NCJ Number
48136
Date Published
1978
Length
4 pages
Annotation
FLAWS IN THE PRINCIPLE THAT THE FAMILIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT OF A STATUS OFFENDER NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED IF THAT CHILD IS TO BE SUCCESSFULLY HELPED ARE EXAMINED.
Abstract
FAMILIES WITH SERVICE NEEDS IS A PROPOSED CATEGORY OF JUVENILE COURT JURISDICTION WHICH IS RECEIVING SERIOUS ATTENTION AS A MEANS OF DEALING WITH THE FAMILY PROBLEMS OF STATUS OFFENDERS. YET A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF THIS PROPOSAL BY THE TASK FORCE ON JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY PREVENTION OF THE NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON JUVENILE JUSTICE STANDARDS AND GOALS REVEALS THE INAPPROPRIATENESS OF APPLYING THIS PRINCIPLE TO AN EXTENSION OF JUVENILE COURT JURISDICTION. THE TASK FORCE WOULD SET UP AN ELABORATE INTERVENTIONIST MACHINERY FOR A CATEGORY OF CASES, WHICH, BY ITS OWN ADMISSION BELONG OUTSIDE THE COURT SYSTEM EXCEPT IN EXTREME CASES. THIS BASIC CONTRADICTION, AND OTHER INCONSISTENCIES, ARE REFLECTED IN THE SPECIFICS OF THE TASK FORCE'S PROPOSAL. THE TASK FORCE CLAIMS TO BE DISREGARDING THE VAGUE LABELS THAT HAVE FORMED THE BASIS OF COURT JURISDICTION BECAUSE OF THE POTENTIAL EFFECTS ON A CHILD OF THE DELINQUENT LABEL; YET IT SEEMS TO IGNORE THE REALITIES OF STIGMATIZATION, APPARENTLY ASSUMING THAT THE PERFECT LABEL HAS BEEN FOUND IN FAMILIES WITH SERVICE NEEDS. THE TASK FORCE ALSO CLAIMS THAT COURT INTERVENTION WOULD TAKE PLACE ON A NO FAULT BASIS, YET THE FIRST STEP IN DETERMINING JURISDICTION WOULD BE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE TRUTH OF THE ALLEGATION OF STATUS VIOLATIONS; AND THOUGH THE TASK FORCE WOULD CAST OUT THE VAGUE LABELS OF THE PAST IN FAVOR OF FIVE WELL-DEFINED FORMS OF STATUS OFFENSE, THESE FIVE CATEGORIES ARE NO LESS VAGUE. THE LIMITED ROLE OF THE JUVENILE COURT'S INTERVENTION INTO STATUS OFFENSE CASES UNDER THE PROPOSAL IS SUPPOSEDLY ASSURED BY THE REPEATED RECOMMENDATION THAT NONCOERCIVE RESOURCES FOR PROVIDING SERVICE BE EXHAUSTED BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT MAY TAKE JURISDICTION. HOWEVER, THE FACT THAT COURT INTERVENTION IS TO OCCUR ONLY AS A LAST RESORT BEGS AN IMPORTANT QUESTION: IF THE COMMUNITY SERVICES HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED AND HAVE PROVEN UNSUCCESSFUL, HOW CAN COURT INVOLVEMENT PRODUCE THE NECESSARY CURE? ALTHOUGH THE TASK FORCE ASSERTS THAT BY ITS VERY NATURE VOLUNTARY TREATMENT SHOULD BE MORE EFFECTIVE THAT FORCED TREATMENT, IT NEVERTHELESS SETS UP THE FAMILY COURT AS THE COERCIVE FORCE BEHIND THE DELIVERY OF SERVICES TO THE STATUS OFFENDER AND THE OFFENDER'S FAMILY. IT IS CONCLUDED THAT THE LARGE AMOUNT OF DISCRETION LEFT TO THE JUVENILE COURT JUDGE UNDER THE FAMILIES WITH SERVICE NEEDS JURISDICTION IS IN MANY WAYS THE MOST CRUCIAL ISSUE, BECAUSE THE PAST RECORD OF THE JUVENILE COURT'S USE OF DISCRETION IS NOT ENCOURAGING. NOTES ARE PROVIDED. FOR AN OVERVIEW OF THE TASK FORCE STANDARDS, SEE NCJ 48135. (KBL)