Executive Summary
Advances in neuroscience as well as societal change have contributed to the recognition of an interim period between adolescence and adulthood, having implications for how the criminal justice system may most effectively respond to this age group.
Emerging adulthood, covering the period from 18 to 25 years of age,Footnote 1 describes a gradual transition from adolescence to adulthood, evidenced in part by the gradual development of the prefrontal cortex which governs reasoning, decision-making, judgement, and impulse control. This may be a factor in assessing culpability and moral-blameworthiness, and has implications for trial procedures and sentence administration. An understanding of brain development, including neuroplasticity and gender differences, is critical to the design and implementation of effective programming and services.
At the international level, the notion of a special approach to young adults in the justice system is well recognized. Young adults are referenced in the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (Beijing Rules – 1985), and Recommendations of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe.
Most European countries have at least some special provisions in their criminal law for young adult offenders, whether it be the extension of juvenile law provisions, or mitigation of sentences imposed under the criminal law. Approximately half of the American states have established special policies for young adults within the adult criminal justice system,Footnote 2 including reduced sentencing options, young adult courts, separate prison facilities and records expunction provisions.
In Canada there is no formal legislative recognition of young adults in the criminal justice system; however, a brief survey of Federal-Provincial-Territorial justice officials and non-government organizations involved in justice services identified several initiatives focused on young adults.
The current literature makes the case for distinct approaches to this population with respect to the legal process, administration of sentences, case management, rehabilitative programming, and social supports. Recognition of the emerging adult brain as still developing and malleable means approaches to this population should capitalize on opportunities to support healthy brain development and encourage desistance from future offending. Interventions which may further compromise healthy brain/cognitive development, such as segregationFootnote 3 and other punitive approaches, should be avoided.
A distinct approach to young adults in the justice system, which recognizes and addresses developmental and rehabilitative needs, can and must also address accountability, public safety, and impact on victims of crime.
To ensure positive outcomes, potential changes to legislation, policy, and practice regarding young adults in the justice system must address risk factors and needs of this population and avoid measures which increase risk to reoffend. Special attention must also be given to ensuring legislative and policy/practice changes accommodate distinct needs of female, Indigenous, racialized, and non-binary young adults in the justice system.
Distinct approaches to young adults in the justice system may be applied at various stages in the criminal justice system from pre-charge diversion, through specialized court procedures, to age-appropriate correctional programming. Potential approaches include:
- Investigation and charge assessment procedures should include enhanced procedural protections for young adults and recognition of potentially reduced moral blameworthiness / culpability, as well as options to avoid the long-term negative implications of a criminal record or conversion of a youth court record to the status of an adult criminal record.
- Measures related to bail and pre-trial detention should consider the negative impacts of detention, both in terms of the custodial environment and the potential loss of employment, housing, and other social supports which may protect against further offending.
- Court proceedings involving young adults should consider potentially diminished cognitive functioning and reduced moral blameworthiness / culpability of young adults and the long-term negative implications of a criminal record or conversion of a youth court record.
- Custodial options for, and community supervision of, young adults should be responsive in both approach and content. Custodial services should avoid the negative impacts of association with an older, more entrenched offender population, as well as more punitive disciplinary measures such as segregation, given the negative impact of social isolation on the developing brain. Programming for young adult offenders should include increased emphasis on education, life and job skills training, counselling, release planning and transitional support.
- Case management and community supervision of young adults should emphasize their greater need for guidance and support in accessing community-based treatment and services.
If the goals of the criminal justice system include rehabilitation and prevention of further offending, the research literature is clear: a distinct approach to young adult offenders that focusses on age-appropriate interventions and supports is warranted. Many approaches may be implemented through policy decisions, while others would require legislative change.
- Date modified: