Representing the Child in Child Protective Proceedings: Toward A New Paradigm

This article will attempt a new approach, one based on an analysis of the child\u27s interests in a child protective proceeding. As will be discussed in Part 1, most interests are surprisingly overlooked or barely articulated in the representation debate. Part 2 will summarize the statutes and case law governing the role of the child\u27s counsel in the child protective litigation continuum. The frequently lengthy process may range from initiation by a child protective agency to the achievement of family reunification or other permanency goal. For children, the continuum of sequential proceeding may span years or decades. Finally, Part 3 will outline a possible solution to the present complex, inconsistent, and frequently incoherent paradigm, one grounded upon traditional representation, as applied to the multiple child interests at stake in every child protective case

The State of American Juvenile Justice

This article will summarize the major twenty-first century state legislative and case law developments. It will also briefly note the expansion of state and local initiatives limiting the prosecution of youthful offenders, such as diversion and restorative justice programs. The state of American juvenile justice has improved significantly in the past several years. However, the reforms are best viewed as a work in progress. Much has been accomplished, but much remains to be accomplished. Crucially, after a generation of “tough on kids” measures, we are on the road toward a true “justice” system for children

Whatever Happened to the Best Interests Analysis in New York Relocation Cases? A Response

This response to Justice Sondra Miller’s article will first discuss the competing interests and expectations of the parties to a relocation dispute, and briefly outline the national view or views. In fact, there is no national standard, or anything approaching a consensus among the states. The New York experience under the exceptional circumstances standard will then be analyzed and appraised. My conclusion is that the standard should be maintained, although I believe that the Court of Appeals should revisit the issue to clarify the factors and criteria relevant to a determination

The Delinquent “Toddler”

Twenty-first century juvenile justice jurisprudence has focused on the criminal responsibility of adolescents, including, notably, the interface between psychological and neurological development and social accountability. The focus has led to a growing awareness that teenagers should not be equated with or held as accountable as adults. For example, several states, including Connecticut, Illinois, and Mississippi, have raised the age of criminal responsibility from 16 or 17 to 18, with a corresponding expansion of juvenile court jurisdiction. Of potentially greater significance, the principle of diminished criminal responsibility has gained credibility. Witness, for example, the US Supreme Court holding that capital punishment cannot be imposed on persons under the age of 18 (Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005)), while life without the possibility of parole cannot be imposed when a juvenile has been convicted of a nonhomicide offense (Graham v. Florida, 130 S. Ct. (2010).) Simultaneously, several states have statutorily restricted the transfer of cases from the juvenile courts to the adult criminal court, partially reversing the late twentieth century “get tough” approach. Overlooked has been the younger or preteen child. Most American states do not maintain a minimum age limitation for juvenile delinquency jurisdiction. Thirty-five states lack any statutory provision, permitting at least the theoretical prosecution of an infant. The remaining 15 have enacted statutes establishing minimum ages ranging from six to 10. The vast majority of American children under the age of 12 may be charged with criminal activity. The vast majority may consequently be subject to detention, confinement in residential institutions, and the adverse collateral consequences of a delinquency finding

The Family Court: An Historical Survey

The New York Family Court this year celebrates its twenty-fifth anniversary. Hailed as an experimental tribunal, designed to resolve society\u27s most intractable problems, including family dissolution, delinquency and child neglect, the court has been perceived as a radical development which altered the then existing legal rules governing family affairs. The Family Court Act indeed incorporates several creative provisions. But the court\u27s foundations were built upon solid jurisprudential underpinnings, principles which had evolved over the course of the preceding century. Establishment of the court was neither radical nor experimental; in reality, Family Court represents the latest increment in the development of legal principles to protect children and adjudicate family disputes. In view of the controversies which have surrounded the court since its inception, an historical silver anniversary analysis may be helpful

The Evil that Men do Lives After Them (Sometimes): A Study of Twentieth Century Analysis of Plato\u27s Political Theory

This paper has two purposes. The first is to develop a theory about what approach to the ideas of the past in general, and Plato in particular, will help us the most in learning how to act in politics. I hope to do this by examining and evaluating the ways in which the 20th Century analysts have looked at Plato. The second purpose is to provide an example of the type of analysis I believe to be most useful. I hope to apply my approach not to Plato, but to those who have analyzed Plato, in an effort to make the most use of these writers’ ideas. Chapter One is a general overview of the analysts I will be discussing; Chapters Two, Three, and Four deal with what it means to approach Plato in a particular way; Chapter Five provides a discussion of what approach to Plato is likely to be the most useful; Chapter Six is a brief conclusion. My analysis rests on two important initial assumptions. The first is that political action is based on political ideas – that individuals makes choices in politics based on the theoretical values they hold. The second assumption is that the goal of understanding our values- the principles on which we act- is best served when we challenge them with as many different views about politics as possible. I will be suggesting that it is not the nature of the view of politics an author has, but rather an author’s failure to be cognizant of the limitations of his/her viewpoint that makes an approach to political thought less than useful. This last point needs some clarification. I believe that the attempt to view the past inevitably involves a tradeoff between presenting a thinker’s ideas “faithfully” in the way he/she had intended them to be presented, and viewing a thinker’s ideas in the way we would like to. As J. G. A. Pocock suggests, the attempt to study the past is an act of translation, and I believe that something is always lost in translation. Much as we might like to have Plato’s opinions on modern questions, Plato never addressed the problems of industrialized mass society, or, for that matter, the threat of totalitarian regimes to individual liberty. To apply Plato to our modern world can only be accomplished if we extrapolate from what he said, and we must realize that we do this at the cost of fidelity to Plato’s intentions. Yet, an analysis which seeks to avoid extrapolating from Plato’s ideas is done at the cost of limiting the extent to which Plato’s ideas can be applied to our own problems

The Juvenile Offender Act: Effectiveness and Impact on the New York Juvenile Justice System

The Juvenile Offender Act of 1978 incorporates the most radical and perhaps the most controversial amendments to New York\u27s juvenile delinquency statutes in several decades. For the first time since 1909, children accused of committing serious offenses are subject to prosecution in the criminal courts. The gradual decriminalization of delinquency, which began a century and a half ago, has been reversed. This report analyzes and evaluates the Act and its implementation. The first two sections summarize the historical development of juvenile delinquency legislation and compare present New York provisions to those in other states. Sections III and IV will evaluate the Act\u27s implementation throughout the criminal and juvenile systems. Recommendations to amend the Act in the last section are largely predicated on the experience to date in applying the statute to youths accused of committing juvenile offenses