The Child Minder

It's not big, and it's not clever. But I'm pretty sure that social workers and youth offending team members up and down the country are today muttering those immortal words "I told you so" after the sentencing advisory panel admitted that sentencing young people who breach their Asbo to a custodial sentence rarely makes sense.

Catching the train home from work last night, my attention was caught by the front page of the free tabloid newspaper the London Paper. Its headline sceamed in large bold letters:

"£2m to go to 30 asbo families."

The story went on to say: "More than £2 million will be spent on London's neighbours-from-hell in a scheme that will teach them how to wash and dress their children. About 30 of the capital's most troublesome families, across seven boroughs, will each benefit from £67,000 of funding - nearly three times the average London salary."

Any unsuspecting member of the public could be forgiven for thinking that the government had decided to reward bad behaviour with cash handouts and free shower gel. Not so.

In fact, the story was referring to government funding for 53 areas (including seven in London) that are piloting intensive family support for around 1,500 families with multiple problems. The idea - which is backed by hard evidence of what works - is that co-ordinated support across these families led by a single professional is more effective (and cheaper) than lots of services working with the same family in isolation.

This London Paper's story is both misleading and irresponsible. But, sadly, it is not uncommon. Is it any wonder that these families are vilified and that social policies aimed at improving their life chances are misunderstood when this is the sort of one-sided coverage they receive?

To read the government's 'progress report' on its war on antisocial behaviour, you could be forgiven for thinking that the only way to claim victory is to use more and more antisocial behaviour powers, more and more often.

In fact, the situation is somewhat more sophisicated than that. For many, the issuing of an antisocial behaviour order is actually a sign of failure, not success. Similarly, a fall in the number of asbos issued could be something to be celebrated not condemned if it reflects the success of voluntary preventive work in tackling antisocial behaviour instead.

A review of action against antisocial behaviour in Camden, due to be discussed at last night's housing and adult social care scrutiny committee meeting, confirms the complete lack of evidence (both locally and nationally) as to the effectiveness of the plethora of new powers available either in terms of reducing the levels of fear of crime among local communities or in terms of improving individuals' behaviour and life chances.

I'm sorry Mr Ried and Mr Blair, but without any such evidence, shouting about the growing numbers of powers used (and organisations allowed to issue them) is at best meaningless, and at worst misleading. Add to that the fear that these powers may be having a disproportionate impact on already disadvantaged groups, and the need to get on and collate evidence of their effectiveness before agencies are coerced into using them even more readily is overwhelming!

The government has announced the first 40 areas to commit to taking forward the government's Respect Action Plan and doing more to tackle antisocial behaviour and support difficult families.

The 40 Respect Areas (see below) will all provide family intervention projects to tackle problem families, offer more parenting classes for struggling parents, make wider use of the "tools and powers" available to tackle antisocial behaviour, and deal with social housing problems. They will also be expected to be more accountable to their local communities via 'face the people' sessions.

Antisocial behaviour orders need a rethink. That is the unsurprising conclusion of the latest research into the controversial orders, introduced six years ago to stop people repeatedly engaging in activities deemed to be antisocial.

The Youth Justice Board-commisisoned research finds that, despite professionals being clear about the importance of making asbos targeted and realistic, in reality they are often so prescriptive they actually make non-compliance likely. The result: more young people with criminal records and a greater chance of them ending up in custody.

Most people agree that asbos have a role to play. However, if we want to ensure that they are used appropriately, it is fundamental for youth offending teams to be integral to the decision-making processes about when and how to impose them. Yet, in many areas, this is still not happening.

It is no coincidence that the research finds that greater Yot involvement in decision-making tends to be associated with lower asbo use.