refnation
Should parents be held criminally and financially responsible for crimes committed by their under-16s?
JusticeEnded 30 Oct

Should parents be held criminally and financially responsible for crimes committed by their under-16s?

Yes 52%No 48%2,069 votes cast

Parents in England and Wales are not automatically criminally liable for crimes committed by their children. Courts must consider a Parenting Order when a child under 16 is convicted, and breaching one is a criminal offence with a maximum fine of £1,000. A May 2026 Youth Justice White Paper proposed higher fines and jail in extreme cases, and in September 2026 the youth justice minister said benefit cuts or prison could follow for non-compliance. Orders have fallen from over 1,000 in 2009/10 to 33 in 2022/23.

Jump to opinions· 79

A narrow Yes win came from a debate in which many No voters agreed with half of it. Their repeated line was liability in money, not in law: “Financially? Probably, if no one else is going to be.”

The most-respected Yes case was a duty argument: parents “have a duty to raise their children, establish boundaries” and should face consequences where they have seriously neglected it. Another Yes voter said the state “encourages feckless parenting”, while one described a family hit by abuse and damage from tearaway kids whose parents “did nothing”.

The most-respected No case turned the question round: “Parents are not allowed to parent anymore, so what do you want them to do?” Others said a 13 to 15 year old in a gang is “realistically outside her control”, and one warned that jailing a parent would “destroy whatever shred of stability that child has left”. A blunter No voter simply wrote “No, regressive, draconian nonsense.”

What stands out is how much the two sides shared. Yes voters hedged with neglect, repeat offending and age limits, one suggesting criminal liability only up to about 14. No voters said they would back parental liability if neglect were proven.

The argument that never settled was where blame ends: with a parent who ignored warnings, or with an overstretched system around them.

“Parenthood comes with responsibilities, and those responsibilities should not end when a child commits a crime. Parents have a duty to raise their children, establish boundaries and take reasonable steps to prevent them from engaging in criminal behaviour. Where parents have seriously neglected those duties, there should be consequences.”

YES case · HighMoor · 7 respects

“Parents are not allowed to parent anymore, so what do you want them to do? You raise your voice to your child now and its "causing them emotional distress" if you want to let parents parent then you can hold them accountable”

NO case · Amy252 · 8 respects

52%
Yes
majority
48% No
Votes2,069
Skipped27
You—

% voting yes, by leaning

16% yes among H. Left voters, 89 of them
34% yes among Left voters, 242 of them
48% yes among C. Left voters, 232 of them
59% yes among Centre voters, 245 of them
62% yes among C. Right voters, 295 of them
69% yes among Right voters, 755 of them
78% yes among H. Right voters, 224 of them
H. Left
Left
C. Left
Centre
C. Right
Right
H. Right
Cite this result

refnation referendum, closed 29 October 2026: “Should parents be held criminally and financially responsible for crimes committed by their under-16s?” — Yes 52%, weighted by political leaning (2,069 votes).

Free to quote with a link to this page — Copy includes it.

Download the counts (CSV) — the votes behind this result, by leaning, party, region and age.

Spread the wordShare
DocketRelated verdicts
Debate

79 Opinions

Sign in and vote to share your opinion.
Amy252· 310
The Ledger-Keeper
Voted noRight lean

Parents are not allowed to parent anymore, so what do you want them to do? You raise your voice to your child now and its "causing them emotional distress" if you want to let parents parent then you can hold them accountable

HighMoor· 477
The Hard-Edged Householder
Voted yesH. Right lean

Parenthood comes with responsibilities, and those responsibilities should not end when a child commits a crime. Parents have a duty to raise their children, establish boundaries and take reasonable steps to prevent them from engaging in criminal behaviour. Where parents have seriously neglected those duties, there should be consequences.

Seneca· 534
The Minimal Sovereigntist
Voted noRight lean

16 is too high an age. A 13-15 year old in a gang with a single mother is realistically outside her control. He should be sent to prison for his crimes, not his mother

Bearcage· 416
The Frugal Realist
Voted yesRight lean

Parents should be responsible for their children including the financial cost of out of control behaviour.

StuOH· 680
The Social-Justice Traditionalist
Voted noCentre lean

Financially and morally yes. Criminally no because children from good homes have murdered.

CalmGavel72· 305
The Bellwether
Voted noLeft lean

I say 'No' because slapping an automatic 'J'Accuse' on parents ignores nuance and the sometimes grey areas in dealing with under 16's. Some won't be told despite the most earnest of parenting. If the option was there to fine and charge parents who deliberately ignore responsibility or abstain from trying to correct and redirect their disobedient teens, then I would vote 'Yes'.

jamiemccaffery· 511
CENTRE RIGHT PRAGMATIST
Voted noRight lean

Sort out child services so they are not so stretched and sort out the lefty teachers. They should be teaching manners and respect.

KarenMyers· 168
The Hard-Right Low-Tax Voter
Voted noH. Right lean

There is no longer any consequences to behaviour by parent’s school or the police. We are creating a generation of people with no morals or values

SheerTally· 232
The Constitutional Democrat
Voted noLeft lean

Familial guilt is about as draconian as it gets; sins of the father and all that. If teens under-16s are committing more crimes, they simply need to be made aware that they WILL face punishment and serve time for it. Take less of a soft approach in dealing with them, and they'll be less likely to think they can get away with. Currently, they have no fear of repercussions and think they're untouchable because they're children. Remove that delusion and you fix the problem.

Caz· 207
The Crimson Humanitarian
Voted noH. Left lean

Financially? Probably, if no one else is going to be. Criminally? No. What would that mean in practice? Jail time? Charges on their records? It's absurd.