TY - JOUR
T1 - Relational security
T2 - conceptualization and operationalization in small-scale, strengths-based, community-embedded youth justice facilities
AU - Souverein, Fleur
AU - Mulder, Eva
AU - van Domburgh, Lieke
AU - Popma, Arne
N1 - Funding Information: The authors received financial support from the Dutch Ministry of Justice for the research conducted in this publication. This funding body had no role in the design of the study, analysis and interpretation of the data or in the writing of this publication. Publisher Copyright: © 2023, BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.
PY - 2023/12/1
Y1 - 2023/12/1
N2 - Background: Given the developmental vulnerability of justice-involved youth, providing a safe environment in secure facilities is a paramount, yet challenging task. Within this complexity, a sound security framework is key. The security framework exists on three dimensions: physical, procedural and relational security. Existing knowledge points at the importance of a shift in focus on physical and procedural security towards relational security as the core of the security framework. At the same time there is a dearth of knowledge on relational security, particularly in the context of youth justice. This paper explores relational security and its working mechanisms in practice. Methods: This paper draws on findings of a comprehensive three-year evaluation of three small-scale, community-embedded facilities that are grounded in relational security. The approach of the evaluation was derived from action research, involving a cyclic process alternating between action, research and critical reflection, while engaging all stakeholders in the research process. The action research cycle involved qualitative research (a total of 63 semi-structured interviews) incorporating the perspective of staff, youth and parents. Results: Relational security is grounded in three distinct, but interrelated, elements – staff’s basic attitude, a constructive alliance between staff and youth, staff presence – and promotes a safe and therapeutic environment through several mechanisms. Conclusions: Relational security can be defined in a practical conceptualization; outlining a way of working that guides staff in how to establish a safe and therapeutic environment in secure facilities. This conceptualization finds support in the well-established literature covering the therapeutic alliance and can be substantiated by two aligning theories concerning youth justice strategies: social-ecological theory and self-determination theory. Relational security is not only a way of working, but also a way of being. It encompasses a vision about security and mentality towards justice-involved youth that sees them not merely as ‘risks to be managed’, but primarly as ‘resources to be developed’.
AB - Background: Given the developmental vulnerability of justice-involved youth, providing a safe environment in secure facilities is a paramount, yet challenging task. Within this complexity, a sound security framework is key. The security framework exists on three dimensions: physical, procedural and relational security. Existing knowledge points at the importance of a shift in focus on physical and procedural security towards relational security as the core of the security framework. At the same time there is a dearth of knowledge on relational security, particularly in the context of youth justice. This paper explores relational security and its working mechanisms in practice. Methods: This paper draws on findings of a comprehensive three-year evaluation of three small-scale, community-embedded facilities that are grounded in relational security. The approach of the evaluation was derived from action research, involving a cyclic process alternating between action, research and critical reflection, while engaging all stakeholders in the research process. The action research cycle involved qualitative research (a total of 63 semi-structured interviews) incorporating the perspective of staff, youth and parents. Results: Relational security is grounded in three distinct, but interrelated, elements – staff’s basic attitude, a constructive alliance between staff and youth, staff presence – and promotes a safe and therapeutic environment through several mechanisms. Conclusions: Relational security can be defined in a practical conceptualization; outlining a way of working that guides staff in how to establish a safe and therapeutic environment in secure facilities. This conceptualization finds support in the well-established literature covering the therapeutic alliance and can be substantiated by two aligning theories concerning youth justice strategies: social-ecological theory and self-determination theory. Relational security is not only a way of working, but also a way of being. It encompasses a vision about security and mentality towards justice-involved youth that sees them not merely as ‘risks to be managed’, but primarly as ‘resources to be developed’.
KW - Dynamic security
KW - Forensic youth care
KW - Institutional violence
KW - Justice-involved young people
KW - Prison
KW - Relational security
KW - Youth development
KW - Youth justice
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85168421217&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - https://doi.org/10.1186/s13034-023-00638-3
DO - https://doi.org/10.1186/s13034-023-00638-3
M3 - Article
C2 - 37592271
SN - 1753-2000
VL - 17
JO - Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health
JF - Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health
IS - 1
M1 - 99
ER -