Page images
PDF
EPUB

search this out." I am enclosing several statements which seem to bear out some of my thinking.

Again, let me thank you for the courtesy you extended and if I can be of help to you in any way, please call upon me.

Very truly yours,

E. H. ROYFE, Director of Programs and Services.

This article is by Richard Perlman, Chief of Juvenile Delinquency Statistics, Children's Bureau, U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare:

"In 1957, more than 600,000 cases of delinquency were referred to juvenile courts. These involved an estimated one-half million different children or about 2.3 percent of all children in the vulnerable age group-10 through 17-in the United States. This percentage represents the proportion of children involved in court delinquency cases in 1 year-1957, and it is frequently cited to show the size of the delinquency problem. A much better idea of the size of the problem can be gained by estimating the percentage of all children who will become involved in at least one court delinquency case during their adolescence. Generally this covers an 8-year period, from 10 through 17 years of age. Allowing for repeaters who are involved in about one-third of all delinquency cases, this percentage is roughly estimated to be as high as 12 percent if the 1957 rate continues. Considering boys alone it would be much higher, roughly 20 percent." S. E. Hathaway and E. D. Monachesi, in reporting on their work with the Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory, show that 22 percent of all boys and 8 percent of all girls in the ninth grade of the Minneapolis schools had appeared before the court, the police or both within a period of 2 years.2

[ocr errors]

Bernard Lander, in his study of juvenile delinquency in Baltimore, presents the following data:

"Approximately 40 percent of the Negro boys aged 14 to 15 and 26 percent of the Negro boys aged 10 to 13 were registered in Baltimore juvenile court on delinquency petitions in the 4-year period covered by this study. Of the white male population group, approximately 12 percent of the 14 to 15 age category and 7 percent of the 10 to 13 age group were in court as alleged delinquents."

[ocr errors]

Hon. WAYNE MORSE.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, GOVERNOR'S COMMITTEE ON CHILDREN AND YOUTH, Harrisburg, June 10, 1959.

U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

MY DEAR SENATOR MORSE: It was very encouraging to learn from the Honorable Joseph S. Clark that the Bureau of the Budget has taken a favorable position on Senate bill 694 which would provide for Federal leadership and financial participation in a program to prevent and treat juvenile delinquency more effectively.

Enclosed is a copy of my testimony presented to the House subcommittee under the leadership of the Honorable Carl Elliott on behalf of the Friends Committee on National Legislation. It is of the greatest importance that any legislative provision include both demonstration and training. We need to develop fresh approaches and for various local communities to share their findings with others. This prevents duplication of effort and brings about a more constructive approach which builds on the most productive programs. At the same time, however, we are confronted by a dearth of trained personnel. The problem of maladaptive behavior baffles the expert let alone untrained personnel.

It is, therefore, of paramount importance that we have training and demonstration go hand in hand. We urge that every effort be made to pass a bill which will provide an appropriation which is more nearly adequate to the scope and crucial need of the problem.

Cordially yours,

ROBERT C. TABER, Chairman.

1 "Delinquency Prevention, the Size of the Problem." the Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, vol. 322, March 1959, p. 3.

2 S. R. Hathaway and E. D. Monachesi, "Analyzing and Predicting Juvenile Delinquency With the MMPI," University of Minnesota Press, 1953. p. 109.

3 Bernard Lander. "Toward an Understanding of Juvenile Delinquency," Columbia University Press, 1954, p. 20.

STATEMENT OF ROBERT C. TABER ON PENDING BILLS ON JUVENILE DELINQUENCY PREVENTION AND CONTROL

My name is Robert C. Taber. I am director of the Division of Pupil Personnel and Counseling of the Philadelphia School District in Pennsylvania and chairman of the Governor's Committee on Children and Youth of Pennsylvania. I am pleased to have this opportunity to testify on behalf of the Friends Committee on National Legislation, a committee which attempts to reflect Friends thinking on a variety of issues, but which does not speak for all Friends, since the democratic organization of the Society of Friends does not lend itself to official spokesmen.

Juvenile delinquency is a matter of vital concern to us all and we support the provisions of every bill which will help mobilize energy and resources to deal with these problems.

Despite the overwhelming testimony presented during the last two congressional sessions clearly demonstrating the need for Federal leadership and funds, we have not as yet taken juvenile delinquency seriously. Only when a comprehensive bill with a substantial appropriation is passed will we have fulfilled our responsibility to troubled children.

We have reached the point where a crucial decision confronts us and time is rapidly running out. Should we make a substantial investment now to cope with a national problem by developing and demonstrating fresh approaches and expanding facilities or shall we spend more later because we have permitted a cancerous growth to get out of hand? If we fail to provide preventions and treatment facilities now, colossal expenditures will be required to fight an uphill battle because the child becomes entrenched in delinquency. Like cancer, early identification and treatment are essential if juvenile delinquents are not to become hardened criminals. If we permit the rise of delinquency to continue unabated, innocent persons will increasingly become the victims of assault and battery, mugging, rape, and murder.

Let me be more specific by drawing from my experience in Pennsylvania. Our detention facilities are overcrowded because of the lack of institutions for delinquents and mental defectives. Court-committed children are obliged to remain in detention awaiting a vacancy. As a consequence, police must illegally keep juveniles in custody in police stations until in turn there are vacancies in a detention home.

A recent study of probation services for juveniles in the State of Pennsylvania revealed that all too often probation is a token gesture because caseloads in some instances were 8 times higher than the accepted workload of 50. Not even a semblance of rehabilitation service could be offered, thereby shortchanging the child in need of close supervision and guidance. Troubled children have a right to expect more than an empty gesture. In one county, probation is a mail-order affair-an exchange of communications without any face to face contact what

soever.

Recreation, gang control, child guidance and other preventive services are woefully inadequate.

It is essential that we receive Federal funds for three purposes:

1. Demonstration projects in local communities such as adequately staffing a juvenile probation department with professionally trained workers to demonstrate what can be achieved with an acceptable caseload; such as gang control and sufficient staff in training schools to work with families before the child is discharged to their care.

2. Training of personnel is urgently needed. Every institution that I know of has authorized positions and is confronted by a shortage of trained personnel and cannot fill them. Five additional institutions have been proposed for Pennsylvania but we shall be at a loss to staff them unless we step up our training programs comparable to what the National Defense Education Act provides for the training of school counselors.

3. Grants to States for the development of more comprehensive programs at the State level where coordination generally is not adequate. Such grants, if given on a matching basis, would prompt the States to provide more generously. It would be my earnest hope that all three phases could be encompassed in a compromise bill. Its passage would have far-reaching effects. Not only would it spur us on to the development of further understanding of delinquency and

of new techniques, but would have a favorable affect on all children. If we are to hold them accountable for their behavior, as we should to encourage inner discipline, as they reach adulthood, then we cannot make idle threats. Those who get away with flouting the law and violation of probation develop attitudes of defiance toward all authority. These attitudes are contagious to all children and therefore affect their morale adversely. When corrective facilities break down at any level, a chain reaction sets in because we can no longer carry through what we indicate as the consequences of flagrant disregard of law and order.

Five million dollars is not sufficient. I would suggest that the level of an effective program might begin at $25 million the first year and rise to a level of $100 million over the next 4 years to support the three-pronged approach demonstration training and grants in aid outlined above. New York City spends approximately that amount for its youth service program alone. The Philadelphia Public Schools spend $1,500,000 for school counseling, one of the most effective services in preventing delinquency. If we were to reduce the ratio of pupils to counselor to 1 to 300 as recommended by the Conant report, we would be obliged to double our expenditure. Although we would not protest the allocations of hundreds of millions for highway and airport construction, we do urge, that appropriations for delinquency be commensurate to the magnitude of the problem. We cannot afford to permit children so desperately in need of help to remain at the bottom of the totem pole. They deserve and must have top priority if we are to preserve the well-being of our Nation.

CIRCUIT COURT FOR LANE COUNTY,

JUVENILE DEPARTMENT AND SKIPWORTH JUVENILE HOME,
Eugene, Oreg., June 4, 1959.

Hon. WAYNE MORSE,
Member of Congress,

U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR MORSE: I am deeply grateful to you for suggesting to Senator Joseph Clark, chairman of the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare that I be invited to appear before his subcommittee to testify on the pending juvenile delinquency bills, S. 694, S. 765, S. 766, S. 1090, and S. 1341.

This invitation and request for an advance written statement concerning the legislation did not reach me until late and while I was attending the National Conference on Social Welfare in San Francisco. Unfortunately my absence from the office and considerable obligations in Eugene did not make it possible for me to accept this privilege and honor.

I was not familiar with the above legislation, but through the good office of Miss Bess Williams of the U.S. Children's Bureau regional office in San Francisco, I was able to procure all but one bill and review them on May 29. Following a hurried return trip to Eugene with the assistance of our principal clerk, Mrs. Phyllis Wald, I was able to hurriedly draft a statement which was forwarded to Mr. Stewart McClure, chief clerk for the above subcommittee. My statement heartily endorsed the objectives of the pending legislation. From the standpoint of one actually working on the firing line with delinquent and neglected children, I endeavored to point out some practical uses to which this legislation might be applied.

As of this writing, I can think of so many more: for example, from May 18 through May 20, Mrs. Alice M. Low, training consultant, U.S. Children's Bureau, made it possible for this department to have a very practical and helpful consultation concerning on-the-job training for our staff. We know that this consultation will enhance our ability to help Lane County children. We are aware that the Division of Juvenile Delinquency Services of the U.S. Children's Bureau operates with a limited staff for training consultation and that it services the whole of the United States. We can appreciate now what additional personnel for this function would do for the country as a whole.

My unawareness of developments in Federal legislation in the field of juvenile delinquency points up some need for improved communications to those of us who are in the field.

It is hoped that there will be further opportunity to be of service to the U.S. Senate as well as to learn about the progress of the pending legislation. Your home is in Eugene and it is earnestly hoped that we will have the honor of your visit to the juvenile court center on your next return. We are proud of what the citizens have made possible in juvenile court services and are submitting the attached copies of our administrative reports.

It is our earnest prayer that the Congress will approve legislation to cope with the juvenile delinquency problem and you and the U.S. Senate are applauded for its efforts in this endeavor.

Cordially,

JACK GLASS, Director.

STATEMENT OF JACK GLASS, DIRECTOR OF THE LANE COUNTY, OREG., JUVENILE DEPARTMENT AND SKIPWORTH HOME

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Jack Glass. I am the director of the Lane County, Oreg., Juvenile Department and Skipworth Juvenile Home. Your committee chairman, Senator Clark, invited me to give testimony concerning Senate bills 694, 765, 766, 1090, and 1341, at the suggestion of Senator Morse, of Oregon, and a committee member. The opportunity to express my views on the proposed juvenile delinquency legislation as one who is on the actual firing line administering direct services to children in trouble or in need of protective services is deeply appreciated.

THE LANE COUNTY JUVENILE DEPARTMENT

The Lane County Juvenile Department as our agency is known is the administrative arm of the circuit court in and for the county of Lane, Oreg. Its headquarters is located at the juvenile court center, 400 Patterson Road. Eugene is the home of the University of Oregon. Lane County is the second largest in Oregon with a population of approximately 150,000 people. This county is one of the most dynamic in the Northwest. Our department provides juvenile probation, clinical, and detention services to dependent, neglected, and delinquent children requiring the services of an authoritative agency. Full details of our program and immediate objectives are contained in the two attached administrative reports for 1956-58.

The commentator is completing his 25th year in welfare work, two-thirds of which has been devoted to various aspects of juvenile corrections, and include training in social work at the University of California at Berkeley. His professional affiliations include Professional Advisory Council, NPPA; Oregon Governor's Committee on Children and Youth; vice president, Oregon Conference of Social Work, and other affiliations. Publications include authorship of the "Manual on Policies and Procedures, San Francisco Juvenile Court."

The Lane County Juvenile Department in the past 31⁄2 years has undergone a complete reorganization. It recently occupied an outstandingly designed and very functional juvenile court center housing the juvenile court, probation, clinical, and detention services. Its program is based on a blueprint resulting from a survey of juvenile court services in Lane County conducted by the National Probation & Parole Association and published in 1955. The accomplishments of this department reflect good community and official suport as represented by a juvenile advisory council, the county commissioners, and the judges of the circuit court. Good communications have developed between the department and both public and private agencies. Exceptionally good liaison has been developed with the police, welfare, health departments, and schools. Achievements to date also reflect the dedicated services of an unusually fine staff of workers functioning on a multidisciplinary basis and with real team spirit. We are not immodest when we state that the department ranks among the top juvenile court departments in the United States. We measure well up in terms of the basic standards prescribed by the National Probation & Parole Association. The Division of Juvenile Delinquency Services of the U.S. Children's Bureau is familiar with our program as two consultants have recently visited our department and a third is expected the end of June.

SUMMARY EVALUATIVE STATEMENT OF PROPOSED LEGISLATION

The objective of the proposed legislation to provide Federal leadership coordination and financial assistance in the diminution control and treatment of the problem of national juvenile delinquency are heartily endorsed. Provision for support to State and local endeavors, both public and private, e.g. :

1. Support to existing programs.

2. Research into causation evaluation of currently effective methods for diagnosis and treatment as well as new methods.

3. Establishment of special projects.

4. Training of personnel are all practical and vitally needed objectives. The commentator did not receive the invitation to make this statement until May 29 while attending the national conference on social work in San Francisco and has not had opportunity to make an exhaustive study of the proposed legislation. No endeavor is attempted to evaluate all of the legislation or all of the particular aspects represented. Notwithstanding this, the following is quite apparent:

1. Juvenile delinquency is no longer an emergency, it is a national catastrophe, and Federal leadership for mobilizing all forces and resources toward solution of the problem is long past due.

2. A crash program for the solution of the problem is now in order. We have many precedents already for crash programs as witnessed by the tackling of such problems as atomic energy and immunization of poliomyelitis. While research is important timewise and for practical results, direct aid to existing programs is mandatory.

3. Every moment of delay means children who are irretrievably lost to rehabilitation and the legislation should operate to get help into the hands of the workers on the firing line as soon as possible.

Our greatest criticism of the proposed legislation is that it does not seem to provide sufficient funds for a real crash program. While there is probably less than $100 million to be appropriated in the proposed legislation over a period of years for a juvenile delinquency problem solving, we appropriate in a single year more than $38 billion for national defense. Actually the growing lawlessness our adult and juvenile populace is a dangerous undermining of our internal security and hence our national security.

Notwithstanding the foregoing statement, I applaud the U.S. Senate of the 86th Congress for taking a giant step forward toward the solution of the juvenile delinquency program.

LIMITED STATE AND LOCAL RESOURCES CURTAIL EFFECTIVE JUVENILE COURT AND CHILD

WELFARE SERVICES

The commentator advocates the utilization of State and local resources for the solution of the juvenile delinquency problem to the nth degree. However, it is quite apparent that State and local resources are not only insufficient but represent such variations in magnitude that the achievement of any nationwide standard of the needed services is beyond achievement. Experience in juvenile court and related work reveals that whether it be on a local or State level that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. For example, although much has been achieved in the reorganization of juvenile court services in Lane County, Oreg., it is rapidly being confronted with a problem because of increased demands for service, some of which should be provided by other agencies in the community. These agencies either are not geared to meet the services or are nonexistent. The Juvenile Department of Lane County is completely financed by local funds. The county budget committee which has given fine support to the reorganized services and building program indicated its inability this year to grant needed additional field probation and auxiliary staff. With a growing community, other needs, and definite local limits in revenue sources, there was indication that this was as far as the county could go at this time. In face of a 16 percent rise in the department's intake for 1958 and mounting probation services caseload, the department will be faced with reducing its standard of services. To complicate matters, it does not appear that the other three key agencies in the community, namely, the welfare department, police, and schools will augment their services. There is no indication that psychiatric services will be extended by the county health department and there seems to be no immediate prospect for a private family welfare agency, the greatest current

« PreviousContinue »