Mental Health

The Clinical/Legal Dilemma Associated with Parens Patriae

British Common Law, the basis of U.S. jurisprudence, has long made a distinction between unpremeditated, impulsive, and infantile behaviors—those behaviors most likely to occur from birth to age 7. The challenge of rehabilitating, instead of merely punishing, wayward children and youth first gained attention in the United States during the mid-1800s among those advocating progressive, proactive, preventive programs for youth. They advocated the creation of special courts for troubled youth, mostly children in need of supervision (CHINS). In 1899, Illinois became the first state to establish a juvenile code specifically addressing criminal conduct, providing the foundation [Page 252]for the U.S. juvenile court philosophy. By 1925, all states had adopted separate juvenile courts based on this intervention philosophy. However, because of a lack of oversight, juvenile courts deteriorated. Following the trend in the adult criminal courts during the 1950s, juvenile courts moved from a proactive clinical model to that of reactive punishment and were not really challenged until 1966 with Kent v. U.S.

The Kent case was interesting in that it represented both the clinical and criminal aspects of juvenile justice while challenging the abuses of the special conditions associated with the juvenile court's authority of parens patriae. In this case, Morris Kent was accused of robbery, burglary, and rape at age 16. His case was first held in juvenile court, and he admitted these offenses during the informal proceedings. His case was then transferred to adult criminal court without a hearing. His juvenile court admission was used in his trial, and he was convicted of the robbery and burglary charges but found not guilty by reason of insanity for the rape charge. He was then sentenced to 90 years in prison. The case was eventually appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which referred the case back to the district court, urging that the conviction be vacated and the indictment dismissed based on the grounds that the transfer from juvenile to adult criminal courts was conducted without a hearing and counsel.

...