Naming and shaming violent young children

The shocking case of the brothers, aged 10 and 11, who attacked two youngsters in Doncaster, South Yorkshire leaving one for dead, has appalled the nation.

Now the debate rages about whether the attackers should be ‘named and shamed’, as happened with the killers of Jamie Bulger, the toddler murdered by Jon Venables and Robert Thompson in 1993.

And are the parents equally to blame for the chaotic lifestyles which led them to commit such crimes?

Reporter Janice Barker asked shoppers in Oldham town centre for their views on what happened to the brutal brothers.

Craig Beckwith, from Rochdale, who has three young children, said: “It is sick. Social services should have done more.

“How have they got away with that? They should have been named, the same as the Jamie Bulger killers.

“You can’t say they were born bad but social services were involved and know all about it. We don’t know what their upbringing was like but social services were aware of it.”

Kate Parker (32), from Oldham, agreed they should be named despite their young ages. She added: “They knew what they were doing — you know right from wrong. Why should they get away with it?

“We don’t know their background but I don’t think they were born that way. Like the Jamie Bulger case, they should be named.”

Geoffrey Lees, from Royton, said what he really thought could not be printed but added: “Mothers and fathers should teach them right from wrong.

“Obviously the parents have some responsibility but this is becoming rife. A stronger message should have gone out, like in the Jamie Bulger case.”

Victoria Steele, from Manchester, said: “I didn’t want to read newspaper reports because it was too distressing. I have two children of 11 and seven and I could picture the scenario.

“I think the brothers should have been named and their family, their parents. I would blame the parents — I know my children know right from wrong.”

Student Kathryn Graham (17) said: “Is it nature or nurture? I’m not sure if we should name and shame.

“There was probably something psychologically wrong, and they were probably mentally immature.”

Her friend Bekki Lana (17) disagreed, saying: “I reckon they are old enough to know what’s right from wrong, and they knew what they were doing.”

Sylvia Houldsworth, from Oldham, said: “I blame the parents and social services should have played a role. I was really shocked by it, why should they get away with it and not be named?”

Husband and wife Tony and Irene Whyatt disagreed about whether the brothers should be named. Tony said: “I don’t think they were old enough to be responsible in that way.

“It was the way they had been brought up. I blame the parents.”

But Irene said: “I say it is their upbringing.

“We have grandchildren and they know what is right. The brothers ought to be named.”

Shirley Lord, of Chadderton, said: “I think they should be named and their parents. It would have a knock-on effect.

“I don’t think social services were up to much. I don’t think they are professional enough.

“I don’t agree with the banning smacking business, it has gone too far and there is no deterrent.

“A bit more discipline early on would stop other people having to pick up the pieces.”