Youth Violence in Australia

Introduction

In recent years youth violence has become a growing concern. Not only has incidence increased but also more worryingly the severity of attacks by young Australians has worsened, leading to major economical and personal losses to society.
In 2009 on the streets of Coolangatta Damien Ford (aged 18) viciously assaulted 18-year-old Sam Ford (no relation) in an unprovoked attack. Sam spent 18th months in hospital and suffered severe brain injuries leaving him disabled and requiring full time care for the rest of his life. In Adelaide in 2008 Sam Davis (aged 17) was attempting to break up a fight at a party when he was king hit in the back of the head by a gate crasher (aged 18). Sam fell to the floor unconscious and died in hospital a few hours later. In Sydney 2012, Thomas Kelly (aged 18) was walking through Kings Cross on a night out when he was king hit for no reason by Kieran Loveridge (aged 18). The punch to the face knocked Kelly to the ground unconscious and he died 2 days later in hospital. This report seeks to understand why youth violence is so prevalent in Australia and review how it can be prevented.

Youth Violence In Australia

Youth violence is classified as the intentional use of physical force or power by a young person between the ages of 10 and 24, against another person, group, or community, with the behaviour likely to cause physical or psychological harm (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2015). According to the Australian Institute of Criminology (2012) the main culprits of violent crimes are males in the 15-19 year age group.

Offenders by selected violent offences and age, 2010–11 (rate per 100,000 population) (Source: AIC)

Violence has significant costs to society in the forms of medical costs, lost output and intangible losses. It is estimated by the AIC (2014) that the annual cost of assaults and violence to society was $3.03 billion in 2011 at $2600 per incident. While it is difficult to identify the exact cost resulting from youth violence, we know that young people are the main offenders when it comes to violence and assault; therefore it can be assumed that they are heavy contributors to the annual cost. Thus it is clear that youth violence is a major public health issue that needs serious attention. Apart from the economical costs of youth violence, there is tremendous personal loss to the families of the victims who have their lives tragically cut short or significantly impaired (disability, brain damage, etc.).

Causes

In order to analyse campaigns aimed at youth violence and to formulate strategies for prevention & early intervention it is important to identify core factors that influence and lead to violence among young people.

One model that has proven effective in identifying risk factors leading to violent behaviour in young people is the Social Development Model (SDM) (Huang et al, 2001). The SDM emphasizes the impact of social and contextual influences of communities, family, school, peers and the individual on antisocial behaviour.
A study conducted by Hemphill et al. in 2009 comparing the modifiable determinants of youth violence in Australia and North America uses the SDM as a basis to identify risk factors contributing to violent behaviour, as well as other research. The methodology of the study involved surveying 2885 school students from Washington State (USA) and 2884 students from Victoria (Australia) in 2002, followed by a 12-month follow-up survey in 2003. The retention rate for the follow up survey was 99% in both states. The results identify the following as risk factors of youth violence:

Demographics: * Male * Low income household * Sole parent status (US only)

Individual Factors * Impulsivity * Binge drinking * Lack of emotional control * Prior violent behaviour

Family Factors * Family conflict * Emotional distance from parents

Community Factors * Community disorganisation * Norms favourable to drug use * Enforcement favourable to drug use

Peer Factors * Association with violent peers

School Factors * Low grades * Low school commitment

Social Responses to Inappropriate Behaviour * Arrests * School suspension

While this study provides a good basis for determinants of youth violence it only provides a profile of individuals most likely to engage in violent behaviours and gives little insight as to why.

In Australia the main cause of youth violence that is consistently reported is alcohol. It is interesting to note that in the study mentioned above, the number of Victorian students who reported engaging in binge drinking was more than double the number of Washington State students.

A report published by the Australian Institute of Criminology in 2011 titled “Alcohol and assault on Friday and Saturday nights: Findings from the DUMA program” investigated the correlation between assault and alcohol consumption by interviewing detainees arrested for assault on Friday and Saturday nights over an 8 week period.
Some key findings indicated that 51% of people arrested for assault on the Friday or Saturday night were males aged 18-25, 79% of which had consumed substantial amounts of alcohol in the past 48 hours, with 53% attributing alcohol as a factor that contributed to their arrest.

At the individual level there is widespread evidence linking violence and alcohol (Parker and Auerhahn, 1998). It is argued that alcohol alters an individual’s perception of risk and impairs intellectual ability and performance. This cognitive deficiency in turn limits the individual’s ability to consider the long-term consequences of their actions, increasing the chances of a physical altercation (Felson and Staff, 2010). Another theory is that alcohol fuelled violence is a self-fulfilling prophecy as individuals believe the perceived correlation between intoxication and violence alleviates them of responsibility and grants them an excuse to engage in violent behaviour (Goldman, Brown and Christiansen, 1987).
But is alcohol solely to blame?
Cross-cultural studies have provided substantial evidence suggesting that alcohol has varying effects on behaviour depending on the cultural and social contexts in which it is consumed (Parker and Auerhahn, 1998).

Anthropologist Dr Anne Fox investigated the drinking culture of Australians in her report “Understanding Behaviour in the Australian and New Zealand Night Time Economies”. The report strongly argues that alcohol is more of facilitator of violence as opposed to the cause of violence. High variability exists amongst countries for fights after drinking with 20.3% from Nicaragua, 17.6% from Czech Republic compared to 3.5% from Denmark and 3.7% from Spain. Dr Fox argues that the difference lies in culture, not only the adult drinking culture but also the way in which children are raised contributes to levels of violence. The report states the Australia has a “macho culture” that encourages violence. Fox states that in Australia, the typical types of fights on night out are an attack of a weaker victim for status or power, fighting in front of an audience for effect, fighting for fun/thrills and fighting in defence of honour or status. This implies that a positive attitude towards violence is the problem and not necessarily alcohol consumption.
However a limitation of Dr Anne Fox’s report is that it can be perceived as biased as the beverage company Lion commissioned her study.

One Punch Can Kill Campaign

A current social marketing campaign aimed at preventing youth violence is the “One Punch Can Kill” (OPCK) campaign. The Queensland Police initiated the campaign in 2007 following the death of Matthew Stanley (aged 14) who died as a result of youth violence.
The target audience of the campaign is generation Y 12-17 and 18-27 year olds, in metropolitan and regional areas of Queensland, with a 75%-25% skew male to female. The overall aim of the OPCK campaign is to see a decrease in the incidence of reported unlawful assaults through encouraging the target audience to consider the use of non-violent alternatives when in a conflict situation. Key messages of the campaign are: * One punch can kill * Assault is a crime * Assault could ruin your future, and violent actions could cost you your family; employment; overseas travel; possibility of a criminal record * You have the choice to walk away or fight

The OPCK assault reduction campaign has been run over 3 phases from 2008. The first phases began with advertising over radio, Internet and social media outlets, the production of merchandise and the development of a website. The second phase involved using television commercials, bus stop advertising, large displays used at youth events and additional social media applications.

Marketplace Communications conducted market research in order to evaluate the early phases of the campaign. Findings indicated that the key messages of the campaign were understood and comprehended by the target audience. Research also indicated that the surveyed individuals struggled to take the soft and cheesy content of the advertisements seriously. Participants in the study showed some signs of attitude change saying the campaign increased their awareness of the consequences and effects of fighting, however there was limited evidence of any behavioural change in the target audience. It was believed that this was because the imagery used in the campaign was not hard hitting enough.

The third phase of the campaign ran from 2010-2011 and included a new look website and continued production and distribution of OPCK merchandise. In addition Queenslanders were given the opportunity to get involved and submit original films, music files, artworks, or images that they thought should be included in the OPCK advertisements. The winning ideas went on to become statewide bus stop, radio and cinema advertisements (QLD Police, 2011).

(Source: OPCK) Competition winner Michael Stuers entry inspired the OPCK bus stop advertisement below

(Source: Mark Lobo Photography)

TNS Australia evaluated the effectiveness of the cinema, radio and bus advertisements in the third phase of the OPCK campaign. The research conducted indicated that the messages and imagery in the phase 3 advertisements had more of an impact on the target audience than that of the earlier phases. Research also indicated that as a result of time, increased exposure and involving the community (advertising competition) awareness of the OPCK campaign had greatly increased. Findings show that while the third phase advertising has appeared to influence the behaviours of reactor (individuals who need provocation to fight) and influencer (people who encourage/discourage fights) groups, there is little of evidence that communications impacted the hard-core group of young males that go out looking for fights (TNS, 2011).

While research has shown the OPCK campaign to have a positive impact in Queensland, some believe the message is not getting across. News articles titled “Assaults fly in the face of party safe campaign” (The Chronicle, 2013), “Fatal bashing reignites 'One Punch Can Kill' message” (ABC, 2013), and “Sunshine Coast police fear ‘one punch can kill’ message going unheard” (ABC, 2015) all detail a surge in violence when they were written and argue that the message is simply going in one ear and out the other in Queensland.

Reflection and Solution

Through analysis of the scope of youth violence in Australia and its causes and as well as the OPCK campaign it is evident that there needs to be a cultural change towards violence in our country. I believe that aspects of the Australian culture are conductive to violence. While I believe alcohol is an influencer of violence, I also believe that it only exposes pre-existing violent attitudes and does not create violent attitudes.

The SDM states that antisocial behaviour in youth’s stems from the individual, community, school and family. In order to achieve a cultural change in Australia we need a multi faceted approach addressing all these areas. At a community level violence needs to be stigmatised, through advertising that has been reviewed by social scientists and anthropologists, it must be communicated that fighting is in no way acceptable and leads to social exclusion. We must also link status with Pro social behaviours such as effective control over drunkenness and violence.
At an individual level we need to introduce compulsory education aimed at non-violent conflict resolution and avoidance techniques during developmental years.
Schools must make young people aware of the negative outcomes of violence, a good way to do this would be to have guest speakers who have been impacted by violence (Doctors, paramedics, police, victims) so see first hand how violence affects society.
Advertising must also be aimed at parents/guardians to promote discussing violence with their children. There should also be community workshops aimed at educating parents on how to effectively communicate the negative implications of violence to their children.

References
1. (NCIPC), P. and Prevention, C. (2015). Definitions|Youth Violence|Violence Prevention|Injury Center|CDC. [online] Cdc.gov. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/youthviolence/definitions.html [Accessed 19 Apr. 2015].
2. Atkinson, B. (2015). Sunshine Coast police fear 'one punch can kill' message going unheard. ABC. [online] Available at: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-01-15/sunshine-coast-police-fear-one-punch-can-kill/6018658 [Accessed 21 Apr. 2015].
3. Fox, A. (2015). Understanding behaviour in the Australian and New Zealand night-time economies. [online] Lion. Available at: http://www.lionco.com/content/u12/Dr%20Anne%20Fox%20report.pdf [Accessed 18 Apr. 2015].
4. Felson, R. and Staff, J. (2010). The Effects of Alcohol Intoxication on Violent Versus Other Offending. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37(12), pp.1343-1360.
5. Fuller, G. (2015). Australian Crime: Facts and Figures. [online] Canberra: Australian Institue of Criminology, pp.64-67. Available at: http://aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/facts/2012/facts_and_figures_2012.pdf [Accessed 20 Apr. 2015].
6. Goldman, M. S., Brown, S. A., & Christiansen, B. A. (1987). Expectancy theory: Thinking about drinking.
In H. T. Blane & K. E. Leornard (Eds.), Psychological theories of drinking and alcoholism. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

7. Hemphill, S., Smith, R., Toumbourou, J., Herrenkohl, T., Catalano, R., McMorris, B. and Romaniuk, H. (2009). Modifiable Determinants of Youth Violence in Australia and the United States: A Longitudinal Study. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 42(3), pp.289-309.
8. HUANG, B., KOSTERMAN, R., CATALANO, R., HAWKINS, J. and ABBOTT, R. (2001). MODELING MEDIATION IN THE ETIOLOGY OF VIOLENT BEHAVIOR IN ADOLESCENCE: A TEST OF THE SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT MODEL*. Criminology, 39(1), pp.75-108.
9. Lobo, M. (2010). One Punch Can Kill Campaign. [online] Melbourne Photographer - Mark Lobo Photography. Available at: http://www.marklobo.com.au/news/2010/12/08/one-punch-can-kill-campaign/ [Accessed 22 Apr. 2015].
10. Market Place Communications, (2008). "One Punch Can Kill" Campaign Evaluation. [online] Queensland Government. Available at: http://www.cabinet.qld.gov.au/documents/2009/oct/one%20punch%20can%20kill%20campaign/Attachments/Evaluation%20Report.pdf [Accessed 21 Apr. 2015].
11. Parker, R. and Auerhahn, K. (1998). Alcohol, Drugs, and Violence. Annual Review of Sociology, 24(1), pp.291-311.
12. Reinikka, A. (2013). Assaults fly in the face of party safe campaign. The Chronicle. [online] Available at: http://www.thechronicle.com.au/news/one-punch-kill-message-toowoomba/1768792/ [Accessed 22 Apr. 2015].
13. Shorthouse, J. and Stephens, M. (2013). Fatal bashing reignites 'One Punch Can Kill' message. ABC Sunshine Coast. [online] Available at: http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2013/12/03/3903851.htm [Accessed 21 Apr. 2015].
14. Smith, R., Jorna, P., Fuller, G. and Sweeney, J. (2015). Counting the costs of crime in Australia: A 2011 estimate. Research and Public Policy Series. [online] Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, pp.15-18. Available at: http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/rpp/129/rpp129.pdf [Accessed 20 Apr. 2015].
15. Sweeney, J. and Payne, J. (2011). Alcohol and assault on Friday and Saturday nights: Findings from the DUMA program. Research in Practice. [online] Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. Available at: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/6/D/F/%7b6DFDDF7C-7948-4786-AB77-3CA21CF0443B%7drip14.pdf [Accessed 20 Apr. 2015].
16. TNS, (2011). One Punch Can Kill Assault Reduction Campaign (Phase Three). [online] Queensland Government. Available at: http://rti.cabinet.qld.gov.au/documents/2011/nov/one%20punch%20can%20kill/Attachments/Attachment%201%20-%20One%20Punch%20Can%20Kill%20campaign%20research.PDF [Accessed 21 Apr. 2015].