Best interest of the child (70s/80s)- Family centerness (80s)Family centerness (80s)- Rights of the child (90s)Rights of the child (90s)- Constitutional rights (2000s)Constitutional rights (2000s)
Long-term trends in child welfare Long-term trends in child welfare institutions in Finland institutions in Finland
Places in SatePlaces in Sate
Reformatory Reformatory Schools (31.12.)Schools (31.12.)
All ”offense based All ”offense based ”placements”placements
(31.12.)(31.12.)
19651965 10001000 750750
19751975 550550 600600
19901990 200200 ....
20002000 300300 ....
20072007 300300 200-250200-250
Best interest of the childBest interest of the child all interventions are supportive all interventions are supportive criminal acts have little or no formal rolecriminal acts have little or no formal role
CounsellingCounselling Open care interventions Open care interventions Foster care ordersFoster care orders Institutional placementsInstitutional placements
1/5 non-consensual1/5 non-consensual majority based on family-based reasonsmajority based on family-based reasons
Child welfare interventions Child welfare interventions
CUSTODIAL CARE CUSTODIAL CARE FOR JUVENILES FOR JUVENILES
AND YOUNG AND YOUNG ADULTSADULTS
Enforcing prison Enforcing prison sentences for juveniles sentences for juveniles
and young adultsand young adults No juvenile prisons: Not enough prisonersNo juvenile prisons: Not enough prisoners All juveniles <18 separated from adults in own unitsAll juveniles <18 separated from adults in own units Normality principle: Conditions, activities and Normality principle: Conditions, activities and
arrangements should correspond to those of the civil arrangements should correspond to those of the civil societysociety
Schooling & Education: In co-operation with local schoolsSchooling & Education: In co-operation with local schools Substance abuse programs: Core element in Substance abuse programs: Core element in
rehabilitation work in Finlandrehabilitation work in Finland Life-skills programs and group activitiesLife-skills programs and group activities Work activitiesWork activities Ensuring the ”rehabilitation continuum”Ensuring the ”rehabilitation continuum”
Work Out Project: Net-work model for Work Out Project: Net-work model for rehabilitation continuumrehabilitation continuum
Individual enforcement plan covering both prison-term and Individual enforcement plan covering both prison-term and post-release. Creating a supportive network in co-operation.post-release. Creating a supportive network in co-operation.
Prison term: Holistic rehabilitation and reinforcement of Prison term: Holistic rehabilitation and reinforcement of functional abilitiesfunctional abilities Structured substance abuse program, debt- economic counselling, Structured substance abuse program, debt- economic counselling,
education & work activities, family work, employment courses, education & work activities, family work, employment courses, creative activities, group activities. Administered by a multi-creative activities, group activities. Administered by a multi-professional team.professional team.
Post-release term: intensive guidance with educational & Post-release term: intensive guidance with educational & therapeutic elementstherapeutic elements Professiuonal tutoring, housing support, guidance/work with Professiuonal tutoring, housing support, guidance/work with
substance abuse, family-work. 6+6 months, organized by WOP substance abuse, family-work. 6+6 months, organized by WOP workers.workers.
35 started, 7 interrupted, in 1-3 years 1 returned to prison35 started, 7 interrupted, in 1-3 years 1 returned to prison
THE ”HEAVY END” OF CHILD THE ”HEAVY END” OF CHILD PROTECTION INTERVENTIONS PROTECTION INTERVENTIONS
2900 children 15-17 placed outside home in Finland2900 children 15-17 placed outside home in Finland Most placements are based on parent’s behaviour and Most placements are based on parent’s behaviour and
family-conditionsfamily-conditions The indirect role of crime: The indirect role of crime:
Child is risking his/her own health and development by committing Child is risking his/her own health and development by committing crimescrimes
Always more than reason for a foster care orderAlways more than reason for a foster care order Estimation: 150-200 children under 18 in involuntary Estimation: 150-200 children under 18 in involuntary
residential care with ”delinquent” background residential care with ”delinquent” background No penal motives!No penal motives! Primary object: School and educationPrimary object: School and education Also behavioural restrictions: 20-30 children in ”Intensive Also behavioural restrictions: 20-30 children in ”Intensive
Special Care” Special Care”
””ODD QUESTIONS” FOR THE ODD QUESTIONS” FOR THE CHILD WELFARE CHILD WELFARE
AUTHORITIESAUTHORITIES How do the child welfare institutions relate to How do the child welfare institutions relate to
juvenile prisons used elsewhere in the world?juvenile prisons used elsewhere in the world? What treatment programs have been used?What treatment programs have been used? How effective is this treatment in terms of How effective is this treatment in terms of
Crime recution?Crime recution? Different approach in CWF?Different approach in CWF?
Providing a safe and secure home like Providing a safe and secure home like environment for children for their social, environment for children for their social, emotional and personal developmentemotional and personal development
Comparating Comparating Penal Severity?Penal Severity?
Can juvenile justice systems be Can juvenile justice systems be compared in terms of penal severity compared in terms of penal severity
and in the extent of the deprivation of and in the extent of the deprivation of liberty?liberty?
Court imposed sentences (% and /pop)Court imposed sentences (% and /pop) differences in ”filtering”?differences in ”filtering”?
PrisonersPrisoners Involuntary recidential care based on the Involuntary recidential care based on the
child’s offending behaviourchild’s offending behaviour But: comparing different institutions (aims, But: comparing different institutions (aims,
conditions, principles etc)? conditions, principles etc)?
Court practicesCourt practices
Imposed prison sentences for offenders of the age of Imposed prison sentences for offenders of the age of 15-17 years / 100 000 pop (2006, excl. traffic)15-17 years / 100 000 pop (2006, excl. traffic)
SWE: Incl. closed juvenile careSWE: Incl. closed juvenile careDEN+NOR: Incl. combinationsDEN+NOR: Incl. combinations
22 24
74
206
254
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
SWE FIN NOR DEN UK
Prison sentences /100 000 pop
Community sentences for offenders of Community sentences for offenders of the age of 15-17 years / 100 000 popthe age of 15-17 years / 100 000 pop
367
776
2318
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Finland Sweden England&W
Community sentences /100 000 pop
PrisonersPrisoners
Sentenced juveniles (15-17 Sentenced juveniles (15-17 y) on a certain day 2001-y) on a certain day 2001-
2005. 2005. N and % of all prisonersN and % of all prisoners
NN %%
DENDEN 88 0,20,2
FINFIN 55 0,10,1
NORNOR 77 0,20,2
SWESWE 11 0,00,0
Young prisoners (15-17 years) Young prisoners (15-17 years) Share of all prisoners 2005-2006Share of all prisoners 2005-2006
%%
FINFIN 0,10,1
DENDEN 0,10,1
SWESWE 0,20,2
NORNOR 0,30,3
GERGER 1,71,7
SCOTSCOT 2,62,6
ENGLAND & WALESENGLAND & WALES 3,03,0
NETHERLANDSNETHERLANDS 9,79,7
Prisoners in the age-group Prisoners in the age-group 15-17 in SWE, FIN and the 15-17 in SWE, FIN and the
UK (2000-2006)UK (2000-2006)
0,3 2,5
125
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
SWE FIN UK
Prisoners serving a sentence (15-17 y /100 000 pop in the age-group)
Prisons and child Prisons and child welfare welfare
institutionsinstitutions
Juveniles (15-17 y) placed Juveniles (15-17 y) placed in ”closed” institutions in ”closed” institutions 2006 (N and / 100 000)2006 (N and / 100 000)
Juveniles 15-17 in "closed" institutionsFIN 15-17 y /100 000CJ Prisoners 5 2,5CWF Involuntary placements in public institutions est. 175 88,5
Total 180 91,1SWECJ Prisoners 1 0,3CWF Institutions "with special supervision" 313 81,4
Total 314 81,7England & WalesCJ Prisoners 2450 125,0CWF *SecChildrHomes, SecTrainCentres 500 25,5
Total 2950 150,5
Age-group 15-17 in Age-group 15-17 in institutions: Finland & institutions: Finland &
England (/100 000)England (/100 000)
FinlandFinland England % WalesEngland % Wales
PrisonersPrisoners 55 125125
””Closed” child Closed” child welfarewelfare
8585 2525
Prisoners & Child Prisoners & Child WelfareWelfare
9090 150150
All prisonersAll prisoners
(including adults)(including adults) 7070 150150
TENTATIVE TENTATIVE INTERMEDIATE INTERMEDIATE
SUMMARYSUMMARY””NORDIC COUNTRIES VS. THE UK”NORDIC COUNTRIES VS. THE UK”
Much less imprisonment in the Nordic Much less imprisonment in the Nordic CountriesCountries
More ”welfarist custodial care”More ”welfarist custodial care” Less ”crime based” custodial care in Less ”crime based” custodial care in
overall in the Nordic countriesoverall in the Nordic countries
Factors explaining Factors explaining the extent in the the extent in the use of juvenile use of juvenile imprisonmentimprisonment
Countries with small % of juveniles in Countries with small % of juveniles in prisons are also countries with low prisons are also countries with low
overall imprisonment ratesoverall imprisonment rates
0,1 0,1 0,2 0,30,9 1,1
1,7 1,8 1,7
2,63
9,7
68 67
79 75 7985
93
108
72
142148
128
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
FIN
DE
N
SW
E
NO
R
SW
Z
FR
A
GE
R
AU
S
NL
IRE
SC
OT
EN
G&
WA
L
Juve
nile
s %
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Pri
son
er r
ate
(/10
0 00
0)
Juveniles % (under 18 y) Prisoners (/100 000)
The extent in the use juvenile The extent in the use juvenile imprisonment is associated with imprisonment is associated with the same factors explaining the the same factors explaining the
overall use of imprisonmentoverall use of imprisonment
Welfare, social equalityWelfare, social equality Social & political trustSocial & political trust Political culture: consensus or conflictPolitical culture: consensus or conflict MediaMedia Crime fairly irreleventCrime fairly irrelevent
No association between No association between prisoner rates and prisoner rates and victimization ratesvictimization rates
Large income differences go Large income differences go together with increased together with increased
prisoner ratesprisoner rates
Investments in social Investments in social welfare welfare
associates with fewer associates with fewer prisonersprisoners
High institutional and social High institutional and social trust associates with low trust associates with low
prisoner ratesprisoner rates
Comparing Comparing trends in Crimetrends in Crime
Can the success of juvenile Can the success of juvenile criminal policy be criminal policy be
assessed on the basis of assessed on the basis of crime data?crime data?
Recording differences?Recording differences?Countries with welfare model Countries with welfare model
tend to report less juvenile tend to report less juvenile crime as % of all offensescrime as % of all offenses
The preventive potential of The preventive potential of imprisonment is questioned imprisonment is questioned
by further observations by further observations showing…showing…
Similar crime trends with countries with Similar crime trends with countries with radically differing prisoner ratesradically differing prisoner rates Finland and 3 Scandinavian countries 1950-Finland and 3 Scandinavian countries 1950-
20052005 Finland and Scotland 1950-2007Finland and Scotland 1950-2007 US and Canada 1980-2000US and Canada 1980-2000
Cross comparative zero-correlations Cross comparative zero-correlations between prisoner rates and crimebetween prisoner rates and crime
0
2 000
4 000
6 000
8 000
10 000
12 000
14 000
1950
1955
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
DENFIN NORSWE
Crime
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
19
50
19
55
19
60
19
65
19
70
19
75
19
80
19
85
19
90
19
95
20
00
20
05
DENFIN NORSWE
Prisoners
PRISON RATES AND CRIME PRISON RATES AND CRIME RATESRATES
Four Scandinavian Countries Four Scandinavian Countries 1950-20051950-2005
0
2 000
4 000
6 000
8 000
10 000
12 000
1950
1955
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
FIN
SCOT
Crime
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
19
50
19
55
19
60
19
65
19
70
19
75
19
80
19
85
19
90
19
95
20
00
20
05
FIN
SCOT
Prisoners
PRISON RATES AND CRIME PRISON RATES AND CRIME RATESRATES
Finland and Scotland 1950-Finland and Scotland 1950-20062006
Comparing the Comparing the Nordic Countries Nordic Countries
SIMILARITIESSIMILARITIES
A very small number of juveniles under A very small number of juveniles under 18 in prisons (5/ 100 000 pop)18 in prisons (5/ 100 000 pop) in practice for serious violent crime in practice for serious violent crime
(homicide)(homicide) Residential treatment for juveniles Residential treatment for juveniles
provided mainly by child welfare provided mainly by child welfare authorities (100/pop)authorities (100/pop) punitive motives have no formal rolepunitive motives have no formal role still also behavioural restrictions and still also behavioural restrictions and
restrictions of movementrestrictions of movement
SOME DIFFERENCESSOME DIFFERENCES
Sweden and Denmark vs. FinlandSweden and Denmark vs. Finland children kept in same institutes both on children kept in same institutes both on
child welfare and criminal justice groundschild welfare and criminal justice grounds
Sweden vs. Finland (and the others)Sweden vs. Finland (and the others) Social welfare interventions incorporated Social welfare interventions incorporated
into the criminal justice system as into the criminal justice system as independent sanctionsindependent sanctions
Benefits and risks in the Benefits and risks in the Nordic Model?Nordic Model?
BenefitsBenefits Avoidance of imprisonment, Avoidance of imprisonment, Education and the best interest of the child rules in the Education and the best interest of the child rules in the
child-welfare systemchild-welfare system Low crimeLow crime
Risks Risks Transparency (what is happening in the CWF)?Transparency (what is happening in the CWF)? Legal safeguards in the CWFLegal safeguards in the CWF Co-ordination between the systems Co-ordination between the systems No separate juvenile CJ: punitive trends in the adult CJ No separate juvenile CJ: punitive trends in the adult CJ
contaminating also the juvenile CJ? contaminating also the juvenile CJ?
COMMON TRENDS & SHARED COMMON TRENDS & SHARED PROBLEMS?PROBLEMS?
Increased number of involuntary Increased number of involuntary foster care orders?foster care orders?
Increased mental health problems Increased mental health problems among the juveniles?among the juveniles?
Blurring the borders between CJ and Blurring the borders between CJ and CWF – or keeping the roles and CWF – or keeping the roles and functions of different systems functions of different systems separated?separated?