A certain number of obligations of another kind 88, are a consequence of the social nature of CEFs, which tend to make the minor into a user, entitled to rights: - personalised provision of measures and support, promoting their development, autonomy and social integration; - that the minor’s consent and direct participation be sought, with the help of their legal representative, in the design and implementation of the measures and support put in place for them. - more generally, the minor’s participation in the operation of the institution, through a social life committee or any other method of participation. There is a sensitive balance between these two approaches. The penal framework is above all aimed at the prevention of recidivism; the advocated approach to education places greater emphasis upon the search for social integration specific to EPMs than upon the search for autonomy advocated by the Social Action and Family Code (CASF / Code de l’action sociale et des familles). In practice, constraint tends to take even greater precedence over the search for autonomy insofar as a more or less clearly stated injunction weighs upon CEFs, arising from social and/or political demands, to ensure the security of citizens in priority. Finally, the search for autonomy also comes up against difficulties specific to the minors catered for. 2.1.2 A Vulnerable Population, above all requiring the provision of Educational and Psychological Measures Whether with regard to CEFs or EPMs, the examination of inmates’ situations shows chequered family histories (broken families, uncertainty of filiation, domestic violence, psychological frailties etc.) and materially and culturally impoverished families; all forms of social exclusion are to be found: lack of work, accommodation and health problems, administrative problems etc. The father is frequently absent, whether this absence is actual – imprisonment, death, separation accompanied with abandonment of the parental educational role – or symbolic – father’s paternal role denied due to immaturity, unemployment, alcoholism, etc. The mothers, who often have to take care of the education of the children on their own, regularly appear to be extremely protective, sometimes allowing the child to take a “man’s place”. Conversely, although less frequently, parents are sometimes encountered who still have adolescent problems themselves, leading them to give priority to their own personal lives, to the detriment of the interests of their children. In their family, these minors were in practice left to themselves, and were allowed total “freedom” without anything in return. It is therefore all the more difficult to lead them towards becoming autonomous since, initially, limits have to be set. Moreover, the educational and emotional deprivation suffered by these young people often gives rise to the lack of a secure image of their personal identity, maintaining them in a state of immaturity which is not solely attributable to their age. It can also be manifested in feelings of omnipotence, a certain tendency to pass easily from thought to the commission of serious acts, difficulty in taking “others” into account, difficulty in envisaging the future and therefore in elaborating educational and professional plans, in short: difficulty in becoming autonomous. It is also likely that a certain model of social “success”, based upon appearances and money, does not encourage these young people to engage in educational plans which would not 88 These obligations result from articles L311-1 et seq. of the Social Action and Family Code (Code de l’action sociale et des familles). 108