PRINCIPAL PROBLEMS IN REFORMING JUVENILE PROVISIONS, WHICH ARE NOT A SEPARATE BODY OF LAW, ARE THE UNCERTAINTY OF THE BIOLOGICAL, PSYCHOLOGICAL, AND SOCIAL DEFINITIONS OF AGE GROUPS, AND THE LACK OF OPPORTUNITY FOR YOUNG PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE CREATION OF JUVENILE LAW. THE DEMAND FOR LAWS PERMITTING THE FREE DEVELOPMENT OF THE JUVENILE PERSONALITY CANNOT BE MET, LARGELY BECAUSE WHILE JUVENILES SHOULD BE PROTECTED FROM EXPLOITATION, THEY CANNOT BE GIVEN THE STATUS OF A SEPARATE GROUP IN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. THE BASIC UNCERTAINTY SURROUNDING THE QUESTION OF WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING CARE AND DETERMINING THE EDUCATIONAL GOALS OF MINORS IS CENTRAL TO THE DILEMMA, SUCH AS THE OBLIGATION OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO AID AND PROTECT DEPENDENT CHILDREN AS REQUIRED IN THE CONSTITUTION. IT IS, MOREOVER, UNCLEAR TO WHAT EXTENT PROTECTION MEANS NEGATIVE PROTECTION FROM DANGER, OR POSITIVE ASSISTANCE, AND WHETHER THE EDUCATION FOR WHICH THE STATE IS COMPETENT EXTENDS TO THE BASIC INTELLECTUAL AND MORAL DEVELOPMENT OF YOUTH RATHER THAN THE SIMPLE TRANSMISSION OF KNOWLEDGE. THE CONCLUSION IS REACHED THAT IT IS UNREALISTIC FOR THE STATE TO PROMISE A 'PROTECTED SPACE' FOR THE FREE DEVELOPMENT OF THE YOUTHFUL PERSONALITY WITH NEW REGULATIONS THAT ARE WITHOUT PROVISION FOR THE PROTECTION OF JUVENILES FROM THE EDUCATIONAL BIASES INHERENT IN REGULATIONS WRITTEN FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THE ADULT CITIZEN. AN EXTENSIVE BIBLIOGRAPHY IS SUPPLIED. -IN GERMAN. (KMD)