To meet these essentials, the juvenile must be represented by counsel, and the proceeding must meet the provisions of section 38-1636 of the Kansas statutes requiring notice and the right of the juvenile to be present and participate. In reaching its holding, the court relies upon the ruling in Kent v. United States (1966) that a court may not determine whether or not to waive its juvenile jurisdiction 'without the participation or any representation of the child.' The Kansas Supreme Court adopts the interpretation of the Kent holding made by the Utah Supreme Court in State in re Schreuder: the disjunctive 'or' in the phrase means due process could be satisfied by counsel representing an absent juvenile. Unless the U.S. Supreme Court or the Kansas legislature recognizes the quasi-criminal significance of a waiver hearing, the Kansas Supreme Court will not break new due-process ground for juveniles involuntarily absent from their waiver hearings. 90 footnotes.