Coupled with news that use of restraint techniques in the youth secure estate is on the rise, the deaths of 15-year-old Alex Kelly and 17-year-old Jake Hardy have highlighted the striking vulnerability of some of society’s most marginalised children.
Demands for fewer children to be sentenced to custody and improved conditions for those who are, have led to significant, if gradual, reform of the system over more than a decade.
But calls to increase the age of criminal responsibility and fundamentally change the way the youth justice system treats young people continue unabated.
Influential think-tank the Centre for Social Justice is the latest organisation to add its weight to the debate.
In Rules of Engagement, Changing the Heart of Youth Justice, published last month, it called for "further and deeper" reform of youth justice to avoid thousands of children being "needlessly criminalised".
The centre’s link to Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith, and the unusual announcement by the Youth Justice Board (YJB) that it will look to implement "practicable" recommendations from the report, have already given the publication some traction.
But ongoing financial constraints, uncertainty over the future influence of the YJB and the government’s drive for localism leave question marks over the likely take-up of the report’s central demands.
CUSTODY
Some of the recommendations in the Centre for Social Justice report, such as increasing the age of criminal responsibility to 12 and raising the custody threshold, are familiar calls, but unlikely to gain much political airtime.
Others, such as affording all children in custody looked-after status, the introduction of independent living units to ease the resettlement process and the introduction of a greater number of smaller, local custody facilities, seem inconceivable in this time of austerity.
But Penelope Gibbs, director of the Prison Reform Trust’s Out of Trouble programme, says it is a "bold statement" by the think-tank that could "prepare the ground for change".
"Achieving a higher custody threshold is by no means impossible," she says. "The key to getting many of these changes through will be economic arguments based on cost analysis."
But funding could prove problematic for the proposal that speech and language therapists be appointed in every young offender institution (YOI).
Money for the appointment of a social worker for each establishment was only secured last year after a long-running dispute between councils and the YJB over who should foot the bill.
Instead, change to custodial regimes may come in a more incremental form.
The call for expansion of restorative justice in secure settings to deal with behaviour issues could help improve overall discipline and reduce incidents of restraint, for example.
Similarly, the proposed shake-up of staff development to increase frequency, range and depth of training could lead to more understanding and a safer environment in the long term.
COURTS
Further reductions to the use of custody will rely heavily on the way cases are dealt with in court.
But the Centre for Social Justice also suggests that courts can help children with a more holistic approach to their welfare.
For example, magistrates could be given the power to order children’s services to investigate whether a child is at risk of suffering serious harm and whether intervention is required – a power currently only available in family court proceedings.
Although this would place additional pressure on local authority children’s services, John Bache, chair of the youth courts committee at the Magistrates’ Association, says it would be a valuable change.
"One of the perpetual problems we have is children coming to court without any accompanying adult or an adult that knows very little about them to an embarrassing degree," he says.
"Some local authorities are excellent, but others aren’t and on some occasions it appears they are not aware of them and that is very worrying indeed."
Annual youth justice data reveals that numbers of parenting orders issued at magistrates courts fell by 25.9 per cent, from 1,261 in 2008/09 to 935 in 2010/11.
A recommendation set out in the report calls for a review of parenting orders, why they are little used and a clarification of their nature and role – something that could feasibly be undertaken by the YJB.
Meanwhile, training for youth magistrates and defence lawyers is highlighted as an important area for improvement and one that should not bear too high an associated cost.
It is suggested that youth magistrate training be developed beyond the current focus of sentencing aims, structure and options to include "comprehensive understanding of the distinct vulnerabilities of children and young people".
"Magistrates and defence lawyers are very varying in their knowledge," Bache accepts. "Any additional training or improvements to existing training would be welcome."
YOUTH OFFENDING TEAMS
Magistrates have previously raised concerns over the quality and availability of community alternatives to custody, another problem highlighted in the report.
But interventions such as intensive fostering arrangements instead of custodial remand are unlikely to be implemented due to cost. Many of the more realistic changes proposed relate to the work of youth offending teams (YOTs).
YOTs play a central role in the court process, compiling pre-sentence reports and with the power to reprimand young people who do not meet the requirements of orders.
The CSJ report advocates that progress in this area can be made through the spread of good practice – something within the YJB’s current remit.
This would include practical support mechanisms to help young people comply with orders, such as sending reminders of appointments via text message and the use of "carrots", such as opportunities to engage in positive activities, as well as "sticks" (breach proceedings).
The opportunity to hand greater discretion to YOTs is clearly available, with minimum standards for YOT services due to be scaled back from April next year under government plans to hand local authorities greater autonomy.
"We propose that the revised national standards give practitioners the discretion to judge what comprises an acceptable number of missed appointments," the report states.
In light of funding cuts, reduced requirements on YOTs and the fact that increasingly, some statutory partners are not represented on YOTs, the call for a review of the structure and remit of YOTs to clarify
their roles, as well as the responsibilities of local partners, is not only feasible, but also clearly important.
POLICE
Many of the report’s suggestions relate to the role of the police in keeping young people out of contact with the wider justice system.
The report calls for discretion "to be restored" to officers so that they can use informal responses, such as a verbal reprimand, to address low-level antisocial behaviour.
Partnerships between every police basic command unit and local youth projects are also called for, as is the establishment of youth advisory groups to provide an opportunity for young people to provide feedback to police.
This would build on another recommendation, which suggests the development of local level youth-led engagement training in partnership with the voluntary sector.
These suggestions do not come with a big price tag and could have clear advantages for the youth justice system.
However, in the absence of a lead on children and young people at the Association of Chief Police Officers after Ian McPherson left the Metropolitan Police in November, it is unclear who could steer such reforms.
The most likely candidates would be the new police and crime commissioners, due to be elected in November, although there are concerns that differing approaches could lead to a postcode lottery for young people.
"Police are the gatekeepers to the system," says Andrew Neilson, director of campaigns
at the Howard League for Penal Reform. "If they are arresting fewer children, the chances are there will be fewer children in custody.
"There is a danger that commissioners could scapegoat young people and say that arresting them [for minor offences] is going to be a big priority. We are at a crucial moment."
