No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A framework for developing children’s legal capability
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 30 September 2025
Abstract
In this paper we introduce a framework for developing children’s legal capability. This is the outcome of an extended period of interdisciplinary research, reflection, and discussion to explore the question of ‘what does a legally capable child look like?’. Initially this question was explored within the context of adult-focused legal capability literature, and we explain how the framework we propose in this paper has been informed by this scholarship. However, we go on to demonstrate how our work breaks new ground not only because of its focus on children, but because we radically reconceptualise legal capability, drawing on a range of interdisciplinary theories. Within the framework we introduce the concept of ‘baseline’ legal capability, and we argue that this addresses the conundrum we identify in the literature, where legal capability is conceptualised as something which those most in need of effective public legal education can never achieve. More generally, we demonstrate how the framework turns traditional ideas about legal education upside down as we ‘decentre’ the law and legal institutions, and instead place the learner at its core.
Information
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Society of Legal Scholars
Footnotes
†
The authors would like to thank Dr Lisa Wintersteiger and Professor Joanna Shapland for their comments on an earlier version of this paper. They would also like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments, which helped to shape this final version.
References
1 The suggestion was made by Matthew Smerdon, Chief Executive of the Legal Education Foundation, at a meeting of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Public Legal Education on 13 October 2016. It is reproduced here with his permission.
2 This project received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (Grant agreement No 818457).
3 Tisdall, EKM ‘Foundations of childhood studies’ in Tisdall, EKM et al (eds) Critical Childhood Studies: Global Perspectives (New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2023) p 23 Google Scholar.
4 James, A and Prout, A ‘A new paradigm for the sociology of childhood? Provenance, promise and problems’ in James, A and Prout, A (eds) Constructing and Reconstructing Childhood (London: Routledge, 2nd edn, 1997) p 7 Google Scholar.
5 Tisdall et al, above n 3, p 27. For further discussion of this issue by the lead author please see D Watkins et al ‘Being home alone and babysitting: responsibility, competency and risk’ (2019) 2 Child and Family Law Quarterly 123 at 124–126.
6 Burman, E Deconstructing Developmental Psychology (Abingdon: Routledge, 3rd edn, 2017) p 235 Google Scholar.
7 Tisdall et al, above n 3, p 26.
8 See for example, GoHenry, available at https://www.gohenry.com/uk/ and Revolut >18 available at https://www.revolut.com/revolut-under-18/.
9 House of Commons Education Committee Delivering Effective Financial Education, Third Report of Session 2023–24, HC 265, 22 May 2024. The evidence was submitted by GoHenry (FE0022) p 1.
10 Notably, Ofcom’s research into media use and attitudes includes children from the age of 3 years and upwards. See Ofcom Children and Parents: Media Use and Attitudes Report (2024), available at https://www.ofcom.org.uk/media-use-and-attitudes/media-habits-children/children-and-parents-media-use-and-attitudes-report-2024/.
11 See for example Orchard v Lee [2009] EWCA Civ 295. For a further discussion of this by the lead author see D Watkins ‘Exploring the role of domestic law in human rights education’ (2022) 5(2) Human Rights Education Review 98.
12 See further Watkins, D et al ‘Exploring children’s understanding of law in their everyday lives’ (2018) 38(1) Legal Studies 59 CrossRefGoogle Scholar and D Watkins et al ‘“If you are 10, you go to prison”: children’s understanding of the age of criminal responsibility’ (2016) 67(3) Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly 311.
13 United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child ‘Concluding observations on the combined sixth and seventh periodic reports of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland’ CRC/C/GBR/CO/6-7, 23 June 2023, para 14.
14 Coventry LSCB Final Overview Report of Serious Case Review re Daniel Pelka (September 2013).
15 Education Act 2002, s 175.
16 For a review of what encourages the public to act on their concerns about a child and what prevents them from acting, see D Radcliffe et al Building a ‘Community of Safeguarders’ (NSPCC Learning, February 2023).
17 UNCRC Art 12(1) states: ‘States Parties shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child.’
18 Lansdown, G ‘Strengthening child agency to prevent and overcome maltreatment’ (2020) 110 (1) Child Abuse and Neglect 104398CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed at 1.
19 M Jones Legal Capability (Plenet, 2010) p 1. Plenet was established in 2007 with funding from the Ministry of Justice to take forward recommendations of a Public Legal Education and Support (PLEAS) Task Force.
20 Community Legal Education Ontario Building an Understanding of Legal Capability: An Online Scan of Legal Capability Research (CLEO, 2016).
21 N Balmer et al Law…What is it Good For? How People See the Law, Lawyers and Courts in Australia (Victoria Law Foundation, 2019) p 6.
22 Ibid, p 7.
23 Eureka! Research and Central England Law Centre Evaluation of the RIPPLE Project – A New Model of Public Legal Education (Central England Law Centre, 2018) p 9.
24 CLEO, above n 20, p 4.
25 CLEO A Framework for Ontario: Introducing a Working Legal Capability Matrix (CLEO, 2016).
26 P Pleasence and N Balmer How People Resolve ‘Legal’ Problems (PPSR/Legal Services Board, 2014).
27 These are: recognising and framing the legal dimensions of issues and situations; finding out more about the legal dimensions of issues and situations; dealing with law-related issues and situations; and engaging and influencing. See Collard, S et al Public Legal Education Evaluation Framework (University of Bristol Personal Finance Research Centre, 2011) p 4 Google Scholar.
28 Ibid, p 12.
29 Balmer et al, above n 21, App 1.
30 Genn, H Paths to Justice: What People Do and Think about Going to Law (Bloomsbury, 1999) p 5 Google Scholar.
31 McDonald, H ‘Assessing access to justice: how much “legal” do people need and how can we know?’ (2021) 11(3) UC Irvine Law Review 693 Google Scholar at 702.
32 Ibid. See also Pleasence and Balmer, above n 26.
33 Civil Procedure Rules 1998, Part 21.
34 Mansell, W A Critical Introduction to Law (Abingdon: Routledge, 4th edn, 2015)Google Scholar p 9.
35 AM Olatokun ‘The journey to legal capability: challenges for public law from public legal education’ (2022) 6(1) International Journal of Public Legal Education 28 at 34.
36 Davies, M Asking the Law Question (Sydney: Lawbook Co Thomson Reuters, 5th edn, 2023)Google Scholar p 443.
37 L Wintersteiger and T Mulqueen ‘Decentering law through public legal education’ (2017) 7(7) Oñati Socio-legal Series 1557 at 1561 and 1566.
38 Target 16.3 is to ‘Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.’
39 In this respect we seek to position this paper as a part-response to Ton Liefaard’s call for further academic research in this area. See T Liefaard ‘Access to justice for children: towards a specific research and implementation agenda’ (2019) 27(2) The International Journal of Children’s Rights 195.
40 UN Human Rights Council Access to Justice for Children. Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, UN Doc A/HRC/25/35, p 4.
41 Guidance Note of the Secretary‐General UN Approach to Justice for Children (September 2008) p 5.
42 Ibid, p 5.
43 UNCRC Art 12.
44 Finch, E and Fafinski, S Legal Skills (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 9th edn, 2023)CrossRefGoogle Scholar Ch 15.2.
45 Collard et al, above n 27, p 5.
46 Freire, P Education for Critical Consciousness (first published 1974) (London: Bloomsbury, 2021)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
47 Freire, P Pedagogy of the Oppressed (London: Penguin, 1970)Google Scholar p 25.
48 Flowers, N ‘Afterword’ in, M Bajaj (ed) Human Rights Education: Theory, Research, Praxis (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2017) p 317 CrossRefGoogle Scholar at p 320.
49 See eg Bajaj, M Schooling for Social Change (New York: Continuum International, 2012)Google Scholar; Bajaj, M et al Advancing Transformative Human Rights Education: Appendix D to the Report of the Global Citizenship Commission (Cambridge: Open Book, 2016)Google Scholar; Bajaj, M (ed) Human Rights Education: Theory, Research, Praxis (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
50 Shaull, R ‘Foreword to 30th Anniversary Edition of Pedagogy of the Oppressed ’ (New York: Continuum International, 2000)Google Scholar p 32.
51 Jones, above n 19.
52 Deci, EL and Ryan, RM (eds) Handbook of Self-determination Research (Rochester: University of Rochester Press, 2004)Google Scholar.
53 Details of the development of the Children’s Rights Confidence Scale form the basis of a separate publication. Pleasence and Balmer have developed a general legal confidence scale for application in the adult population: see P Pleasence and N Balmer ‘Development of general legal confidence scale: first implementation of the Rasch measurement model in empirical legal studies’ (2019) 16 (1) Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 143.
54 Bajaj (2012), above n 49, pp 76–93.
55 Ibid, p 89.
56 Ibid.
57 Pleasence, P et al How People Understand and Interact with the Law (The Legal Education Foundation, 2015)Google Scholar.
58 Ibid.
59 Smetana, J and Braeges, J ‘The development of toddlers’ moral and conventional judgements’ (1990) 36(3) Merrill-Palmer Quarterly 329 Google Scholar; Smetana, J and Yoo, H Na ‘Development and variations in moral and social conventional judgements: a social domain theory approach’ in Killen, M and Smetana, J (eds) Handbook of Moral Development (New York: Routledge, 3rd edn, 2023)Google Scholar; J Smetana ‘Social-cognitive development: domain distinctions and coordinations’ (1983) 3 Development Review 131; Turiel, E The Development of Social Knowledge: Morality and Convention (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985)Google Scholar.
60 R Thornberg et al ‘ Children’s conceptions of bullying and repeated conventional transgressions: moral, conventional, structuring and personal-choice reasoning ’ (2016) 36(1) Educational Psychology 95 at 107.
62 L Nucci and M Santiago Nucci ‘Children’s responses to moral and social conventional transgressions in free-play settings’ (1982) 53(2) Child Development 1137; J Smetana et al ‘Abused, neglected, and nonmaltreated children’s conceptions of moral and social-conventional transgressions’ (1984) 55(1) Child Development 277; Thornberg et al, above n 60.
63 Nucci and Nucci, ibid, at 1341.
64 ibid
65 Eureka! Research and Central England Law Centre Evaluation of the RIPPLE Project – A New Model of Public Legal Education (Central England Law Centre, 2018) p 9 Google Scholar.
66 Collard et al, above n 27, p 38.
67 M Ferrari and J Baglin ‘Does community legal education work? Educating English language students about consumer contracts’ (2018) 29 Journal of Law and Social Policy 29 at 45.
68 Collard et al, above n 27, p 12.
69 Coumarelos, C et al Legal Australia-Wide Survey: Legal Need in Australia (Law and Justice Foundation of New South Wales, 2012) p 29 Google Scholar.
70 Balmer, N et al Knowledge, Capability and the Experience of Rights Problems (Plenet, 2010) p 59 Google Scholar.
71 Ibid, p 58.
72 Forell, S and McDonald, H ‘Beyond great expectations: modest, meaningful and measurable community legal education and information’ (2015) 21 Justice Issues: The Law and Justice Foundation of New South Wales 1 Google Scholar.
73 Ibid, at 2; Balmer et al, above n 70, also propose that public legal education interventions should be targeted towards particular segments of the population.
74 M Qian and K Clark ‘Game-based learning and 21st century skills: a review of recent research’ (2016) 63 Computers in Human Behavior 50; T Anastasiadis et al ‘Digital game-based learning and serious games in education’ (2018) 4(12) International Journal of Advances in Scientific Research and Engineering 139.
75 J Huizinga Homoludens. A Study of the Play Element in Culture (London: The Beacon Press, 1955) p 13.
76 Struthers, A Teaching Human Rights in Primary Schools: Overcoming the Barriers to Effective Practice (Abingdon: Routledge, 2020)Google Scholar.
77 Eg A Bloom et al ‘Evaluating a method for eliciting children’s voice about educational support with children with speech, language and communication needs’ (2020) 47 British Journal of Special Education 170, and F Haigh et al ‘Developing a critical realist informed framework to explain how the human rights and social determinants of health relationship works’ (2019) 19 BMC Public Health 1571.
78 Haigh et al, ibid. See also Blaikie, N and Priest, J Social Research: Paradigms in Action (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2017)Google Scholar Ch 1.
79 For example, through the application of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory. See further U Bronfenbrenner The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1979).