Petitioned Status Offense Cases in Juvenile Courts, 2004

Author(s):  
Anne L. Stahl
1976 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 438-455 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles W. Thomas

Numerous authorities have argued convincingly that what have been termed "status offenses" should be removed from the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. Perhaps the most cogent rationale that has been advanced in this regard flows directly from the statutory and procedural inequity that is clearly demonstrated by this vaguely defined set of offenses. Unfortunately, many advocates of reform have gone on to argue that a substantial body of empirical research has shown that (1) status offenders are not a significant threat to society because they have not been and generally will not become involved in more serious offenses and (2) any movement toward more serious involvement stems more from the stig matizing consequences of formal legal processing than from any other source. Such assertions are based on insufficient or nonexistent empirical evidence. Indeed, this analysis, based on an examination of the offense histories of a large sample of juveniles who appeared before one of two urban juvenile courts on one or more occasions during a five-year period, shows that many juveniles charged with status offenses have previously been charged with other types of offenses, that juveniles whose first court appearance involved a status offense are more likely to recidivate than those first charged with a misdemeanor or a felony, and that there is little or no evidence to support the contention that legal processing is associated with subsequent involvement in more serious delinquency. '


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 211
Author(s):  
Durrell M. Washington ◽  
Toyan Harper ◽  
Alizé B. Hill ◽  
Lester J. Kern

The first juvenile court was created in 1899 with the help of social workers who conceptualized their actions as progressive. Youth were deemed inculpable for certain actions since, cognitively, their brains were not as developed as those of adults. Thus, separate measures were created to rehabilitate youth who exhibited delinquent and deviant behavior. Over one hundred years later, we have a system that disproportionately arrests, confines, and displaces Black youth. This paper critiques social work’s role in helping develop the first juvenile courts, while highlighting the failures of the current juvenile legal system. We then use P.I.C. abolition as a theoretical framework to offer guidance on how social work can once again assist in the transformation of the juvenile legal system as a means toward achieving true justice.


1970 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 255-263
Author(s):  
Jeffrey E. Glen

In this paper, the nature and procedures of the juvenile court adjudication process, as distinguished from the disposition proc ess, are briefly discussed and related to the need for separate adjudicatory and dispositional hearings in the juvenile court. The problem of permitting certain dispositional functions to occur before the adjudication is then considered, as well as the question of whether the dispositional hearing, or dispositional phase of the hearing, must always take place at a later date than the adjudicatory hearing or phase. For the purposes of this paper, "bifurcation" refers to the separation of the adjudicatory hearing (analogous to the criminal trial) from the dispositional hearing (analogous to the criminal sentencing hearing) by a sub stantial period of time, the hearings being scheduled and held on different days. The discussion is based upon positions of the National Council on Crime and Delinquency, as articulated in its Standard Juvenile Court Act (sixth edition, 1959) and the Council of Judges' Model Rules for Juvenile Courts (1969).


1983 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 519-533
Author(s):  
M. A. BORTNER
Keyword(s):  

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1953 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 589-592
Author(s):  
WILL C. TURNBLADH

INCREASINGLY, in recent years, pediatricians have been called on to work with the problem of juvenile delinquency. Published statistics on crimes and antisocial activities by children have sometimes been frightening, and loose remarks are often made about drastic remedies being needed to "curb" modern youth. In such a situation, parents naturally turn to their physicians for advice and counsel. Within the community pattern of the attack on juvenile delinquency, the "juvenile court" has a central role. If the ignorance of this editor is any index, pediatricians, in general, know little of the structure, responsibilities, jurisdiction, community relationships, and standards of juvenile courts. It is, for example, both revealing and reassuring to learn that ". . . the court stands in the position of a `protecting parent' rather than a prosecutor. . . ." The National Probation and Parole Association, a nonprofit citizen and professional organization with professional and technical staff, seeks to extend and improve probation and parole services for both children and adults throughout the country, to promote juvenile and domestic relations courts and to develop specialized facilities and programs for the detention of children. At the request of the editor, Mr. Will C. Turnbladh, Executive Director of the Association, has prepared the following interesting and informative article on the background and some of the problems of juvenile courts.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
David Jackson Inglis

Every year thousands of "Delinquent" children appear before the Juvenile Courts of the world. What then is a delinquent child? The definition of a delinquent child varies in different schools of thought. The aim of this thesis is to take each of these schools of thought, critically examine them, and then try to reach some decree of synthesis in the etimological battlefield of Juvenile delinquency.


Author(s):  
Kellie Rhodes ◽  
Aisland Rhodes ◽  
Wayne Bear ◽  
Larry Brendtro

Approximately 1.7 million delinquency cases are disposed in juvenile courts annually (Puzzanchera, Adams, & Sickmund, 2011). Of these youth, tens of thousands experience confinement in the US (Sawyer, 2019), while hundreds of thousands experience probation or are sentenced to community based programs (Harp, Muhlhausen, & Hockenberry, 2019). These youth are placed in the care of programs overseen by directors and clinicians. A survey of facility directors and clinicians from member agencies of the National Partnership for Juvenile Services (NPJS) Behavioral Health Clinical Services (BHCS) committee identified three primary concerns practitioners face in caring for these youth; 1) low resources to recruit and retain quality staff, 2) training that is often not a match for, and does not equip staff to effectively manage the complex needs of acute youth, and 3) the perspective of direct care as an unskilled entry-level position with limited impact on youth’s rehabilitation. This article seeks to address these issues and seeks to highlight potential best practices to re-solve for those obstacles within juvenile services.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document