Black and Mixed Heritage children in England face harsher penalties than their White peers, even when they have committed the same offences, according to a new report.
Researchers from Manchester Met’s Manchester Centre for Youth Studies and the University of Bedfordshire, funded by the Nuffield Foundation, have published their findings in a report examining the extent and nature of racial disproportionality when young people come into contact with the youth justice system.
Racial disproportionality in the youth justice system is a longstanding issue. The 2017 Lammy Review highlighted that racial disparities in the youth justice system had significantly worsened over time.
Researchers reviewed national and international literature, sent out a survey to all youth justice services, spoke to 34 children who had been diverted from the youth justice system, interviewed 50 youth justice practitioners, and analysed 42 case files.
Findings revealed that during the diversion process – intended to steer children away from being formally convicted and given a criminal record – the police were the primary decision-makers, and when decisions about children were made solely by the police or courts, racial disproportionality and geographical disparities increased.
In relation to education, many children had been excluded from school which was often the beginning of a child’s journey into youth justice diversion.
Many of those excluded reported experiencing racism at school, from both teachers and peers, and when they reported these incidents, they often felt ignored or treated unfairly.
The study also found that most of the children had unidentified Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) and/or neurodivergent conditions.
Dr Anne-Marie Day, Lecturer in Criminology at Manchester Met, said: “More and more children are being diverted away from the formal youth justice system, but this appears to be benefiting White children more than Black and Mixed Heritage children. We have made a range of pragmatic, cost-effective recommendations that could reduce racial disproportionality at the gateway to the youth justice system and would urge policymakers to give them careful consideration.”
Recommendations around diversion decision-making include the need for youth justice professionals to be consulted on decisions made in police custody for all children, to better inform decisions and ensure more children are offered alternative options.
According to the report, multi-agency decision-making is needed as early as possible, and the panel should include membership from the youth justice service, police, victim liaison, education, the third sector, and the local community.
In relation to policing, there should be a national adoption of an informal diversion disposal to be used when no formal action is taken – known as ‘Outcome 22’. This measure will not appear on the child’s police record and allows them to access diversionary interventions without an admission of guilt. Mandatory legal advice should also be available for children at the police station, provided by legal advisors specially trained in youth justice.
Recommendations across education include youth justice practitioners attending school exclusion hearings where there is criminal justice involvement, and when children are at risk of permanent exclusion schools should assess if they have any SEND or welfare needs.
Schools should also regularly report and analyse exclusion statistics, and OFSTED should hold schools accountable for addressing disproportionality in school exclusions.
Dr Anne-Marie Day is a member of Manchester Met’s Institute for Children’s Futures (ICF) which launched last year. It brings together the University’s existing academic expertise, and works with children and young people, policymakers, and practitioners through research, policy innovation, and action to tackle the diverse challenges faced by children and young people, especially those who are disadvantaged. I
