Analysis - "Boot camps" for young people who commit serious offending are coming back. The coalition government has promised to pilot "military-style academies" by the middle of the year - despite a wealth of international and New Zealand evidence that boot camps do not reduce reoffending.
It has been encouraging to see this evidence receive extensive media coverage and expert analysis. Less encouraging, however, has been the minister for children's reported rejection of expert advice that the boot camp model is flawed and ineffective.
So, why do we keep returning to interventions that don't work? For boot camps, there are at least three possible explanations.
First, they appeal to politicians who want to appear tough on crime, while also saying they are encouraging rehabilitation options.
Second, boot camps seem to have a strong appeal to common sense: people want to believe structure and military discipline can turn around young people's lives, and this belief outweighs contradicting evidence.
Third, boot camps can take different forms, so evidence of their ineffectiveness can be avoided by claiming, as the minister has, that improvements will be made this time.
This seems unlikely, however, when the core features that characterise boot camps - strong discipline in particular - are a main reason they don't work. To understand why, we need to look at the psychology of punishment and behaviour change.
These kids are probably not getting the support they need at home or school. Imagine if we spent the money on support programmes to help them grow up into productive members of society, instead of this performance.
That's the thing! We know from evidence that programmes for youth offenders really do work. Just not boot camp style programmes. Vocational and counselling combos are where it's at.
Why don't we have counseling lobbyists making bribe donations to politicians instead of prison companies!
Yes! Why is it always the evil side that does the bribery!