Children and Young People Who Harm Others
2013; Wiley; Volume: 22; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1002/car.2293
ISSN1099-0852
Tópico(s)Child Abuse and Trauma
ResumoChild Abuse ReviewVolume 22, Issue 4 p. 227-231 EditorialFree Access Children and Young People Who Harm Others First published: 22 August 2013 https://doi.org/10.1002/car.2293Citations: 2AboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Over the previous two decades, we have seen, it is argued, a moral panic emerge with regards to children who cause harm to others (Barter and Berridge, 2011). The moral panic, fuelled by the creation of ‘folk devils’, has come to dominate public and policy debates around this issue. This has both restricted robust and open explorations of how best to respond to this problem, and resulted in an emphasis on individual blame and ‘wickedness’ rather than a wider examination of all the contributing influences including inequities which underpin children's use of violence (Scraton, 1997). ‘moral panic, fuelled by the creation of ‘folk devils’, has come to dominate public and policy debates around this issue’ The anxiety and trepidation surrounding children's harmful behaviour have been fuelled by the media coverage of isolated, although appalling and therefore high-profile, cases where children have abused, and in very exceptional cases, killed another child. Public concern can be traced back to 1996, when two ten-year-old boys abducted and murdered the two-year-old toddler James Bulger. The coverage of the murder and the representation of the two boys in the press, by the police and the courts as ‘born evil' and ‘demonic’ constitute, according to Scraton (1997), modern folk devils. This case represents a watershed for how childhood deviancy in the UK has come to be perceived. The death of James Bulger resulted in an intense, and continuing, scrutiny of the meaning of childhood, and especially the duality of the innocent/evil child (Brown, 2011). A new consensus emerged on the way in which children who harm have come to be viewed by the state, where their own vulnerability and victimisation have been ignored, or at least subordinated, to the depiction of their behaviour as a signifier of their individual failings. This conceptualisation is not restricted to the UK. A review of international media representations of youth violence by Nichols (2011) showed that the coverage: exaggerated the scale of the problem; relied on simplistic and distorted explanations casting the problem as one of ‘bad youth’; and, lastly, influenced policies aimed at addressing children's violence. ‘The death of James Bulger resulted in an intense, and continuing, scrutiny of the meaning of childhood’ Consequently, the ‘blame the youth position’ has led to attitudes and policies which ignore the underlying inequalities and societal factors associated with children's harmful behaviour and instead promote punitive and reactionary responses. This was illustrated when the then UK Children's Commissioner, Maggie Atkinson, in response to the recall to prison of one of James Bulger's killers, argued that serious reconsideration should be given to raising the age of criminal responsibility and that more therapeutic, family- and community-based reparatory responses were required for children who harm (Thompson and Sylvester, 2010). James Bulger's mother responded by calling for Atkinson to be sacked for her ‘twisted and insensitive’ comments. In response, Atkinson was made to apologise for any ‘hurtful’ remarks (BBC, 2010). Any open and dispassionate debate around how best to respond to these very sensitive issues was therefore curtailed. Hopefully, the papers contained in this special issue will go some way to bridge this gap. ‘Any open and dispassionate debate around how best to respond to these very sensitive issues was therefore curtailed’ The five papers address a divergent range of children's harmful behaviours. However, a number of central themes run through the contributions. First, to understand and respond appropriately to children who cause harm, their behaviour needs to be contextualised in respect to the wider structural and cultural inequities that they face in their lives, including their own victimisation. Second, it is imperative that our response holds as central the fact that they are first and foremost a child, irrespective of how they have acted. This will in some instances be a difficult process, but one which is not helped by invoking an adult criminal justice system, or a society which views such children as inherently evil and unredeemable. Last, interventions based on adult offenders cannot simply be transferred to children, who are at a different developmental stage. They are not, as Keane and colleagues (2013) argue in their contribution to this issue, simply ‘mini-adults’. ‘interventions based on adult offenders cannot simply be transferred to children, who are at a different developmental stage’ In the first paper of the special issue, Simon Hackett and colleagues (2013) use a retrospective case file analysis to examine the characteristics of 700 children and young people referred to UK services due to sexually harmful behaviours. Demographic findings show that the vast majority of referrals were male, white and adolescent. The gender balance reflects previous findings which demonstrate clearly that sexually harmful behaviour is predominantly a problem of males, while the lack of referrals for black and minority ethnic young males raises possible concerns that this group may be facing harsher criminal justice options. Encouragingly, the higher proportion of younger children referred towards the later time period leads the authors to speculate that this may be due to heightened professional awareness leading to earlier recognition and referrals. However, in some cases a prolonged history of antisocial behaviour and sexually problematic behaviour was present. This highlights the need for preventive and intervention services which enable professionals to identify and appropriately support at-risk children and their families in a non-stigmatising manner. According to the authors, this necessitates a broader view of a child's development ‘rather than an approach which focuses primarily on the “index offence” (p. 243). In paper two, Keane et al. (2013) provide practice messages for achieving this from an Australian context. ‘in some cases a prolonged history of antisocial behaviour and sexually problematic behaviour was present’ The majority of the referrals shared histories of childhood trauma and abuse, underpinning the contention made at the beginning of this editorial. This finding is also reflected in the third paper by Stuart Allardyce and Peter Yates (2013) who used case studies to illustrate the impact of previous experiences of abuse for understanding young people's own sexually harmful behaviour. Hackett et al.'s (2013) findings on victim type are of particular interest, with young instigators of sexual harm exhibiting less fixed victim profiles, for example, in relation to age and gender, than is found with adult perpetrators, indicating that victim selection in childhood is more opportunistic. Again, this links to paper three which explores the practice implications of this for risk assessment. Overall, the central message is that children and young people who sexually harm are a diverse group with complex needs, often associated with their own victimisation. However, as the authors acknowledge, how best to intervene remains open to debate. This underlines the significance of the following two contributions to this special issue which together provide us with important practice insights into how this may be achieved. ‘young instigators of sexual harm exhibiting less fixed victim profiles’ The second paper by Michael Keane and colleagues (2013) documents a family therapeutic approach developed in Australia to address the issue of sibling sexual harm. At the heart of the intervention is the challenge of achieving a balance between individual safety and the wellbeing of all family members. A particular practice dilemma is the separation, and subsequent reunification, of a young person from their family, taking into account the needs of both the victim and the offending sibling. Keane et al. (2013) question the transferability of a feminist framework of sexual violence, under which many adult sexual assault services operate, which advocates the premise that the victim's rights must always take precedence. However, for Keane et al. (2013), this underlying principle becomes questionable when the sexual offender is themself a child, and especially in the case of sibling harm. Inevitably, tensions emerge regarding respecting the rights of the victim alongside the benefits to the offending sibling of maintaining contact with their family. In many cases, the best interests of each sibling may be in conflict. Ultimately, the authors stress that the wishes of the child victim cannot be privileged above, nor are more important than, the needs of the offending child. ‘tensions emerge regarding respecting the rights of the victim alongside the benefits to the offending sibling’ Three case studies are used to illustrate the therapeutic benefits of working with the whole family, which can, they argue, preserve the family unit, prevent unnecessary family separation and lead to better outcomes for the whole family. The issues raised in this paper demonstrate clearly the very difficult dilemmas that practitioners and families face and the limitations of practice frameworks based on adult offender programmes. Stuart Allardyce and Peter Yates (2013), in the third paper, also writing from their practice experience, outline a model of risk assessment which conceptualises the different risks that a young person who has sexually harmed may present to different potential victims in different settings. The authors use four contrasting case studies to illustrate a specific developmentally supportive approach to risk management and reduction. Many of the case studies echo Hackett et al.'s (2013) description of families in which trauma and abuse are prevalent. Consequently, the authors stress that to reduce risks, previous experiences of trauma and abuse also need to be addressed. Allardyce and Yates (2013) state that adolescent males who cause sexual harm represent a heterogeneous group who show a greater propensity to vary victim type compared to adult offenders, reflecting Hackett et al.'s earlier finding. In response, the authors argue that ‘a formulation approach to risk assessment allows us to move beyond merely the likelihood of future risk, to consider more dynamically issues of victim selection and circumstances in which risk may be present’ (p. 255) Central to this framework is the assessment of family dynamics, and in particular sibling relationships. In addition, as a result of the fluid nature of victim selection in adolescence, the model provides insights into assessing the risk of family-community crossover for future victimisation. ‘to reduce risks, previous experiences of trauma and abuse also need to be addressed’ In the penultimate paper of this special issue, Anne Stafford (2013) looks at a different aspect of harm from young people: physical violence in sport. Although there is growing recognition of child protection issues in sport and ballet (Papaefstathiou et al., 2013; Parent and Demers, 2011), little research has addressed the issue of harm caused by teammates and competitors. Stafford's contribution to this special issue provides new evidence on the use of physical violence by young people in a range of sporting settings, from amateur to elite levels. It is therefore a welcome addition to this growing body of work. ‘new evidence on the use of physical violence by young people in a range of sporting settings’ While the author acknowledges that engagement with sport is generally a positive experience, she provides uncomfortable evidence that sport is not necessarily a safe place for children and young people. The study used a convenience sample of over 6000 young people who completed an online survey, supplemented by in-depth interviews. The authors argue that to understand fully the high level of physical violence found between young people in sport it needs to be viewed in relation to the wider negative sporting ethos; where over-training and harsh competition are common components of sporting cultures. Underpinning this is the institutionalised physical and emotional harm that occurs between coaches and young people, which in turn endorses physical violence between sporting peers. Thus, as with other forms of peer violence, it is the wider (adult) structural and cultural influences, in this case damaging sporting cultures, which accentuate children's and young people's harmful behaviour. Young people's interviews worryingly showed that physical aggression from peers in competitive sport was an expected and accepted aspect of taking part. The normalisation of peer violence, and the associated positioning of victims as deserving or undeserving, has been a recurring theme in research on children who harm others (Barter and Berridge, 2011; Barter et al., 2009). As disconcerting, and again reflecting previous studies, the author found little evidence that young people's concerns were heard. In conclusion, Stafford argues for a supportive sports ethos where children's and young people's voices are viewed as an essential component in developing a new positive sporting culture. ‘Young people's interviews worryingly showed that physical aggression from peers in competitive sport was an expected and accepted aspect’ The final paper reports on an evaluation of a social information processing model to predict the risk of intergenerational child abuse. Little is known about the mechanisms and risk factors associated with physical child abuse transitions for males. Sandra Azar and colleagues' (2013) study is based on a sample of 79 adolescent males who exhibit a range of risk factors associated with physical child abuse by fathers, including peer aggression. The authors postulate that as later parenting styles are often set early in life, measuring these mechanisms in adolescence may help to predict future risks for physical child abuse and thus inform effective targeting of prevention strategies. ‘measuring these mechanisms in adolescence may help to predict future risks for physical child abuse’ The results provide evidence on the possible transition of child physical abuse for high-risk adolescent boys. They found that young men with rigid and unrealistic child expectations gave more irrelevant solutions to childrearing problems, bestowed greater negative intent attributions to the child's behaviour and were consequently more likely to advocate the use of harsh punishment in childrearing. When the participants were questioned about their responses to a range of childrearing scenarios, a high proportion gave aggressive, coercive or maladaptive responses, suggesting that ‘punishment’ meant physically harsh treatment. The authors conclude from this that punishment ratings are a reasonable indicator of physically aggressive parenting, although future work is needed to verify this contention. The authors tentatively state that the study provides preliminary support for its prediction of future male punishment responses towards children. ‘punishment ratings are a reasonable indicator of physically aggressive parenting, although future work is needed to verify this contention’ This special issue concludes with three book reviews. Therese Duignan reviews Lorraine Radford's book Rethinking Children, Violence and Safeguarding. The book explores the debates and challenges around violence and childhood, considers theoretical perspectives in relation to child maltreatment and children's violence and, lastly, looks at the implications for children's lives. Duignan concludes that the book ‘influenced and changed my professional practice’ (p. 300). In the second contribution, Jazmine Hoare looks at Children Behaving Badly? Peer Violence between Children and Young People, a book which David Berridge and I co-edited. Lastly, Gabrielle Gregory and Jaclyn Palmer review Jonathan Caspi's book Sibling Aggression: Assessment and Treatment. The book provides a detailed literature review and offers both an exploration of the mechanisms of sibling aggression and conflict and draws together a task-centred therapeutic model. References Allardyce S, Yates PM. 2013. Assessing risk of victim crossover with children and young people who display harmful sexual behaviours. Child Abuse Review 22: 255– 267. DOI: 10.1002/car/2277Wiley Online LibraryWeb of Science®Google Scholar Azar ST, Okado Y, Stevenson MT, Robinson LR. 2013. A Preliminary Test of a Social Information Model of Parenting risk in Adolescent Males at Risk for Later Physical Child Abuse in Adulthood. Child Abuse Review 22: 268– 286. DOI: 10.1002/car/2244Wiley Online LibraryWeb of Science®Google Scholar Barter C, Berridge D. 2011. Children Behaving Badly? Peer Violence between Children and Young People. Wiley-Blackwell: Chichester. Google Scholar Barter C, McCarry M, Berridge D, Evans K. 2009. Partner Exploitation and Violence in Teenage Intimate Relationships. NSPCC: London. Google Scholar BBC. 2010. Children's chief apologises for Bulger killers comment. BBC News, 17 March. Available: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8572028.stm [19 March 2010]. Google Scholar Brown J. 2011. Understanding dimensions of ‘peer violence’ in preschool settings: An exploration of key issues and questions. In Children Behaving Badly? Peer Violence between Children and Young People, C Barter, D Berridge (eds). Wiley-Blackwell: Chichester; 21– 32. Google Scholar Duignan T. 2013. Book review of Rethinking Children, Violence and Safeguarding by L. Radford. Child Abuse Review 22: 300. DOI: 10.1002/car.2291Wiley Online LibraryWeb of Science®Google Scholar Gregory G, Palmer JA. 2013. Book review of Sibling Aggression: Assessment and Treatment by J. Caspi. Child Abuse Review 22: 303. DOI: 10.1002/car.2290Wiley Online LibraryWeb of Science®Google Scholar Hackett S, Masson H, Balfe M, Phillips J. 2013. Individual, Family and Abuse Characteristics of 700 British Child and Adolescent Sexual Abusers. Child Abuse Review 22: 232– 245. DOI: 10.1002/car/2246Wiley Online LibraryWeb of Science®Google Scholar Hoare J. 2013. Book review of Children Behaving Badly? Peer Violence between Children and Young People edited by C. Barter and D. Berridge. Child Abuse Review 22: 301– 302. DOI: 10.1002/car.2240Wiley Online LibraryWeb of Science®Google Scholar Keane M, Guest A, Padbury J. 2013. A Balancing Act: A Family Perspective to Sibling Sexual Abuse. Child Abuse Review 22: 246– 254. DOI: 10.1002/car.2284Wiley Online LibraryWeb of Science®Google Scholar Nichols S. 2011. Media representations of youth violence. In Children behaving Badly? Peer violence between children and young people, C Barter, D Berridge (eds). Wiley-Blackwell: Chichester; 167– 180. Wiley Online LibraryGoogle Scholar Papaefstathiou M, Rhind D, Brackenridge C. 2013. Child Protection in Ballet: Experiences and views of teachers, administrators and ballet students. Child Abuse Review 22(2): 127– 241. DOI: 10.1002/car.2228Wiley Online LibraryWeb of Science®Google Scholar Parent S, Demers G. 2011. Sexual Abuse in Sport: a model to prevent and protect athletes. Child Abuse Review 20(2): 120– 133. DOI: 10.1002/car.1135Wiley Online LibraryWeb of Science®Google Scholar Scraton P. 1997. Child in Crisis? UCL Press: London. Google Scholar Stafford A, Alexander K, Fry D. 2013. Playing Through Pain: Children and Young Peoples Experiences of Physical Aggression and Violence in Sport. Child Abuse Review 22: 287– 299. Wiley Online LibraryWeb of Science®Google Scholar Thompson A, Sylvester R. 2010. Even Bulger killers were just children says Maggie Atkinson, Children's Commissioner. Timesonline. Available: http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/families/article7060162.ece [13 March 2010]. Google Scholar Citing Literature Volume22, Issue4Special Issue: Children and Young People Who Harm OthersJuly/August 2013Pages 227-231 ReferencesRelatedInformation
Referência(s)