BEFORE 1870 RUNNING AWAY WAS LOOKED UPON AS NORMAL BEHAVIOR AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADOLESCENTS TO MAKE NEW LIVES FOR THEMSELVES WERE ABUNDANT IN FRONTIER AMERICA. BETWEEN 1870 AND 1930, HOWEVER, THIS LAISSEZ-FAIRE ATTITUDE GRADUALLY FADED AND AROUND 1930 STATES BEGAN ESTABLISHING COMPULSORY EDUCATION LAWS AND ENFORCING A NEW CLASS OF 'CRIME' CALLED STATUS OFFENSES. AS A RESULT YOUNG PEOPLE ARE DENIED ENTRY INTO THE LABOR FORCE UNTIL THEIR LATE TEENS AND MUST DEPEND UPON THE FAMILY DURING YEARS OF GREAT TURMOIL. IN 1973 THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE TOOK A CLOSER LOOK AT RUNNING AWAY BEHAVIOR AND CONCLUDED THAT 'THROWAWAY' CHILDREN CONSTITUTED ABOUT A QUARTER OF THE PROBLEM. RUNNING AWAY CAN BE DESCRIBED AS A CONFLICT BETWEEN PARENT AND CHILD OVER SOCIAL CONTROL ISSUES. THERE IS A LACK OF COMMUNICATION BETWEEN PARENTS AND CHILDREN; YOUNGSTERS PERCEIVE PARENTS AS NOT LISTENING AND PARENTS PERCEIVE CHILDREN AS DISOBEDIENT AND INSENSITIVE. THE FAMILY IS WEAK BUT INTACT AND PROGNOSIS IS GOOD WITH PROPER INTERVENTION. IN CONTRAST, THE THROWAWAY'S FAMILY HAS SO DISINTEGRATED THAT PROGNOSIS IS POOR AND, IN ADDITION, THE CHILD SUFFERS FEELINGS OF ISOLATION AND WORTHLESSNESS FROM BEING REJECTED. RESEARCHERS AND SOCIAL WORKERS NEED TO RECOGNIZE THESE DIFFERENCES AND ADAPT THEIR STRATEGIES ACCORDINGLY. REFERENCES ARE FOOTNOTED. (GLR)