Resources are key to plans to reform the juvenile justice system, writes Carl O'Brien
A mother stood up at the back of the courtroom, holding a bulging cardboard file in her hands, as tears trickled down her cheeks. "This goes back to when he was in third class," she said to the judge.
"I've been to a psychiatrist, counsellors, social workers and now you. And now you're going to release him onto the streets. That's what I've been trying to avoid all my life."
The mother was in court to plead that her 16-year-old son, who was appearing in court on theft charges, be remanded in custody because she couldn't control him at home any more.
It's a scene which repeats itself regularly before Court 55 in the Children's Court in Dublin, where frustration over the juvenile justice system often spills over into tears, anger and resentment.
Most working in the welfare and justice system acknowledge that it is riven with faultlines that result in fragmented and unco-ordinated services for troubled young people and their families.
Much has to do with the haphazard implementation of the Children's Act, a legislative framework that placed greater emphasis on care rather than custody by making detention of young people a measure of last resort.
The failure to introduce alternatives to detention, such as community sanctions, has seen a significant increase in detention rates in recent years, according to recently published research by Dr Ursula Kilkelly of UCC.
Plans expected to be approved by Cabinet this week may go some way towards speeding up what has been a largely laggardly approach by the Government towards creating a more progressive juvenile justice system.
Raising the age of criminal responsibility from seven to 12 will have important implications for the care and welfare system - under the auspices of the Health Service Executive - which will deal with children who have often been directed into the juvenile justice system at an early age.
To anyone who spends time in the courts, it is clear children who appear before judges exhibit a range of problems such as mental illness, behavioural problems (such as attention deficit disorder), substance abuse, and alcohol and drug addiction.
Provided sufficient resources become available, this could lead to a greater emphasis on family support services and early intervention for children with developmental or emotional problems who end up in trouble with the law.
The introduction of community sanctions - provided for in the original Children's Act of 2001 - will also help create more alternatives for judges.Other long-overdue measures look set to be introduced, such as the ending of detaining children alongside adults in places of detention, with a greater emphasis on placing offending teens in child detention schools.
Amid such progressive steps, the provision for Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (Asbos) seems a bizarre move, out of step with the more progressive, welfare-centred reforms.
The measure has all the hallmarks of a political move to be seen to address the issue of anti-social behaviour.
Provision for the naming of children who are subject to Asbos goes against the entire ethos of the Children's Act, which puts its emphasis on giving children a second chance to get out of a cycle of offending behaviour.
The fact that the measure, originally floated by Minister for Justice Michael McDowell, is so watered down in its final form gives hope that judges may use it sparingly.
While the overall reforms are welcome, they will still not address the fragmentation at the heart of the services directed towards children at risk. The reorganisation of the Office of the Minister for Children, who will have greater access to Cabinet, is an encouraging step in the right direction.
Ultimately, however, the provision of sufficient resources and political will determine whether plans to reform the juvenile justice system prove successful.
