By Iain Brennan and Ajima Olaghere
A Campbell policy brief on “The effects of sentencing policy on re-offending” notes that “there is no evidence that custodial sentences make for a safer society.” This evidence is consistent across a variety of contexts with different types of offenders and provides the most comprehensive evidence to date that, as a means of behavior change, punishment through justice systems is counter-productive.
This is particularly true for young people: our new Campbell systematic review contributes evidence that, for juvenile offenders, diversion away from formal sanctions at the earliest possible stage is the best option for them and society.
Pushing young people through criminal justice procedures increases the chance they will commit further harm.
Consistently, official records and self-report evidence have shown that offending peaks in late adolescence and, for most, stops there without the aid of social or criminal justice intervention. A large percentage of offending by young people is low-level, such as drug possession, antisocial behavior and criminal damage. Admittedly, these offences are not harmless and a public policymaker’s instinct may be to punish this offending. Our systematic review shows, however, that pushing these young people through costly and stigmatizing criminal justice procedures increases the chance they will commit further harm.
Specifically, our review shows that policymakers can expect slight reductions in future delinquent behavior among low-risk youth when police officers initiate and steer youth away from formal processing through techniques such as diversion, diversion with services, and restorative cautions.*
Police-led diversion improves outcomes for young people and society.
Our review summarized 19 high-quality studies from the UK, North America, and Australia. While the results across time and country were generally consistent, additional studies from other countries with similarly low ages of criminal responsibility are needed. We found little difference between diversion only and diversion with services, which suggests we have much more to learn about why young people do and do not reoffend. Despite these gaps in our knowledge, an implication of our review is that policymakers should not only expand the use of early diversion models with low-risk youth, but also extend these approaches to low-risk adults.
While our results are modest, this review is the best evidence to date to indicate that police-led diversion improves outcomes for young people and society. Based on our evidence, we believe that policymakers have a moral and fiscal responsibility to divert juvenile offenders away from criminal justice systems at the earliest possible stage.
*A plain language summary of this review is available here in English and Spanish.