Court Services - The Right Arm of the Juvenile Court (From Major Issues in Juvenile Justice Information and Training - Readings in Public Policy, P 423-438, 1981, John C Hall et al, ed. - See NCJ-77318)

• NCJ Number: 77330
• Author(s): L G Arthur
• Date Published: 1981
• Length: 16 pages
• Sale Source: Academy for Contemporary Problems
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

The past president of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges advocates retention of the traditional position of the judiciary as broker and arbiter of services in the best interests of the child.

Abstract

The need for personal, judicial superintendency of programs and services is also described. Under the American system of separation of powers, the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government have each developed systems and hierarchy designed to accommodate their missions. The rationale for court control of the persons serving the court is as elemental as the concept of separation of powers. Neither determinate sentences nor bureaucratic sentencing by the executive branch can both provide discretion to accommodate varying circumstances and protect the rights of the parties involved. Judicial sentencing is the best alternative because only a court can listen objectively to all parties, protect their rights, individualize dispositions, and be held accountable for its decisions. To make dispositional orders which will best answer the needs of both the child and the public, the court must have reliable information. This information must be provided in the form which the court can most efficiently use by those who are accountable to the court and who understand and appreciate the constitutional implications of intervening in another person's liberty. In addition, the court must be accurately and frequently advised on predispositional matters in order to make dispositional changes when they become needed. The court must have its own staff to perform this function. Moreover, the court needs its own staff to work out certain behavioral problems since others not under the court's administrative control have their own priorities. Finally, the court must have its own staff to supervise the disposition, if the dispositional intention of the court is to be followed with more consistency, fewer problems, and better regard for the rights of the child and the public. Footnotes are provided. (Author abstract modified)