It’s All Relative: The Absolute Importance of the Family in Youth Justice
from a New Zealand perspective
We know that there are many, often culturally based, definitions of what a family is. What a
family ‘ought’ to be is a value judgement beyond the scope of today’s talk which will focus on
the following aspects of the family:
1. There are imperatives for involving the family and ensuring family participation in youth
justice.
2. Why is it so hard to deliver family participation, especially for our most serious young
offenders?
3. The New Zealand approach, including the Family Group Conference and its advantages.
There are at least three Imperatives for involving the family and ensuring family participation in
Youth Justice
I. The International Covenants/Instruments demand it.
• The Beijing Rules requires it.
• UN Rights of the Child applies it.
II. There is a strong relationship between family based risk factors and adverse life
outcomes, including youth offending. Early life experiences associated with youth
offending include:
• not being cared for as a child;
• having a young parent and parents separatied or living apart;
• showing signs of psychological disturbance from a young age;
• the family having little money and/or living in many places;
• parental criminality and involvement in the use of drugs;
• harsh physical punishment, physical, sexual and/or emotional abuse;
• witnessing family violence or bullying;
• the family not knowing where their children were when they went out, or not supervising
children’s leisure activities; and
• the child not having a relationship with their father.
Family factors one of the big four risk factors: Home; School; Friends; Community
III. Family is the best location for enduring interventions that will work.
• Our aim: Mobilise the family!
Of course, questions are posed about families being actively involved in helping to determine
the appropriate response to their young person’s offending. Questions such as ‘Should they be
involved to ensure accountability and address the causes of offending? And do families
generally know best?’ arise. The New Zealand experience is that families should definitely be
involved, although we recognise that some families are hard to reach.
3. Why is family participation in Youth Justice so hard to achieve?
• most families of serious youth offenders are hard to reach and live on the margins of the
community
• these families are fractured and disadvantaged
• the families of recidivist offenders are the problem, not the solution and so we think there is
little point in involving them
• but, finding wider family members who can become involved can almost always be found;it
is hard work, but usually worth the effort
• “professionals” think they know best and too easily take over
• families feel alienated – with “state” solutions imposed upon them
• working with families of serious young offenders is usually very hard and time consuming
So how is family participation achieved in the NZ Youth Justice system?
4. Family Participation in the NZ YJ System
Firstly, 80% young offenders are not charged and so are not brought to Court. They have the
following characteristics:
– they are “Adolescent Only” offenders- who will “age out” of offending with prompt
family based intervention
– they are usually from relatively stable and co-operative families
In addition
– NZ has a Specialist “Youth Aid” division of the NZ Police which enlists family
participation in “alternative resolutions”
– we recognise that charging these young people is counter productive and detrimental
– families are usually “up for the task” with these young offenders
–
The graph below shows the fall off in appearances before the NZ Youth Court after the passing
of the Children and Young persons and Family Act (1989) which made bold decisions about
moving away from a court based YJ system to a family and Family Group Conference (FGC)
based system.
Rate per 10,000 population of
14 – 16 year olds, appearing in the NZ Youth Court
Secondly, the 20 % who are the most serious offenders are dealt with in the following way by
Family Group Conferences:
♦ When Police wish to charge but cannot arrest (powers to arrest young people are limited)
an “Intention to Charge” FGC must be convened.
♦ If a young person appears in Court and does not deny the charge, or if the charge is
subsequently proved, a FGC is mandatory. There is no numerical limit to FGCs.
♦ The FGC determines whether the charge is admitted and if it is, a plan to hold the
offender to account and to address the causes of offending is formulated and brought
to the Youth Court which almost always agrees to the plan.
♦ If the offending is very serious, or if there is no agreement (seldom), or if the FGC plan
is not completed, the Youth Court imposes formal orders, which in 2013 included prison
in 10 cases. Sometimes an FGC realises and accepts that prison or custody is inevitable
The graph below shows that 20% of offenders commit 60% of offences including serious
offences
120
100
80
60
40
20
100
95
90
85
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
Account for this percentage
of offences
FGCs focus on the most prolific 20% of young offenders
The most prolific % of young offenders
How may Family Group Conferences be described? Briefly, they may be described in the
following terms:
• there is (partial) delegated decision making from the state to families and victims, in all
cases except murder and manslaughter.
• they may be considered “Overkill” for more minor to moderate offending
• they are not explicitly a prescription for restorative justice, but practiced according to
restorative justice principles. They were originally conceived as a family decision making
mechanism.
• the FGC model is not an indigenous, Maori model, but parts of the process are
consistent with Maori cultural approaches.
• family members who can contribute can always be found...somewhere
• FGCs is not expensive. They require good facilitators and need to have good
information at hand. But primarily a FGC requires the presence of (relatively) willing
human beings.
As we know, being sorry for offences committed, harm done and pain caused is a challenge so I
sould like to end with Hemi’s song which reflects Hemi’s thoughts after being part of FGCs:
I’m sorry for all the pain that I caused
Putting your family through something I could never have stopped
And now I’m staring at the stars thinking of what i have done
Something stupid of course what was I thinking of
Looking for my mentality but that was lost
Back in the days BC id be pinned to a cross
But instead I’m writing this rhyme because you gave me a chance
So in the words that I write
You should know that they came from my heart
You opened my eyes despising what I had done
Look above and find the strength to carry on….
The stupid things I’ve done in my life
Creating enemies that want to bring a lot of strife
We’d fight
On the streets
Is probably where you would see me
Drugged out struggling to breath
But now I’m down on my knees
With a million apologies
Please time freeze wish I could turn back the time
Rewind but its all over and done
A new era begun
The sun has risen
And its shining through
This song I compose is dedicated to you.
Judge Andrew Becroft
Principal Youth Court Judge for New Zealand
Te Kaiwhakawā Matua ō Te Kooti Taiohi