By Nadia Nesrallah
All over Canada people are trying to find ways of dealing with youth crime and young offenders. One issue at the forefront of this debate is parental responsibility legislation, something Manitoba has already dealt with by enacting a Parental Responsibility Law two years ago.
Mary, who can’t be identified because of the Young Offenders Act, is the mother of two young offenders who were recently in court. This October’s court appearance was the first for one son while it’s the second for the other. Her two children stole a van and damaged it, a case that would qualify for parental penalties if parental liability legislation existed.
Under the proposed parental responsibility laws, parents of young offenders would be charged and forced to pay for the damages caused by their children.
Mary said she supports the idea but has some reservations.
“If the parents haven’t sought help to deal with their children they should be responsible,” she said. “If it’s a first offence, I think they should let it go, if it happens once and the parents are held responsible then it’s like cleaning up the child’s mess, they aren’t going to learn from that.”
However, one of Mary’s children disagreed. “I don’t think it’s right that parents pay,” he said. “If you’re gonna do it you should pay for it.”
In Ontario, the Parental Responsibility Act also known as Bill 19 was on its way to becoming a law a year ago. Though the bill was dropped, it is reasonable to assume, considering Premier Mike Harris’s emphasis on youth crime, that the issue of parental responsibility may come up again.
Two years ago, when the parental responsibility legislation was passed in Manitoba, both the governments of British Columbia and Ontario gave the approach a closer look.
While the bill is no longer on its way to becoming law, it has certainly left a lasting impression on those seeking to crack down on youth crime.
Provincial governments seem to be scrambling to deal with the perceived leniency in the Young Offenders Act.
Supporters claim parents should be supervising their children and making sure they aren’t engaging in delinquent behaviour.
They claim holding parents legally accountable is one way to prevent children from breaking the law.
The Progressive Conservative “Blueprint,” released during the last provincial election, re-introduced the idea of parental responsibility legislation to deal with youth crime.
“Respect for the law and responsibilities of citizenship are something children must be taught, particularly by their parents. We think parents should get the credit when their children are good citizens but must also take some responsibility when their children break the law.”
In the Blueprint, Mike Harris promised to “bring in legislation making parents financially responsible for property damage and other consequences of their children breaking the law.”
Mark Totten, director of research and training at the Youth Services Bureau of Ottawa-Carleton says there were some good things about the proposed legislation.
But he admits he is undecided.
“In some cases caregivers have to be held responsible and accountable,” he said. “But it’s not a black and white issue.”
Totten says parental responsibility laws also conflict with the Young Offender’s Act and the Youth Crime and Justice Act.
“The two levels of jurisdiction aren’t working together. The provincial legislation is out of synch with federal legislation and it’s problematic.”
By holding parents accountable for the actions of their children, young offenders are no longer being forced to take legal responsibility for their actions.
This defeats the purpose of the Young Offenders Act which was designed to make youth offenders legally accountable.
In the U.S., parents are being fined for a variety of their children’s wrongdoings. In some states, skipping school and breaking curfew are considered offences where parents must pay fines, do community service work or take parenting classes.
To date, no evidence suggests that these laws are decreasing youth crime.
Both the proposed law in Ontario and the existing Manitoba law focus mainly on civil liability concerning property that has been wilfully damaged, stolen or vandalized.
Bill Sparks, executive director for the John Howard Society of Ontario, says the concept of having offenders pay for their crimes is excellent but the learning experience is lost if the offender isn’t the one paying.
Sparks’ organization works to promote just and humane responses to crime and its causes in the community. He says, Parental Responsibility “isn’t an ideal way of dealing with it (youth crime) because it shifts the responsibility and learning onto the parents,” he says.
In addition to its consequences for the rehabilitation of youth offenders, these laws have some important technical problems because they come into conflict with the Charter of Rights.
Ottawa lawyer Israel Gencher called these laws “fundamentally unjust.” He described them as a violation of a parents’ rights to hold them accountable for their children’s actions.
While provincial responsibility legislation has only been passed in Manitoba, the attention it is getting means that society as a whole must consider the long-term implications for young offenders and society.