Juvenile Judges See No Improvement in Failing Youth Care and Child Protection

The concerns of the judges are not new. Together with other organizations, they have been calling for years for improvements in care for vulnerable children. Because a solution is lacking, waiting lists remain long and appropriate help still takes too long to arrive. Juvenile judges face the same limitations in all areas within their jurisdiction – cases concerning custody and visitation, child protection measures, and juvenile criminal law. 

When juvenile judges determine that children are threatened in their development, they can place them under supervision. They can also authorize the government to remove a child from the home to provide help. However, due to too few child protection workers and youth care providers being available and children dealing with constantly changing child protection workers, necessary help often takes too long to arrive. And due to waiting lists for investigations, for example into parents parenting skills, children placed out of home are sometimes unnecessarily separated from their parents for too long.

Closed youth care is being phased out, but not enough replacement care (at home or in an open institution) is provided. There is a great shortage, especially of specialist care for the most vulnerable children. The result is that children stay in a closed institution longer than necessary, are transferred to a less suitable institution, or are sent home where they do not receive the structure and boundaries they need. When these youths end up in an open institution, restrictive measures (such as confinement to their room) are sometimes wrongly applied because the right guidance cannot be provided. 

The shortage of caregivers and specialist institutional places also affects juvenile criminal law. As a result, the pedagogical approach to minors who commit offenses is compromised. Staff shortages in juvenile detention centers mean that youths often stay in their rooms and treatments do not start. Due to lack of space, young adults sometimes end up in regular penitentiary institutions, which do not meet the principles of juvenile criminal law, which mainly focuses on guiding childrens development. 

Youths who receive a PIJ measure (placement in a youth institution, also called juvenile TBS) sometimes remain detained longer because a good outflow is not arranged, for example due to the lack of a suitable follow-up place. The alternative is that they are sent home while still needing guidance. This increases the risk that they will reoffend. 

Juvenile judges bring cases to court more often to check whether help or an investigation is being started. But sometimes we cannot avoid taking the lack of possibilities into account in our decisions, says Judge Van Kalveen. Especially child protection and juvenile criminal cases present judges with major dilemmas. Is it legitimate to make such drastic decisions when implementation leaves much to be desired? We see children and families who urgently need help every day. It is really necessary that the problems in the entire youth care chain are addressed.