NCJ Number
27747
Journal
Trial Volume: 11 Issue: 4 Dated: (JULY/AUGUST 1975) Pages: 64-66
Date Published
1975
Length
3 pages
Annotation
AFTER REVIEWING THE HISTORY OF THE JUVENILE COURT AND THE EFFECT OF MAJOR U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISIONS ON THE JUVENILE COURT, THE AUTHOR DISCUSSES CURRENT PROBLEMS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS IN THE JUVENILE COURT OPERATIONS.
Abstract
THE TRADITIONAL ROLE OF THE JUVENILE COURT WAS ONE OF PROTECTIVE REHABILITATION; JUVENILES WERE NOT TREATED AS CRIMINALS IN THE CRIMINAL COURT, BUT WERE INSTEAD TREATED INFORMALLY THROUGH NON-CRIMINAL, NON-ADVERSARY PROCEEDINGS, HOWEVER, THREE MAJOR SUPREME COURT DECISIONS (IN RE GAULT, IN RE WINSHIP, AND MCKEIVER V. PENNSYLVANIA) BEGAN THE PROCESS OF SELECTIVE INCORPORATION OF DUE PROCESS GUARANTEES NORMALLY ASSOCIATED ONLY WITH ADULT COURTS INTO JUVENILE PROCEEDINGS. THE AUTHOR REVIEWS EACH OF THE DUE PROCESS GUARANTEES NOW ACCORDED TO JUVENILES, AND POINTS OUT IN TURN THE PROBLEMS AND ISSUES RAISED BY THE GUARANTEES. ALSO DISCUSSED ARE THE FAILURE OF THE JUVENILE COURT IN ITS REHABILITATIVE IDEAL AND THE ROLE OF THE LAWYER IN JUVENILE COURT PROCEEDINGS. THE AUTHOR ARGUES THAT THE JUVENILE COURT MUST CONCERN ITSELF WITH THE CAUSES AND PREVENTION OF JUVENILE DELINQUENCY AS WELL AS WITH DUE PROCESS; TO DO THIS, HE STATES THAT THE ENTIRE FAMILY SITUATION SHOULD BE BROUGHT WITHIN THE AMBIT OF THE JUVENILE COURT AND ITS SERVICES, IN A FAMILY OR DOMESTIC COURT CONCEPT. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)