How do young people facing criminal justice sanctions respond to the ‘risky’ label? This paper considers young people’s varied responses to the stigma produced by the interaction between negative labels and social inequalities.
Building on our previous work exploring experiences of stigma, this paper brings together research on young people’s responses to everyday experiences of misrecognition and stigma within the context of structural barriers and limited opportunities. Considering the myriad of types of action, inaction and reaction, this paper will discuss the role of ‘promotive’ relationships in young people’s lives, addressing how relationships can promote opportunities and support aspirational action. The paper concludes by raising questions about what we still need to understand in relation to young people, stigma and social inequalities.

This paper draws on Tyler’s (2020) work on stigma power and anti-stigma practices to question how we might present research on stigma in non-stigmatising ways. Reflecting on research that seeks to challenge the over-representation of care-experienced individuals in the youth and adult criminal justice systems, it considers some of the findings from that work alongside the challenges of disseminating key messages. Key findings from work in this area link to negative gendered judgements, official files and the ‘paper self’, damaging staff cultures in care and a lack of societal aspiration. Whilst stigma may be most acutely felt at the individual-level, communicating how it can emerge from systemic failings and/or the deliberate and unintended consequences of policy choices is a challenge - albeit an important anti-stigma practice to aspire to.

Pre-arranged Panel Title: Navigating negative judgements and representations of young people

Panel Convenor: Bethan Davies (Cardiff University)

This paper centres on practitioners’ concerns about the potentially stigmatising impacts of early interventions for young people and the dilemma this creates, specifically in the context of extremism prevention. Within these interventions, particular behaviours and activities are necessarily signified as deviant and ‘risky’, yet the problematic consequences of labelling young people in this way are well established (Deakin et al., 2022; Coppock and McGovern, 2014; Hallett et al., 2019). With definitions of extremism expanding and a push to do ‘more’ to prevent future harm, many practitioners working in this context also report concerns about stigmatising and criminalising young people. In turn, this creates an ‘action/inaction conundrum’ in decisions of intervention, which will be the focus of this paper.

Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork, the paper will provide a critical account of how those working with young people attempt to manage the kind of ‘double risk’ that is at play in this conundrum: the risk of stigmatisation through action (intervention), as well as the risk of future extremism if they take no action at all. Insights are derived from naturalistic observations of five different interventions, as well as interviews with policy actors and practitioners including teachers, police officers, youth and support workers. Concepts of stigma and labelling (Matza, 1969; Goffman, 1990, 1991) will also be used in exploring practitioners’ views and practices.