v The Illinois Juvenile Court and those in other states that folksved in its path were (and, in many

cases,
remain) drastically different from adult

1013-1

No juries. The matter was decided by judges who wore regular clothes instead of black robes and sat at
a table with the other participants rather than behind

Parens Patriae A doctrine that holds that the state has a responsibility to look after the well-being of
children and to assume the ole of parent if necessary

nube hac engaged in behavior deemed

placed in state-re

and grounds for

committed by a

offenses are most

authorities.

CAREER TIP Mes

require students in

These states empla

laws by working
cious patterns of a

Edit & Cr

La bench. Because the primary focus of the con on the child and not the crime, the judge had was
discretion in disposing of each case.

Different terminology. To reduce the stigma of crimi nal proceedings, "petitions" were issued instead of
"warrants." The children were not "defendants, but "respondents," and they were not "found guilty" bu
"adjudicated delinquent."

No adversarial relationship. Instead of trying to determine guilt or innocence, the parties involved in the
juvenile court worked together in the best inter ests of the child, with the emphasis on rather than
punishment. rehabilitation

▸ Confidentiality. To avoid "saddling" the child with a criminal past, juvenile court hearings and records
were kept sealed, and the proceedings were closed to the public.

By 1945, every state had a juvenile court system mod eled after the first Illinois court. For the most part,
these courts were able to operate without interference until the 1960s and the onset of the juvenile
rights movement.

13-1c Status Offending

After the first juvenile court was established in Illinois, the Chicago Bar Association described its purpose
as

24°C