Professionals working on child-related issues psychologists, social workers, mediators, including former public officials with years of experience working with children are criticizing the new draft law proposed by the ruling party, Georgian Dream.

The bill in question is the Draft Law on the Rehabilitation and Support of Juvenile Offenders, which, among other amendments, envisions the creation of closed-type institutions for 10–14-year-old children. According to the document, children who have not yet reached the age of criminal responsibility but have committed an offense will be sent to such institutions.

Professionals in the field believe that although the initiative is “wrapped in very appealing terminology,” it will not solve the problem offenses committed by minors under 14 and will instead worsen these children’s social conditions. They argue that the solution lies in the prevention of such behavior, not the punishment of children.

“We the Independent Professional Union  Article 78 of the Constitution, the Professional Union of Psychologists, the Professional Union of Mediators, and the Association of Social Workers respond to the ‘Draft Law on the Rehabilitation and Support of Juveniles in Conflict with the Law’ and believe that the approach envisioned by this document is alarming. Despite its carefully chosen terminology, it will lead to the ruin of future generations, not rehabilitation. The most sensitive part of the bill is the provision that allows placing children aged 10 to 14 in closed-type institutions.

We believe that the proposed bill which ostensibly aims to reduce criminal risks among minors below the age of criminal responsibility will not only fail to reduce these risks if implemented but will create additional harmful consequences. Specifically:

Stigmatization and isolation of the child from society through the label “in conflict with the law,” whether or not the child is placed in a closed institution. Such labeling reinforces the child’s self-perception as a “problematic offender,” which fosters behavior aligned with this identity an effect confirmed by scientific theory;

Risks to emotional and psychosocial development: research shows that children aged 10–14 are especially sensitive to social judgment. Isolation from society can deepen mistrust toward adults and state institutions and contribute to depression, anxiety, and other behavioral or mental health difficulties that will be extremely hard to address once the child leaves the institution;

Increased negative peer influence: placing many children with behavioral difficulties together heightens the risk of unhealthy role modeling and the spread of deviant behavior;

Disruption of social skill development: institutional environments hinder the development of emotional regulation and relationship skills that are critical during adolescence. In addition, the loss of connection with family, school, and community weakens the child’s support network and increases the likelihood of continued deviant behavior.

At the age of 10–14, impulsivity, difficulty foreseeing consequences, and susceptibility to influence are natural developmental traits. These traits become a problem only when the environment is inadequate. Because problematic behavior is usually a signal of environmental issues, the solution is to improve the environment, not isolate the child.

We must also consider that restorative justice is an alternative to traditional punitive approaches, focusing not on punishment but on repairing harm, taking responsibility, and restoring relationships.

Restorative justice requires that children’s behavior, even when it leads to serious outcomes, be treated as a matter of child protection and social policy not as an object of sanctions.

For the state, this should mean recognizing that a child’s behavior is a symptom of a deeper problem. This approach does not ignore the child’s responsibility; on the contrary, it helps the child understand and change their behavior without stigmatizing them.

For example, the diversion and mediation program based on restorative justice principles and supported by resources from various state institutions shows that over 90% of participating minors do not reoffend. In contrast, the proposed amendment imposes heavier burdens on children below the age of criminal responsibility than current law imposes on minors over 14.

Based on all of the above, we believe that the approval process for this bill must be halted. We also consider it necessary for the bill’s authors to publicly explain:

  • What scientific, international, or local practices, research, and modern standards in child development, mental health, and social policy underpin the bill, and specifically the labeling of 10–14-year-olds as “in conflict with the law”?
  • Was the bill drafted in consultation with qualified specialists in the field, and was there coordination with the Care Agency, local governments, the Social Service Agency, and all other bodies responsible for child welfare and crime prevention?
  • Is the state doing everything possible to prevent offenses among 10–14-year-olds, to address difficult behavior, and to ensure protection, wellbeing, and support whether through programs and services, qualified human resources, or family support? Are relevant agencies fulfilling their duties, and if not, why?

Because state agencies are failing to fully meet their responsibilities in this area, a closed institution should not be viewed as the solution. Such institutions may be used only as a last resort to protect a child’s safety for example, when a child faces an immediate risk of severe self-harm or suicide, when the family environment is dangerous, and when all other forms of support have been exhausted. Placement in a closed setting must be temporary, used only in crisis situations, and subject to strict monitoring.

A better solution is to work with the child in their real environment. This includes: daily or frequent contact with a social worker/mentor; family-centered work to support parents in addressing social difficulties and developing positive parenting skills; an individualized educational plan to reintegrate the child into schooling, with daily involvement of a social worker;
rapid mediation of conflicts by a multidisciplinary team.

Just as society cannot develop by hiding its problems, a child’s behavior cannot change through isolation. Real change begins with prevention, support, and strengthening the environment that shapes the child,”