NCJ Number
74691
Editor(s)
L H Pelton
Date Published
1981
Length
328 pages
Annotation
Following a historical overview of the juvenile court's involvement with abused and neglected children and child welfare agencies, this article discusses current trends in abuse and neglect proceedings, such as due process and minors' rights.
Abstract
When the juvenile court was organized at the turn of the century, it assumed authority to commit dependent and neglected children to the care of institutions and agencies for placement. Over the years, and especially after the passage of the 1935 Social Security Act, child welfare agencies gained control over investigations and placements for neglected children, with the courts serving only as a last-stage formality in the removal process. Because of Federal concern over arbitrary criteria used by States to distribute welfare funds, Congress has given courts authority to influence agency decisions to remove children from their homes. This intent is evident in the Aid for Dependent Children Foster Care Program and in the 1973 Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act which has had a major impact on revising State abuse and neglect laws. In response to the growing problem of children stranded in foster care placements, review systems have also been implemented in some areas to periodically assess agencies' foster home placements. The law has recently shown an increasing interest in redefining and reasserting its role as decisionmaker in family policy matters. An important aspect of this trend has been the introduction of more formalized procedures such as the rights of children and parents to legal counsel, reporting laws concerning observed abuse or neglect, and due process protections. A more controversial reform proposed for neglect and abuse hearings has been the imposition of standards governing the disposition of a child and limiting the judge's discretion. Standards have been difficult to implement because judges and attorneys tend to prefer removing the child from the home for safety reasons. Although the due process regulations have brought more marginal cases to court, they have also delayed decisionmaking, often for months. Because judges and lawyers rely increasingly on expert psychiatric opinions, a determination of abuse and neglect may be influenced by a particular psychiatrist's theoretical orientation rather than be based on observable facts. The courts should instead press for more supportive services, particularly for families suffering hardships imposed by poverty. Footnotes and 18 references are provided.