FAMILIES WITH SERVICE NEEDS - JURISDICTION AND SCOPE OF AUTHORITY (FROM STATUS OFFENDERS AND THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM - AN ANTHOLOGY, 1978, BY RICHARD ALLINSON - SEE NCJ-48132)

• NCJ Number: 48135
• Author(s): ANON
• Date Published: 1978
• Length: 4 pages
• Corporate Author: National Council on Crime and Delinquency
• Publication Format: Document
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: REPRINTED FROM JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY PREVENTION - REPORT OF THE TASK FORCE ON JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY PREVENTION

Annotation

STANDARDS DESIGNED TO DEAL INTELLIGENTLY AND REALISTICALLY WITH THE PROBLEM OF FAMILY COURT JURISDICTION OVER CHILDREN ACCUSED OF STATUS OFFENSES ARE RECOMMENDED.

Abstract

THESE STANDARDS WERE FORMULATED BY THE TASK FORCE ON JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY PREVENTION OF THE NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON JUVENILE JUSTICE STANDARDS AND GOALS. THE TASK FORCE'S PRIMARY ACTION WAS TO TAKE A STANCE THAT SOME KIND OF WELL-PLANNED COURT JURISDICTIONAL SCHEME FOR CERTAIN WELL-DEFINED STATUS BEHAVIORS CAN AND MUST BE ESTABLISHED. THE TASK FORCE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED ALL THE BEHAVIORS COMMONLY INCLUDED WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF JUVENILE OR FAMILY COURTS AS STATUS OFFENSES. IT ACTED TO DISCARD THE VAGUE LABELS THAT HAVE FORMED THE BASIS FOR COURT JURISDICTION AND SOME SERIOUS ABUSES. THE CRITERIA FOR SELECTING BEHAVIOR WAS SIMPLE: THE ONLY CONDUCT THAT SHOULD WARRANT FAMILY COURT INTERVENTION IS THAT CONDUCT WHICH IS CLEARLY SELF-DESTRUCTIVE OR OTHERWISE HARMFUL TO THE CHILD. ACCORDINGLY, THE TASK FORCE AGREED THAT THERE ARE FIVE BEHAVIORS THAT MUST ULTIMATELY FALL UNDER THE FAMILIES WITH SERVICE NEEDS JURISDICTION OF THE FAMILY COURT. THESE ARE: SCHOOL TRUANCY, REPEATED DISREGARD FOR OR MISUSE OF LAWFUL PARENTAL AUTHORITY, REPEATED RUNNING AWAY FROM HOME, REPEATED USE OF INTOXICATING BEVERAGES, AND DELINQUENT ACTS COMMITTED BY A JUVENILE YOUNGER THAN 10 YEARS OF AGE. IN BRINGING THESE BEHAVIORS UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE FAMILY COURT, THE TASK FORCE DOES NOT INTEND TO PERPETUATE THE TRADITIONAL EMPHASIS ON THE CHILD ALONE; RATHER, ALL FAMILY PARTICIPANTS WOULD BE BROUGHT UNDER THE JURISDICTION AND AUTHORITY OF THE FAMILY COURT REGARDLESS OF WHO FILES THE REQUEST FOR SERVICES. IN PROCEEDINGS WITHIN THIS FRAMEWORK THE FAMILY COURT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO MAKE TWO DETERMINATIONS. FIRST, THE COURT WOULD ESTABLISH THE TRUTH OF THE ALLEGATIONS OF STATUS BEHAVIOR. SECOND, THE COURT WOULD DETERMINE WHETHER ALL AVAILABLE VOLUNTARY ALTERNATIVES TO ASSIST THE CHILD AND THE FAMILY HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED. THE TASK FORCE ENVISIONS THE FAMILIES WITH SERVICE NEEDS JURISDICTION EXTENDING NOT ONLY TO THE CHILD BUT ALSO TO THE PARENTS AND TO ANY PUBLIC INSTITUTION OR AGENCY WITH LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY OR DISCRETIONARY ABILITY TO SUPPLY SERVICES. IN THIS WAY, THE FAMILY COURT WILL HAVE A DIRECT JURISDICTIONAL TIE TO ANY PERSON, SCHOOL SYSTEM, TREATMENT FACILITY, OR SERVICE ASSOCIATED WITH THE CHILD'S BEHAVIORAL PROBLEM. BROADENING THE SCOPE OF JURISDICTION ALSO WIDENS THE RANGE OF DISPOSITIONAL ALTERNATIVES AVAILABLE TO THE FAMILY COURT. THE COURT WOULD HAVE THE POWER TO COMMAND THE ASSISTANCE AND COOPERATION OF INSTITUTIONS SERVING CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, AND THUS, DISPOSITIONAL ORDERS COULD COMMAND THE PROVISION OF SERVICES, THE COOPERATION OF OFFERED SERVICES, OR THE CONTINUATION OF DISCONTINUATION OF BEHAVIORS BY ANY PARTY. THE PLACEMENT OF THE CHILD IN ALTERNATIVE CARE FACILITIES WOULD ALSO BE POSSIBLE. (KBL)