Juvenile Economic Sanctions

• Published date: 01 February 2014
• Date: 01 February 2014
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12070
• Author: Tamara Walsh

POLICY ESSAY

JUVENILE ECONOMIC SANCTIONS

Juvenile Economic Sanctions

A Logical Alternative?

TamaraWalsh

University of Queensland, Australia

Research around the world has consistently shown that people of low socioeconomic

status are more likely to interact with the criminal justice system (Bennett and

Broe, 2008; Weatherburn,2001; as to juveniles, see Weatherburn and Lind, 1998).

In Australia, almost 40% of young offenders come from the areas of lowest socioeconomic

status, and Indigenous young people are overrepresented in the youth justice system by up

to 25 times (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2013).

This context of disadvantage cannot be ignored when evaluating the efficacy of different

sentencing options. In one Australian study, criminal defendants experiencing homeless-

ness or impaired decision-making capacity were asked their views on various sentencing

alternatives (Walsh, 2011). Their comments regardingfines were scathing. One respondent

said:

What’s the point of fining people that are on benefits, which is only going

to make their lives harder down the track, and they’re just going to keep

reoffending? There’s no logic. (Walsh, 2011: 24)

Does the fact that the people receiving the economic sanctions view “no logic” to their

situation mean that we are barking up the wrong tree here? Not necessarily, but the matter

is certainly worthy of further exploration.

Like other countries around the world, in the context of juvenile justice Australia

has experimented with a range of penalties: detention, fines and restitution, conferencing,

cautions, and community supervision. Most Australian young people who are found guilty

of a criminal offense receive a noncustodial penalty. Only around one in ten juvenile

offenders receives a custodial sentence, and this rate has remained steady for many years

(Australian Bureau of Statistics,2008, 2013). Most juveniles are cautioned or dismissed with

Direct correspondence to Tamara Walsh, T.C. Beirne School of Law, University of Queensland, Australia,

Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia (e-mail: t.walsh@law.uq.edu.au).

DOI:10.1111/1745-9133.12070 C2014 American Society of Criminology 69

Criminology & Public Policy rVolume 13 rIssue 1