We need to talk about adultification
Halima is one of our Senior Project Support Officers. In this blog post, she talks about the concept of adultification and why it matters in our work.
Adultification is something that has come up a lot recently in the media following the case of Child Q in Hackney, London. As Changing Futures Bristol engages with a cohort of 16–25year-olds experiencing multiple disadvantage, the concept of adultification is very relevant to the work that we do. Adultification was first identified as a contributory factor in statutory child welfare contexts in the USA, prevalent in education, health, and youth justice settings. This then filtered across to the UK and has been championed by researcher Jahnine Davis who defines adultification as: “when notions of innocence and vulnerability are not afforded to certain children. This is determined by people and institutions who hold power over children and young people. When adultification occurs outside of the home it is always founded within discrimination and bias”.
Adultification is found in multiple contexts, spanning across domestic abuse, socio-economic disadvantage, transphobia, homelessness, young carers, children in care, and health. These are all arenas in which children are required to adopt or assume adult-like roles. These are also heavily embedded within intersectionality. Adultification became a focus in the UK because of the Child Q enquiry in Hackney. Child Q was strip searched in school by the police whilst she was menstruating, because a teacher had accused her of carrying cannabis. There are several reasons as to why this was a safeguarding failure; escalation policies weren’t followed and the adults who were supposed to protect her safety and dignity failed to do so. Two other serious case reviews from Newham where teenage boys were killed also had adultification as a key finding.
It could be argued that had these children been treated as children rather than offenders with full capacity, a rehabilitation approach may have prevented their deaths. When working with children, we must recognise that precocity is not a gift. There are likely to be underlying reasons as to why a child is required to present in an adult-like fashion, and this may be important in the wider context of working with that child. A child subjected to adultification experiences loneliness, isolation, has an increased level of vulnerability to exploitation, and can grow up to lack trust in the world around them.
This is important for Changing Futures Bristol for two reasons. The Bristol Keeping Children Safe Partnership has yet to develop an adultification policy. This means that although there are regional reviews that give us a basis to work from as practitioners, Bristol-specific policy is yet to be developed and disseminated. Secondly, we could argue that many of our clients have been subjected to adultification as children, and therefore have had to live with the resulting impact of this. Our focus on relationship building and trust with clients means we need to be mindful of the lasting impact of adultification.
Adultification is heavily embedded in racism and discrimination. To address this, we need to adopt an anti-racist stance. We must also recognise that capacity varies in all people regardless of perceived neurological development, and accept the legal definition of a child, irrespective of how policies may address ‘children’ and ‘young people’. Keeping this at the forefront of our minds when working with our young people will empower us to provide healthy professional challenge in a situation where a child is being adultified.