Assemblages of penal governance, social justice and youth justice partnerships

Abstract

Youth justice in England and Wales is delivered by multi-agency Youth Offending Teams (YOTs) which are expected to work in partnership with social welfare agencies to provide 'holistic' support that targets the interrelated personal and social needs of young offenders associated with their risk of reoffending. This article engages with criminological debates which attempt to interpret the hybrid assemblages of penal governance that have characterized late modernity in order to theorize why these partnerships have had only limited success in addressing the social context of youth crime. It will be argued, evidenced by an analysis of research data on YOT partnerships in action, that these assemblages are 'classed' in so much as they act as conduits for strategic elements which articulate powerful class interests (along with those of other social forces) to be translated into practice. Such strategic elements sustain class inequality and deny social justice to young people in conflict with the law.

Policing paedophilia: Assembling bodies, spaces and things

“…Assemblage thinking has certainly gained wide currency across the social sciences, the arts and humanities, as well as within criminological work more broadly (Campbell, 2013;Gray, 2013;Haggerty and Ericson, 2000;Maurutto and Hannah-Moffat, 2006). Yet, it has a very marginal presence within policing studies, and is all but invisible from scholarship focused on pluralised policing forms.…”

Children First, Offenders Second: The Centrality of Engagement in Positive Youth Justice

“…Conversely, the other pilot YOSs had mitigated the Scaled Approach by ameliorating the risk focus and retaining a wider concern about the welfare of children, leading to a combined decrease in reconviction rates of 3%. In his evaluation of the Scaled Approach pilot exercise, Sutherland () interviewed YOS practitioners and found that most were more concerned about meeting children's welfare needs than targeting risks through their assessments and interventions (see also Gray ), largely because ‘individual practitioners disagree with the practice model being proposed and the use of Asset more generally’ (Sutherland , p.54). The implication here is that practitioners, too, have become disengaged by the risk‐based assessment processes forced upon them and have decided to pursue their own (often welfare‐focused) objectives and principles as a more engaging alternative to enable children to realise the benefits of youth justice assessment and intervention.…”

Delivering Rehabilitation: The Politics, Governance and Control of ProbationL.Burke and S.Collett. Abingdon: Routledge (2015) 200pp. £26.99pb ISBN 978‐0‐415‐54038‐4

“…The book is also rather light on the issues of resistance and dissenting opinions. I would argue (Gray 2013) that the governance of youth crime is a far more nuanced process in which socio-political, economic and cultural interests battle to exert their influence. That having been said, the book is a worthwhile contribution to the comparative analysis of youth penality.…”