The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
$.20 (XI U. S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR JAMES J. DAVIS. Secretary CHILDREN’S BUREAU GRACE ABBOTT, Chief JUVENILE-COURT STANDARDS REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE APPOINTED BY THE CHILDREN’S BUREAU. AUGUST, 1921, TO FORMULATE JUVENILE-COURT STANDARDS ADOPTED BY A CONFERENCE HELD UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE CHILDREN’S BUREAU AND THE NATIONAL PROBATION ASSOCIATION WASHINGTON, D. C., M AY 18. 1923 WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1923 Sbv-.q u. ‘S ? £ % https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis bt*» £ C CONTENTS. Page. Foreword________________ l_____________ .___________________________ _____________ I. The court________________________________________________________________ A. Court given jurisdiction__________________________________________ B. Nature of proceeding_____ ____________________ C. Extent of jurisdiction_______________________________ •______________ D. The judge__________________________________________________________ . II. Process before hearing_______________________________________________ A. Relation between the court and the police department___ ____ B. Reception o f complaints and adjustment of cases______________ III. Detention______________ ___________________________________________ 1______ A. Detention policy___________________________________________________ B. Methods of detention_____________________________________________ IV. Study o f the c a se _______Ü __________________________ _____________________ ; Y. H earin g__________________________________________________________________ A. Children’s cases__________ B. Cases involving adults__________________________________ ;_______ _ C. Use of referee___________________________________________ ___________ V I. Disposition of cases_______ V II. Probation and supervision_____________________________________________ V III. Records___________ 52567°— 23 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis ra v 1_2 1 1 , 4 2 2 -3 2 3 3-4 3 4 4 5_g 5 g g g 7 10 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis FOREWORD. A t the request o f a conference on juvenile-court standards held in Milwaukee on June 21-22,1921, under the auspices o f the Children’s Bureau and the National Probation Association, a committee was appointed by Julia C. Lathrop, then chief o f the Children’s Bureau, to work out standards. The following served as members o f the committee: Judge Charles W. Hoffman, Hamilton County court o f domestic relations, Cincinnati, Ohio, chairman. Judge Kathryn Sellers, juvenile court o f the District of Columbia. Judge Henry S. Hulbert, juvenile division o f the probate court of Wayne County, Detroit, Mich. Judge Frederick P. Cabot, juvenile court, Boston, Mass. Dr. Miriam Van Waters, referee of the juvenile court o f Los Angeles County, Calif. Dr. William Healy, director o f the Judge Baker Foundation, Boston. Dr. V. V. Anderson, associate medical director o f the National Com mittee for Mental Hygiene. Charles L. Chute, secretary o f the National Probation Association. Herbert C. Parsons, secretary o f the Massachusetts Probation Com mission. Bernard Fagan, chief probation officer o f the children’s court of New York City. Joseph L. Moss, chief probation officer o f the juvenile court, Cook County, Chicago, 111. Henry W. Thurston, o f the New York School for Social Work, New York City. Ralph S. Barrow, State superintendent o f the Alabama Children’s A id Society. Secretary: Emma O. Lundberg, Children’s Bureau, United States Department o f Labor. This committee has been at work for two years. It has met a number o f times,, and in January, 1923, held a two-day session in Washington, at which a tentative draft o f standards was prepared. This draft was mimeographed and sent by the Children’s Bureau to more than 200 persons, including judges, probation officers, officers o f child-caring agencies, and others interested in juvenile-court work. A considerable proportion of those to whom the draft was sent made https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis VI FOREWORD. specific suggestions, which were carefully considered at meetings o f the committee in May of 1923. The members of the committee were not agreed on all points, but each statement represents the prevailing opinion as expressed in the committee meetings and in suggestions received. The committee presented a preliminary report to a second con ference held in Providence in June, 1922, and a final report to a third conference held in Washington on May 18, 1923, both under the auspices o f the National Probation Association and the Children’s Bureau. After a free discussion in this conference, and the adop tion o f certain amendments, the report was approved in the form in which it is here given. The fundamental principles underlying the standards might be summarized as follows! (1) That the court dealing with children should be clothed with broad jurisdiction, embracing all classes of cases in which a child is in need of the protection o f the State, whether the legal action is in the name o f the child or of an adult who fails in his obligations toward the child; (2) that the court should have a scientific understanding o f each child; (3) that treat ment should be adapted to individual needs; and (4) that there should be a presumption in favor o f keeping the child in his own home and his own community, except when adequate investigation shows this not to be in the best interest o f the child. In drafting laws based on these recommendations consideration must o f course, be given to provisions o f State constitutions, ex isting court systems, and related laws which it may be necessary to modify if the standards are to be fully realized. G race A https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis bbo tt. COMMITTEE REPORT ON JUVENILE-COURT STANDARDS. I. THE COURT. A . C O U R T G IV E N J U R IS D IC T IO N . 1. There should be available to every community a court equipped to deal with children’s cases. 2. The laws o f each State and local conditions determine whether the juvenile court should be an independent court or a branch o f a court, and in what court system it should be placed. In order that the court may serve rural as well as urban population, it is usually desirable that the county should be the unit o f jurisdiction. 3. The juvenile court should be a court o f superior jurisdiction and a court o f record. The disposition o f a child in the juvenile court, or any evidence given in a juvenile court proceeding, should not be lawful evidence against the child in any civil, criminal, or other cause or proceeding in any other court. B . N A T U R E O F P R O C E E D IN G . In children’s cases the proceeding should be chancery or equity, and not criminal, in nature. The juvenile court should, however, be vested with criminal jurisdiction in adult cases such as contributing to delinquency and dependency o f children. C* E X T E N T O F J U R IS D IC T IO N . 1. The juvenile court should be vested with exclusive jurisdiction over the following classes of cases: (a) Children alleged to have violated laws or ordinances of the State or o f any subdivision thereof, or children whose con duct or associations are alleged to have rendered them in need o f the care and protection o f the State. The juvenile court should not have the power to waive jurisdiction and certify cases for trial in another court. (&) Children whose custody is to be determined by reason o f their being in need of protection and supervision, homeless, abandoned, destitute, without proper parental care or guardian ship, neglected or cruelly treated, or in surroundings dangerous to morals, health, or general welfare. (e) Adoption cases. (d) Children in need of protection or custodial care by reason o f mental defect or disorder. 1 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 2 JUVENILE-COURT STANDARDS. (e) Violations o f school-attendance laws beyond the provi sions for control by school administration. ( / ) Contributing to delinquency or dependency. A finding of delinquency or dependency of the child should not be necessary to adjudication. Action should not be limited to parents or guardians in cases of delinquency. (g) Nonsupport or desertion o f minor children. ( h) The determination of paternity and the support of chil dren born out o f wedlock. 2. The age limit under which the court may obtain jurisdiction in children’s cases should be not lower than 18 years. Marriage of the child should not terminate jurisdiction. Jurisdiction once obtained should continue until 21 years o f age unless the case is sooner dis missed or passes out o f the jurisdiction o f the court. D . T H E JUDGE. 1. The judge should be chosen because o f his special qualifications for juvenile-court work. He should have legal training, acquaint ance with social problems, and understanding of child psychology. 2. The tenure of office should be sufficiently long to warrant special preparatory studies and the development o f special interest in juve nile work, preferably not less than six years. 3. The judge should be able to devote such time to juvenile work as is necessary to keep detention at a minimum, to hear each case care fully and thoroughly, and to give general direction to the work o f the court. II. PROCESS BEFORE HEARING. A . R E L A T IO N B E T W E E N T H E C O U R T A N D T H E P O L IC E D E P A R T M ENT. 1. The jurisdiction o f the court should begin as soon as petition is filed or as soon as a child is taken into custody or placed in charge of an officer o f the court; Whenever a child is taken into custody the parents or the person with whom the child resides should be noti fied at once by the police officer or other person holding such custody. The responsibility for such notice should rest with the court. 2. A child taken into custody should immediately be placed in the care of an officer of the juvenile court, and only if necessary taken to a place o f detention for juveniles. 3. The police and peace officers should be required to work in close cooperation with the juvenile court in the handling o f juvenile cases, and should be given a clear understanding o f the difference between the procedure in children’s cases and that in cases of adult offenders. 4. The police should not attempt to handle unofficially cases o f juvenile delinquency after the child has been taken into custody. Police authorities should not be empowered to place children on unofficial probation without referring them to the court. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis JUVENILE-COURT STANDARDS. 3 5. The police should not be authorized nor should they, have the power to hold children in a station house. When the chijd is taken to a place o f detention for juveniles, the authority o f the police should cease except for giving information as to the cause o f the child s arrest and filing a formal petition or complaint. 6« From the moment a child is taken into custody he should be sheltered to the greatest 'possible extent from public observation and from conditions that tend to mark him as an offender. Transporta tion in a police van, escort by a police officer in uniform, and any visible physical restraint are objectionable and should be avoided. Transportation o f girls to a place o f detention- or elsewhere should be by women officers. 7. With rare exceptions no collateral, bail, or appearance bond should be required in children’s cases. B . R E C E P T IO N O F C O M P L A IN T S A N D A D J U S T M E N T O F C A S E S . 1. The judge, or a probation officer designated by him, should ex amine all complaints and after adequate investigation determine whether a petition should be filed or other formal action should be taken. It should be the duty o f the court to bring about adjust ment o f all cases without such formal action whenever feasible. 2. Supervision should be exercised in cases handled informally when it is desirable thus to safeguard the child or keep in touch with developments. 3. The judge should exercise general supervision over all the work o f the court, even though he is not able to give individual attention to all cases. III. DETENTION. A . D E T E N T IO N P O L IC Y . 1. The number o f children detained and the length o f detention should be kept at a minimum, and so far as possible those who must be detained should be provided for in private boarding homes. De tention should be limited to children for whom it is absolutely necessary, such as: (a) Children whose home conditions make immediate re moval necessary. (5) Children who are beyond the control o f their parents or guardians, runaways, and those whose parents can not be relied upon to produce them in court. (o) Children who have committed offenses so serious that their release pending the disposition o f their cases would endanger public safety. (d) Children who must be held as witnesses. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 4 JUVENILE-COURT STANDARDS. (e) Children whose detention is necessary for purposes o f observation and study and treatment by qualified ex perts. 2. Children should not be detained in jails or police stations. 3. No child should be detained without an order from the court for a longer time than is necessary to obtain such court order, unless the parents consent to detention or unless the parents can not be reached at once and need for detention is indicated, and in these cases de cision as to detention should rest with the judge or some one desig nated by him, usually the chief probation officer. 4. Constant effort is required to keep the period o f detention in each case as short as possible. This may be accomplished through frequent hearings, prompt investigation, sufficient court staff to ex pedite the movement o f cases, and adequate facilities for institu tional care. B . M E T H O D S O F D E T E N T IO N . 1. For temporary detention either a public detention home or boarding homes under the supervision o f the court should be pro vided, available to the entire area over which the court has juris diction. 2. The essential features of a detention home are the following : (a) The juvenile court, if not actually operating the detention home, should control its policies and the admission and release o f children. (&) Provision should be made within the home for segrega tion o f sexes and types o f children, and for adequate isolation facilities and medical care. (c) Adequate facilities should be provided for the study o f the child’s physical and mental health, but except in rare instances, the detention home should not be used primarily for this purpose. (d) There should be specialized school work for the children detained, and recreational facilities should be provided. The daily program o f activities should be full and varied in order that constructive interests may supplant morbid tendencies and undesirable companionships. Opportunity should be given for the exercise o f the child’s religious duties. (e) Effective supervision should be maintained at all times. ( / ) The detention home should not be used as a disciplinary institution. IV. STUDY OF THE CASE. 1. Social investigation should be made in every case, and should be set in motion at the moment o f the court’s earliest knowledge o f the case. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis JUVENILE-COURT STANDARDS. 5 2. The minimum essentials o f adequate study o f a case o f delin quency are: Study o f the child himself, including a physical and a mental examination and study o f his behavior, developmental his tory, school career, and religious background; study o f his environ ment, including his family and home conditions; an estimate o f the essential causal factors responsible for his behavior; and in the light o f this estimate, recommendations for treatment. 3. Psychiatric and psychological study o f the child should be made at least in all cases in which the social investigation raises a question o f special need for study and should be made before decision concern ing treatment, but only by a clinic or examiner properly qualified for such work. 4. The clinic for study o f the child should be a separate branch o f the court or a separate organization fully available. The personnel required includes a physician trained in psychiatry, a psychologist, and one or more social investigators. 5. The physical examination should be thorough, and all the com munity facilities for diagnosis and treatment should be utilized. Physical examinations o f girls should be by women. 6. For rural communities facilities for study o f the child may be provided through the development of centers in urban communities or through traveling clinics under the auspices o f State boards or commissions or institutions. V. HEARING. A . C H IL D R E N ’S C A S E S . 1. The hearing should be held as soon as proper notice to parents or custodians can be given, and within 48 hours. 2. There should be no publicity in a juvenile-court case. The hearing should be private, with no one present other than those directly concerned in the case. Witnesses should not be permitted in the court room except when testifying. Adequate provision should be made for children awaiting hearing, and they should be protected from publicity and given necessary supervision. 3. One or both parents or the legal guardian o f the child should be required to be present. 4. The hearing should be conducted with as little formality as possible, and the formal adherence to the practice and rules o f pro cedure that characterizes the criminal court should be avoided. 5. The purpose o f the juvenile court is to prevent the child’s being tried and treated as a criminal; therefore, all means should be taken to prevent the child and his parents from forming the conception that the child is being tried for a crime. In the ascertainment o f facts the court Should always bear in mind the rules o f evidence. This https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 6 JUVE FILE-COURT STANDARDS. does not imply, however, that in the application of these rules the court must conduct a formal hearing. 6. In all cases there should be a written report of the proceeding, not official in the. sense that affidavits and petitions are official but unofficial and private, to be used by the court for the purpose of record and interpretation. 7. In every case the court should explain to the child and parents the nature o f the proceeding and the disposition made o f the case. 8. Under no circumstances should jury trials be permitted in chil dren’s cases. They are inconsistent with both the law and the theory upon which children’s codes are founded. 9. Children should not be present at the hearing of neglect or de pendency cases except for the time required for identification, when identification is necessary. B . C A S E S IN V O L V IN G A D U L T S . In cases involving adults, such as cases in which adults are charged with contributing to the delinquency or dependency o f children, the usual court procedure in criminal cases is necessary, as the defendant is entitled to all the safeguards that the law and Constitution throw around him. In the trial o f these cases children who are involved should be protected to the extent that they should not appear in the court room except for the purpose of testifying, and while in the court room should be accompanied by a probation officer. C. U S E O F R E F E R E E . 1. It is desirable that girls’ cases should be heard by a properly qualified woman referee. 2. Where the area of jurisdiction is so large that the judge can not attend promptly to cases in all sections, the court should utilize prop erly qualified referees. 3. In all cases heard by referees the judge should pass on findings and recommendations and review all dispositions. The judge should have general oversight o f policies and each part o f the district should be given a fair proportion o f his time. VI. DISPOSITION OF CASES. 1. Sufficient resources of various types should be available for the supervision of children in their own homes, and for the care in family homes or in institutions o f those who can not remain with their own families, so that in disposing of each case the court may fit the treatment to the needs of the child. 2. Institutional care should be utilized only when careful study that includes a knowledge of the needs and possibilities of the indi vidual clearly indicates the necessity for it, or when repeated at tempts to adjust the child to home life in the community have failed. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis JUVENILE-COURT STANDARDS. 7 3. Fines should never be imposed in children’s cases. Restitution or reparation should be required only in cases where they seem to have disciplinary value or to instill respect for property rights. 4. A complete copy ©f the social investigation and reports o f physical and mental examinations, and a summary o f the work done by the court on the case, should accompany the order o f commitment to an agency or institution. These records should be unofficial and private. 5. Children placed under the care of private agencies or institu tions should remain under the jurisdiction o f the court, and there should be close cooperation between the court and the agency or institution. The court should have the power to require reports con cerning the progress o f the child and to visit agencies and institutions to which children are committed. A ll private agencies and institu tions receiving children from the court should be subject to State supervision. 6. Administrative work such as placing dependent or neglected children in family homes should not be undertaken by the court itself, unless suitable agencies are not or can not be made available for this type of service. 7. The court should be authorized to order the parents o f children committed to the care o f agencies or institutions to contribute to the support o f the children. 8. When its jurisdiction does not include offenses by adults against children, it should be the responsibility o f the juvenile court to see that proceedings are initiated in other courts whenever such action is advisable. There should be close cooperation in these cases be tween the juvenile court, the prosecuting authorities^ and the crimi nar court, and the juvenile court should use all possible means o f protecting child witnesses in other courts. VII. PROBATION AND SUPERVISION. 1. The probation staff should be appointed by the judge from an eligible list secured by competitive examination, subject to approval by a supervising board or commission. 2. The minimum qualifications o f probation officers should be as follow s: (a) Education: Preferably graduation from college or its equivalent, or from a school o f social work. (5) Experience: A t least one year in case work under super vision. (<?) Good personality and character j tact, resourcefulness, and sympathy. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 8 JUVENILE-COURT STANDARDS. 3. The compensation o f probation officers should be such that the best types o f trained service can be secured. The salaries should be comparable with those paid to workers in other fields o f social service. Increases should be based on records o f service and effi ciency. 4. Not more than 50 cases should be under the supervision of one probation officer at any one time. Officers handling girls’ cases should be assigned a smaller number. 5. I f volunteer service is used, the persons performing such serv ice, or the executive o f the organization o f volunteers, should be directly responsible to the court. 6. Girls’ cases should always be assigned to women officers; cases o f boys under 12 years may be assigned to women officers, but all cases o f boys 12 years o f age and over should be assigned to men. 7. The district system is frequently an economical method o f assignment, but fitness o f particular officers for special kinds o f work must also be taken into account. 8. A definite plan for constructive work, even though it be tenta tive, should be made and recorded in each case and should be checked up at least monthly in conference with, the chief probation officer or other supervisor. 9. A general minimum probation period o f from six months to one year is desirable, but exceptions should be allowed on recom mendation o f the supervisor or chief probation officer. The length o f probation in each case should be determined by study of the case, needs disclosed, and progress made. 10. Reporting by a child to a probation officer at regular intervals should be required only if it seems clearly to be for the good o f the probationer, and should never be made a substitute for more con structive methods o f case work. When rightly safeguarded, report ing gives opportunity for acquaintance with the child, and free conversation regarding his interests and surroundings, and is a means o f training in habits o f regularity and punctuality. 11. Regular reporting should usually be limited to delinquent boys over 12 years o f age, and they should report at a suitable place away from court and approved by the judge or chief probation officer. Mingling o f boys reporting should be avoided through using different days in the week and fixing a certain time for each child to report. 12. Except in rare cases, home visits at least once every two weeks are essential to effective supervison, knowledge of the assets and liabilities o f the family, and correction of unfavorable conditions. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis JUVENILE-COURT STANDARDS. 9 13. In probation work due consideration should be given to language, racial psychology, and religion. 14. Reconstructive work with the family should be undertaken whenever necessary, either by the probation officer himself or in cooperation with other social agencies. Whenever other agencies can meet particular needs their services should be enlisted. In cases in which two or more agencies are concerned with the same family frequent conferences are necessary for good team work. 15. Special detailed school reports for each child on probation are advisable. The educational authorities should be requested to cooperate through weekly reports, frequent conferences, and other means; but care should be taken to preserve harmony, faith, and good will between the teacher and pupil, the probationer and proba tion officer. 16. The probation officer should assist and guide children o f working age in the choice o f a vocation. 17. Whether or not an employer should be informed with refer ence to the child’s delinquency depends on the type o f employer. Tact and judgment should be used in protecting the interests of both the employer and the child. 18. Planning for the “ spare time ” or recreation o f probationers is a very important part o f a probation officer’s functions. 19. In rural communities it is often practicable and desirable to combine probation work with other types o f social service. The form of combination and the division o f work will vary according to local conditions and needs. The probation officer, however, should not hold other office in relation to the court, nor an office identified with the prosecution o f cases, such as clerk o f the court, police officer, or sheriff. Reporting o f probationers is usually not practicable, and it may be necessary to use volunteer aid to a larger extent than in urban communities. Volunteer workers should be carefully selected and should be under the supervision o f a paid officer. Emphasis should be placed on the strict accountability to the court o f all officers, paid and unpaid, doing probation work. The officers should be provided with adequate means o f trans portation. 20. Supervision o f the work o f probation officers should be exer cised by a State commission or board, either specially created or definitely charged with this duty, or by a State supervisory officer. The supervision should be advisory both to the probation officers and the courts as to all features o f the service, but with power to require the keeping o f prescribed records and to compel periodical reports to the supervisory board or officer. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 10 JUVENILE-COURT STANDARDS, V III. RECORDS 1. Every juvenile court should have a record system which pro vides for— (a) The filing o f the necessary legal records. (&) The filing o f social records covering the investigation o f the case, the study o f the child, &nd the work done by the officers o f the court and the probation staff. These social records should be deemed privileged and con fidential records of the court, and should be at all times safeguarded from indiscriminate public inspection. 2. The filing system should be such as to permit ready identifica tion o f cases. 3. The records o f the social investigation and the study of the child should include all the facts necessary to a constructive plan o f treatment. 4. The records of supervision should show the constructive case work planned, attempted, and accomplished, and should give a chronological history o f the supervisory work. 5. The court should compile annually statistical information which will show the problems deafit with and the results. 6. In order that it may be possible to compile information covering a period o f years and to compare the work o f one court with that o f others it is essential that uniform terminology and methods o f statistical tabulation and presentation of fundamental items be agreed upon. By this means onkO^atT significant social data con cerning the prevention and ^kpnenjbi© ! juvenile delinquency and neglect be obtained. m yv https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis V
@FedFRASER