NCJ Number
61091
Journal
Ohio State Law Journal Volume: 39 Issue: 2 Dated: (1978) Pages: 327-346
Date Published
1978
Length
20 pages
Annotation
THE LEGAL BASIS ON WHICH INTERSTATE PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN MIGHT BE MADE OR CHALLENGED IS SUMMARIZED IN THIS ARTICLE WITH EMPHASIS ON THE OFFICIALS' AUTHORITY TO SEND CHILDREN OUT OF THEIR HOME STATES.
Abstract
COURTS AND EXECUTIVE AGENCIES, THROUGH THEIR OFFICIAL DECISIONS AND INFORMAL CONCURRENCE, SEND CHILDREN ACROSS STATE BOUNDARIES FOR PLACEMENT IN FACILITIES AND INSTITUTIONS FAR FROM THEIR HOME COMMUNITIES. BASIC QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE LEGALITY OF THIS PRACTICE, ESPECIALLY CONCERNING THE AUTHORITY OF THE COURTS TO SEND CHILDREN AWAY FROM THEIR HOMES AND STILL MAINTAIN PROPER SUPERVISION OF THE CHILDREN, ARE INFREQUENTLY ASKED. OHIO LAW AFFECTING INTERSTATE PLACEMENTS IS SIMILAR TO THAT OF OTHER STATES. LIKE MOST JURISDICTIONS, OHIO IS A MEMBER OF THE INTERSTATE COMPACT ON THE PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN. BUT OHIO LAW IS UNIQUE IN PROVIDING STATUTORY AUTHORITY FOR INTERSTATE PLACEMENTS TO OHIO JUVENILE COURTS AND THE OHIO YOUTH COMMISSION. THE STATUTES OF MOST STATES DO NOT EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZE SUCH PLACEMENTS. SOME STATE CONSTITUTIONS CONTAIN PROHIBITIONS OF INTERSTATE PLACEMENT, AND SEVERAL OTHERS CONTAIN PROVISIONS THAT MAY BE APPLICABLE TO OFFICIAL PLACEMENTS OF DELINQUENT OR STATUS OFFENDERS. CASE LAW HAS DETERMINED THE EXISTENCE OF A RIGHT TO TREATMENT FOR JUVENILES PREMISED ON DUE PROCESS, EQUAL PROTECTION, AND EIGHTH AMENDMENT GROUNDS. STATES HAVE JUSTIFIED RESTRICTIONS ON INDIVIDUALS' LIBERTIES BY ASSERTING THE NEED FOR SERVICES, BUT IF SUCH SERVICES ARE NOT PROVIDED, THEN THE STATES LOSE THE LEGAL BASIS FOR THE RESTRICTIONS. FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT ARGUMENTS AND ISSUES OF THE RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION HAVE BEEN RAISED, BUT JUDICIAL DECISIONS HAVE CONSTRUED STATUTES THAT CONTAIN NO GEOGRAPHIC LIMITATIONS ON PLACEMENT TO PERMIT INTERSTATE PLACEMENTS. FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. (TWK)