The setting of an 'age of criminal responsibility' by States across the international spectrum is a formal recognition that children do not possess the same mental capacity to comprehend the extent of the criminality of their actions, and their implications, as adults. Any such legal threshold which abruptly deems a child 'criminally responsible' upon the dawning of a birthday is inherently arbitrary, yet a necessary legal fiction. The central conundrum addressed by this discussion is "which direction?"---at what age should policy-makers draw the line. Should legislators be advocating low ages of criminal responsibility, or should they be championing higher ages? An examination of the juvenile justice regimes of the UK and Canada provides an informative backdrop against which to base a sound conclusion: higher ages of criminal responsibility should be adopted in order to counteract and safeguard against the current climate of 'zero tolerance' and retributive 'just deserts' currently motivating youth justice policy.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:LACETR/oai:collectionscanada.gc.ca:QMM.33054 |
| Date | January 2000 |
| Creators | Lees, Charlotte. |
| Contributors | Healy, Patrick (advisor) |
| Publisher | McGill University |
| Source Sets | Library and Archives Canada ETDs Repository / Centre d'archives des thèses électroniques de Bibliothèque et Archives Canada |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Coverage | Master of Laws (Institute of Comparative Law.) |
| Rights | All items in eScholarship@McGill are protected by copyright with all rights reserved unless otherwise indicated. |
| Relation | alephsysno: 001821037, proquestno: MQ75366, Theses scanned by UMI/ProQuest. |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds