At 10 years old, some children may still struggle to tie their shoelaces or use a knife and fork properly. Yet under the law of England and Wales, a child of this age is old enough to be held criminally responsible for their actions.
Raising the age of criminal responsibility to at least 14 appears to have widespread support among the UK public. Crucially, this was consistent across the political spectrum – suggesting it is seen as a question of basic child protection.
This is the age at which, in the eyes of the justice system, childhood effectively ends. But there could soon be a chance to bring this law into line with that of other comparable nations.
The current age of criminal responsibility sits in stark contrast with other legal protections we afford to children. Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s announcement of a planned social media ban for under-16s from spring 2027 is a potent example of this.
Under-18s in England and Wales cannot purchase vape products or alcohol. They cannot marry or vote, and they must be 17 to drive. Society has constructed these protections on sound developmental logic: children are not yet adults, and the law should reflect that.
The recently published youth justice white paper, which sets out the Government’s strategy on young people in the criminal justice system, stated that the Government will assess the age of criminal responsibility in England and Wales. But it has made no firm commitment to raise it.
England and Wales have the lowest age of criminal responsibility in Europe, alongside Switzerland. In the Republic of Ireland children can be held criminally liable from 12, while in Croatia it is 14, along with Germany, Italy and Spain. In Denmark, Norway and Sweden it is 15, and it is 16 in Portugal.
The United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child has long called for an absolute minimum age of 14, and Scotland raised its age of criminal responsibility from eight to 12 in 2021. Northern Ireland is facing renewed calls to raise the age to 16 following a previous consultation on raising the age from 10 in in 2022.
Politicians have dismissed calls for reform by claiming there is no public appetite for change, despite leading justice figures proposing an amendment to the recent crime and policing bill to raise the criminal age of responsibility to 14.
Raising the age of criminal responsibility to at least 14 appears to have widespread support among the UK public. Crucially, this was consistent across the political spectrum – suggesting it is seen as a question of basic child protection.
What neuroscience tells us
Knowledge of adolescent brain development has advanced considerably in recent decades. A substantial body of research demonstrates that children have developmentally immature brains. Experts can also say with confidence that the brain does not reach full maturation until after the age of 30.
The adolescent brain is characterised by heightened impulsivity, reduced capacity to consider consequences, and heightened emotional reactivity. These traits are neurologically normal, not moral failings. But the intersection of childhood, responsibility and serious violence exposes the deep complexities within youth justice.
Most children who enter the justice system have been excluded from school
Taking victims’ experiences seriously and questioning a system that criminalises children at a younger age than most comparable democracies are not competing goals. A mature justice system can – and must – do both.
But by and large, children who end up in England and Wales’s youth justice system are not budding criminals. Around 66% of children in custody have experience of the care system, and 80% have special educational needs or disabilities.
Around half come from racial minority backgrounds, and research shows that racial disparities begin early – with school exclusions and at the point where decisions are made about whether to divert children away from the justice system. The vast majority of children who have come into contact with the justice system have been excluded from school.
These are children who have been let down by services such as education, healthcare and social care. And any racial disparities they might face compound every stage of this process.
Raising the age of criminal responsibility is not only better for children – it produces better outcomes for victims and society too, with evidence showing that diversion from the formal justice system reduces reoffending far more effectively than early criminalisation.
Young offender institutions have been condemned as sites of institutionalised abuse. Children can be held in isolation for 22 hours a day, while educational provision is inadequate and rehabilitative support is minimal.
As researchers focused on children and young people at the Institute for Children’s Futures at Manchester Metropolitan University, we bring together legal expertise and criminological insight in the study of children, society and the law.
We argue that England and Wales must raise the age of criminal responsibility to 12 as a minimum, with a serious ambition to reach 14 in line with the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child recommendations from 2023.
This means diverting children away from criminal justice processes and towards the health, education and social support they need.
Raising the age of criminal responsibility is not only better for children – it produces better outcomes for victims and society too, with evidence showing that diversion from the formal justice system reduces reoffending far more effectively than early criminalisation.
This is not because children should face no consequences for harmful behaviour – they should. But the system as it currently exists does not rehabilitate, it harms. And no child, whatever they have done, deserves to be processed through a machine that was never designed with their wellbeing in mind.
This article first appeared on The Conversation, and is republished under a Creative Commons Licence; you can read the original here.
About the Authors
Dr Anne-Marie Day a is Senior Criminology Lecturer and youth justice researcher at the Manchester Metropolitan University (MMU) Centre for Crime and Youth Justice Research. She previously spent four years as a Criminology Lecturer at Keele University, and has completed a number of research studies including a Nuffield Project on pathways into and out of custody for care experienced children. Dr Day has many years’ experience as a practitioner and policy maker in a range of roles; she is a qualified Probation Officer, and has worked in the community, courts and prison, and as a Senior Policy Adviser for the Youth Justice Board.
Dr Elizabeth A Faulkner is a Senior Lecturer in Law at MMU, and a Fellow of the Higher Education Academy. Elizabeth’s interests are in international law, human rights, legal history and crime, specialising in international child law, human trafficking, modern slavery, children’s rights, mobility/migration and exploitation. She is the author of The Trafficking of Children: International Law, Modern Slavery and the Anti-Trafficking Machine, which was published by Palgrave Macmillan in April 2023 in the Transnational Crime, Crime Control and Security Series. In 2024 she published her first edited collection with Bristol University Press – Modern Slavery in Global Context: Human Rights, Law and Society.
Pictures: top © Upaynose / iStock: above © Ground Picture / Shutterstock
