would have to fight is segregation. Because as long as you are not integrated, the educational system can't produce the kind of people who have the security, feel secure enough, to advance in our society. Mr. ESHLEMAN. I thank the chairman.

Mr. O'HARA of Michigan. Judge, I found your testimony here very stimulating. I also had an opportunity to read your remarks before the Judge Baker Guidance Center at Harvard. Of course, I am not an expert on the responsibilities and problems of the juvenile court system. What information I have comes from the newspapers, but it seems to me that the juvenile courts are primarily trying to cope with very, very immediate social problems.

And they do not have sufficient personnel, talent, money, and so forth, to go at very many of the deeper problems.

The problem is that by the time a young person appears before a juvenile court, very often he is a danger to society, and the court has to find some way to cope with that.

Judge BAZELON. On an emergency basis. That is right.

Mr. O'HARA of Michigan. On an emergency basis. Judge Lincoln, who is going to testify this afternoon, has pointed out that one of his problems has been how to deal with these kids after all your juvenile detention facilities, your youth homes, and training schools are filled. That indeed is the problem.

While the juvenile court has a number of functions which you described in your paper, one of them, of course, involves the protection of society, and to an extent punishment of delinquency. I have been watching the juvenile court system over a number of years, and I see what happens.

If a young person is in just a little trouble, he is handled through the juvenile court system, as he ought to be, rather than being treated as an adult. This makes sense, of course, because he is not an adult. But the minute that child gets in serious trouble, really serious trouble, and there is a great outcry in the paper, and his crime makes the front page, the first thing that happens to him is that he is waived to an adult court.

Judge BAZELON. And he is the one that needs that help most.

Mr. O'HARA of Michigan. So the way the system actually operates in all too many instances is that if he is guilty of something that in the regular judicial system would probably result in his being placed on probation or fined $50, then they take care of him in the juvenile court. If, on the other hand, his crime is of a greater magnitude, he is sent to the regular judicial system for prosecution. The result may be imprisonment for 15 to 25 years which is far longer than the juvenile court is permitted to detain a juvenile.

This procedure seems to me to be of great perversion of the system. Judge BAZELON. I am not exactly free to comment on that, because I have a case pending before me that involves that very problem. Mr. O'HARA of Michigan. I won't ask you to comment on it, then. Judge BAZELON. But that was the comment in the Kent case, that went to the Supreme Court. There the boy waived to the adult court. And he was tried for robbery and rape, I think it was. He was found not guilty by reason of insanity of rape and given 30 to 90 years for I think robbery or murder, I forget what it was, but the point was

that the reason why he was waived was not because of the crime, at least for the record, but because there were no facilities to take care of him. There were no facilities to take care of a boy that disturbed, in the juvenile court.

No facilities were available to him, it said. And even if they were, they said they would only be able to hold him for 5 years, and that was not enough time to take care of a boy who was that seriously disturbed. So, without talking about any particular case, this gets back to the problem that there are no facilities.

Now, I said to these people in Boston who had come back there, who had been trained at the Judge Baker clinic in the past 15 years from all over the world: Look, you have been out in the world preaching this gospel and starting clinics all through the country and the world, and juvenile courts and so forth. It seems to me that you are really acting as society's janitors. You are taking in all the debris and kicking it under the rug. You are taking these kids, and you have none of the facilities and none of the things you need to deal with them. Why don't you cry out against it? Why don't you question your own usefulness?

And then of course I admitted: Who wants to question his own usefulness? Who wants to spend a whole lifetime doing something and then wake up some morning saying, "What have I been doing?"

So instead of that, you just keep going and make the best of what somebody hands you.

Mr. O'HARA of Michigan. I agree with that. The reason for a juvenile court system is to give special treatment to delinquent juveniles, who are in need of supervision or are dependent, or whatever these definitions are in the State laws, I think this specialized treatment is a great idea.

But we just haven't been able to come up with the wherewithal to convert that idea into a reality. So what it turns out to be all too often is a punishment or a holding operation, and not a very good one. When we do nothing, or substantially nothing, there is a very great possibility that this youth will become a hardened criminal-a two or three time loser. Since we really have very few chances to do anything with him we shouldn't miss any opportunity. The fact that we neglect the juvenile problem to the extent we do, not only doesn't make sense in humanitarian terms; it just doesn't make any kind of economic sense or any logical sense at all.

Judge BAZELON. We can all agree to that. But the chairman is a very practical fellow. He asked me the other night, "What do you suggest we do? What are your recommendations?"

Well, in answer to both of you, I can say that the problem is a very, very difficult one. It isn't only a question of money. It is a question, I would almost put it, of love and money.

I don't think we care. Even after you care and even after you put the money into it, you haven't got the problem solved. Because it may very well be that the thing is so deep-well, if it is the economic system, you are not going to solve it with a psychiatrist, or you are not going to solve it with 50 social workers or 150. But I have no objections and I think it is very important-to trying everything we can. We are not going to change the economic system soon, so that

these people have the kind of chance we ought to have. So in the meantime we ought to try anything we can, and we learn something in connection with failure. We learned a lot at the time I was putting my efforts forth in the Cardozo project in failing to learn why you fail. And that is very important.

Mr. O'HARA of Michigan. I would like to break the problem down into two parts. In the first place, I think the immediate need is some kind of help for agencies dealing with juvenile delinquents, so they can do their immediate emergency job better. That is the job that can't wait for research. It is a job that is here today, here tomorrow, here the next day. And I think they need to do something right away.

And granted that is only a small part of the answer to juvenile delinquency, at least it is something concrete that we can do immediately.

Judge BAZELON. Yes. It is a spur. But on the other hand, there is a danger in it too. The danger is that we will evolve without knowing it, a system of preventive detention, under the guise of treatment, when there is no treatment.

In other words, when you detain confined children on a promise of treatment where there is no treatment, you have set up a system of preventive detention. And unfortunately the kids that get thrown in there are not the middle-class kids. When I say "unfortunately" I don't want to see them thrown in either.

Mr. O'HARA of Michigan. What I am saying is: We have to patch up the old vehicle while we design the new one.

Judge BAZELON. Yes. That is right. But you see, we can use our concern to do something great, but we can always use it in a bad way. Mr. O'HARA of Michigan. I would not want to do one without the other. I assure you of that.

Mr. PUCINSKI. Mrs. Mink.

Mrs. MINK. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I wonder, in connection with the words "detention institutions," were you including in that, the suggestions that have been made with reference to halfway houses?

Judge BAZELON. Well, no, there is always such a wide disparity be tween the concept and the actuality. Conceptually, the halfway house is a very good thing.

As I understand what most people mean by halfway houses, I would not say so, because there would be a great effort to integrate the children into the community. No, what I am talking about is this kind of thing. You see, we won't have a system of preventive detention frontally; that is, in straight forward terms. Because it sounds bad; it is bad. It has moral problems; it has legal problems.

But the danger is that we will do it under the guise of do-gooding. and under the guise, under the label, of treating kids, we confine them. That is dangerous. That is also a problem that we have in the mental health field, the public mental health field, where we want to get rid of people and we don't want to do it in a nasty way, so one of the nice ways of doing it, and I put "nice" in quotes, is to find them of unsound mind and put them away where they won't bother us.

Now, these kids are bothering us. And there is a temptation, unless we are very careful, of evolving a system of preventive detention for these children. And that would be horrible.

Mrs. MINK. Now, in your work under the Joint Commission, which, according to your testimony, was established only recently, one of your duties, as indicated in your statement, was the study of our resources, and the treatment of these children who have exhibited antisocial behavior. In the process of your work in the Commission, have you been able to arrive at rough estimates of the numbers of children that are currently being detained in the so-called child institutions because of their antisocial behavior?

Judge BAZELON. That is one of the things that I am insisting we learn about. We are just in the process of that now.

Mrs. MINK. The Commission is already undertaking this assignment. Is that correct?

Judge BAZELON. Yes.

Mrs. MINK. I ask this question because one of the recommendations you make in your statement is that we include this as one of the directions to the Secretary.

Judge BAZELON. That's right.

Mrs. MINK. And I was interested to know what the tie-in is in your Commission and the new responsibilities we are going to establish under this new bill.

Judge BAZELON. Well, we find that there is a dearth of figures. That is one of the surprising things to us. But as you have pointed out, we were slow in getting started. I doubt whether or not we will be ready by June of 1968 with what we are supposed to do.

Mrs. MINK. Are there any estimates you can provide the committee in terms of the numbers?

Judge BAZELON. I can't now. But if I do come into possession of such figures, I will furnish them.

I think it is very important for this committee and the Joint Commission to collaborate, whenever possible. Because you want the same information we are getting. And of course the fact of the matter is that we are getting it for you.

There are some great problems. I was on the President's Panel on Mental Retardation. And I learned there, for example, that four out of five mentally retarded people, children-retardation is not due to genetic and physiological factors.

In other words, you can't identify a brain lesion on an EEG or a skull X-ray. But on form 5, the retardation is due to a deprivation of some intellectual or emotional stimuli at a critical time in their development.

Now, if you take the one child who has the brain damage, that you can identify, let us say he has an operating level of 50, and you take the other four, and they have an operating level of 50, our society can understand the one and be willing to treat him, as a person that is disabled, but not the other four. They are just dumb.

I suggest that the four no more choose the disability than the one. But our society and our law does not condone ignorance, even though the ignorance is not the fault of the individual. And I think that underlies much of our problem, too. There are some old notions that we have about these matters.

Mrs. MINK. How has the Commission gone into the problem of what happens to a child who has been at one time declared a delinquent or has made an appearance before a juvenile court?

Is there any uniformity in the regard that the community has for this child subsequently, in terms of the label the child must carry subsequently in looking for a job? Is there any permanency of this record as he matures into adulthood, and is this one of the problems?

Judge BAZELON. I don't know. I don't think it is one of the great problems. I think the treatment the child receives is the thing that makes the mark. I think that makes a difference as to what happens to him as he develops. I think that twists. I think that is bad, generally. Now, all of this is subject to some exception. For instance, in the District of Columbia-I think in my speech I point it out-how many cases is it a judge has to hear every day?

Mrs. MINK. Fourteen per day.

Judge BAZELON. Fourteen per day. Well, it is impossible, utterly impossible. I mean, to understand the 14 situations and deal with them on an individualized basis. Utterly impossible. You are beaten before you start.

Mr. FORD. Would the gentleman yield?

In regard to this juvenile record, in my own State of Michigan we bend over backward in every way possible to prevent this. I did have a record which shows that in a large number of our misdemeanor cases and also in felony administration we acted as a magistrate. We found that the provision of a good case for probation was the guy who had a juvenile record, who, having passed his 17th birthday, came to court with his first adult offense. The probation department had pretty good luck with some of these boys, by pointing out to them that they were getting a second chance.

And they did convince them that they could have confidence in the fact that they were getting a new start, and that they were kind of blowing the whole thing and that they were going out with a clean slate. In this respect, the very careful attention that is given to protecting the juvenile record turns out to be a plus factor, in providing a very definite point at which you could ask a young person or attempt to reason with him and give him an opportunity to turn himself around and take that second chance.

Judge BAZELON. I am sure that works in a great many cases. But on the other hand I am always struck by the fact that you are sending a boy back to the place that produced him. You are sending him back to the very conditions. And so you are asking an awful lot for him to overcome and override the air he breathes that produced the kind of behavior.

Now, these situations are different. The boys are different, the families are different, and there are different things to conjure with. But by and large, no matter what you do, if he has to go back to the same conditions, he has two strikes on him.

Mrs. MINK. Judge, could you advise the committee whether you have found in the course of your study and work in the field of juvenile delinquency any model systems that have evolved in cities and communities with reference to their specific handling of the problem of juvenile offenders?

Judge BAZELON. No, I have not. I know some very fine juvenile court judges, just wonderful human beings. But they don't get the facilities, and they don't get the resources to work with.