SO, HOW DID WE GET HERE?
THE 17TH CENTURY:
Youth crime beginning in the 17th century created the historical and social context necessary for understanding Canadian culture today. Records indicate that youth crime was problematic in North America as early as the 17th century; however, little is known about youth involvement in crime before this time. It was argued that the concept of childhood was first “found” in Western Europe during this time. Before this, there was little distinction between individuals on the basis of age. At this time, judges were merciful and sympathetic towards youth in court. In Europe, children below the age of 7 could not be liable for crimes and youth between the ages of 7 to 14 were subjected to the doctrine of doli incapax. This doctrine indicated that youth were “incapable of doing harm”, and they were not able to be prosecuted for criminal offences unless contested by the Crown. The youth crime laws in Canada were ruled and highly influenced by European law and were maintained due to the large number of settlers at this time.
When a large wave of settlers arrived in Canada, they found first nations communities with a significant difference in ideologies regarding youth treatment. The first nations children had rights and large independence from their parents. The youth worked and provided for their families. In contrast, the children of European settlers completely depended on their parents. This resulted in a clash between the old world of first nations and new wave of settlers as they believed that children with that degree of freedom undermined their parents’ authority. Other problems were seen within the fur trade system, which worked as a form of inheritance for first born youth. The fur trade was problematic as it was met with organized crime. This was the first indication of youth involvement in crime. Another problem was seen with immigration. Impoverished Europeans were promised better lives by immigrating to Canada but were faced with unemployment, illness, destitution or death on the journey over. This resulted in children having to fend for themselves on arrival in order to survive, and crime erupted.
THE 18TH CENTURY:
The 18th century could be considered a time of experimentation regarding youth crime regulation. In Canada, one’s level of education was thought to equal their likelihood of involvement in crime. The more educated the youth were during this period was thought to equate to less crime. Additionally, religion was a form of teaching morality. Thus, the European settlers had a strong connection to religion. Prairie classrooms were used as vehicles by which immigrants would assimilate. This state project had a significant impact on society as it asserted the value of education. This also created a divide in gender roles as females were taught only religious instructions and abilities such as needlework. Whereas, men were taught skills needed for future careers. Short term confinement was punishment for deviant youth as fines were useless with children having a lack of possessions to collect. This period was a major starting point in asserting blame on parents for children’s actions. This was implemented by military justice as the leading form of law enforcement.
The test of criminal capacity, taken from M’Naughton’s Case in 1843, set the legal range for claiming insanity. According to this, children were treated in court similarly to individuals with mental disorders. If charged, the child must have been proven to “know the natures and consequences of his conduct, and to appreciate that it was wrong”. In the early period of the 18thcentury, children were jailed with adults. This changed in 1857 with two statutes. First, the Act for Establishing Prisons for Young Offenders which led criminals under 21 to be moved to reformatories. Second, the Act for the More Speedy Trial and Punishment of Offenders which aimed to reduce pre-trial detention for children.
THE 19TH CENTURY:
With the start of the 19th century in Canada, poverty continued and worsened. The new world had limited resources to support newly arriving settlers. Orphans and immigrant children sent to Canada were exploited and forced to work as indentured servants. Initially, the societal mission was to rescue poor children and provide them with “useful, healthy, and profitable employment”. This grew over time to include more than 50 organizations engaged in this work. Many children were brought to Canada without their family’s knowledge because many organizations believed that youth in poverty was a result of poor parenting which provided justification to permanently remove them. Approximately 100,000 children were bought and sold as slaves for the purpose of paying their entry into Canada. These children were forced to work under the ownership of their masters for 7 to 8 years in order to “repay their debts”. Once released, they were given freedom which often included farmland in order to begin their lives as Canadians. Often, these children endured horrible working conditions and miserable treatment. This caused many to flee which was considered a felony and resulted in criminal charges. Despite the involvement of government officials in the juvenile immigration movement, there were no official government policies specifically related to importation of child laborers. Immigration to Canada was unrestricted, unregulated and scattered between federal and provincial levels of government. The state supported child importation because it benefited agriculture in Canada. The government provided a grant of 2$ per child brought into Canada. Despite this support, the government had no intention of responsibility toward these children. The duty of care was assigned to whoever brought them into Canada, which were not restricted by any rules or regulations. This eventually received significant resistance from individuals in the community which was ignored by the government. Eventually, the initial support for the juvenile immigration movement decreased when the media turned against the children, who then become victims of hostility. The changing public perceptions led to the demise of child importation.
Throughout the 19th century, youth crime was the subject of significant public concern and discourse. News outlets continuously warned about youth crime and the steps necessary to control it. By the mid- 1800’s, the poor were targeted for allegations of immorality. There was a new urban problem surrounding the challenges associated with poverty such as illiteracy, sex trade, addiction and juvenile delinquency. One significant event covered by The Globe and Mail was the death of Reena Virk in Victoria, British Columbia. Two young individuals were charged with second degree murder and six young women were also convicted of aggravated assault in part of Reena’s death. This case, known as the Victorian public issue, was the key in influencing the politic of youth crime. This caused a large stir in communities, which resulted in the emergence of specialist professions and agencies to combat these problems that were perceived as growing out of control. These agencies focused on the issue of immorality as they believed that adults had a moral obligation to children. A significant amount of concern surrounded young women. The focus was not on the safety of female youth, but rather on the perceived danger to their morality. Women were ideally meant to represent a pure and virgin-like presence, and youth crime was a large threat to this ideology. Thus, in the early 1900’s, the social reform movement sprouted with the belief that youth were able to be reformed. Scott and Kelso asserted the Child Savers Movement which encouraged the rehabilitative philosophy stressing that society was able to fight the “evil” rooted in juvenile delinquents. From this, the Juvenile Delinquency Act was created.
THE 20TH CENTURY
The 20th century in Canada brought on a new shift in dealing with youth crime. New laws meant to better grasp the problem of youth crime resulted in children being more easily criminalized. This period was met with the expansion of the drug trade which led to an increase in arrests as young people were used as pons in the drug trade to complete dirty work. This is not an indication or more crime being committed. Simply, this reflected a change in the type of crime which occurred. At this time, the “nothing works” idea became more popular and children’s rights activists criticized the enormous power of the youth court. However, this did not call for change in legislation. Rather, public concerns over rising youth crime served to better politicize youth justice which resulted in more strict police activity. An unease balance between child welfare and crime control in youth legislation was a large focus of public debate. Ever since, there has been a steady move away from the child welfare approach.
In this period, a new wave of research surfaced. Twin and adoption studies began in the 1930’s which highlighted a link between genetics and behaviour leading to crime. Adoption studies asserted a link between adopted criminal youth and biological criminal parents. This suggested a very small link which was nonsignificant. Still, ideas related to this dominated the field at the time. In the footsteps of Lombroso, William H. Sheldon completed a somatotype study in the attempt to link body shape to criminality. From this, three types of body shape was highlighted. First, Mesomorphs were most likely to engage in crime. They were muscular, tall and had broad shoulders. Second, Endomorphs were heavy with a round, soft shape and were most likely to be mentally ill. Third, ectomorphs were thin, tall and linear. According to Sheldon, they were most likely to commit suicide. This study proposed a problem because he linked physical and psychological characteristics while failing to provide a conclusion with valid statistical methods. Biological explanations for behaviour lost much of their popularity as they often have an implication of inferiority to justify prejudice and discrimination.
The cycle of crime reflects public concern that crime is never being adequately controlled. This calls for a never-ending reform as trends vary with time. An expansion of youth crime has been seen throughout time. However, this is due to the evolution of society’s recognition of young criminals and definitions surrounding juvenile youth.
SOURCES:
“History of Education in Canada.” The Canadian Encyclopedia, http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/history-of-education.
“Parens Patriae, Crime, and Childhood.” Multiple Lenses, Multiple Images Perspectives on the Child Across Time, Space, and Disciplines, by Hillel Goelman et al., University of Toronto Press, 2014, pp. 50–55.
“Parens Patriae, Crime, and Childhood.” Multiple Lenses, Multiple Images Perspectives on the Child Across Time, Space, and Disciplines, by Hillel Goelman et al., University of Toronto Press, 2014, pp. 50–55.
Yurtoğlu, Nadir. “Not Here by Choice: Canada‘s Importation of Child Labourers.” History Studies International Journal of History, vol. 10, no. 7, 2018, pp. 241–264., doi:10.9737/hist.2018.658.
“Biological Theories of Crime (Criminology Theories) IResearchNet.” Criminal Justice, criminal-justice.iresearchnet.com/criminology/theories/biological-theories-of-crime/14/.
Goheen, P G. “The Ritual of the Streets in Mid-l9th-Century Toronto.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, vol. 11, no. 2, 1993, pp. 127–145., doi:10.1068/d110127.
Follow My Blog
Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.
41775.home.blog 