Sociology 2267A/B Chapter Notes - Chapter 2: Juvenile Court, Parens Patriae, Toronto Humane Society
30 Apr 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Chapter 2- Creating A Juvenile Justice System: Then and Now:
Introduction:
• Juvenile justice system created response probs gen by emerging system of capitalism
served undermine trad fam supports- 2 resulting probs growing number poor kids on
street and higher levels street crime committed by young people= sense kids of poor and
working class needed to be controlled
• Creation Victorian reformers/ child savers- term used refer 19th-cent NA middle-class
reformers who were instrumental in creation separate system of justice for juveniles
• Child savers believed delinquency was product bad environments and state should act
like a parent to “save” children from these envs, even if meant removing them from
parents’ homes and placing them in an institution- motivated primarily by humanitarian
concerns and desire save children from harmful fam influences and protect full force crim
law and neg influences adult crim offenders
• CN juvenile justice system officially created 1908 through passage Juvenile Delinquents
Act- result efforts begun 100 years earlier
The Canadian juvenile justice system:
• 2 men credited by historians creating juvenile justice system- JJ Kelso and WL Scott
• Kelso became driving force behind establishment Toronto Humane Society and
Children’s Fresh Air Fund, after 1893 appointed Prov Superintendent of Neglected and
Dependent Children= began campaigns getting children, including delinquents, out
institutions and into foster care homes
• Kelso’s reform activities completed by children’s court movement
• ON Children’s Charter provided separate magistrates hear cases involving youth under
16 and youth under 21= separate trials and commitment places other than prisons
• 1906, Scott persuaded Ottawa appoint 2 probation officers for supervision child offenders
and drafted Juvenile Delinquents Act= law on July 8, 1908= justice system children and
youth separate from adult system
JDA: Philosophy and Definitions:
• JDA created welfare-based juvenile justice system- a model of juvenile justice based on
rehabilitative philosophy
• Main philosophy underlying legislation came from doctrine parens patriae, meaning
parent of the country- orig in medival England= king’s right control property orphaned
heirs purpose protection
• 18th cent expanded include best interest principle as means actively promoting well-being
child/ young person
• 19th cent extended beyond monarch to state and to children w/o property orphaned/
neglected
• Became legitimized in common and statutory law in various English-speaking countries
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
• Under orig JDA, youth had to break law, not nec crim law, to be adjudicated delinquent
by court
• JDA def delinquency- violation by young persons of any fed, prov/ municipal law for
which a fine/ imprisonment was the penalty/ commission any other act would make
young person liable to be committed to an industrial school/ reformatory- 1924, act
revised include much broader range behavs
JDA: The system:
• JDA gave courts extensive power and cases to be handled summarily
• Indictable- in Canadian Criminal Code, refers to offences are of serious nature; max
sentence never less than 2 years- courts had to decide if youth tried in adult court
• Juvenile cases conducted privately and notices delinquency hearings sent parents/
guardians
• Provided wide range sentences/ dispositions- act in child’s own good and best interests of
community= adjorn hearing, impose fine as much $10, place foster home/ children’s aid
soc, probationary sentence/ send child to industrial school/ reformatory
• Probation- sentence of court involves supervision in comm and set conds must be
adhered to if person is to remain in comm (central element juvenile court)
• Required probation officers conduct investigations for court, assist and direct court and
rep interests child in court and also supervised children sentenced period probation (most
important function)
• Probation officer’s object work reform child and whole fam and could be achieved only
through working w child in home, school and workplace- women more approp b/c in
nature and labour even better-class W could be obt more cheaply than that of men
• Some scholars long maintained probation never lived up to promise as ultimate tool
reforming individ b/c quickly reverted to policing role
• Once adjudicated delinquent, children remained wards of court until court released/
reached 21- provs allowed set max age under which youth could be adjudicated
delinquent (varied by prov)
• Implementation costly and JDA didn’t require immediate implementation= sporadic
• Newfoundland never implement JDA, but est juvenile courts through prov leg
• Men main actors creating justice system, once JDA passed, W played major role system
as probation officers and judges
W.L. Scott on the role of the probation officer:
• Soon child arrested/ informed against PO notified- see child as friend, get its confidence
and hear story- visits places info about habits and hist may be obt
• In court represent child as friend not as accuser- consider best interest
• After trial supervise child- if all else fails sent to institution/ home makes reform
hopeless= foster home
Opposition to the JDA:
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
• Those opposed bill did so on grounds not punitive enough/ out of concern about pot
abuses children’s and parents rights
• New juvenile court replace existing children’s courts- run by police magistrates-
employees connected with those courts would also be replaced
• Some minor opposition to proposed legislation from children’s aid soc in Toronto, in part
from Society of Saint Vincent de Paul- stemmed concern over ability probation officers
properly supervise delinquent children
• Feared children wouldn’t be represented by lawyer, fate rest entirely in hands probation
officers and most important, be denied right to trial
• Most Victorian reformers shrugged off opposition- most not concerned about children’s
rights b/c convinced what doing was protecting children so believed decisions and actions
working in justice system sim always be in best interest of children but in 1967
concluded adults have autonomous legal rights but children don’t
Modifying the juvenile justice system:
• 1959 United Nations through Declaration of the Rights of the Child, gave legitimacy to
notions children should have rights, 1979 designated year of child
• 1960s civil-rights movement US and CN created first bill of rights- challenges parens
patriae foundation juvenile justice more frequent and concerns inability JDA ensure due
process young people
• Major criticisms directed at JDA w regard to status offences- behavs considered be illegal
only b/c age status of individ (ex: truancy)= adult
• Lumping together all child and youth offences, undermined seriousness some crim
offences and thereby inhibited any deterrent effect of punishment on crim behav and
young people hadn’t broken any crim law punished same manner those who had, neg
affected close association w chronic offenders in institutions
• No set terms- incarceration lasted as long took individ be reformed/ rehabilitated (due
process concerns)
• Inconsistencies application law- sentence lengths varied characteristics and circs rather
nature of behav, max ages delinquency varied across country and treatment provisions
not consistent
• Social workers not part juvenile justice system, not accountable courts decisions-
concerns role and discretionary power
• JDA failed provide adequate public protection from crim behav of children and youth
• Major factor cont demise JDA changing public and political attitudes about youth crime
and critics skeptical about efficacy of treatment
• Reform attempts began 1965 and YOA end product nearly 2 decades fine-tuning
• Important points contention included max age youth be brought into juvenile system from
adult system and cost providing additional numbers youth being supervised in comm
• First Young Offenders Act, intro 1970= seen too legalistic and too punitive- crim code
for children
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
