*/
The use of physical restraint against children in custody has more than doubled over the last five years, a damning report has revealed.
This has happened, despite the number of children behind bars falling over the last 10 years from nearly 3,000 to fewer than 1,000, according to the report from the Howard League for Penal Reform.
It comes 10 years after the Howard League published the Carlile Inquiry following the deaths in custody of two teenagers, which recommended that restraint should never be used ‘to secure obedience or compliance’.
The report, The Carlile Inquiry 10 Years On, found that between 2011 and 2015, 4,350 injuries had been sustained by children subject to restraint and a fifth of incidents involved the ‘head-hold’ technique.
It also showed the ‘widespread practice’ of holding children in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day and the fact that 367 boys had been strip-searched in 2015.
Chief executive of the Howard League, Frances Crook, said: ‘There is much to celebrate in the story of children in conflict with the law because the numbers are significantly reduced, but still children in custody are mistreated, abused, and suffer a punishing regime.’
Carlile called on the Ministry of Justice to do more to implement his previous recommendations.
A Ministry of Justice spokesman said such techniques should be a ‘last resort,’ and added: ‘We are clear that if restraint is absolutely necessary, it must be used within the parameters of the law, and comply with strict safeguards.’
The use of physical restraint against children in custody has more than doubled over the last five years, a damning report has revealed.
This has happened, despite the number of children behind bars falling over the last 10 years from nearly 3,000 to fewer than 1,000, according to the report from the Howard League for Penal Reform.
It comes 10 years after the Howard League published the Carlile Inquiry following the deaths in custody of two teenagers, which recommended that restraint should never be used ‘to secure obedience or compliance’.
The report, The Carlile Inquiry 10 Years On, found that between 2011 and 2015, 4,350 injuries had been sustained by children subject to restraint and a fifth of incidents involved the ‘head-hold’ technique.
It also showed the ‘widespread practice’ of holding children in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day and the fact that 367 boys had been strip-searched in 2015.
Chief executive of the Howard League, Frances Crook, said: ‘There is much to celebrate in the story of children in conflict with the law because the numbers are significantly reduced, but still children in custody are mistreated, abused, and suffer a punishing regime.’
Carlile called on the Ministry of Justice to do more to implement his previous recommendations.
A Ministry of Justice spokesman said such techniques should be a ‘last resort,’ and added: ‘We are clear that if restraint is absolutely necessary, it must be used within the parameters of the law, and comply with strict safeguards.’
The Chair of the Bar reports back
By Kem Kemal, CEO, Henry Dannell
By BSK Financial Planning
Mário Barroso, Head of R&D and Method Development at AlphaBiolabs
Susie Griffin on the admin that keeps barristers from billable work
Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group, explains how global events can influence the performance of pensions and ISAs, and why taking a long-term approach to investing is often the most effective strategy
Kick off your career at the Bar Council’s Pupillage Fair this October – it’s one of the most valuable opportunities for aspiring barristers, says Amelia Clegg
Join us on Saturday 21 November 2026 at Leeds Beckett University and see for yourself why the North continues to be an exceptional place to build a career at the Bar
The golden age of advocacy? David Langwallner pays homage to the filmic if contentious barrister Sir Edward Carson and some of his contemporaries
Henry Fingerhut outlines what the Bar Standards Board AI guidance means for early career barristers
Not yet, says Jacob Turner. Regulation, unlike the technology itself, is a domain the legal profession can still control
