What this is
The independent review by Charlie Taylor of the Ministry of Justice policy framework that permitted certain pain-inducing techniques on children in young offender institutions, secure training centres and transport between court and custody. It was commissioned October 2018 by the youth justice minister and published 18 June 2020, a 33-page report, alongside the government’s response.
Taylor visited every young offender institution and secure training centre and two secure children’s homes. He watched footage of 66 incidents of restraint, of which pain-inducing techniques were used in 44, reviewed the paperwork for each, and spoke with 25 children on whom pain had been used. He defined a pain-inducing technique as one “deliberately designed to cause pain to a child”.
What it records
The Minimising and Managing Physical Restraint system allows three pain-inducing techniques: mandibular angle, wrist flexion and thumb flexion. The mandibular angle is not permitted for more than 5 seconds, as the review records, because of the risk of long-term nerve damage.
His findings:
- pain-inducing techniques were being used in circumstances the policy did not intend
- MMPR’s behaviour-management methodology was not “fully embedded” across the estate
- there was widespread overuse of restraint, with officers either failing to intervene early or moving too quickly to restraint
- staff needed to pause and assess before intervening
He made 15 recommendations. The first is that in any restraint, and particularly a prolonged one, a senior officer must take control, make decisions and give instructions. He did not recommend a complete ban.
How to read it
The 44 figure needs its denominator said out loud: it is 44 of the 66 incidents Taylor watched. It is what he saw in the footage he was shown, not a rate across the estate and not a count of incidents in the year.
The second rule is about the recommendation. This review is often cited as though it called for pain-inducing techniques to be abolished. It did not. It found a gap between the written rule and what staff did, and it recommended supervision and decision-making rather than abolition.
The third rule is the finding a trainer can use: pain compliance is a policy choice, not a technique. The review shows what happens when a restraint runs long and nobody is in charge.
Where it stops
It covers children in the youth secure estate: young offender institutions and secure training centres, the two secure children’s homes Taylor visited, and transport between court and custody. It says nothing about adult prisons, police custody or schools.
The review was commissioned 2018 and published 2020, and it describes practice before publication, so it is evidence about the estate then, not now. It makes no finding that any individual use of force was unlawful, and it decides nothing about any child.
Whether the 15 recommendations were implemented is not assessed here. The government responded on the same day and the Youth Custody Service later established an Independent Restraint Review Panel, but this page does not track what either produced.
Confidence is confirmed: the publication page and the report PDF were both opened, and the recommendations were counted in the text.
Sources
- Ministry of Justice and HM Prison and Probation Service, independent review of the use of pain-inducing techniques in the youth secure estate, 18 June 2020
- Charlie Taylor, a review of the use of pain-inducing techniques in the youth secure estate (report PDF, 33 pages), 18 June 2020
If your service still permits pain compliance, our restraint reduction training covers how to review the policy against what actually happens when a restraint runs long.
Reviewed 20 October 2026.