Approaches To Anti-social Behavior In Australia And Britain

By Author: Henry Ford
Total Articles: 189
Comment this article

The prime role played by the law is to ensure harmonious coexistence among those bound by it. There is no one capable of living in total isolation. Society is therefore built against this background. There are things that are conventionally acceptable, and these form the basis of the law. Several theories have been proposed regarding what is acceptable and helpful to humanity and these have formed the basis of the laws. Since the year 1999, there have been a lot of debates and legislations going on with regard to anti-social behavior in both Britain and Australia. The young people in particular, have been engaging in antisocial behavior, and this prompted the governments both in the United Kingdom and Australia to come up with laws aimed at controlling this behavior. Legislations such as Crime and Disorder Act of 1998, Antisocial Behavior Act of 2003 in the United Kingdom were established to this end. Most of these laws place great responsibility on the parents, the understanding being that parents have a role to play inn shaping the lives of their children. Australia of course took up from the United Kingdom these legislations ...
... thereby introducing its own laws similar to those in the United Kingdom. In some cities such as Mount Druitt and New England in Australia the Youth Conduct Orders Act of 2008 has since been put in place. What exactly motivates these governments to respond in such ways? Is it a case of overreacting to certain social problems that these governments have otherwise been unable to address? This paper will make a critical assessment of these legal moves and their effects on the young people in the long term. To aid in this endeavor, some of the legislations and other information will be called to use.

The Aim of Antisocial Orders
As early as the 1930s, laws governing the conduct of young people came up, with the introduction of the Children and Young Persons Act of 1933. The aim was to compel parents to have a keen look at the behavior of their children. This meant that parents would be required to pay for offenses committed by their children. At the present time, societies have become increasingly aware of the challenges related to community living. There are laws as well which dictates how parents are to reproach their children, while at the same time addressing the issues that encourage antisocial behavior (Brown, 2004:210). A society composed of antisocial individuals would be chaotic and totally unlivable. In 2005, the government of England established the Serious Organized Crime and Police Act which empowered the courts to impose a fine of up to five thousand pounds on the parent of a child who involved in an offense against another person or the property of another person. Antisocial behaviors are several, ranging from noise to substance abuse. The parents play a very important act in the lives of their children, which is why the government came up with several laws compelling the parents to exercise more control over their children. In 1991, the courts were given more powers, through the Criminal Justice Act, which required parents to ensure that their children fully complied with the legal requirements if convicted. Non compliance with this law attracts a fine of one thousand pounds. In the year 1998, the Crime and Disorder Act was enacted with a new requirement that parents to follow a specified program in parenting, and even exercise specific control on certain behavior of the child. The aim of these programs is to help the parent gather the necessary experience in order to bring up responsible citizens. The measures taken depend on the offense the young person is involved in. It could be refusal to attend school, or any other offense that the courts may have convicted the child of. Parenting Orders can be applied by a number of people as provided for in the Police and Justice Act of 2006, and the Anti-Social Behavior Act of 2003. These Acts empower the Youth Offending Teams, the Social Landlords, as well as the education authorities in the various localities to move to court in view of making applications for Parenting Orders if they feel that the parents were not doing enough, or when they feel that the children were actually involved in antisocial behavior (Home Office, 2007). The Youth Offending Teams are empowered to make such applications because of their role in youth formation. The education authorities have the same powers due to the important role they play in the educational level. This is particularly when children are not frequently attending school (Home Office, 2007). The landlords on the other hand have the role of providing cheap houses and thus have the role of ensuring that order prevails within their environs (Home Office, 2007). The introduction of anti social laws aim at maintaining safe neighborhoods while at the same time helping these young people to grow into acceptable members of society. Some of the provisions are however very questionable. The Housing Act of 1985 allows the courts to repossess the house of a parent or guardian who allows the children to act antisocially. This law tends to assume that the parents the behavior of the children entirely depends on the parent. It also assumes that the parent or guardian has the power to exercise control over the children. It is possible however, that the children be beyond the ability of the parent or guardian control, especially where age is a factor. The law does not put into consideration the possibility that there exists no link between the way a child behaves and the role of the parent.

The author is associated with

The author is senior writer at https://www.allacademicanswers.com