Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T19:43:31.588Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Odyssey of the Juvenile Court: Policy Failure and Institutional Persistence in the Therapeutic State

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2008

Andrew J. Polsky
Andrew J. Polsky
Affiliation:
Hunter College, CUNY
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The human services have come to occupy a vital position in the modern welfare state, penetrating nearly all its activities and institutions. Beyond providing a minimum level of support, these services seek to restructure the behavior of their clients so they can better cope with the demands and challenges of modern life. To realize this goal social personnel employ an approach that can most accurately be defined as therapeutic: the situation of the client is viewed as a condition that must be diagnosed; the caseworker establishes a helping relationship; a suitable treatment plan is designed and implemented. Although the middle class voluntarily avails itself of therapeutic services, public intervention by social personnel has a distinctly lower-class bias and an authoritarian character. The middle class purchases therapeutic services from private providers. The state focuses on marginal populations and its subjects usually have no choice about assuming a client status.

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in American Political Development , Volume 3 , Spring 1989 , pp. 157 - 198
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

This article began as a paper presented at the 1986 meeting of the American Political Science Association. I would like to thank Theda Skocpol, Francis Fox Piven, George Curtis, and John Drew for their comments on that paper. Stephen Skowronek and Karen Orren guided me through the revision process, and I was further aided by the suggestions of an anonymous referee who reviewed an earlier draft. I was ably assisted in my research by three Hunter College students, Jenelline Connors, Lionel Francois, and Andrea Lewis. I received a grant from the Professional Staff Congress-City University Faculty Research Award Program to help support the writing of this article.

1. See Fox, Sanford J., “Juvenile Justice Reform: An Historical Perspective,” Stanford Law Review 22 (06 1970): 1187–1239CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rothman, David J., Conscience and Convenience: The Asylum and its Alternatives in Progressive America (Boston: Little, Brown, 1980)Google Scholar; Ryerson, Ellen, The Best-Laid Plans: America's Juvenile Court Experiment (New York: Hill and Wang, 1978)Google Scholar; Platt, Anthony M., The Child Savers: The Invention of Delinquency, 2d ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977)Google Scholar; Schlossman, Steven L., Love and the American Delinquent: The Theory and Practice of “Progressive” Juvenile Justice, 1825–1920 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977)Google Scholar.

2. See especially Foucault, Michel, Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972–1977, edited by Gordon, Colin (New York: Pantheon, 1980)Google Scholar.

3. Donzelot, Jacques, The Policing of Families (New York: Pantheon, 1979), esp. pp. xxv–xxviGoogle Scholar. Donzelot is the one historian who has situated the juvenile court in the larger therapeutic apparatus.

4. See, for example, Skowronek, Stephen, Building a New American State: The Expansion of National Administrative Capacities, 1877–1920 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mollenkopf, John, The Contested City (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983)Google Scholar.

5. See Boyer, Paul D., Urban Masses and Moral Order in America, 1820–1920 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1978)Google Scholar. For a vivid and influential contemporary statement, see Brace, Charles Loring, The Dangerous Classes of New York and Twenty Years Work among Them (New York: Wynkoop and Hallenbeck, 1872)Google Scholar.

6. On sanitation, see Bremner, Robert H., The Public Good: Philanthropy and Welfare in the Civil War Era (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1980), 34Google Scholar; Warner, Sam Bass, The Private City: Philadelphia in Three Periods of Its Growth (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1968, 1971)Google Scholar. On public parks, see Olmsted, Frederick Law, “Public Parks and the Enlargement of Towns,” Journal of Social Science 3 (1871): 17, 20Google Scholar; Bender, Thomas, Toward an Urban Vision: Ideas and Institutions in Nineteenth Century America (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1975), 169, 172, 176–77Google Scholar. On social housing, see Lubove, Roy, “The New York Association for Improving the Condition of the Poor: The Formative Years,” New York Historical Society Quarterly 43 (07 1959): 321–22Google Scholar.

7. Brace, Dangerous Classes of New York, 90–93, 234–35; Bender, Toward an Urban Vision, 133–35, 143–44, 147–48; Hawes, Joseph M., Children in Urban Society: Juvenile Delinquency in Nineteenth Century America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1971)Google Scholar, chap. 8.

8. Trattner, Walter I., From Poor Law to Welfare State: A History of Social Welfare in America, 2d ed. (New York: Free Press, 1979), 80–85Google Scholar; Roy Lubove, The Professional Altruist: The Emergence of Social Work as a Profession, 1880–1930 (1965; reprint, New York: Atheneum, 1980), chap. 3; Boyer, Urban Masses and Moral Order, 144–52; Bremner, Robert H., From the Depths: The Discovery of Poverty in the United States (New York: New York University Press, 1956, 1972), 17, 51–52Google Scholar; Donzelot, Policing of Families, 55, 64–65, 69.

9. See Donzelot, Policing of Families, 55.

10. Coll, Blanche D., Perspectives in Public Welfare: A History (Washington, D. C.: U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1969), 43–44Google Scholar; Bremner, Public Good, 200–01.

11. Fox, “Juvenile Justice Reform,” 1226–27; Hawes, Children in Urban Society, 132–33, 139.

12. Boyer, Urban Masses and Moral Order, 154–55; Jane Addams, Twenty Years at Hull House (1910; reprint, New York: New American Library, 1961), 162; Brooks, John Graham, “The Future Problem of Charity and the Unemployed,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (cited hereafter as Annals) 5 (1894): 11–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13. Devine, Edward T., Misery and Its Causes (New York: Macmillan, 1909), 11, 13–14Google Scholar; Frankel, Lee K., “The Relation between Standards of Living and Standards of Compensation,” New York State Conference on Charities and Corrections (cited hereafter as NYSCCC), Proceedings 7 (1906), 23, 30Google Scholar; Simkhovitch, Mary Kingsbury, “Friendship and Politics,” Political Science Quarterly 17 (06 1902)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14. Ryan, John A., “The Standard of Living and the Problem of Dependency,” National Conference of Charities and Corrections (cited hereafter as NCCC), Proceedings 34 (1907), 343Google Scholar; Mary Kingsbury Simkhovitch, The City Worker's World in America (1917; reprint, New York: Arno, 1971), 20, 48–49, 170–71, 176.

15. On the new version of the social question, see especially works in the social gospel tradition such as Gladden, Washington, Social Salvation (Boston and New York: Houghton, Mifflin, 1902)Google Scholar. On society's obligation to aid the working-class family, see Devine, Edward T., The Principles of Relief (New York: Macmillan, 1904), 21Google Scholar; Addams, Jane, “Charity and Social Justice,” President's Address, NCCC, Proceedings 33 (1906, 2d ed.), 2–3; Mary E. Richmond, Friendly Visiting among the Poor: A Handbook for Charity Workers (1899; reprint, Montclair, N. J.: Patterson Smith, 1969), 141Google Scholar.

16. On the reform coalition, see Schiesel, Martin J., The Politics of Efficiency: Municipal Administration and Reform in America, 1880–1920 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1977)Google Scholar. On philanthropy's commitment to social hygiene measures, see Devine, Principles of Relief, 36–39, 42, 46, 69.

17. See Platt, Child Savers, 99; Donzelot, Policing of Families, 82–83.

18. Addams, Jane, “The Objective Value of a Social Settlement” (1892)Google Scholar, in Lasch, Christopher, ed., The Social Thought of Jane Addams (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1965)Google Scholar (cited here-after as Social Thought), pp. 57, 61; Richmond, Friendly Visiting among the Poor, chap. 11.

19. Woods, Robert A., “Social Work: A New Profession” (1906)Google Scholar, in Woods, The Neighborhood in Nation-Building (1923; reprint, New York: Arno Press, 1970) (cited hereafter asNNB), 93–94; Woods, Robert A. and Kennedy, Albert J., The Settlement Horizon: A national Estimate (New YorkRussell Sage Foundation, 1922), 143–50Google Scholar; Ellen H. Richards, Euthenics: The Science of Controllable Environment (1910; reprint, New York: Arno Press, 1977), chap. 2.

20. Woods and Kennedy, Settlement Horizon, 311; Jane Addams, The Spirit of Youth and the City Streets (1909; reprint, Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1972), 47.

21. Addams, Twenty Years at Hull House, 208–09; Wald, Lilian D., The House on Henry Street (New York: Henry Holt, 1915), 55–58Google Scholar; Woods and Kennedy, Settlement Horizon, 241, 250–51, 256; Simkhovitch, City Worker's World, 157.

22. Rothman, Sheila M., Woman's Proper Place: A History of Changing Ideals and Practices, 1870 to the Present (New York: Basic Books, 1978), chap. 3Google Scholar.

23. Foucault, Power/Knowledge, 52, 119.

24. Lubove, Professional Altruist, 34–35; Donzelot, Policing of Families, 167.

25. Devine, Principles of Relief., 10–11; Devine, Edward T., “Remedies for Too Low a Standard of Living,” NYSCCC, Proceedings 9 (1908), 63Google Scholar;Smith, Samuel G., “Social Standards,” President's Address, NCCC, Proceedings 32 (1905), 8Google Scholar.

26. Riley, Thomas J., “A Sociological View of Poverty,” NYSCCC, Proceedings 14 (1913), 187Google Scholar; Bishop, Samuel H., “The New Movement in Charity,” NYSCCC, Proceedings 2 (1901), 91Google Scholar; Richmond, Friendly Visiting among the Poor, 6, 8–9, 191–93.

27. Simkhovitch, City Worker's World, 19–20.

28. Devine, Principles of Relief, 19, 22–23.

29. Fetter, Frank A. in “Discussion of ‘Ethics of Too Low a Standard of Living’,” NYSCCC, Proceedings 9 (1908), 62Google Scholar. See also Brooks, “Future Problem of Charity and the Unemployed,” 24, 27.

30. Woods, Robert A., ed., Americans in Process: A Settlement Study (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin, 1902), 7Google Scholar;Addams, Twenty Years at Hull House, 219; MrsEinstein, William [Hannah B.], “Pensions for Widowed Mothers as a Means of Securing for Dependent Children the Benefits of Home Training and Influence,” NYSCCC, Proceedings 11 (1910), 225Google Scholar.

31. Wald, House on Henry Street, 44; Addams, Twenty Years at Hull House, 146, 211–212.

32. Cole, William I., Motives and Results of the Social Settlement Movement (Cambridge: Harvard University Department of Social Ethics, 1908), 16Google Scholar; Simkhovitch, City Worker's World, 67.

33. Woods, Robert A., ed., The City Wilderness (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin, 1899), 290–304Google Scholar; Woods, Robert A., “Settlement Houses and City Politics” (1900) NNB, 68; Addams, Twenty Years at Hull House, 238Google Scholar.

34. Conyngton, Mary, How to Help: A Manual of Practical Charity (New York: Macmillan, 1909), 192–93Google Scholar; Almy, Frederic in “Discussion of ‘Pensions to Widowed Mothers as a Means’,” NYSCCC, Proceedings 11 (1910), 232, 234Google Scholar.

35. Wald, House on Henry Street, 60, 261; Addams, Jane, “A Function of the Social Settlement” (1899) Social Thought, 197Google Scholar; Einstein, “Pensions for Widowed Mothers as a Means,” 231.

36. Ryerson, Best-Laid Plans, 19–20; Eliot, Thomas D., The Juvenile Court and the Community (New York: Macmillan, 1914), 122–24Google Scholar.

37. The dynamics of this coalition were explored some years later by its participants. See the various essays in Jane Addams et al., The Child, the Clinic and the Court (1925; reprint, New York: Johnson Reprint Corp., 1970). Fox overstates the role of sectarian child protection organizations in producing the 1899 Illinois Juvenile Court Act and misunderstands its emphasis when he claims it was primarily intended to upgrade institutional conditions. See Fox, “Juvenile Justice Reform,” 1222–23, 1226–27. For a more balanced account based on the Wisconsin experience, see Schlossman, Love and the American Delinquent, 133–37.

38. On the legal rationales for the court, see Schlossman, Love and the American Delinquent, chap. 1; Flexner, Bernard, “The Juvenile Court—Its Legal Aspects,” Annals 36 (1910): 51–52Google Scholar.

39. For a vivid early account of the therapeutic orientation of the court, see Baker, Harvey H., “Procedure of the Boston Juvenile Court,” Survey 23 (02 5, 1910): 643–52Google Scholar. Fox asserts that the juvenile court should be seen as merely an incremental reform because it continued a pattern of procedural informality in juvenile justice. See Fox, “Juvenile Justice Reform,” 1221–22. It is clear from court movement writings, however, that informality was but an adjunct to the full therapeutic revolution that proponents intended.

40. On the scope of juvenile court jurisdiction and its connection to philanthropic strategy, see Donzelot, Policing of Families, 109–10, 87–88. Fox also stresses the value of the court for philanthropic intervention. See Fox, “Juvenile Justice Reform,” 1227.

41. Ryerson, Best-Laid Plans, 43–47.

42. Donzelot, Policing of Families, 119–20, 122–24; Rothman, Conscience and Convenience, 215, 218; Ramsey, Annie, “Work of the Probation Officer Preliminary to the Trial,” NCCC, Proceedings 33 (1906, 2d ed.), 132–35Google Scholar; Flexner, Bernard, “The Juvenile Court as a Social Institution,” Survey 23 (02 5, 1910): 628Google Scholar.

43. Baker, “Procedure of Boston Juvenile Court,” 646–49; Donzelot, Policing of Families, 99–102, 107–08.

44. Almy, Frederic, “Juvenile Courts and Juvenile Probation,” NYSCCC, Proceedings 2 (1901), 284Google Scholar; Breckinridge, Sophonisba P. and Abbott, Edith, The Delinquent Child and the Home (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, Charities Publication Committee, 1912), 170Google Scholar; Donzelot, Policing of Families, 103–04; Ryerson, Best-Laid Plans, 50–52.

45. For a penetrating legal critique from this period see Lindsey, Edward, “The Juvenile Court Movement from a Lawyer's Standpoint,” Annals 52 (1914): 141–44Google Scholar. Even within the court movement questions arose over the procedural latitude granted the institution. See Flexner, “Juvenile Court as a Social Institution,” 637–38.

46. These views were frequently expressed by Julian Mack, the second Chicago juvenile court judge. See Mack, , “The Juvenile Court: The Judge and the Probation Officer,” NCCC, Proceedings 33 (1906, 2d ed.), 123–31Google Scholar; Mack, , “Juvenile Courts as Part of the School System of the Country,” NCCC, Proceedings 35 (1908), 369–83Google Scholar; Mack, , “The Law and the Child,” Survey 23 (02 5, 1910): 638–43Google Scholar. See also Ryerson, Best-Laid Plans, 76–77.

47. Kelsey, Carl, “The Juvenile Court of Chicago and Its Work,” Annals 17 (1901): 299Google Scholar; Walker, Charles T., “The Work of the Juvenile Protective Association,” Child Conference for Research and Welfare, Proceedings 1 (1909), 60Google Scholar. Ryerson contends that the need to put the court's work on a scientific footing was recognized only later, but these early statements demonstrate that a scientific foundation was sought from the outset. See Ryerson, Best-Laid Plans, lOOff.

48. “Testimony of Judge Merritt W. Pinckney,” in Breckinridge and Abbott, Delinquent Child and the Home, 234–35. See also the essays in Addams et al., Child, the Clinic and the Court.

49. Baker, “Procedure of Boston Juvenile Court,” 650; Murphy, Thomas, “The Juvenile Court of Buffalo,” NYSCCC, Proceedings 3 (1902), 137–38Google Scholar; MrsRogers, Helen W., “The Probation System of the Juvenile Court of Indianapolis,” NCCC, Proceedings 31 (1904), 376Google Scholar.

50. Donzelot, Policing of Families, 108–09.

51. Almy, “Juvenile Courts and Juvenile Probation,” 288–89; Donzelot, Policing of Families, 110–11.

52. Rhoades, Mabel Carter, “A Case Study of Delinquent Boys in the Juvenile Court of Chicago,” American Journal of Sociology (cited hereafter as AJS) 13 (1907): 77CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Thurston, Henry, “Some Phases of the Probation Work of the Juvenile Court,” NCCC, Proceedings 32 (1905), 180–82Google Scholar; Flexner, “Juvenile Court as a Social Institution,” 630, 632.

53. Kirchway, George W., “Social Work and the Law: Forms of Cooperation between Law and Social Work,” National Conference of Social Work (cited hereafter as NCSW), Proceedings 53 (1926), 182Google Scholar; Flexner, Bernard and Baldwin, Roger N., Juvenile Courts and Probation (New York: Century, 1914, 1916), 80–81Google Scholar; Donzelot, Policing of Families.

54. See, for example, Waite, Edward F., “The Outlook for the Juvenile Court,” Annals 105 (Spring 1923): 234Google Scholar;Roscoe Pound, Foreword, to Young, Pauline V., Social Treatment in Probation and Delinquency (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1937), xxv, xxviiiGoogle Scholar.

55. Schlossman, Love and the American Delinquent, 62–63, 66; Fox, “Juvenile Justice Re-form,” 1224.

56. Julian W. Mack, “Legal Problems Involved in the Establishment of the Juvenile Court,” in Breckinridge and Abbott, Delinquent Child and the Home, 190–91; Ryerson, Best-Laid Plans, 67–68.

57. Eliot, Juvenile Court and the Community, 13–14, 16; Pound, Foreword, xxviii–xxix; Nutt, Alice Scott, “The Future of the Juvenile Court as a Case-Work Agency,” NCSW, Proceedings 66 (1939), 371Google Scholar.

58. For example, Chicago judge Merritt W. Pinckney argued for mothers' aid in an important charity conference debate. See Pinckney, , “Public Pensions to Widows: Experiences and Observations Which Lead Me to Favor Such a Law,” NCCC, Proceedings 39 (1912)Google Scholar.

59. Lundberg, Emma O., Public Aid to Mothers With Dependent Children: Extent and Fundamental Principles, Children's Bureau Publication no. 162, U.S. Department of Labor (Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1926), 9–10Google Scholar.

60. Waite, “Outlook for the Juvenile Court,” 240; Goodnow, Charles N., “The Chicago Court of Domestic Relations,” in Breckinridge, Sophonisba P., ed., The Child in the City (Chicago: Department of Social Investigation, Chicago School of Civics and Philanthropy, 1912), 330–40Google Scholar.

61. By the Second World War over 65,000 children each year were placed on probation (Carr, Lowell Julliard, Delinquency Control [New York: Harper, 1941], 135)Google Scholar.

62. Roger Baldwin, “The Presentation of the Case,” in Breckinridge, ed., Child in the City, 341–44, 347; Flexner and Baldwin, Juvenile Courts and Probation, 44–45, 51; Lenroot, Katherine F. and Lundberg, Emma O., Juvenile Courts at Work: A Study of the Organization and Methods of Ten Courts, Children's Bureau Publication no.141, U. S. Department of Labor (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1925), 94, 100–01Google Scholar; Falconer, Douglas P., “Making the Child Safe for the Community,” NCSW, Proceedings 53 (1926), 165Google Scholar.

63. Flexner, Bernard, “The Juvenile Court — Its Legal Aspects,” Annals 36 (1910): 53, 55Google Scholar; Mack, “Law and the Child,” 640; Flexner and Baldwin, Juvenile Courts and Probation, 75, 77.

64. Flexner, “Juvenile Court as a Social Institution,” 614–15, 620–21, 636–37; “Testimony of Judge Merritt W. Pinckney,” 207–08; Thurston, “Some Phases of the Probation Work of the Juvenile Court,” 178–79.

65. Breckinridge and Abbott, Delinquent Child and the Home, 56–57, 61, 70, 160.

66. Ibid., 170–71, 173–74; Nutt, “Future of Juvenile Court as a Case-Work Agency,” 373; Lenroot and Lundberg, Juvenile Courts at Work, 111, 195.

67. For contemporary discussions of the early findings on recidivism, see Carr, Delinquency Control, 173–80; Abbott, Grace, “The Juvenile Court and a Community Program for Treating nd Preventing Delinquency,” Social Service Review (cited hereafter as SSR) 10 (1936): 233–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

68. Lundberg, Emma O., “The Juvenile Court as a Constructive Social Agency,” NCSW, Proceedings 49 (1922), 155; Dependent and Delinquent Children in North Dakota and South Dakota, Children's Bureau Publication no. 160, U.S. Department of Labor (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1926)Google Scholar.

69. Eliot, Juvenile Court and the Community, 22, 25; Pound, Foreword, xxx; Rothman, Con-science and Convenience, 244.

70. Nutt, “Future of Juvenile Court as a Case-Work Agency,” 378; Carr, Delinquency Control, 161–62.

71. Lenroot and Lundberg, Juvenile Courts at Work, 122, 225, 228, 245.

72. Baker, Herbert M., “The Court and the Delinquent Child,” AJS 26 (1920): 178; Pound, Foreword, xxviii, xxxiii; Ryerson, Best-Laid Plans, 139Google Scholar.

73. Eliot, Juvenile Court and the Community, pp. 23–24; Hiller, Francis H., “The Juvenile Court as a Case Working Agency: Its Limitations and Its Possibilities,” NCSW, Proceedings 53 (1926), 142–43Google Scholar; Pound, Foreword, xxvi; Ryerson, Best-Laid Plans, 85–86.

74. Nutt, “Future of Juvenile Court as a Case-Work Agency,” 374.

75. Baldwin, “Presentation of the Case,” 347–48; Eliot, Juvenile Court and the Community, 32–33; Hotchkiss, Willard E., “The Juvenile Court as It Is Today,” NCCC, Proceedings 39 (1912), 456–57Google Scholar; Flexner, Bernard, “A Decade of the Juvenile Court,” NCCC, Proceedings 37 (1910), 108, 110–11Google Scholar; Young, Social Treatment in Probation and Delinquency,14–15 Nutt, “Future of Juvenile Court as a Case-Work Agency,” 374. This aspect of juvenile court development has been much discussed by historians. See, for example, Rothman, Conscience and Convenience, 261–63.

76. Kirchway, “Social Work and Law,” 182; Abbott, “Juvenile Court and a Community Program,” 237; Healy, William and Bronner, Augusta F., New Light on Delinquency and Its Treatment (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1936, 1950), 147, 205, 222Google Scholar; Young, Social Treatment in Probation and Delinquency, 163, 166; Nutt, “Future of Juvenile Court as a Case-Work Agency,” 373–74.

77. Baker, “Court and the Delinquent Child,” 178; Flexner, “Juvenile Court as a Social Institution,” 637; Pound, Foreward, xxvii.

78. William Healy, “The Psychology of the Situation: A Fundamental for Understanding and Treatment of Delinquency,” in Addams et al., Child, the Clinic and the Court, 48; Henry S. Hulbert, “Probation,” in Addams et al., Child, the Clinic and the Court, 239, 241, 243–44; Young, Social Treatment in Probation and Delinquency, 605; Carr, Delinquency Control, 4, 18–19, 158. For a contrasting view see Jacoby, A. L., “The New Approach to the Problem of Delinquency: Punishment versus Treatment,” NCSW, Proceedings 53 (1926), 180Google Scholar.

79. Glueck, Sheldon and Glueck, Eleanor T., One Thousand Juvenile Delinquents: Their Treatment by Court and Clinic (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1934)Google Scholar; Rothman, Conscience and Convenience, 245–48; Abbott, “Juvenile Court and a Community Program,” pp. 233–34.

80. Young, Social Treatment in Probation and Delinquency, 25–6, 126, 132, 292.

81. Ibid., 603–04; Baker, “Court and Delinquent Child,” 177; Carr, Delinquency Control, 198–99.

82. Eliot, Juvenile Court and the Community, ix; Justin Miller, “Introduction,” to Young, Social Treatment in Probation and Delinquency, xxxiv; Ryerson, Best-Laid Plans, 78–79.

83. Workum, Ruth I., “The Relationship between the Functions of the Juvenile Court and Those of the General Child-Caring Agencies,” NCSW, Proceedings 49 (1922), 142Google Scholar; Hotchkiss, “Juvenile Court as It Is Today,” 450, 455; Lindsey, “Juvenile Court from a Lawyer's Stand-point,” 147–48. See also Donzelot, Policing of Families, 98.

84. Eliot, Juvenile Court and the Community, 151–52.

85. Young, Social Treatment in Probation and Delinquency, 28; Rothman, Conscience and Convenience, 247; Donzelot, Policing of Families, 112, 124–25.

86. Lundberg, “Juvenile Court as a Constructive Social Agency,” 157–58; Hiller, “Juvenile Court as a Case Working Agency,” 144; Rothman, Conscience and Convenience, 286–88.

87. See Juvenile-Court Standards, Children's Bureau Publication no. 121, U.S. Department of Labor (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1923). For a discussion of this work, see Rosenthal, Marguerite, “The Children's Bureau and the Juvenile Court: Delinquency Policy, 1912–1940,” SSR 60 (06 1986): 306–07Google Scholar.

88. On the role of the Children's Bureau in promoting the social agency model, see Dunham, H. Warren, “The Juvenile Court: Contradictory Orientations in Processing Offenders,” Law and Contemporary Problems 23 (1958): 513–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rosenthal, “Children's Bureau and the Juvenile Court,” 307. For an example of a promotional (but still critical) follow-up study, see Lenroot and Lundberg, Juvenile Courts at Work.

89. Lundberg, “Juvenile Court as a Constructive Social Agency,” 159–60; Lenroot, Katherine F., “The Evolution of the Juvenile Court,” Annals 105 (Spring 1923): 221Google Scholar; Hiller, “Juvenile Court as a Case Working Agency,” 146–48.

90. Nutt, “Future of Juvenile Court as a Case-Work Agency,” 377–78.

91. Healy, “Psychology of the Situation,” 47–48; Healy and Bronner, New Light on Delinquency, 141, 146–47, 220–22; Carr, Delinquency Control, 283.

92. Smith, Barry C., “The Commonwealth Fund Program for the Prevention of Delinquency,” NCSW, Proceedings 49 (1922), 168–74Google Scholar; Lou, Herbert H., Juvenile Courts in the United States (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1927), 200Google Scholar.

93. Healy and Bronner, New Light on Delinquency, 16.

94. Augusta F. Bronner, “The Contribution of Science to a Program for Treatment of Juvenile Delinquency,” in Addams et al., Child, the Clinic and the Court, 79.

95. Healy and Bronner, New Light on Delinquency, 223; Young, Social Treatment in Probation and Delinquency, 622; Donzelot, Policing of Families, 97, 116, 118–19.

96. Kirchway, “Social Work and the Law,” 185–86; Lubove, Professional Altruist45, 55–56, 63–66, 76–7, 83, 88–89; Rothman, Conscience and Convenience, 247–48; Ryerson, Best-Laid Plans, 105–06, 110.

97. Bronner, “Contribution of Science to a Program for Treatment of Juvenile Delinquency,” 82–83; Ryerson, Best-Laid Plans, 113–14; Ehrenreich, John H., The Altruistic Imagination: A History of Social Work and Social Policy in the United States (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1985), 52Google Scholar.

98. Healy and Bronner, New Light on Delinquency, 141–42; Young, Social Treatment in Probation and Delinquency, 289–90; Ryerson, Best-Laid Plans, 110; Lubove, Professional Altruist, 89, 91–102, 108–10, 114, 119–21.

99. Young, Social Treatment in Probation and Delinquency, 320, 324–28, 330–31; Donzelot, Policing of Families, 170; Ehrenreich, Professional Altruist, 117–18.

100. Ryerson, Best-Laid Plans, 110–11; Donzelot, Policing of Families, chap. 5.

101. See Kahn, Alfred J., A Court for Children: A Study of the New York City Children's Court (New York: Columbia University Press, 1953), 4–5, 230, 294–95, 308–09, 312Google Scholar. Note that even Kahn expresses doubts about what clinical services can achieve; see pp. 10–11.

102. Tappan, Paul W., “Children and Youth in the Criminal Court,” Annab 261 (Spring 1949): 129Google Scholar; Killian, Frederick W., “The Juvenile Court as an Institution,”Annals 261 (Spring 1949): 92–93, 95Google Scholar;Kahn, Courtfor Children, pp. 104, 106, 114–15, 117–19, 140, 147, 155, 157, 161, 164–65, 169–70, 174, 177–79, 269; Fisher, Bernard C., “Juvenile Court: Purpose, Promise, and Problems,” SSR 34 (1960): 80Google Scholar.

103. Peck, Harris B., “Resistance in Delinquency,” Social Work in the Current Scene (NCSW Selected Papers) 77 (1950): 379–81Google Scholar; Dunham, “Juvenile Court: Contradictory Orientations in Processing Offenders,” 523–24; Studt, Elliot, “The Client's Image of the Juvenile Court,” in Rosenheim, Margaret Keeny, ed., Justiceforthe Child: The Juvenile Court in Transition (New York, Free Press, 1962), pp. 209–10Google Scholar.

104. Advocates of this approach before the Second World War expected comprehensiveness alone to yield results. See Carr, Delinquency Control, 382–83.

105. Allen, Francis A., “The Borderland of the Criminal Law: Problems of ‘Socializing’ Criminal Justice,” SSR 32 (1958): 113, 115Google Scholar; Dunham, “Juvenile Court: Contradictory Orientations in Processing Offenders,” 516;Younghusband, Eileen L., “The Dilemma of the Juve-nile Court,” SSR 33 (1959): 11, 18, 20Google Scholar; Caldwell, Robert G., “Juvenile Court: Its Development and Some Major Problems,” Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science (cited hereafter asyCL) 51 (1961): 502, 508CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

106. Paul W. Tappan, “Judicial and Administrative Approaches to Children with Problems,” in Rosenheim, ed., Justice for the Child, 148–49; Dunham, “Juvenile Court: Contradic-tory Orientations in Processing Offenders,” 522, 526.

107. Ibid., 521; Younghusband, “Dilemma of the Juvenile Court,” 11.

108. Allen, “Borderland of the Criminal Law,” 114; Younghusband, “Dilemma of the Juvenile Court,” 12; Caldwell, “Juvenile Court: Its Development and Some Major Problems,” 509.

109. Birnbaum, Karl, “A Court Psychiatrist's View of Juvenile Delinquents,” Annals 261 (Spring 1949): 57–58Google Scholar; Kahn, Court for Children, 129–30. For an earlier statement of these concerns, see Healy and Bronner, New Light on Delinquency, 6, 169–71.

110. Nutt, Alice Scott, “The Juvenile Court in Relation to the Community — An Evaluation,” SSR 17 (03 1943): 3–4Google Scholar; Dunham, “Juvenile Court: Contradictory Orientations in Processing Offenders,” 523; Tappan, “Judicial and Administrative Approaches to Children with Problems,” 152.

111. Eliot, Juvenile Court and the Community. See, similarly, Baker, “Court and the Delinquent Child,” 181.

112. On the shifting views of the Children's Bureau, see Rosenthal, “Children's Bureau and the Juvenile Court,” 308–11. For a statement by a bureau official supporting child welfare departments as an alternative to the court, see Nutt, “Future of Juvenile Court as a Case-Work Agency,” 377–78.

113. Rosenthal, “Children's Bureau and Juvenile Court,” 312–13.

114. Abbott, “Juvenile Court and a Community Program,” 227, 238–39. On the neighborhood strategy see Young, social Treatment in Probation and Delinquency, 583–59.

115. Platt, Child Savers, 189; Ryerson, Best-Laid Plans, 158–59.

116. On these community programs, see Platt, Child Savers, 183–84.

117. Carr, Delinquency Control, 149, 249–56.

118. Younghusband, “Dilemma of the Juvenile Court,” 20. For an example of this enthusiasm for new techniques, see Miller, Michael M., “Psychodrama in the Treatment Program of a Juvenile Court,” JCL 50 (1960): 453–59Google Scholar.

119. See, for example, August Aichorn Center for Adolescent Residential Care, Inc., Plan for Residence No. 1 (New York, 1981).

120. Pray, Kenneth L. M., “The Place of Social Case Work in the Treatment of Delinquency,” SSR 19 (1945): 235–44Google Scholar; Reinemann, John Otto, “Probation and the Juvenile Delinquent,” Annals 261 (Spring 1949): 118Google Scholar; Kahn, Court for Children, 231–32; Tracey, Gerald A., “ASocial Worker's Perspective on Social Work in Probation,” Crime and Delinquency 7 (1961): 131–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

121. Killian, “Juvenile Court as an Institution,” 93; Yablonsky, Lewis, “The Role of Law and Social Science in the Juvenile Court,” JCL 53 (12 1962): 427, 429Google Scholar.

122. Perkins, John Forbes, “Indeterminate Control of Offenders: Arbitrary and Discrimina-tory,” Law and Contemporary Problems 9 (1942): 624–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Yablonsky, “Role of Law and Social Science in Juvenile Court,” 435.

123. Ryerson, Best-Laid Plans, 57–59, 61. The comparison with the star chamber was first advanced by Roscoe Pound in the 1930s. See Pound, Foreword, xxvii.

124. Platt, Child Savers, 152–155.

125. Allen, “Borderland of the Criminal Law,” 116; Dunham, “Juvenile Court: Contradic-tory Orientations in Processing Offenders,” 516–17, 519; Tappan, “Judicial and Administrative Approaches to Children with Problems,” 149, 159; Caldwell, “Juvenile Court: Its Development and Some Major Problems,” 504–06; Yablonsky, “Role of Law and Social Science in Juvenile Court,” 431–33.

126. Perkins, John F., “Common Sense and Bad Boys,” Atlantic Monthly 173 (05 1944): 47Google Scholar; Allen, “Borderland of the Criminal Law,” 117; Younghusband, “Dilemma of the Juvenile Court,” 15–17; Studt, “Client's Image of the Juvenile Court,” 204; Ryerson, Best-Laid Plans, 132–35.

127. Caldwell, “Juvenile Court: Its Development and Some Major Problems,” 507; Yablonsky, “Role of Law and Social Science in Juvenile Court,” 431. See also Allen, “Borderland of the Criminal Law,” 118–19; Fisher, “Juvenile Court,” 78–79; Howard E. Fradkin, “Disposition Dilemmas of American Juvenile Courts,” in Rosenheim, ed., Justice for the Child, 121.

128. Caldwell, “Juvenile Court: Its Development and Some Major Problems,” 507–09; Tappan, “Judicial and Administrative Approaches to Children with Problems,” 147–48, 151, 154–55. For an early statement of this position, see Wigmore, John H., “Juvenile Court vs. Criminal Court,” Illinois Law Review 21 (1926): 375–77Google Scholar.

129. Dunham, “Juvenile Court: Contradictory Orientations in Processing Offenders,” 520–21; Younghusband, “Dilemma of the Juvenile Court,” 17; Studt, “Client's Image of the Juvenile Court,” 209–10.

130. Schramm, Gustav L., “Philosophy of the Juvenile Court,” Annals 261 (Spring 1949): 102–03Google Scholar; Orman W. Ketcham, “The Unfulfilled Promise of the Juvenile Court,” in Rosenheim, ed., Justice for the Child, 25–28; Paul W. Alexander, “Constitutional Rights in the Juvenile Court,” in Rosenheim, ed., Justice for the Child, 84–85, 87–90, 92.

131. Alexander, “Constitutional Rights in Juvenile Court,” 83–84, 92; Fox, “Juvenile Justice Reform,” 1235; Prescott, Peter S., The Child Savers: Juvenile Justice Observed (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1981), 7, 63–64Google Scholar.

132. Ibid., 51, 59–61.

133. In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967). For a discussion of the Court's reasoning and determination, see Ryerson, Best-Laid Plans, 147ff.

134. Prescott, Child Savers, 65, 219.

135. Fox, “Juvenile Justice Reform,” 1237.

136. Platt, Child Savers, 164–69; Prescott, Child Savers, 5, 18–19, 102.

137. Ibid.

138. Caldwell, “Juvenile Court: Its Development and Some Major Problems,” 497–98, 506.

139. Tappan, “Children and Youth in Criminal Court,” 128, 132; Dunham, “Juvenile Court: Contradictory Orientations in Processing Offenders,” 513, 521.

140. Ryerson, Best-Laid Plans, 104–05.

141. Rosenthal, “Children's Bureau and the Juvenile Court,” 313.

142. Ibid.; Nutt, “Future of Juvenile Court as a Case-Work Agency,” 378.

143. Rosenthal, “Children's Bureau and the Juvenile Court,” 317n40

144. Carr, Delinquency Control, 56–57.

145. Nutt, “Juvenile Court in Relation to the Community,” 5–6.

146. Tappan, “Judicial and Administrative Approaches to Children with Problems,” 155.

147. Nutt, “Juvenile Court in Relation to the Community,” 6–7; Kahn, Court for Children, 243; Alfred J. Kahn, “Court and Community,” in Rosenheim, ed., Justice for the Child, 231–32; Fox, “Juvenile Justice Reform,” 1232.

148. Figures given in Yablonsky, “Role of Law and Social Science in Juvenile Court,” 433; Charles Shireman, Foreword to Rosenheim, ed., Justice for the Child, v–vi.

149. Studt, “Client's Image of the Juvenile Court,” 207–09; Ryerson, Best-Laid Plans, 127–31.

150. Tappan, “Judicial and Administrative Approaches to Children with Problems,” 145; Fisher, “Juvenile Court,” 78; Castillo, Angel, “Juvenile Offenders in Court: The Debate over Treatment,” New York Times, 07 24, 1981, B4Google Scholar.

151. Prescott, Child Savers, 29–30, 219–20.

152. Alexander, “Constitutional Rights in Juvenile Court,” 86.

153. Fox, “Juvenile Justice Reform,” 1238.

154. Nutt, “Responsibility of Juvenile Court and Public Agency,” 315–16; Yablonsky, “Role of Law and Social Science in Juvenile Court,” 433.

155. Prescott, Child Savers, 120, 239.

156. Ibid., 238–40.

157. Neustadt, Richard M., “Home Conservation—A Step in Social Conservation,” Report of the New York State Commission on Relief for Widowed Mothers (Albany, 1914)Google Scholar; Nesbitt, Florence, Standards of Public Aid to Children in Their Own Homes Children's Bureau Publication no. 118, U.S. Department of Labor (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1923), 31–35Google Scholar.

158. Abbott, Edit and Breckinridge, Sophonisba P., The Administration of the Aid-to-Mothers Law in Illinois Children's Bureau Legal Series no. 7, U.S. Department of Labor (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1921), 38–40, 41–42Google Scholar.

159. Einstein, “Pensions for Widowed Mothers as a Means,” p. 231; Tishler, Hace Sorel, Self-Reliance and Social Security, 1870–1917 (Port Washington, N.Y.: Kennikat Press, National University Publications, 1971), 153–54Google Scholar.

160. Lubove, Professional Altruist, chap. 5.

161. Abbott, Edith, “The Experimental Period of Widow's Pension Legislation,” NCSW, Proceedings 44 (1917), 154–55Google Scholar.

162. See especially Bogue, Mary F., Administration of Mothers' Aid in Ten Localities, Children's Bureau Publication no. 184, U. S. Department of Labor (Washington, D. C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1928)Google Scholar.

163. Abbott, “Experimental Period of Widow's Pension Legislation,” 162-–3; Lundberg, Public Aid to Mothers with Dependent Children, 4.

164. Abbott and Breckinridge, Administration of Aid-to-Mothers Law in Illinois, 114; Bogue, Administration of Mothers' Aid in Ten Localities, In.