Nearly a Century Later - The Child Savers - Child Advocates and the Juvenile Justice System

• NCJ Number: 80064
• Author(s): R B McNally
• Date Published: 1981
• Length: 14 pages
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Publication Type: Historical Overview
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Paper prepared for the annual meeting of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, March 11-14, 1981.

Annotation

A comparative analysis of the historical development of the juvenile justice reform movement in the late 19th century with the activities of contemporary child advocates finds many similarities between the groups, particularly their reliance on Government intervention to solve social problems.

Abstract

The child saving movement which arose between 1865 and 1900 was spearheaded by white women from the middle and upper classes whose philanthropic work filled a void in their lives created by technological progress, affluence, and changes in social patterns. A growing concern with problems caused by industrialization and immigration resulted in child labor laws, compulsory education, and the Illinois Juvenile Court Act of 1899, the first statewide court for juveniles. It was not until the 1960's that the juvenile court system came under attack for the failure of parens patriae and not applying due process safeguards. The 1960's, like the 1870's, were characterized by great social turbulence and reform movements such as women's rights and child advocacy. While the 19th century child savers looked to Government for some type of control to supplant the family, the contemporary child advocates ask the Government to support alternatives to incarceration for juveniles. Both movements assume middle class values, and contemporary reformers have not challenged established institutions, but merely advocated an alternative form of social control. A review of the literature suggests that child advocates of the 1960's were primarily females with varying levels of formal education and belonged to lobbying groups with political clout. The child savers did make the public aware that children should not be treated as adults, but both movements have been self-serving and unwilling to take the risks necessary to effect real change. The failure of both reform groups is illustrated by a juvenile court which functions on an adversial model and the emergence of punitive juvenile codes in most States. Nearly a century later, the juvenile justice system is returning to its original form which processed and punished adults and youths in the same manner. The paper provides 17 references.