National commissions have called for reform of status offense laws. What is the position of the National Advisory Commission? Is the Commission's position the same as that of the American Bar Association (ABA)? Do you agree or disagree with these positions, why or why not?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

• The federal government's National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals, created a national crime policy, opting for the nonjudicial treatment of status offenders.
• The only conduct that should warrant family court intervention is conduct that is clearly self-destructive or otherwise harmful to the child.
• To meet this standard, the commission suggested that the nation's juvenile courts confine themselves to controlling five status offenses: habitual truancy, repeated disregard for parental authority, repeated running away, repeated use of intoxicating beverages, and delinquent acts by youths under the age of 10.
• The ABA's National Juvenile Justice Standards Project, designed to promote significant improvements in the way children are treated by the police and the courts, called for the end of juvenile court jurisdiction over status offenders.
• The ABA issued a statement about reforming the juvenile status offender process – many teens go before the courts because of behavior that would not otherwise subject them to judicial involvement if they were adults.
• How the law, prosecutorial policy, and court practice addresses youth who are chronic runaways, persistent school truants, or continually out-of-control at home should be examined.
• Given the increase in females entering the juvenile justice system, gender differences should also be examined.
• Special attention also needs to be given to the problem of and solutions to chronic truancy