A Freedom of Information Request by the BBC has discovered that over 3,000 crimes were committed by under-10’s who can’t be prosecuted because they are below the age of criminal responsibility.
This has naturally led some to ask – including the BBC – whether the age of criminal responsiblity should be lowered.
England, Wales and Northern Ireland already have one of the lowest ages of criminal responsiblity with only Scotland and some US states trying children as adults at a younger age – 8 and 6 years old respectively.
My eldest son is 9 years old and at that age he he knows right from wrong. However, I don’t think that he is mature enough to fully appreciate the consequences of his actions which is pretty important when you consider whether someone has knowingly broken the law with an understanding of the consequences or whether they have done so with diminshed responsibility.
Don’t worry, I’m not going soft – a child under 10 can still be tried and punished for their actions if they are old enough to know right from wrong but they will be treated as a child, not an adult.
The Childrens Society is calling for the age of criminal responsibility to be raised to 14 which would bring us in line with Germany, Austria, Russia and Japan.
I think 10 is probably about the lowest age to expect a child to have the same understanding of the consequences of their actions as an adult would. I certainly wouldn’t be happy with the age being lowered but then I wouldn’t necessarily be happy with it being raised either. On balance, I think 10 is fine and as the saying goes “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.