The shift away from the welfare approach seems to be the result of growing skepticism about its benefits, both for the child and the community. Critics from the right maintain that the welfare model of justice is too lenient and that it fails to take into account the need to protect the community from dangerous offenders. Critics from the left contend that the welfare model is too arbitrary and discretionary, to the point where young people's legal rights are threatened. In 1976, a Royal Commission focused on juvenile justice in South Australia argued in favor of a system based firmly on the notions of adversarial justice and due process, at least at the adjudication stage. Central to this traditional approach is the trial, where accused persons invoke their rights by pleading not guilty and putting the prosecution to the test. The authors demonstrate, however, that the overwhelming majority of young persons in South Australia forego their rights by admitting the allegations made against them. Thus, the rhetoric of adversarial justice and due process is not compatible with the reality of routinely admitting guilt. Prospects for juvenile justice system reform are discussed. 44 references, 3 notes, 2 tables, and 1 figure