NCJ Number
              15550
          Journal
  Juvenile Justice Volume: 25 Issue: 2 Dated: (AUGUST 1974) Pages: 2-9
Date Published
  1974
Length
              8 pages
          Annotation
              ARGUMENT THAT CHILDREN HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE 'PUNISHED' FOR WHAT THEY HAVE 'DONE' AS OPPOSED TO 'TREATED' FOR WHAT SOMEONE ELSE THINKS THEY 'ARE'.
          Abstract
              THE AUTHOR CITES THE 'PERSON IN NEED OF SUPERVISION' DESIGNATION AS A PRIME EXAMPLE OF THIS DISTINCTION. HE ARGUES AGAINST A JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM BASED ON A PHILOSOPHY OF REHABILITATION AND TREATMENT HAS DEMONSTRATED A BUILT-IN POTENTIAL FOR ABUSE. ALSO MENTIONED ARE THE FACT THAT SUCH A SYSTEM HAS BEEN PROVEN TO WORK AND THE IMPLICATIONS OF USING BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION THERAPY AS PART OF JUVENILE TREATMENT AND REHABILITATION. THE AUTHOR ALSO POINTS OUT THAT ACCEPTED PRACTICES FOR THE TREATMENT PHILOSOPHY - INDETERMINATE SENTENCES, INVASION OF PRIVACY (IN THE NAME OF INDIVIDUALIZATION OF TREATMENT), AND BROAD JUDICIAL AND CORRECTIONAL DISCRETION DO NOT ACCOMPANY PUNISHMENT. IT IS ARGUED THAT, IN ADDITION, PUNISHMENT WOULD IMPLY TIME LIMITS AND WOULD INVOLVE THE SMALLEST POSSIBLE NUMBER OF CHILDREN, SINCE IT WOULD NOT BE VIEWED AS A DESIRABLE DISPOSITION.
          