Criminal detention and alternatives: fundamental rights aspects in EU cross-border transfers be sentenced to youth service if they give their consent and the arrangements are considered appropriate.209 United Kingdom (England and Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland). There is therefore an international obligation to ensure that alternatives to imprisonment exist for children at both the pre- and post-trial stage. In Bulgaria, for example, children can be placed under the supervision of their parents or guardians, the administration of the educational establishment in which they have been placed, an inspector from a child pedagogical facility, or a member of a local commission for combating juvenile delinquency. In Portugal, this supervisory measure may be prolonged until the young person reaches the age of 21. The choice of supervisory measure is flexible, and courts give preference to measures that least interfere with a  child’s independence as regards their decisionmaking and conduct in life. This method hopes to achieve better compliance from the child as well as their parents, legal guardians or persons possessing legal custody.214 Such supervision has the advantage of enabling children to maintain their social contacts, and of promoting their reintegration into society and a constructive role in society. Some alternatives to detention are particularly suitable for children. Non-institutionalised educational measures are a less disruptive form of tackling offending behaviour because children are typically able to continue to live at home and continue going to their regular school. For instance, in Belgium, children can be supported by a program of scholastic reintegration or social or educational monitoring.210 In the Czech Republic, a number of educational limitations or educational measures can be imposed.211 These measures do not necessarily have to be school-related. Indeed, the ECtHR has stated that the words “educational supervision” must not be equated rigidly with notions of classroom teaching, but should embrace many aspects of the exercise, including supervision by parents and local authorities.212 In Finland, for instance, a programme of monitoring meetings, monitored assignments and programmes support the child’s social adaptation and introduction to working life.213 Such non-institutional educational measures can also be supported by institutional measures in cases where a greater degree of supervision is required. The most commonly available alternative to preand post-trial imprisonment for children across EU Member States appears to be supervision by nonjudicial bodies. These can include parents, guardians, or non-judicial bodies. Such measures are available in 15 Member States: Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Lithuania, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden and the 209 Sweden, Ministry of Justice ( Justitiedepartementet), Penal Code (Brottsbalken), 1 January 1965, Chapter 32, para. 2. 210 Droits des jeunes (2007); Belgium, Act of 8 April 1965 on the protection of young persons, the treatment of minors who have committed an act deemed to constitute an offence and reparation for damage caused thereby (Loi relative à la protection de la jeunesse, à la prise en charge des mineurs ayant commis un fait qualifié infraction et à la réparation du dommage causé par ce fait), 8 April 1965 as amended by the Act of 15 May 2006 on the protection of young persons and the treatment of minors who have committed an act deemed to constitute an offence amended (Loi relative à la protection de la jeunesse, à la prise en charge des mineurs ayant commis un fait qualifié infraction et à la réparation du dommage causé par ce fait), JDJ No. 258, Brussels, 15 May 2006. 211 Czech Republic, Act on Judicial Procedure in the Area of Juvenile Affairis (Zákon o soudnictví ve věcech mládeže), June 2003, paras. 19, 21 and 25. 212 ECtHR, P. and S. v. Poland, No. 57375/08, 30 January 2013, para. 147. 213 Finland, Juvenile Penalty Act (Laki nuorisorangaistuksesta/ Lag om ungdomsstraff), 21 December 2001, Section 2. 76 5.2. Parents with young children This section focuses on parents – in particular mothers – with young children (typically under the age of ten), in situations involving detentions of the main care-giver for a child. It is important that contact with the child is continued, as this is an important aspect of the parent’s right to family life and rehabilitation.215 This is also important from the child’s perspective: it is a clearly established principle that children should benefit from contact with their family.216 Thus, efforts should be made to ensure that children are not separated from their parents. It is certainly essential to avoid having children accompanying parents in detention. This again underscores the need for a greater use of alternatives to detention. The UN Guidelines for the Appropriate Use and Conditions of Alternative Care for Children state that, when a child’s sole or main carer may be deprived of liberty as a result of preventive detention or sentencing decisions, non-custodial remand measures and sentences should be taken in appropriate cases wherever possible.217 214 Portugal, Decree-Law 48/95, Criminal Code, Art. 4–6. 215 Council of Europe, European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), 4 November 1950, Art. 8; ECtHR, Öcalan v. Turkey (No. 2), No. 24069/03, 197/04, 6201/06 and 10464/07, 18 March 2014, paras. 154–159. ECtHR, Messina v. Italy, No. 25498/94, 28 December 2000, paras. 59–65. 216 UN, Committee on the Rights of the Child, Art. 9, 10 and 37 (c); UN, GA (1985), Beijing Rules, No. 13.3, 26.5 and 27.2; UN, GA (2015), UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Nelson Mandela Rules), A/ Res/70/175, No. 37; UN, GA (1990b), UN Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty, A/ Res/45/113, No. 59. 217 UN, GA (2010), para. 48.