|
22 November 2005 Panorama ASBO programme Panorama did a programme about ASBOs being used against vulnerable children. Here is the link: (requires broadband to view the programme). ASBOs on trial Firstly; the programme was about ASBOs and vulnerable children. It featured 3 case studies and interviews with a Manchester City Councillor, a Corby Councillor, Hazel Blears Minister of State for Crime, Security and Communities, a 'leading child psychiatrist' and a barrister and, oh I nearly forgot, the completely ineffectual Children's Commissioner for England. The argument is that vulnerable children 'with ADHD' are being given ASBOs. Wrong argument This criticism is misguided. There is a danger that it shores up ASBOs. It enables the government to say that there may be a few cases where ASBOs are used inappropriately and guidance will be issued to prevent this but ASBOs are a useful tool etc etc. Further; this argument tends to go no further than saying that the soft control of the pharmaceutical / ADHD / Psychiatry lobby is preferable to the hard control of ASBOs. Indeed on the BBC message boards about this programme Andrea Bilbow from ADDISS - The National Attention Deficit Disorder Information and Support Service, London, UK writes "Is it no wonder ASBOs are ineffectual. I think it is high time these children were referred for a mental health assessment first, primarily being screened for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, before one even considers an ASBO. ". A case of out of the frying pan into the fire. There was a revealing moment when the child psychiatrist Professor Susan Bailey stated: "It's been long recognized in all the very good research studies, there is a very strong association between early-onset, anti-social behaviour and ADHD." Well, since ADHD is an invented condition - one of those psychiatric conditions that can be diagnosed if certain behaviours in a checklist are identified but for which there is no identified biological aetiology - and since the checklist for ADHD is a list similar to a check-list of 'anti-social' behaviour it should surprise no one that Professor Bailey and her colleagues have 'discovered' a correlation. (The usual mistake of people like Professor Bailey evidenced here is to believe in the objectivity of their own subjective diagnostic categories). In other words; if the only route out of an ASBO is to claim ADHD and be ravaged by the psychiatric drugs pushed on naughty / implusive children by the ADHD lobby I would personally recommend young people to stick with the ASBO. That is ASBOs and ADHD 'diagnoses' are rival methods of controlling naughty / impulsive youngsters and with an ASBO at least you aren't ravaged by drugs. The savagery of Councillor Eddie Newman from Manchester Panorma did us a service by exposing the savagery of this man who is a leading light in the ASBO culture in Manchester. When put on the spot about one 16 year old boy with a low IQ and an ADHD tag for a moment we glimpsed some of the rabid anger which drives people to promote ASBOs. To be fair to Councillor Newman I have no doubt that there are instances on his patch of grossly irresponsible and frightening behaviour by out of control teenagers. The problem with the ASBO solution is that it does not engage with young people at all. ASBOs are described by the government as control orders not punishments. Their aim is simply to make problems go away - to stop anti-social behaviour. But it should be obvious to people like Councillor Newman that people need input to change their behaviour. Slapping an order on someone does nothing to engage with them at all and thus nothing to provide a motive to change behaviour. It requires on the part of the person awarded an ASBO a rational decision not to break the terms of the order, but most people awarded an ASBO will be somewhat out of control, and this is the kind of self-control they probably have not developed. I think this applies whether they are impulsive children with low IQs or say adults with a tendancy to commit suicide. (The woman who was given an ASBO by Bath magistrates because of her tendancy to leap into rivers). The BBC message boards also have a fair sprinkling of this stupid response ('child scum') for example. It is stupid because however hard it is to face out of control young people - and certainly some young people are to some extent out of control, though I would suggest only rarely seriously - not doing so, trying to deal with them at arm's length with video surveillance and ASBOs just isn't going to work. This isn't, if you like, a 'do-gooder' position; it is basic psychology. I said 'rarely seriously'; if the Panorama footage of children 'engaged in anti-social' behaviour is anything to go by this is fair. We saw children running about on roofs, children digging up the grass in a park, children riding a quad bike in a park, and quite a lot of drunken teenagers not doing much until provoked by someone. In other words - bored children with nothing to do. It is just misguided to respond as Councillor Newman does with his angry and heavy-handed approach. The BBC message boards These can be followed by following the link from the Panorama page given at the top of this page. The BBC claims to publish a representative selection. We have: 18 were of the 'give the little hooligans a hiding / taste of porridge' etc variety 8 showed reasoning and an attempt to arrive at a considered view 3 recounted personal experience 3 spoke up directly for freedom Is it possible then that part of the ASBO drive at a politcal level is the same one as used to drive the absurd 'short-sharp-shock' inititatives in the eighties? Basically, giving difficult teenagers and children a hard time appears to be popular with (on this sample) more than half the electorate. No matter that it doesn't do any good and that at least some of the children / teenagers who are awarded ASBOs will go on to commit suicide. Jim Sharp in Coventry says he is a psychologist working in the Criminal Justice system. He writes "ASBOs are useful and need to be applied without delay to control and hopefully assist, as one of the approaches to be used to help out-of-control children and teenagers to improve and reduce their offending". Well, for a start he is using the word 'offending' to refer to non criminal behaviour. This, of course, is how Criminal Justice professionals on the ground see ASBOs - they regard young people who 'engage in anti-social behaviour' as criminals. He complains about ivory tower social scientists; but at least some degree of detachment would perhaps prevent him criminalising young people who have committed no criminal offence. We are in danger of criminalising bored children. It would be better to provide activities to engage them. Did we learn anything? The three case studies of young people would have been more useful had we been given more information about the behaviour which led to them being awarded an ASBO and about the background, personal and community in each case. In one case we were told a single fight in the street with another boy lead to a 14 year old being awarded an ASBO. In one case the father, when interviewed, linked the onset of his son's problems to when he went inside for a little over a year. Clearly sending fathers to prison causes problems for young men growing up. In the case of 'Andrew' it seemed that he was a child crying out for care. He was a diminutive boy of 16 whose voice hardly seemed to have broken and I find it very hard to see how he could be perceived as a threat by anyone. One factor which came out was that in two cases ASBO conditions prevented the young person socialising with their friends. In the case of Liam in particular you got the sense that 'having a buzz with his mates' was the one time in his life when he could relax a little. In the case of Andrew his original ASBO conditions prevented him playing football because it meant congregating in a group. Denying young people opportunities to socialise is not going to teach them social responsibility. Was the progamme worth it? This progamme was a missed opportunity. There was plenty of scope to make the central point about ASBOs - namely that the government is criminalising ordinary behaviour of bored teenagers, in areas of social deprivation, rather than providing youth centres and facilities. Far from building communities ASBOs are building the power of professionals over communtiies. The job title of Hazel Blears, Minister of State for Crime, Security and Communities should give us a clue here. There was plenty of footage of bored chilren running about on roofs and in parks crying out for this point to be made. ASBOs are popular with a kind of knee-jerk 'lets give the young hooligans a taste of their own medicine' constituency - but government should do better than pander to the lowest and most stupid instincts available. The ADHD v. ASBO debate is a minor power struggle between rival power phalanxes. The programme at least put a human face on some young people who have been awarded an ASBO but it is a lack of politcal courage to take the 'sick note' approach. |