A 'veneer of progress'? The youth justice chief answers her critics
What happened
On 12 October 2026, the chief executive of the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales published an article defending the approach that now shapes how the system treats children who offend. The author is Steph Roberts-Bibby. The approach is called Child First. It has four parts, often remembered as ABCD. Treat children as children. Build a pro-social identity – that is, help a child see themselves as someone with a future, not as an offender. Collaborate with children rather than deciding for them. And divert them from stigma wherever possible. The Board dropped the phrase "Offender Second" from the framework in 2021. The article is unusual because it was written in response to criticism, and it quotes the criticism directly. Two academics, Samantha Burns and Hannah Smithson, argued in 2026 that Child First is a "magic concept" – a phrase that sounds good and means whatever the user wants. They said it offers a "veneer of progress" while "masking enduring structural inequalities", and described it as "resistant to scrutiny and lacking in operational clarity". Roberts-Bibby does not dismiss that. "Burns and Smithson are right that adopting progressive language is not, by itself, evidence of reform," she writes. She accepts that children in the system are highly disadvantaged, and that the challenges are "significantly more acute" for care-experienced children and for children from Black or Mixed heritage backgrounds. Her argument is that the Board cannot control welfare, housing, education or economic policy – but it can influence how children are treated once they are in the system. And her claim is that Child First is "a practical, evidence-led approach that has helped achieve historic drops in child crime and custody rates".
Why this matters
This is an education story as much as a justice one, because what happens to a child in trouble with the police usually decides what happens to their schooling. A child who is diverted away from a formal criminal record can stay in school, keep a training place, and apply for jobs without explaining a conviction. A child who is pulled into the court system often loses all three. The decision made in a police station at 15 can still be shaping someone's life at 30. The second reason to pay attention is the argument itself. It is rare, and healthy, for a public body to publish its critics' sharpest words and then answer them. Most organisations quietly ignore academic criticism. There is also a lesson here that applies far beyond youth justice. "We adopted a progressive framework" is not a result. Results are things like: how many children ended up in custody, how many got back into education, how many came back through the system a second time. The article is at its strongest when it talks about those, and weakest when it talks about frameworks and toolkits. And the inequality point should not be skipped over because the Board conceded it. Care-experienced children and children from Black and Mixed heritage backgrounds are over-represented at every stage. An approach that improves average outcomes while leaving that gap untouched has not finished the job.
What the evidence actually says
The article sets out a fair amount of evidence, and it is a mixed picture rather than a clean win. On outcomes: the average number of children in custody in 2024/25 fell by 3 per cent, to the lowest level on record. Fewer children are entering the system for the first time than ever before. Diversion data published for the first time in 2026 shows that nearly half of youth justice service outcomes were resolved without a caution or a formal court outcome. In Wales, 63 per cent of total outcomes were diversionary outcomes with youth justice service involvement. Those numbers are real. What they do not prove on their own is that Child First caused them. Child crime has fallen across many comparable countries over the same period, for reasons that include changes in how young people spend their time. The article is making an association argument, and it is worth saying so. On practice, the research cited is more specific. Crest Advisory found that 86 per cent of practitioners surveyed said clear guidance enabled Child First to work – but also found inconsistency and barriers between agencies. Children described positive relationships with workers. Research by Hanman and O'Connor at Loughborough University found practitioners had shifted from focusing on the offence towards a child's development and strengths. Children reported being listened to before being assessed, getting activities based on their interests, and receiving support into education, training or employment. The same research found that poverty, housing problems and school exclusions still limited what support could achieve. An evaluation of a Child First custody pilot found that training changed professional behaviour and reduced child detention, while gaps remained in specialist legal advice and multi-agency involvement. Inspections by HM Inspectorate of Probation found that services embedding the approach showed higher engagement, better multi-agency working and better long-term outcomes. So the honest summary is this: the direction of travel in the numbers is good, the practice research is encouraging but patchy, and the critics' central complaint – that the framework can be claimed without being delivered – is partly supported by the Board's own evidence about inconsistency. There have been concrete policy changes too. Case management guidance was rewritten in 2022 after three years of work, shifting from managing risk to child-centred practice. Teams now embed speech and language therapists, child mental health practitioners and substance misuse specialists. The Metropolitan Police extended its Deferred Prosecution Scheme to selected knife possession offences, and 2026 government guidance expects all police forces to offer deferred prosecution in suitable child knife possession cases, recorded since April 2026 under a new outcome code. The Youth Justice Board is itself becoming a national continuous improvement body.
Practical advice
If you are a parent or carer whose child has been arrested or questioned, a few things are worth knowing. A child under 18 must have an appropriate adult present during a police interview. That can be a parent, carer or a trained volunteer. Do not let an interview go ahead without one. Free legal advice at a police station is available to everyone, including children, regardless of income. Ask for the duty solicitor. Taking it is not an admission of anything. Ask specifically whether diversion is possible. Options vary by force, but they include community resolutions, deferred prosecution and out-of-court disposals. These can avoid a formal record. If nobody raises it, raise it yourself. Ask what any outcome will mean for future DBS checks, apprenticeships and travel. The answers differ a great deal between outcomes, and they are hard to change later. Tell the school early, and ask for support rather than waiting to be told off. School exclusion makes every other outcome worse, and the research cited above names it as a limiting factor. If your child has unmet needs – speech and language difficulties, ADHD, autism, a mental health problem – say so in writing. Many youth justice teams now have these specialists attached, but they have to know.
What to know
The Youth Justice Board's chief executive, Steph Roberts-Bibby, published a defence of the Child First approach on 12 October 2026, quoting and answering academic criticism that it is a "magic concept" offering a "veneer of progress". Child First has four tenets: treat children as children, build a pro-social identity, collaborate with children, and divert from stigma. The supporting figures: the average number of children in custody in 2024/25 fell 3 per cent to the lowest on record; first-time entrants are at a record low; nearly half of youth justice service outcomes are now resolved without a caution or court outcome; in Wales 63 per cent of outcomes were diversionary. The cited research is encouraging but uneven. Practitioners report a real shift in practice, children report being listened to, and inspections find better outcomes where the approach is embedded. The same research finds inconsistency between areas, gaps in specialist legal advice, and continuing limits from poverty, housing and school exclusion. The Board accepts that progressive language is not itself evidence of reform, and that disadvantage is sharper for care-experienced children and children from Black and Mixed heritage backgrounds. If your child is questioned by police: insist on an appropriate adult, take the free duty solicitor, and ask directly about diversion and what any outcome means for future checks and apprenticeships. Sources: Youth Justice Board for England and Wales, "How evidence is building a better youth justice system", GOV.UK, 12 October 2026, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/how-evidence-is-building-a-better-youth-justice-system; Ministry of Justice and Youth Justice Board, "Youth justice statistics: 2024 to 2025", GOV.UK, 29 January 2026, https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/youth-justice-statistics-2024-to-2025; Youth Justice Board, "Record lows in youth justice annual statistics 2024-25", GOV.UK, 29 January 2026, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/record-lows-in-youth-justice-annual-statistics-2024-25. This article is for general information and does not replace advice from a doctor, pharmacist or other qualified healthcare professional.
Related articles
Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays: the hub that opened at a football ground
On 12 October 2026, the Department for Work and Pensions announced that a new Youth Hub had opened in Exeter. The hub is for people aged 16 to 24. It is at St…
Three years of missing accounts, and two trustees on the register
On 12 October 2026, the Charity Commission announced that it has opened a statutory inquiry into an education charity called Crossfields Institute. The charity…