Social control ideology in the legal regulation of youth can be summarized and chronicled as a history based on the concepts of "doing good" (inclusion) and "doing justice" (exclusion). "Doing good," as defined by Cohen, emphasizes rehabilitation as the primary aim of punishment and is based on the medical model of reform. "Inclusion" incorporates the ideas of integration, tolerance, absorption, incorporation, and keeping individuals in the community. On the other hand, "doing justice" as a reason for punishment incorporates the ideals of fairness, openness, and safety from abuse. "Exclusion" incorporates the concepts of stigma, segregation, banishment, separation, classification, and punishment. Canada's JDA was primarily aligned with the ideology of "doing good"; however, it also emphasized exclusion. Individuals were stigmatized by the label juvenile delinquent, and segregation in training schools and confinement to prison remained part of sentencing under the act. The YOA is a continuation of combined social control ideologies. "Doing good" and "inclusion" dominate, and the needs of the juvenile prevail. There is evidence of "doing justice" in the tougher language of the law in that young persons must bear responsibility for their offenses; there is a clear distinction between rule violators and non-rule violators, and young offenders are entitled to the rights of due process and to procedural safeguards. Stanley Cohen's suggestion that the ideologies of "doing good" and "doing justice" in social control are separate and distinct has not been confirmed in the JDA and the YOA. 70 references