Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.475367
Title: Process and Conflict in the Juvenile Court.
Author: Tomlinson, P. J.
Awarding Body: London School of Economics and Political Science (University of London)
Current Institution: London School of Economics and Political Science (University of London)
Date of Award: 1975
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Abstract:
Process and Conflict in the Juvenile Court is an attempt to examine the concept of Juvenile Justice within the specific context of the Juvenile Court in England and Wales. To understand the way in which the court operates, and the personal and ideological conflicts which characterise it, it is necessary to see the particular as a manifestation of the general. The emergence of juvenile justice as a system separate from, and different in principle from adult justice has created an institution embodying equally legitimate, but conflicting interests which can be expressed in various ways; needs versus rights, law versus welfare, due process versus executive justice. Balance is difficult to achieve, and legal systems in different societies are oriented in either one direction or the other with some retaining a court, whilst others have developed more informal measures. A discussion of the problems of administrative justice and individualised justice lead to the conclusion that a legal framework is necessary in protecting the interests of children and their families. At the same time, however, an analysis of court process demonstrates the need to make proceedings more sensitive and meaningful for the young people who are dealt with in this setting. The numbers of children appearing before the court make this an increasingly unattainable goal, as they already place too great a strain on existing resources. The legislation passed for England and % les in 1969 attempted to keep a small proportion of children out of court if it appeared they were not in need of official sanction, but this has had only a limited impact on the problem. Raising the age of criminal responsibility, removing older children to a separate youth court, and instituting a policy of radical non-intervention are all discussed as alternative methods for reducing the population of the juvenile court.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.475367  DOI: Not available
Share: