Youth Offending

Youth offending An issue risen by Wainwright and Nee (2014) highlighted the point that by providing effective early intervention to young offenders, this may prevent them from going to becoming established offenders. Richards (2011) emphasises that rapid brain development may impacts inhibitory responses, emotional self-regulation and the thought process of risk and reward in young offenders. Although youth offenders may have a belief of invincibility, they are able to understand risk although the pressure of their peers can override the common sense and ability to clearly think through decisions (Richards, 2011). Teenagers are generally searching for their identity, making them vulnerable to peer pressure, Richards (2011) explains this could
They describe the risk of developing social skills and relationships being impacted by early delinquency and deviant behaviour which, as stated previously, seems to be apparent in this period of development. By using a GLM based intervention programme they found that the cycle of desistance involved three states of development in the young person. Educating the person so that they become socially aware is key for them to acknowledge their wrong doing; by achieving some sense of personal development which then leads to engraining a sense of hope into the young person. These three things can act as buggers against criminogenic behaviour as well as motivates the individual by reinforcing the potential they can turn their lives into something good. Wainwright and Nee (2014) suggest that by using a GLM based intervention which allows the offender to collaborate with the clinician in regards to goal setting and strengths; could crease of sense of belonging in the young person and assist in the search for their
Their aim was to determine what dominant primary goods associated with the behaviour of non-western youth sexual offenders. The question was whether the victim classed as a child or not, and whether the offence was penetrative or non-penetrative assault had any influence over the offender’s lack of ability to achieve primary human goods such as happiness, agency or inner peace. Chu and Colleagues (2015) integrated both GLM and the Self-Regulation Model (SRM) in order to evaluate the youth’s ability to attain primary goods, reach their goals and be able to regulate their behaviour. The Estimate of Risk of Adolescent Sexual Offence Recidivism (ERASOR) is a validated assessment took used in this study to determine the youth’s risk of reoffending. Clinicians used this along with an offence pathways checklist as part of SRM as a guideline to determining the youth offenders primary goods and risky behaviour. They found three primary goods that were prominent; 91.1% sought pleasure; 35.7% noted relatedness as a driving factor; with 17.3% showing inner peace as very important. Chu and Colleagues (2015) found no correlation between the age of the victim, the nature of the offence and the primary goods therefore the youth offenders who assaulted child victims through penetrative sexual offenders were no more likely to commit the offence than youth who assaulted non-child