14 MAY 2025

Why PAVA Spray Has No Place in Youth Custody

By Aaron Ankrah, Civil Servant, Try Justice Network Member, and Former Prisoner



The recent announcement to roll out PAVA spray in youth custody settings is deeply concerning. As someone who spent time in adult prison and had regular contact with young people from youth offender institutions while in HMP Parc, I have seen first-hand how systems of control operate and how damaging they can be when the focus is on compliance rather than care.

Now, as a civil servant and Try Justice Network member, I remain committed to reform and rehabilitation. But this decision represents a step backward. It risks undoing the very trust, dignity, and stability we need to build for meaningful change in young lives.

PAVA spray is a chemical incapacitant, not a tool of care or de-escalation. Using it on children is not only physically harmful but psychologically scarring. It reinforces fear-based compliance and legitimises force as a normal part of custodial life. The message it sends to children (many of whom already come from traumatic, abusive, or neglectful backgrounds) is simple: you will be controlled, not cared for.

Had this kind of tactic been used on me as a young adult, it would have hardened me further. I witnessed how young inmates, particularly those from Black and minority ethnic backgrounds, were treated differently, spoken to differently, and punished more frequently. There is no doubt in my mind that PAVA will be used disproportionately against these children, just as we already see with stop and search, strip searches, and isolation.

Beyond the trauma and inequality it may cause, PAVA undermines the core of what youth justice should be: rehabilitation, not retribution. A system that relies on chemical force to maintain order is a system that has lost its way.

Rather than escalating force, we should be de-escalating tension. We need a dedicated regulatory body for youth custody settings which is focused on trauma-informed care, therapeutic practice, and rehabilitation. Currently, Ofsted are a regulatory body, but youth custody settings operate differently from other school settings and having the same regulatory body risks not meeting the needs of such a specialist environment.

What works, and I have seen it work, is consistency, structure, and emotional support. Young people in custody need hope, boundaries, and someone who genuinely sees their potential. In my experience, officers who made the effort to connect were respected - not because they used power, but because they showed understanding. Those are the relationships that change behaviour, not a spray canister.

This policy does not improve safety. It compounds harm. If we truly care about the futures of these young people, many of whom will return to our communities, we must invest in people, training, and support systems. Not weapons.

This is not just a professional view. It is a lived experience one. And from where I stand, there is no justification for PAVA in youth custody.