Chapter 2

THE HISTORY OF JUVENILE JUSTICE

Juvenile Justice: An Introduction, 7th ed.

Chapter 2

What You Need to Know• Throughout most of history, youthful offenders were

handled under the same laws and system as adults.• The early institutions for handling juveniles (houses

of refuge and reformatories) emerged in the 1800s as an outgrowth of concern over poverty and the need to train youths to be productive members of society.

• The first recognized juvenile court was in Cook County, Illinois, in 1899 with a focus on helping youths and not punishment.

• Parens patriae became the philosophical basis for the new juvenile court with a focus on handling youths as parents would handle their children.

Chapter 2

What You Need to Know (Cont’d)

• The early court cases of Ex parte Crouse and Commonwealth v. Fisher affirmed the right of the state to intervene in a child’s life even if the parents objected.

• Platt and others argue that the juvenile court was not developed solely out of the benevolent intentions of those involved, rather it was developed as a tool of capitalism to ensure a complacent work force.

• Today, juvenile courts operate under a number of different rationales besides parens patriae, including punishment, deterrence, child welfare, restorative justice, and rehabilitation.

Chapter 2

Property and Person

• Throughout most of history, there was no such status as “child.”

• The very young, from birth to age five or six, held much the same status as any other property.

• Once the individual reached the age of five or six, he or she became a full-fledged member of society.

Chapter 2

Chapter 2

Indifference Toward Children

• The life expectancy of the average person was short.• Infant mortality rate exceeded 50 percent.• Indifference reduced or eliminated the pain and

sorrow that would accompany the loss of the infant.• The inability of many families to provide for the

young.• Each child represented an increased burden to the

already overburdened family.

Chapter 2

Practices with Infants

• Infanticide– the killing of young children– common before 4th century (appears into 14th)– strong economic reasons– dowry practice - provision of goods by the female’s family

to the groom

• Abandonment– similar to reasons for infanticide– all classes in society

Chapter 2

Practices with Infants

• Wet-Nursing– Surrogate mother paid to care for a child. – Wealthy families would hire other women to raise their

children.– Poor women would kill their offspring in order to save their

mother’s milk for the “paying” youths.

Chapter 2

Practices with Infants

• Involuntary Servitude/Apprenticeships– Nothing more than the sale of youths by the family.– Alleviated the burden of having to feed and clothe the

person– Gained something of “greater” value in return—money, a

farm animal, food, or some other necessity of life– view that individuals who survived the years of infancy

were simply “little adults”

Chapter 2

Legal Status of Young Adults

• Subject to the same rules and regulations as adults.• No separate system for dealing with youthful

offenders.• The law made no distinction based on the age of the

offender.• Youths could be (and were) sentenced to death.• Nullification, or refusal to enforce the law against

children, often took place.

Chapter 2

Emergence of Childhood• Concept of childhood began to emerge in the

sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.• Medical advancements brought about a lengthening

of the life expectancy of youths.• Clergy and scholars began to view the young as

different from adults and in need of protection, assistance, and guidance in order to grow up uncorrupted.

• Young viewed as a source of attack on the immoral and sinful aspects of society.

• Childhood came to be seen as a period of time during which the young could receive an education and moral training.

Chapter 2

Rise of Juvenile Institutions• Grew out of the establishment of ways to handle poor

people in the cities.• Poor were seen both as a threat to society and in

need of help.• Bridewell Institution established in 1555 in London to

handle youthful beggars.• Houses of Refuge

– First house in New York City in 1825.– Rationale and setup closely followed the concern for the

poor and the need for training.– Central aspects were indeterminate sentences, education,

skills training, hard work, religious training, parental discipline, and apprenticeships.

Chapter 2

Rise of Juvenile Institutions

• Problems with Houses of Refuge– Housed juveniles with adults.– Housed poor with offenders.– Military behavior was the norm- enforced silence, marching,

uniforms, and swift and habitual corporal punishment. – Lack of education.– Overcrowding.– Basically a prison.

• Lyman School for Boys– Established in 1848 in Massachusetts.– Eliminated the housing of adult and juvenile offenders in the same

facility.

Chapter 2

Rise of Juvenile Institutions• Reformatory Movement

– Carried over the goals of Houses of Refuge– “Cottage” set-up

• intended to closely parallel a family• surrogate parents would oversee the training and education of a

small number of problem youths• discipline would be intermixed with the care and concern typical

of family life• emphasized work on the farm

– Faced similar problems of overcrowding, lack of education and training, and harsh discipline as Houses of Refuge

• Lancaster State Industrial School for Girls– Similar cottage set-up and problems as those for boys

Chapter 2

Rise of Juvenile Institutions

• Probation Developed– John Augustus in 1841 credited with starting probation in

Boston.– 1869 - Massachusetts dictated that the State Board of

Charities would participate in, and take charge of, court cases involving youthful offenders.

– Probation officers would assist in the gathering of information on the youths, suggest alternative means of intervention, and oversee the placement of juveniles in reformatories and apprenticeships.

Chapter 2

Establishment of the Juvenile Court

• The first recognized individual juvenile court was established in Cook County, Illinois, in 1899.

• The legislation that established the Illinois court reflected the general belief in the ability to alter youthful behavior.– Court was to operate in a highly informal manner without any of the

trappings of the adult court.– Lawyers and other adversarial features of the adult system (such as

rules of evidence and testimony under oath) were discouraged.– Judge was to take a paternal stance and provide whatever help and

assistance was needed.– Goal of providing assistance to both the youth and the family.– All juveniles under the age of 16 could be handled by the new court.

Chapter 2

Establishment of the Juvenile Court• Gradual widening of the juvenile court’s mandate.

– In 1903 Illinois added status offenses to the court’s jurisdiction.

• Development of new institutions for handling youths who needed to be removed from their families.– Illinois State School at St. Charles, Illinois, funded in 1901

and opened in 1905.– Followed the family/cottage model.

• Institution of court-affiliated guidance clinics.– First established in Chicago by William Healy in 1909.– Relied on the new psychological and sociological

explanations emerging during this time.– 232 clinics were established by 1931.

• By 1920 all but three states had juvenile courts.

Chapter 2

Parens Patriae

• Legal philosophy adopted by the juvenile court.• Loosely translated as the state as parent.• Based on the actions of the English Chancery Court.

– Concerned with property matters in feudal England– Oversaw the financial affairs of juveniles whose parents

had died– Acted as a guardian until such time that the youth could

assume responsibility

• Parens patriae was used prior to establishment of court to justify intervention with youths.

Chapter 2

Parens Patriae

• Ex parte Crouse, 1838– Incarcerated upon her mother’s request but against her

father’s wishes– Father argued that it was illegal to incarcerate a child

without the benefit of a jury trial– Pennsylvania Supreme Court rejected the father’s

argument and denied that the Bill of Rights applied to youths

• People v. Turner, 1870– Disagreed with Crouse decision– Affirmed the rights of the parent to care for the child– Intervention to be reserved for instances in which the

youth had violated a criminal law and after the application of due process

Chapter 2

Crouse excerpt:– May not the natural parents, when unequal to the task of

education, or unworthy of it, be superseded by the parens patriae, or common guardian of the community? It is to be remembered that the public has a paramount interest in the virtue and knowledge of its members, and that of strict right the business of education belongs to it. That parents are ordinarily entrusted with it, is because it can seldom be put in better hands; but where they are incompetent or corrupt, what is there to prevent the public from withdrawing their faculties, held as they obviously are, at its sufferance? The right of parental control is a natural, but not an inalienable one. It is not excepted by the declaration of rights out of the subject of ordinary legislation (Ex parte Crouse, 1838).

Parens Patriae

Chapter 2

Parens Patriae• Commonwealth v. Fisher 1905

– Child had a right to intervention and not a right to freedom.

– Parents had little, if any, rights in the disposition of the child.

– Juvenile court was viewed as providing help in the most benevolent fashion possible.

– Pennsylvania Supreme Court granted the juvenile system a free hand in dealing with youths.

• Basic constitutionality of the juvenile system went largely unchallenged after the Fisher decision.

• Fisher was largely ignored in favor of parens patriae.

Chapter 2

Fisher excerpt:• The design is not punishment, nor the restraint

imprisonment, any more than is the wholesome restraint which a parent exercises over his child. The severity in either case must necessarily be tempered to meet the necessities of the particular situation. There is no probability, in the proper administration of the law, of the child’s liberty being unduly invaded. Every statute which is designed to give protection, care, and training to children, as a needed substitute for parental authority, and performance of parental duty, is but a recognition of the duty of the state, as the legitimate guardian and protector of children where other guardianship fails. No constitutional right is violated (Commonwealth v. Fisher, 1905).

Parens Patriae

Chapter 2

Problems of the Court• Many of the courts and agencies relied solely on

untrained volunteers.– The number of full-time, paid juvenile court judges,

probation officers, and trained clinicians was small.– Inadequate facilities and resources.

• The expanded jurisdiction of the court based on parens patriae also led to an increase in unofficial dispositions and handling of youths.– Many proceedings took place without the presence of a

judge or the keeping of records.– Many trivial actions, such as making noise, sledding in the

street, playing in the street, riding bicycles on the sidewalk, and throwing paper into the sewers, became the subject of unofficial cases.

Chapter 2

Benevolence or Self-interest?

• Benevolence argument– Institution of the juvenile court has generally been held as

a progressive, humanitarian development.– The establishment of the juvenile court was seen as

benevolent actions of the reformers and society.– Institutions and the court needed to provide the type of

love, affection, and concern found in the family setting.

Chapter 2

Benevolence or Self-interest?

• Self-interest argument– Typically discussed in terms of “child savers.”– The growth of juvenile justice seen as a part of larger social

movements that attempted to solidify the position of corporate capitalism in the United States.

– Intervention through the courts allowed the powerful classes of society to mold a disciplined, complacent labor force.

– Juvenile court was a means of preserving the existing class system in the United States.

– The driving force behind the growth of the juvenile system were middle- and upper-class individuals.

– The establishment of new laws addressed the activity of the lower classes.

Chapter 2

Juvenile Justice from 1920 to the 1960s

• Most of the great movements and changes in juvenile justice were completed by the early 1920s.

• The problems and criticisms directed at the court and its institutions were passed off as the failure to implement the programs properly.

• Society and the legal system were content to leave the juvenile justice system alone to search for effective interventions, provided the system continued to act in the best interests of its youthful clients.

• Various new institutions were established for handling problem youths.

• Psychological explanations and perspectives led to the growth of various training and counseling (group and individual) programs.

Chapter 2

Changes since the 1960s• The period from 1967 to the early 1980s has been

referred to as the Due Process Period.– The federal courts ruled in a number of key cases that

juveniles had to be offered some procedural rights similar to those enjoyed by adults.

• The 1980s returned to an approach that was more punishment-oriented and ushered in what is referred to as the Punitive Period.– The strong reliance on and belief in rehabilitation and

treatment that dominated throughout the twentieth century has given way to more punitive responses.

• Parens patriae remains the key philosophy underlying juvenile courts in the United States.