Knife Crime

4 which equip children to navigate conflict without resorting to violence or fear (Hobson et al., 2022). Equally important is ensuring that the voices of children with lived experience of the justice system, alongside the perspectives of frontline professionals, are embedded within policy design and implementation (Creaney & Burns, 2024). See Appendix 1 for a further discussion of research-informed alternative approaches. Distinguishing children and young adults The proposals outlined in this Crime and Policing Bill do not differentiate between children (under 18), young adults (18–25), and adults in their treatment of knife-related offences. Not accounting for developmental stage, legal status, and contextual vulnerability risks undermining the effectiveness and proportionality of the proposed measures. Neuroscientific and psychological research consistently demonstrates that key aspects of cognitive, emotional, and psychosocial maturity continue to develop into the mid-twenties (Sawyer et al., 2018). Children and young adults - particularly those exposed to trauma and adversity in childhood - may be more susceptible to peer influence, less able to assess risk, and more likely to act impulsively. These developmental differences have implications for how knife-related behaviour should be interpreted and addressed in criminal justice contexts (Steinberg, 2013). There is also substantial evidence that punitive criminal justice responses are largely ineffective for children and young people (Hampson & Day, 2025). Approaches that emphasise arrest, prosecution, or custodial sentences are associated with poor long-term outcomes, including increased likelihood of reoffending (Petrosino et al., 2010). By contrast, interventions that adopt a child-first approach have been found to be more effective at reducing reoffending (Case & Browning, 2021; Case & Haines, 2015). There appears to be an underlying assumption in the presentation of the Bill that an increase in maximum penalties for these offences is productive, where, particularly in the case of children and young adults, the evidence indicates that this is not the case. Given this evidence, we urge policymakers to ensure that any legislative changes clearly differentiate between children, young adults, and adults, and reflect an understanding of child and adolescent development. Failure to do so may lead to harmful and counterproductive outcomes, including the unnecessary criminalisation of children and young adults. We advocate for age-appropriate, welfare-led approaches that consider the wider context of children’s lives and aim to address the root causes of serious violence, in order to protect children from harm and keep the public safe. Safeguarding against disproportionality Any legislative effort to address knife crime must be accompanied by robust safeguards to prevent the disproportionate criminalisation of minoritised groups, particularly children from racially minoritised backgrounds and those with neurodevelopmental disabilities. There is a