JUVENILE JUSTICE - STANDARDS AND GOALS

• NCJ Number: 50401
• Journal: TEXAS JOURNAL OF CORRECTIONS Volume: 4 Issue: 15 Dated: (JULY/AUGUST 1978) Pages: 36-39
• Author(s): D GILMAN
• Date Published: 1978
• Length: 4 pages
• Corporate Author: Texas Corrections Assoc
• Publication Format: Article
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: GENERAL PRESENTATION TO THE ANNUAL CONFERENCE OF THE TEXAS CORRECTIONS ASSOCIATION, EL PASO (TX), 1978

Annotation

THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE JUVENILE JUSTICE STANDARDS PROJECT (JJSP) ARE REVIEWED, WITH EMPHASIS ON THEIR REJECTION OF THE THEORY OF PARENS PATRIAE AND THE REHABILITATIVE APPROACH TO JUVENILE JUSTICE.

Abstract

THE AUTHOR, THE DIRECTOR OF THE JJSP, DESCRIBES THE PROCESS BY WHICH THE STANDARDS WERE DEVELOPED. REJECTING THE ASSUMPTION THAT THERE IS A THERAPY ADEQUATE TO TREAT AND CURE RUNAWAYS, TRUANTS, AND UNGOVERNABLE CHILDREN ONCE THEY ARE WITHIN THE JUVENILE COURT'S JURISDICTION, THE JJSP PROPOSES A NARROWER AND MORE PRECISE JURISDICTIONAL BASE FOR THE COURT, ONE WHICH ELIMINATES COURT JURISDICTION OVER NONCRIMINAL MISBEHAVIOR (I.E., PERSONS IN NEED OF SUPERVISION--P.I. N.S.) WHILE RECOMMENDING CONTINUED PURVIEW OVER SERIOUS DELINQUENT BEHAVIOR. DUE TO DISENCHANTMENT WITH EFFORTS OVER THE PAST 75 YEARS TO REHABILITATE AND MODIFY THE BEHAVIOR OF JUVENILES, MOST OF THE RECOMMENDED STANDARDS REJECT THE THEORY THAT JUVENILE COURT INTERVENTION IN THE LIVES OF CHILDREN IS ALWAYS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD (PARENS PATRIAE). AS A RESULT THE STANDARDS CALL FOR PROPORTIONALITY IN SANCTIONS FOR JUVENILE OFFENDERS, ARGUING THAT THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE OFFENSE AND NOT THE COURT'S VIEW OF THE JUVENILE'S NEEDS SHOULD REPLACE VAGUE AND SUBJECTIVE CRITERIA. SANCTIONS ARE DIVIDED INTO THREE CATEGORIES: NOMINAL, CONDITIONAL, AND CUSTODIAL. FURTHER, THE STANDARDS URGE THE ABOLITION OF INDETERMINATE SENTENCING, WHICH ALLOWS CORRECTIONAL AUTHORITIES DISCRETION TO ACT ARBITRARILY TO RELEASE OR CONFINE JUVENILES, PERMITS WIDE DISPARITY IN THE PUNISHMENT RECEIVED FOR THE SAME MISCONDUCT, AND CREATES A POTENTIAL FOR ABUSE THAT THE PUBLIC IS HELPLESS TO PREVENT. THE STANDARDS ALSO RECOMMEND THAT THE LEAST RESTRICTIVE ALTERNATIVE SHOULD BE UTILIZED WHEN INTERVENING IN THE LIVES OF JUVENILES. IF A DECISIONMAKER, SUCH AS A JUDGE OR AN INTAKE OFFICER, IMPOSES A RESTRICTIVE DISPOSITION, THE STANDARDS RECOMMEND THAT HE OR SHE STATE IN WRITING WHY LESS DRASTIC REMEDIES ARE INAPPROPRIATE OR INADEQUATE. GUIDELINES ARE ALSO ESTABLISHED FOR VOLUNTARY, COMMUNITY-BASED AGENCIES TO SERVE P.I.N.S., AS WELL AS TEMPORARY SHELTER CARE. THE RESPONSE OF THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM TO THE STANDARDS IS SEEN AS A MEASURE OF ITS CAPACITY FOR SELF-REFORM. (JCP)