Britain's Young Offenders

by BASIL HENRIQUES

1

IT IS very seldom that a child before the court comes from a good home where the parents are living happily together in a district devoid of slums and with adequate open space for play. There always has been juvenile delinquency and there probably always will be, for there are children who, like adults, are weak-willed and have not enough strength to resist temptation, and there are children who, like adults, are unhappy.

The Juvenile Courts in England are courts of primary jurisdiction, and the procedure in hearing a case is exactly the same as in the adult courts. But the language used is modified so that the children fully understand what is happening. For example, after the reading of the charge, the defendant is not asked “Do you plead guilty?" but “Did you do that?" If there is the slightest hesitation in the answer, a plea of not guilty is taken, and the case has to be proved in strict accordance with the laws of evidence and beyond reasonable doubt. As with adults, the defendant is always given the benefit of the doubt.

The age of criminal responsibility is eight, and the upper age of those dealt with in the Juvenile Court is seventeen. Some youngsters below the age of eight know the law! They commit all kinds of offenses, generally with a gang of older boys— for these little ones are useful in getting through small openings - and when they are caught, they merely thumb their noses at the policeman and say, “Yah, you can’t touch me, I’m under eight !“

At fourteen, BOYS and girls cease to be “children “ and are called by the undignified name of “young persons" until they are seventeen, when they become “adults.”

A “young person" who is charged with an indictable offense has the right to be tried by a judge and jury in a higher court. Very few of them choose this. Those who do, generally know the ropes and want to give as much trouble as they can. Actually the higher courts do not have much greater powers than the Juvenile Courts, which can try every kind of offense except manslaughter or murder. The few offenders who elect to be tried in a higher court probably hope that a soft-hearted jury will not find these “poor little chaps" guilty of the serious offenses with which some of them are charged.

At least one of the parents must be present. If they so desire, they can be legally represented and the court has the power to grant them legal aid if they are in poor circumstances. (As a matter of fact, very few cases are defended by solicitor or counsel; it is seldom necessary.)

The public are not allowed to be present in Juvenile Courts, but they are public courts in that newspaper reporters may be present and they represent the public. They may report any cases they wish to, but they may not give names or describe a case in such a way that it can be identified. There is some controversy now as to whether names should be reported, but the general opinion is that no useful purpose would be served by doing so, and a great deal of harm might result from giving publicity to what are often only childish pranks, even though such pranks are serious breaches of the law.

All the Juvenile Courts are administered by three unpaid lay justices, one of whom should be a woman. In London the panel of justices and the Chairman of the Court are appointed for three years by the Home Secretary. They are selected because of their aptitude and flair for the work and because of their experience in dealing with children and young persons.

It is now recommended that no Juvenile Court Magistrate should be appointed over the age of fifty and that the compulsory age of retirement should be sixty-five. Actually age does not matter so much as capacity to understand and sympathize with the outlook of children. But it is essential that a Magistrate have excellent hearing. Some of the children are too nervous to speak above a whisper, and forbidden words for any Magistrate should be “Speak up" or “What?" It is unfair to interrupt children when they are reciting the story they have carefully prepared.

Often the child is asked to come right up to the Magistrates’ table, and he tells his story in a whisper. That is why the table at which the Magistrates sit should not be broader than 1½ feet, and also why they should not sit on a raised platform or dais. The children should be urged to tell in their own words what took place. Their description may vary from that of the police, and often the motive behind the offense is discovered in this way. They should be encouraged to say what happened from the time that they first thought of doing what they did.

This formal trial, even if for the younger ones the atmosphere of the court is somewhat informal, may be considered the wrong method of dealing with children. But it is the very essence of British tradition not only that justice should be done, but also that any citizen who is charged with an offense should feel that justice has been done in his case. A child has a very keen sense of justice, and he should leave the court feeling that he has had a fair hearing. If he or his parents are not satisfied with the decision of the court, they are always advised to appeal to a higher court, and legal aid may be granted them to do this.

Until the Magistrates can find an answer to the question why the offense was committed, it is difficult for them to order the right treatment. Pretrial inquiries are an impingement of the rights of a citizen, for he may be found not guilty at his trial. The Magistrates therefore generally remand all except the most trivial eases in order to get a full report from the probation officer on the character, home environment, family relationship, and history of the child. When considered necessary, a psychiatrist’s report is also asked for. This is by no means done in every case, but it is nearly always done in sexual offenses, or when the child has been before the court before, or when its behavior is beyond normal comprehension.

2

THE causes of juvenile delinquency are many and varied. Some of them are likely to be the same as in the United States, but some are peculiar to Britain and to those other countries which suffered the ravages of war. The most important of these was the evacuation of all school children to places of safetv in what were called the reception areas. This meant that the children were separated from their parents during the very important formative years of their life. Furthermore their education was seriously interrupted, for many of them were misfits with their foster parents and became unhappy and homesick. The result was that they were brought back home, only to be sent away again after the next bad raid, often to a different reception area. Thus many who seem mentally subnormal are found to be only educationally retarded through inadequate schooling.

This backwardness and this lack of training by their own parents, with whom many have felt themselves estranged when they returned home at the end of the war, are contributive factors in delinquency today. Americans can never be sufficiently thankful that they were saved these two great evils.

Again, in the bombed areas it is still comparatively easy to break into warehouses, shops, and dwellings, many of which have not yet been completely secured. Ruins to city children are like the rocks on the seashore, providing delightful games of fun and adventure. Once they have climbed onto the roofs of blitzed buildings, the urge to explore further is very st rong, and soon they discover that it is easy to break open an occupied house or store. Thus, without previous wrong intention, they find themselves tempted to steal, and the temptation becomes too great for them.

There is also in England a shortage of police, and the streets are si ill only dimly lit on account of the fuel shortage. Both of these facts make the risk of being caught more remote. Perhaps one of the causes for the recent increase of charges against children and young persons is the better police detection. Nowadays a police car can be on the spot in three or four minutes.

More juveniles have been before the courts lately, but it would be absurd to describe the situation ns a “crime wave.”The offenses, though serious enough, are not serious in comparison with those committed in other countries. There are extremely few crimes of violence, and practically never are the juveniles armed. No matter how trivial the offense, such as stealing fruit off a stall or from the back of a van, it is included among the statistics.

Some of the “crimes” show that the defendants have a fine spirit of adventure and enterprise which has been misdirected. Others show that they have crafty, distorted minds. On the whole, however, they are delinquents not because they are bad, but because they are unhappy or come from a bad or broken home.

It is remarkable how many of them are not the first member of the family to be charged, one of their parents or elder brothers or sisters having previously appeared in the courts. A large number come from homes which are neglected and poor. They have dragged themselves up in the streets which were their nurseries as children and which became their play grounds as adolescents. There has been no discipline in their homes, and no fixed standard of right and wrong has been set them by their parents. They have been punished one day for something which on the next was overlooked. They have often been threatened with punishment, but they have never known whether the threats would be carried out. (When they were, they were administered as smacks or a “belting” given in anger and with no deterrent effect.)

Occasionally the parents are charged with receiving what their children have stolen. Such children have never been trained in self-restraint, and become an easy prey to any temptation. They do what they want to do on the spur of the moment, with little thought about the consequences. When, therefore, they plead that it was “a sudden temptation,” this is very often true; they see what they want and they take it, just because they want it.

The most diffiult problems are the unhappy children, from unhappy homes in which the parents are not living together unitedly and harmoniously. It is probably just as bad for the children when they are brought up in a home where the parents are continually quarreling in front of them as it is when the parents are living apart or are divorced. In either case the children have divided loyalties, perhaps giving their affection to one parent and even hating the other.

But worse even than this is the plight of the children who feel that they are unwanted and unloved— the illegitimates, the stepchildren, and the children whose parents married because the mothers were pregnant at the time. There is nothing which causes greater suffering to a child than to be starved of parental love. Feeling that no one cares for them, such children in turn do not care what they do or what happens to them. It seems to them that nothing matters.

They seek to escape from their loneliness and unhappiness by mixing with undesirable youngsters, generally older than themselves, which brings to them a sense of their own importance, and they try to forget their half-conscious misery in illegal adventure.

Poverty in the sense of insufficient money is seldom a cause for delinquency today, but poverty in the sense of insufficient commodities is a very real cause. Sweets and food have been rationed and the price of toys is high, so that the temptation to steal things of which there is a shortage is very great.

Behind all this is a great deterioration in the influence of religion. Few of those who come before the courts are actively connected with a church or have had religion satisfactorily taught to them. For these children, there are no sanctions behind the great “Thou shalts” and “Thou shall nots.” They do not stand in awe and reverence of what is good, and they fear no consequences in this world or the next. The all-important thing to them is not to be caught, and in actual fact it is generally the most, stupid ones who are caught.

3

IN deciding how to treat a case, the Magistrates have the future welfare of the child foremost in mind, but they must also protect society and deter others from committing similar offenses. More often than not, it is the parents who need treatment, but the Juvenile Court only has the power to bind them over in high sureties to see that their children do not get into trouble again. All cases of domestic relations and of neglectful or cruel parents are dealt with in the adult court, the children being sent for treatment to the Juvenile Court. In some respects this may be a disadvantage, although the Juvenile Court probation officers work in close coöperation with those of the adult court.

Instead of sending such parents to prison, which has little educative value, the experiment is now being tried of placing them on probation, on condition that they reside with their children in a cottage home for a period during which they learn how to do properly the domestic work of the home and to look after and care for their children. The scheme is too new to show results yet, but theoretically it gives promise of success, so long as the cases selected for such treatment are those where the ignorance rather than the cruelty of the parents is the cause for neglect.

As to the treatment of the child, the most usual practice is to place him under the supervision of a probation officer, He undertakes to be of good behavior and to be guided by the probation officer during the specified time, which must not be more than three years. Only if he breaks the conditions of his probation order will he have to appear before the court again to be dealt with in some other way. On the other hand, if his conduct is very satisfactory, the probation officer can always ask for the order to be rescinded before its expiration.

The work of the probation officers is perhaps the most highly skilled of all social work. Although they are required to have attained a diploma or a degree in social science, it is even more important that they possess an understanding heart. They must have a sense of vocation, and no amount of training can give them this.

They have to win the confidence of the parents as well as that of the children. Where there is disharmony in the home, they have to try to bring about a reconciliation between the parents, which means dealing with delicate marital relationships. Where the attitude of the parents towards the child is wrong, they have to advise and guide them so that the child gets a feeling of security. Where the slovenly habits of t he parents are such as to prevent any kind of home life, they have the almost impossible task of trying to train them to become more orderly. The stupidity of many of the parents is very marked; some are almost mentally deficient.

Probation is never likely to succeed unless there is full coöperation in the home; if this cannot be achieved, it is generally better to remove the child. But removal is a last resort, because the tie between the child and its home is so strong that nothing can really replace it. Although a child often says that he does not want to return home, the craving for parental love remains with him wherever he goes. The court therefore is faced with a dilemma: Should it send him to a school, to the ordered life of which he would probably quickly respond, or should it refrain from severing the strong ties to a home to which, though it may be an unsatisfactory one, nevertheless the child feels attached?

Because of this attachment, many children are allowed to remain at home under supervision even though the chances of success are remote. If this plan fails, both the parents and the child know that they have had their chance, and both are more likely to see the justice of his removal to a school and to be reconciled to it. This practice of the court means that the figures of failures on probation are high, but it does not mean that the system of probation is a failure.

It is sometimes advisable to remove a child from his environment for a short time either by boarding him with relatives or friends, or, if he is working, by placing him in a hostel. A gang can be broken up in this way, or a youngster who is beginning to let himself go, but whose bad conduct has not yet become a habit, can be halted by a jerk of this kind.

4

TRAINING in an Approved School, which corresponds to the American reform school, is really the only hope for those who have not had and are never likely to have good moral training in their homes. Between 80 and 90 per cent of those who are sent do not come before the courts again during at least three years after leaving the school. That there is not a greater percentage of success is due to the fact that the bad habits have become so ingrained by the time the children go to the school that it is almost impossible to eradicate them, or to the fact that the children are of such very poor mental caliber that they are incapable of responding to the training.

The order is generally for three years, but the length of time spent in the school depends upon the conduct of the child, and every six months his case is considered with a view to early release. He is generally permitted to leave after about twenty months, but if he does not settle down satisfactorily after he is released, he is liable to be recalled to the school by the headmaster at any time within three years of the date of committal. Supervision continues for a further twelve months, though he cannot be brought back to the school during that time unless he commits another offense.

There are a large number of Approved Schools which vary in character: some are large, others small; some are on the cottage system, some the barrack system; in some the discipline is very strict, in some it is less so. Every effort is made to send the child to the school most suitable to his own peculiar background, history, and character. All the schools are open, and none of them bear the slightesl resemblance to prison.

The method of training is through trust and friendship. Team games form an important part of the curriculum, and through them the children learn loyalty and unselfishness and fair play. A tradition or tone is created by the children themselves and they will not tolerate behavior which undermines the good name of the school. They are taught a trade, and those who previously were too unstable and undisciplined to stick to their jobs learn to take an active interest in their work and to form the habit of perseverance.

But the most important part of their training lies in the relationship between the headmaster or housemaster and the children. Masters are carefully selected for the strength of their personalities and their knowledge of children and young persons. Only when he looks upon his housemaster as his friend will the child be ready to confide completely in him and to reveal to him the worries and unhappinesses which deep down may have been the cause of his antisocial behavior. Once this has been achieved, it becomes comparatively easy to reform him; and unless it is achieved, any improvement will probably be only temporary.

There are some schools which are using color and beauty besides friendship and trust as a means of reformation. The walls, counterpanes, and curtains of the bedrooms are carefully chosen to bring a sense of peacefulness to a troubled child. The games rooms and sitting rooms are devoid of ugliness,and in its place are to be found homeliness and beauty. There are flowers on the white cloths of the dining tables, and the lawns are laid out with multicolored flower beds. The refining influence and beauty and the exhilarating effect of color induce in the child a feeling of pride in his school and of respect for himself.

The aftercare of the child is as important as the training in the school. His re-establishment in the community should commence the day that he enters the school. The aftercare officer will one day have to form a bridge between the child and its home, and while the child is being reformed in the school, it is the officer’s duty to try to reform the home. When he has become the friend of both the child and his parents, rehabilitation is greatly facilitated.

But there are many cases where it is inadvisable to send a child directly back to his home. No school can teach the value of money or the right use of unsupervised leisure. Some of the schools, therefore, have hostels to which the boys are sent until they have settled down to their work and to a life of comparative freedom.

The state as a legislative body can do much to stem juvenile delinquency; the moral standards set by the nation can do even more; but most can be achieved by the training given to children by their parents. Slums must be abolished, but it is not enough for the state to build houses; what is needed is a home within each house, and that means a spirit of love and happiness uniting all the members of a family.

Society must recognize that youngsters, especially during adolescence, like to associate with those of their own age; they are full of the spirit of adventure, and if there are no outlets for this on the sports ground or in the gymnasium, they will seek it in ways which may bring them to the court. The state must see that there is everywhere a sufficiency of playing fields, play centers, and youth organizations to satisfy the needs of children and young persons.

The more police there are, the greater will be the risk of detection and the fewer will be the crimes committed. It is the duty of the state to protect its citizens by an adequate police force.

But the crux of the matter is to be found in the moral standards demanded by society as a whole and by the parents in particular. What hope is there that children will grow up into moral, Godfearing, honest citizens if commercial dishonesty, marital infidelity, divorce, and deceit are not frowned upon by society? When citizens seek to evade laws and regulations, to avoid income taxes, to get more than their allotted share of gasoline and food, to dodge customs duties, how can children be expected not to follow their example by a similar dishonesty in matters which appertain to them — in dodging school or work, in deceit and lies, in selfishness and disloyalty? If their parents indulge in gambling or drink, is it not only natural that the children should see nothing wrong in these things? If the main goal of their parents lies in ephemeral pleasures and excitement, why should not theirs be the same?

There will alw ays be a residuum of children whose parents have not the intelligence to rear and train them, and there will always be some children who themselves have not the understanding or self-discipline to play the game of life fairly and cleanly, who are amoral, unrestrained, or perverted. The chances of eradicating delinquency among these are not great. For the latter group the hope lies in the psychiatrist; for the former, it is in removing the children entirely from their parents’ influence.

In all this work the Magistrates of the Juvenile Courts and society as a whole must not waver from the belief that fundamentally children are good and not bad, and that it is the duty of the state and the task of the Magistrates to see that those children who appear in the courts are given the fullest opportunities to reveal the great good that lies within them.