Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Criminal Justice Policy Review
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sanborn, J. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

A Parens Patriae Figure or Impartial Fact Finder: Policy Questions and Conflicts for the Juvenile Court Judge

Joseph B. Sanborn, Jr.

University of Central Florida

For several decades, juvenile courts functioned like clinics. Judges assigned there were instructed to assume a variety of roles: jurist, psychologist, counselor, sociologist, and parent. The In re Gault decision in 1967 granted juvenile defendants several constitutional rights that transformed juvenile courts into criminal court-like operations. Juvenile court judges have not been told whether they should continue to be paternal or emulate their counterparts in adult court; research has not addressed this subject. In this study, 100 juvenile court workers (judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, probation officers) from three juvenile courts (urban, suburban, rural) were interviewed to ascertain how judges operate in juvenile court and what these workers perceive to be the proper role for the judge. The data show that most workers believe that the role of the juvenile court judge is and should be unique.

Criminal Justice Policy Review, Vol. 12, No. 4, 311-332 (2001)
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Feminist CriminologyHome page
M. J. Leiber, S. J. Brubaker, and K. C. Fox
A Closer Look at the Individual and Joint Effects of Gender and Race on Juvenile Justice Decision Making
Feminist Criminology, October 1, 2009; 4(4): 333 - 358.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Youth Violence and Juvenile JusticeHome page
J. B. Sanborn Jr.
Hard Choices Or Obvious Ones: Developing Policy for Excluding Youth From Juvenile Court
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, April 1, 2003; 1(2): 198 - 214.
[Abstract] [PDF]