To safeguard children, agencies must work together to provide stability, reliability and hope. However, this doesn’t always happen. For too many children who enter care, the systems designed to protect them instead add to their fears that they are unlovable and that no-one cares.

Children in care are 10 times more likely to end up in prison

Recent data shared by the government shows the stark reality of what it means to be a child in care:

• they are four times more likely to receive a criminal conviction
• ten times more likely to end up in prison
• and 49% of children in care who receive a caution or conviction have their first contact with the justice system after entering care, not before.

This shows that it’s not just coming from a difficult homelife that brings them before the courts, it is how the system responds to their needs once they are removed from their home. As a result of this the government has announced a review of the National Protocol guidelines to prevent the criminalisation of children in care. This confirms what practitioners have known for years, children in care are far more likely than their peers to be criminalised.

Why are children in care more likely to be involved in crime?

Children who have already been abused, exploited, or neglected often face the harshest judgement for the very behaviours caused by that harm. They are labelled difficult, uncooperative or disruptive, and their voices are given the least weight because trust and communication are harder for them. Some of the catalysts for them getting a criminal record include:

• Incidents that would be handled privately in a family home escalate to police involvement in residential care
• Breaking property, outbursts of distress, or struggling to regulate emotions are treated as criminal matters rather than as responses to trauma
• Professionals working with children in care are ill equipped to understand the reasons behind behaviour and to respond appropriately
• Children in care are more susceptible to manipulative behaviour as they seek to build connections with a safe adult where they can
• There is a lack of resources to educate and protect them for example by not having enough workers to support each child
• Moving around placements and locations so they lack stability, youth prisons offer more stability and structure

To truly address the issue requires properly trained staff, sufficient resources, and smaller caseloads to provide the 1:1 support these children need.

Once a child enters the youth justice system, they are far more likely to remain in it. What began as a cry for help can become a cycle of unmet needs, instability and reoffending. In our experience, some children even prefer youth custody over their care placements because the prison environment offers basic stability: a warm bed, three meals a day, and a measure of respect. The opportunity to intervene early with care, compassion and therapeutic support is replaced by retribution and punishment.

The government’s review of the National Protocol is welcome and overdue. Strengthening statutory expectations for local authorities, schools, police and health services is essential. A child who has suffered neglect or significant loss needs specialist help, not prosecution. A teenager overwhelmed by their emotions needs de-escalation and consistency, not handcuffs. And a child who has been groomed or abused deserves safeguarding and justice, not suspicion or blame.

Will the review work?

Unless the system is fundamentally overhauled, its effectiveness will be limited. Children enter care because the state has stepped in to protect them, yet only 13% of care homes are owned by local authorities. Most are run by private providers, where financial priorities can conflict with children’s best interests. Some of the issues this creates include:

• Profits taking precedence over children’s stability and needs.
• High fees paid by local authorities without corresponding evidence of improved outcomes.
• Children living further from home because placements are moved to meet company needs rather than child needs.
• Less transparency and scrutiny compared with public provision.
• Budget-driven decisions affecting staffing, training and the quality of care.

The Protocol itself is guidance for multi-agency working, primarily between police and social care. To be truly effective, it must apply to everyone involved in a child’s care. All professionals need to understand the impact of trauma on behaviour, and respond using de-escalation and restorative approaches, not punishment.

Our systems should offer safety and stability, not create new cycles of harm. If the true mark of a civilised society is how it treats its most vulnerable children, then we cannot be satisfied with where we are. Child care provision must be heavily invested in to ensure these children are given the support they need to thrive, just as we would want for our own children.

Every child deserves to be heard, supported and cared for. No child should be written off as a hard case. Until that principle is consistently applied, our most vulnerable children will continue to be let down by the very structures they rely on.