Page images

Mr. HURLEY. Senator, with respect to Big Brothers, recently they organized one in Wilmington, and they restricted their activities merely to a boy, say, whose father was deceased, or the parents were divorced or something. When we tried to get them involved in help and counseling and delinquent from the court, the response wasno, he has a father. He may not know where his father is but here again I think it illustrates the particular point of view or philosophy of the private agency as to what it wants to do.

Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Is there a coordinating function that you see which is worth while between, say, the offices of the juvenile courts, the correctional personnel, voluntary agencies, to try and sort of coordinate efforts that are directed toward young people in a given community? Do you know of any now? Do you think it would be worth while?

Mr. WHITLATCH. I think you could do much more in this regard. We have I am sure in Cleveland a much better organized system of welfare agencies than we have in many places. We have the Cleveland Welfare Federation, that tries to bring us all together, public and private, but within the federation there is an emphasis on the private. And as I indicated, over the years, in modern development, it has been the public agencies that have been taking over more and more of social work functions. We do need more liaison, I am sure, and some of this is thwarted by the fact that we are all overworked and preoccupied with our own operation-we ought to have more time for working out our mutual problems.

Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Thank you very much. We appreciate your comments. I haven't had a chance to review your prepared statement, but I will look forward to reading it.

Dr. Leonard Cottrell.

(The prepared statements and material submitted by Judge Hurley and Judge Whitlatch follow :)



Honorable Senator Clark, chairman of the Subcommittee on Employment, Manpower, and Poverty and members of this honorable committee, my appearance here today is to state the position of the National Council of Juvenile Court Judges concerning the Juvenile Delinquency Prevention Act 1967 (Senate Bill 1248 and House Bill 12120).

The National Council of Juvenile Court Judges is a national non-profit organization vitally concerned with the improvement of administration of justice for and in behalf of the youth of this nation. The 1965 National Council at its National Convention passed a resolution which resolved:

"Now, therefore, be it resolved that this convention of the National Council of Juvenile Court Judges go on record as urging the Federal government to provide funds on a matching basis to the several states and/or counties thereof, for the correction, redirection and education of delinquent youth, and

"Be it further resolved that the officers of the National Council of Juvenile Court Judges take the necessary action with the Department of Health, Education and Welfare and/or any other appropriate federal office or department to initiate and implement the intent and the purpose of this resolution."

Recommendation: Passage of the Juvenile Delinquency Prevention Act 1967.It is the recommendation that the Senate pass Senate Bill 1248 as it basically achieves the aim of the Council's Resolution and, also it follows the recommendation of the Task Force on Juvenile Delinquency (The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice).

Recommendation: House of Representatives bill 12120.-It is the position of the National Council that H.R. 12120 also meets the requirements of the Resolu

tions adopted by the National Council in 1965 concerning Federal Aid for Juvenile Facilities.

Personal statement of Honorable Joseph P. Hurley, chairman of the Committee for Federal Funds for Juvenile Problems

It is understood that the following observations are personal and do not necessarily reflect the position of the National Council of Juvenile Court Judges. Recommendation: Research and technical assistance.—It is felt that H.R. Bill 12120 should be amended to contain provisions for research demonstration and technical assistance. It is felt that continuing research is absolutely necessary if the objective of the legislation bills are to be obtained. Report 47 (September 19, 1967) accompanying this bill submitted by the Committee on Education recommended adequate research provisions and procedures under Title III. Recommendation: Provisions for training professional and non-professional personnel. Both Bills should include necessary training for Juvenile Court personnel. This would include professional and non-professional personnel. One of the basic problems that confronts those who are attempting to solve the problem of delinquency is the shortage of adequate personnel. The turnover is fantastic.

Recommendation: Training facilities.-It is my considered opinion that this section is one of the most vital sections of both bills. Training facilities are woefully inadequate. The need for training facilities, halfway houses, boys' homes, and youth hostels are absolutely essential. It is only when a youth can be placed in a proper setting can the process of rehabilitation be of any value.

In conclusion I personally feel that both Bills reflect legislation which will be of great value to the nation, the states, the community, and, of course, the youth concerned. It deservedly reflects credit to those who have assisted in its formulation.

I wish to thank you for your courtesy.


Senator Clark and members of this honorable committee, I appear in behalf of an organization whose members are daily in viable communication with the delinquent youth of our nation. It is we who have the direct responsibility for the control, correction, education and redirection of the troubled youth who constitute the grave national problem which this legislation is designed to meet. The ever rising idea of juvenile delinquency has brought much criticism on the Juvenile Courts. We are expected to do the job but in spite of our pleas, local and state governments have not furnished us the necessary facilities with which to discharge our responsibilities. We are like the Israelites of old who cried out to the Pharoh "No straw is given to your servants yet they say to us 'Make bricks!' And behold your servants are beaten ; but the fault is in your own people.” Exodus 6: 16.

As the late Senator Estes Kefauver said after many months service as Chairman of the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency: "There's nothing wrong with the juvenile court idea, there's nothing wrong with the great majority of juvenile courts, that a little understanding, community support and proper staffing won't cure."

In general, we strongly favor and support H.R. 12120. Our Council's resolution adopted in 1965 is completely supportive of this legislation. We see the great present need of the Juvenile Courts being met by Sec. 105 (2) which provides for: (A) Combination Detention and Diagnostic Facilities, (B) Halfway Houses, (C) Small, residential community based facilities for diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation of youths, and (D) Training schools for the rehabilitation and education of youth in the custody of a public agency charged with the care of delinquent youth.

While we would not detract from the importance of (A), (B), and (C) above in the care of delinquents we are persuaded that because of the massive numbers of delinquent children now in need of good care and training that the training schools, (D) above, offer the best hope providing the requisite care for the overwhelming number of delinquent children now in need of placement outside their own homes

A recent survey of 13 states showed an existing need for 17,500 training school beds. The survey further indicated that in almost all of the states surveyed present training schools for delinquent children were grossly overcrowded and that the problem of overcrowding was being met by premature discharge resulting in a high rate of recidivism-60% in a state which kept youth for the shortest period.

Commitments to the Ohio Youth Commission increased 50% during the last four years alone, going from 2,500 in 1962 to 3,745 in fiscal 1966. It is estimated that by 1970, the Commission will need an additional 3,200 beds over its present capacity of 1,800 to provide adequate care for the number of children that will be committed to its custody. That this estimate is conservative is demonstrated by a recent survey conducted by the Ohio Legislative Service Commission of the Ohio Legislature in which the state's juvenile court judges reported that they would have committed an additional 2,000 children to the Youth Commission in 1965 had adequate facilities been available.

Detention facilities are sorely needed in Ohio and throughout the United States. Only 22 of Ohio's 88 countries have Detention Homes. In the other 66 counties children are detained in the County Jail or in whatever makeshift facility the judge can provide. The 1967 Legislature failed to pass legislation which would have provided State aid for the establishment of Detention Homes to serve several contiguous rural counties.

The ultimate answer to the delinquency problem is prevention and therefore Part B of the Act is especially laudable. There is now a great need for additional prevention services in most large communities and a definite paucity of these services exists in the smaller communities.

The objective of the Act as to the creation of training schools will be greatly impeded by Sec. 306 under Title III. This section provides that only 20% of grants to the State may be retained by the State for its own programs. In prac tically all the States training schools are created and operated by the State. Being accustomed to this historically local communities and counties will not take on this new tax responsibility even though granted Federal aid. This has been demonstrated in Ohio where the State provided a subsidy to the counties for construction and operating costs. Only one county has taken advantage of this plan in its two years of existence. Thus it is to the States that we must look for the construction for the much needed training schools. In some States other services such as probation, diagnostic facilities and delinquency prevention programs are provided by the State. Hence the development programs contemplated by the Act would be enhanced if States were permitted to retain a greater share of their allocation than the 20% now provided. We would estimate that 60% of the allocation should be retained by the State if the end sought by this legislation is to be attained.

We believe that the Bill should contain a provision for national private agencies experienced in the training of Juvenile Court personnel to apply to the Secretary for allocations to carry on training institutes. Among such agencies are the National Council of Juvenile Court Judges and the National Council on Crime and Delinquency. Allocations for this purpose could be made from the 25 per centum which is made discretionary with the Secretary in Sec. 302(b). Senator Clark and members of the committee, I personally and the National Council of Juvenile Court Judges are most appreciative of the opportunity which has been given us to present our views on this legislation. Thank you for your courteous attention.


Whereas there is great and grave concern in all of the United States concerning the increased incidents of crime among both our youth and adult population, and

Whereas there is abundant evidence that many adult criminals had a history of criminal activity in their youth, and

Whereas it has been demonstrated that proper facilities for the education and redirection of delinquent youth can be the constructive influence needed to deter the youth from criminal activity in adulthood and make of said youth useful productive citizens, and

Whereas state, county and private facilities for delinquent children throughout this nation are grossly inadequate and greatly overcrowded, and

Whereas the past failure of state and local governments to provide the sorely needed institutions has created this problem and has demonstrated that state and local governments will not and probably cannot meet the present pressing requirements and the ever increasing need of our expanding youth population, and Whereas the proper redirection and education of delinquent youth would greatly reduce poverty in future generations,

Now, therefore, be it resolved that this convention of the National Council of Juvenile Court Judges go on record as urging the Federal government to provide funds on a matching basis to the several states and/or counties thereof, for the correction, redirection and education of delinquent youth, and

Be it further resolved that the officers of the National Council of Juvenile Court Judges take the necessary action with the Department of Health, Education and Welfare and/or any other appropriate federal office or department to initiate and implement the intent and the purpose of this resolution.

[From the Plain Dealer, Apr. 24, 1967]


(By J. F. Saunders)

The realization that the streets of most large American cities are not safe for travel, especially after dark, tempers any exulting over freedoms this nation offers.

New Yorkers go home at twilight and lock their doors. In Washington, a hotel doorman is likely to suggest that a visitor limit a stroll to well lighted areas. In Cleveland, special police measures have been taken to combat street attacks. In all of these precautions, the old custom of locking the barn after theft of the horse is being followed. Instead of acting to nip crime careers in the making, society waits until the hoodlum is beyond redemption and then seeks expensive protection from him.

There is substantial evidence that not many criminals wait until adulthood to begin their apprenticeship outside the law. Rare is the veteran lawbreaker who does not have a record as a juvenile delinquent. And many of the street crimes are committed by juvenile gangs.

For the public's greater protection, it would appear to be the part of wisdom and economic efficiency to concentrate upon delinquency prevention as a means of giving the streets back to the citizens who use them lawfully.

But while the federal government is lavishing vast amounts of money on public and college educations and on school buildings, it does nothing toward construction or operation of schools for delinquent children, a growing segment of the population in desperate need of help.

Judge Walter G. Whitlatch of Juvenile Court recently polled 12 states from Maine to Oregon on their existing needs in juvenile detention and found a shortage of 14,499 beds. None of the 12 states matched Ohio's shortage of 3.000 beds.

Most states are paroling delinquents not because they have become rehabilitated but because the states have a waiting list of new offenders ready for the space.

In Cuyahoga County last year, 200 youngsters were returned to correctional institutions for violation of parole. Their crimes would not have been committed had the state been able to care for them until they were deemed ready for return to society.

Had you been assaulted on a street by a hoodlum paroled because the state had no place to keep him you would be rightly outraged over a blind spot in federal outlays which blocks any spending for protection of the public from physical harm.

Special schools are needed in the United States today to accommodate at least 75,000 children, who could be rescued from lives of crime by the proper attention


This need is so urgent that use of existing facilities that can be rapidly converted to correctional programs is the only way the gap can be partly bridged in time. Building programs on drawing boards would become available too late to rescue the youngsters needing help.

Established training schools have demonstrated what a spectacular job they can do in preparing troubled and wayward children for useful citizenship. In such schools, truancy, of course, is no problem because the youngster cannot go any place except to his assigned class.

Away from environments harmful to them, many youngsters buckle down and do excellent work. There just are not enough such places where they can be sent. Confinement, by itself, does more harm than good. Training is the key to correctional success.

At their 1965 convention, the National Council of Juvenile Court Judges urged the federal government to provide funds on a matching basis to states and counties for the education of delinquent youth.

Nothing has happened but some expression of interest from a public wanting its streets made safe again could exert strong pressure.

Estimates of additional bed space needed by a sample 13 State juvenile programs to provide a minimum of 1 year's care for their wards

Illinois (Youth Commission).

Maine (Department of Mental Health and Corrections) (tentative).
Florida (Division of Child Training Schools) __
Maryland (State Department of Public Welfare).
New York (Department of Social Welfare).
Pennsylvania (Department of Public Welfare).
Minnesota (Department of Corrections) –
North Carolina (Board of Juvenile Correction).
Wisconsin (Department of Public Welfare).
Kentucky (Department of Child Welfare).
Michigan (Department of Social Services).
Oregon (State Board of Control)__

Ohio (Youth Services Advisory Board).

Total additional bed space needed‒‒‒‒‒‒‒

1 Based on current and projected needs during the next 5 years.

Number of additional bed

space needed 1














17, 499

2 Estimated on the basis of alternative community services rather than institutional bed space.


Dr. COTTRELL. Senator Kennedy, I have a very brief statement. I have also a prepared statement of a fuller development of the position, and a book which Dr. Stanton Wheeler and I published on the general problem of delinquency.

I believe Mr. Smith has put those documents in the hands of the committee.

I appreciate this opportunity to speak to you in behalf of the Juvenile Delinquency Prevention Act of 1967 (S. 1248). My name is Leonard S. Cottrell, Jr., and I am a social scientist employed as secretary of the Russell Sage Foundation of New York City.

However, I am appearing before you today as a private citizen, representing no organization. My professional career and qualifications are outlined in the attached curriculum vita. My special interests and experience in the field of juvenile delinquency and the problems of youth may be summarized briefly as follows:

Forty years ago I was a probation officer of the Cook County juvenile court in Chicago, Ill. While in that position, and later as a research sociologist on the staff of the Illinois Institute for Juvenile Re

« PreviousContinue »