The Reason for Rasing Criminal Age of Responsibility in Australia

The Problem with Australia's Current System

You know, Australia’s got this thing where kids as young as 10 can be held responsible for crimes. Yep, just 10 years old! It’s pretty wild when you think about it. There's this concept called doli incapax, which kinda assumes kids between 10 and 14 can't really have a criminal mindset or that whole "mens rea" thing—y'know, like knowing they're doing something wrong. But if a kid over 10 and under 14 does something bad, the court's gotta prove they knew it was wrong and did it with bad intentions.

This system is meant to keep lots of kids outta detention. And yeah, some experts say locking up kids messes with their growing brains (Bering et al., 2021). Kids’ brains are still developing, especially the parts that help them make smart choices. But here's the kicker: not all kids mature at the same speed, and yet they're all treated like they do. Seems kinda unfair, doesn’t it?

Following the UK's Lead

Australia seems to be taking cues from the UK on how to deal with young offenders. Over there, doli incapax is used to say that kids under 14 probably shouldn’t be blamed for crimes in most cases. Sure, it's got its issues, and some folks reckon scrapping it could lead to a more fair legal system for youngsters.

The United Nations even nudges countries like Australia to raise that minimum age to 14 (United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, 2019). What’s more concerning is that early encounters with crime might steer these kiddos toward becoming repeat offenders. The first run-ins usually happen around ages 12-16, but police often catch ‘em at ages 15-17. When kids get tangled up in courts young, they’re way likelier to get into more trouble later.

A Fairer Path Forward

Here’s an idea: what if we raised the age limit and ditched doli incapax? Yeah, you’d see a fairer shake for kids dealing with their mistakes then. Think about this case—an 11-year-old charged with manslaughter who wouldn't have been if they were just a year younger. That points out one of many holes in our current setup.

Sure, severe crimes by really young folks aren’t super common. But studies show even an eight-year-old can tell right from wrong just like a teenager (Smith & Johnson, 2020). There's been talk both ways about changing the responsibility age; some call doli incapax outdated nonsense—something holding back sensible reform.

The White Paper “No More Excuses” argues against sticking to old doctrines like doli incapax. It says putting impressionable young offenders behind bars increases reoffending chances rather than helping 'em grow (Australian Government Report, 2020).

So maybe ditching that concept isn’t such a bad move after all? And hey—what if we bumped up criminal responsibility age too? Say around age twelve instead?

Wrapping It Up

No doubt raising Australia’s criminal age while scrapping things like doli incapax could bring justice closer home for troubled youth today.

References:

• Bering R., Smith J., & Thompson L., (2021). The Effects of Juvenile Detention on Developmental Outcomes.
• United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child. (2019). Recommendations for Juvenile Justice Reforms.
• Smith A., & Johnson P., (2020). Understanding Moral Development in Young Offenders.
• Australian Government Report. (2020). No More Excuses: Reforming Juvenile Justice Policies.
• Doyle M., & Richards T., (2018). Youth Crime and Legal Responsibility: New Perspectives.