NCJ Number
43048
Date Published
1977
Length
34 pages
Annotation
JUVENILE STATUTES WHICH VIOLATE THE ANGLO-AMERICAN CONCEPT THAT LAWS MUST BE CLEAR, UNIFORM, AND IMPERSONAL ARE CITED, AND SUGGESTIONS ARE MADE FOR REWORDING AND REFORM.
Abstract
PINS STATUTES ARE OFTEN DELIBERATELY VAGUE TO ENABLE THE COURT TO EXTEND ITS AUTHORITY INTO AREAS NOT FORESEEN. HOWEVER, A JUVENILE PROTECTION LAW WHICH EXACTLY MEETS ANGLO-AMERICAN STANDARDS OF SPECIFICITY AND UNIFORMITY MAY BE MORE UNJUST THAN ONE WHICH ALLOWS FOR INVESTIGATION INTO INDIVIDUAL CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. AT PRESENT, SUCH LAWS FOCUS ON PARENTAL AUTHORITY (THE 'REASONABLE COMMAND' RULE) OR 'HABITUAL DISOBEDIENCE.' IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT LAW INSTEAD FOCUS ON THE ELEMENT OF DANGER TO THE CHILD AND TO SOCIETY. UNDER SUCH A STATUTE, THE COURT WOULD AUTHORIZE INTERVENTION ONLY WHEN THE DISOBEDIENCE IS WITHIN A UNIVERSE OF CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH SUGGEST THAT, WITHOUT INTERVENTION, THE YOUTH WOULD BECOME A DELINQUENT. AN INQUIRY INTO DANGEROUSNESS COULD PROVE MORE FAIR TO CHILDREN THAN CURRENT LAWS, WHICH DEMAND SUBMISSION TO PARENTS AND MAY BE LESS INTRUSIVE THAN EXISTING INCORRIGIBILITY LAWS. PARENTAL DISCRETION TO INVOKE COURT PROCESS WILL BE REDUCED BECAUSE NO RATIONAL PARENT CAN EXPECT JUDICIAL REVIEW OF TRIVIAL COMPLAINTS. THE COURT COULD REFUSE TO INTERVENE UNTIL THERE IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM OF PUBLIC ORDER, FORCING PARENTS TO SEEK HELP FROM OTHER SOURCES. IT IS, HOWEVER, CLEAR FROM A VARIETY OF PERSPECTIVES THAT PINS LAW GENERATES AN UNBREAKABLE PARADOX OF AUTHORITY AND AUTONOMY, WHILE DANGEROUSNESS FAILS TO SATISFY THE RULES OF LEGAL JUSTICE. THE PECULIAR PROBLEMS OF PINS INTERVENTION MAKE SUCH PARADOXES INEVITABLE.