NCJ Number
73483
Date Published
1980
Length
20 pages
Annotation
This chapter of a book about equal rights for children examines the juvenile court system from the viewpoint of a child and recommends abolition of this system, because it denies the defendants their constitutional rights.
Abstract
The juvenile court system appears to work to the advantage of children because its aim, in contrast to the adult court system, is nonpunitive. However, the juvenile court system fosters a double standard, because under the pretext of being their caretaker, it bars children from exercising the constitutional rights pertaining to the due process of the law. This can be seen in the very definition of delinquency, which is too broad and vague, and therefore subject to personal interpretations of judges. Furthermore, the philosophy of child-saving, which is the basis of the juvenile court system, often justifies imposing middle-class values. Moreover, the idea that the State has the authority of a parent over children (parens patriae) is unrealistic, since no child could view the judge in the court of law as his or her parent. In addition, the nonpunitive theory is a fiction, since detention in a 'youth home' is viewed by the child as punishment. To avoid the double standard, the separate justice system for children should be abolished. Children should be afforded the procedural protection enjoyed by adults, including transcripts (which are not required in juvenile court) and fixed sentences. However, an abolition of the juvenile court system does not mean that children should be imprisoned together with adult offenders, but rather that they would acquire equal rights and be treated justly, instead of being powerless. Background information on the juvenile court system philosophy is included.