I ran an institution for delinquents which I think was a very good one and where we took pretty broken down kinds of youngsters, such as Chief Proetz showed on that screen and helped rehabilitate them into useful citizens. I still keep in contact with many of these children.

However, this is a scattered experience. I think what we have to do is go into communities and show you can run a good probation department, that it is desirable to be a juvenile policeman, that to be a cottage parent in an institution is a respectable job.

I think the only way we have to do it is to go into a community on one of these jobs and let it shine out as an example of what can be done for these youngsters. This I think is a proper role at this time for the Federal Government.

Someone asked me whether or not there was a broader range of things the Federal Government might do. I think we could dream a little bit and develop a pretty ideal set of programs, but I do not think it is my place to say to your committee what might be or might not be practical from the standpoint of the Congress. But apparently from where we sit we are not going to get a big bite, we are going to get a little one. And my feeling is if we are going to get a little one, let us get one that is going to tell.

Mr. ELLIOTT. Congresswoman Green.

Mrs. GREEN. I was very glad to have your comments, Mr. Lourie.. Certainly the committee remembers your testimony of last year. I am well aware also of the politics that have been played in the course of the last several weeks. I know of groups that have been listed as endorsing a particular bill or a particular approach and the people in the organization had never taken any action.

I am well aware of all this political situation, but I must say to you, Mr. Lourie, that if the Federal Government's role as you see it is only for projects, that as far as Oregon is concerned, we have a great many projects going now. We need no new projects there, but we do need help in adequately staffing the courts and the juvenile delinquents' homes and so on.

We need help in doing abetter job in the projects that are already under way. Maybe this is not true in the other 48 States because they do not have projects underway, but it was my impression that there were lots of projects going on and they needed some help in doing an adequate job. I just cannot, for the life of me, see the role of the Federal Government as going into the States and going into a city and saying, "We are going to set up a project," when judges and probation officers are on the spot and are trained and think they have some pretty big projects underway.

Mr. LOURIE. I do not see the development of activity at the local level in exactly that way. I think we are faced with what might be a balanced kind of thing. I think that if what we did was to do nothing

but give sums of money for stipends at the moment, that we would not be helping to create the kind of atmosphere that we need within which States and local groups would put energy into these programs.

You know when you go into the State legislatures you find local groups of all sorts coming in to support projects for retarded children, for mentally ill children, for crippled children, for dependent and neglected children. You find very few people coming in to defend the lot of the delinquent child. And when I think of a project, when I think of activities at the local level, I think of going into a probation department and helping that probation department to do such a good job that everybody recognizes that the thing to do is to build good probation departments.

Now, that will include the necessity of getting trained people.

Mrs. GREEN. May I interrupt? If you have a good probation officer there, could he not build a good probation department?

Mr. LOURIE. I think that what we face is, as Chief Proetz says, taking the people we have and starting with them. There are policemen on the force in cities; basically the budgets of the city and the budget of local counties are not going to spread.

The thing I think is needed is to help them, to take their policemen and to convert them. I do not think that kind of conversion is going to be done outside of their immediate frame. I think they need to use the persons, think we all need to use the universities and graduate schools in this connection, but I do not see that what we need to do is take psychiatrists, for instance, and send them to special schools for delinquency.

I think that what we need to do is attract psychiatrists to our broken down institutions for delinquents in the States.

Mrs. GREEN. Is it not true, Mr. Lourie, that the statistics show there are not nearly enough psychiatrists in the country to fill the demands? How many you say, lets us attract them?

Mr. LOURIE. I would question whether the training of psychiatrists is something that you approach on the basis of delinquency. I think we have to approach the training and I think the Federal Government through the National Institutes of Health programs, for instance, is getting at the training of psychiatrists. They said psychiatrists are needed in this country, we are going to train them, so that the bringing of these people into the delinquency field I think will have to come on another basis.

Mr. ELLIOTT. Thank you very much, Mr. Lourie, and thank you, Mr. Beck, Mr. Austin, and Dr. Eliot.

Our hearings will resume at 10 o'clock in the morning.

You ladies and gentleman have contributed greatly to our knowledge and have been very helpful, and we appreciate your kindness. (Whereupon, at 4:03 p.m., the committee recesses until 10 a.m., Wednesday, March 18, 1959.)

JUVENILE DELINQUENCY PREVENTION AND CONTROL

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 18, 1959

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPECIAL EDUCATION OF THE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met at 10 a.m., pursuant to call, in room G-53, the Capitol, Hon. Carl Elliott (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Representatives Elliott, Green, Daniels, Giaimo, Lafore, and Wainwright.

Also present: Mary P. Allen, subcommittee clerk, and Charles Backstrom, research assistant to the subcommittee.

Mr. ELLIOTT. The subcommittee will be in order, please.

The list of witnesses today is made up of Mr. Elliot Richardson, of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Mr. Richardson is accompanied by officials of the Children's Bureau, including Mrs. Oettinger, who is Chief of the Children's Bureau. Following Mr. Richardson will be Mr. George J. Hecht, publisher of Parents Magazine, testifying for the American Parents Committee, Mr. Rudolph Danstedt of the Washington office of the National Association of Social Workers, Miss Sally Butler, General Federation of Women's Clubs, and Miss Germaine Krettek of the American Library Association.

I wanted to call that list so that all of us might recognize the problem we have of moving along. We have a full day's witnesses for tomorrow also, consisting of Judge Thomas J. S. Waxter, of the American Public Welfare Association, Mr. A. D. Buchmueller, of the Child Study Association of America, Mr. Francis Bosworth, of the National Federation of Settlements, Mr. George Riley, of the AFL-CIO, Mr. Richard Lennard, of the Industrial Union Department of the AFL-CIO and there is a list for the following day and for Friday, I believe.

Mr. Secretary Richardson, we are happy to have you and you may proceed in any manner that you see fit.

Do you have a statement, Mr. Secretary?

Mr. RICHARDSON. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I have a brief statement and I think perhaps in the light of the number of witnesses the committee plans to hear that it might be most expeditious if we read our statements through before proceeding to the questions of the committee, since there may be things that would otherwise be covered. Mr. ELLIOTT. Without objection you may proceed, Mr. Richardson.

STATEMENT OF ELLIOT L. RICHARDSON, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

Mr. RICHARDSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mrs. Oettinger and I appreciate very much this opportunity to appear before your committee in connection with your consideration of legislation concerned with juvenile delinquency.

Juvenile delinquency continues to be one of the major problems in the United States and few communities have escaped the impact of its continuing national rise. With the increased mobility of population, the expansion of suburban areas, and more rapid transportation, among other trends, juvenile delinquency can no longer be thought of as being confined within the boundaries of neighborhoods, local communities, or even States.

The continuing rise in juvenile delinquency extends throughout the Nation. It is not confined to any one group of States. Nor is it confined to any one geographic area. Rural and urban areas alike are confronted with this problem.

Reduced to its simplest terms, juvenile delinquency grows from the inability of far too many of our young people to live with themselves, their families, and with each other in the fast moving and unstable world in which they find themselves.

The Department I represent-dedicated to conserving and developing the human resources of the Nation-has a tremendous interest in the problem of juvenile delinquency. Either directly or indirectly, nearly every unit of the Department touches upon this problem.

In the Social Security Administration, the Children's Bureauwith an overall responsibility for helping improve the conditions under which children are born and grow up-has a particular concern for those youngsters in conflict with the law. In 1955, it established the Division of Juvenile Delinquency Services, whose staff members on request give professional consultation in cities and counties all over the country. The Bureau's Division of Research collects and analyzes statistics on juvenile delinquency and on services to delinquents. It also conducts, or provides, technical consultation on studies relating to the reduction of delinquency and the treatment of delinquent youth.

A very heartening advance was made for children when the Congress last fall amended the Social Security Act to extend grants for child welfare services, which are administered by the Children's Bureau, to children in urban areas on the same basis as to rural children. These are services that help to keep children in their homes, and strengthen family life; services that protect babies who are going to be adopted; services that provide good foster homes when this is necessary; and as provided in the act-services to children in danger of becoming delinquent.

In 1956 the Congress amended the Social Security Act to give emphasis to social services in public assistance programs services that lead, importantly, to the strengthening of family life, that help stimulate city and community efforts to help families and individual people get back on their feet, and to tap all sources of help for families in trouble.

By incorporating in the legislation the word "services" the Congress gave a powerful incentive to the States to move in the direction