CRITERIA THAT CURRENTLY GUIDE THE DETENTION DECISION IN JUVENILE COURTS IN OHIO ARE ASSESSED. PRACTICAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL OBJECTIONS TO THE WIDESPREAD PRACTICE OF PREVENTIVE DETENTION (DETAINING JUVENILES WHO ALLEGEDLY PRESENT A RISK OF HARM) ARE RAISED. PROPOSALS FOR REFORMING INTERIM DETENTION PRACTICES--JUVENILE CODE REFORM LEGISLATION IN OHIO, INTERIM STATUS STANDARDS PROPOSED BY THE JOINT COMMISSION ON JUVENILE JUSTICE STANDARDS, PROPOSALS TO PROVIDE JUVENILES WITH A RIGHT TO BAIL--ARE EVALUATED. EXISTING RULES AND PROPOSED STANDARDS ARE MODIFIED AND INTEGRATED TO CREATE A NEW MODEL SAID TO BE BOTH SPECIFIC ENOUGH TO AVOID UNJUSTIFIABLE DETENTION AND FLEXIBLE ENOUGH TO PRESERVE THE ABILITY OF THE COURT TO PROTECT THE CHILD, THE FAMILY, AND SOCIETY. THE MODEL BEGINS BY DEFINING CATEGORIES OF ALLEGED DELINQUENTS WHO MAY AND MAY NOT BE DETAINED. JUVENILES WHO HAVE NOT DEMONSTRABLY THREATENED THE PHYSICAL SAFETY OF THEMSELVES OR OTHERS AND WHO ARE NOT KNOWN TO HAVE BEEN INEXCUSABLY ABSENT FROM PRIOR COURT HEARINGS MAY NOT BE DETAINED. THE MODEL THEN SPECIFIES METHODS OF CONDITIONAL RELEASE FOR DETAINABLE JUVENILES AND METHODS OF COURT SUPERVISION AND CONTROL FOR JUVENILES WHO MAY NOT BE DETAINED. DETAINABLE JUVENILES MAY NOT BE HELD UNLESS THE COURT HAS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED THE ALTERNATIVES OF UNCONDITIONAL RELEASE AND RELEASE UNDER SIX SPECIFIED CONDITIONS OF SUPERVISION (CUSTODY, CURFEW, PERIODIC REPORTING, ETC.). THE COURT MAY ALSO IMPOSE THE LEAST RESTRICTIVE OF THE SAME SIX CONDITIONS TO ASSURE THE APPEARANCE OF NONDETAINABLE JUVENILES. (LKM)