WHEN THE DIFFERENTIAL PROCESSING OF JUVENILES BY THE JUVENILE COURT IS EXAMINED, FINDINGS SUGGESTS THE SYSTEM IS BASED ON A DOUBLE STANDARD OF CRIMINALITY THAT IS COUNTER TO BOTH THE PRINCIPLE OF LEGALITY AND TO CORRECTIONAL GOALS PROFESSED BY THOSE IN JUVENILE REHABILITATION. THESE CONTRADICTIONS ARE DISCUSSED IN LIGHT OF IN RE GAULT (1967) WHICH RULED THAT CERTAIN CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS MUST BE AFFORDED A JUVENILE IN THE ADJUDICATORY STAGE OF A DELINQUENCY HEARING WHERE LOSS OF LIBERTY WAS A POSSIBILITY. AFTER GIVING AN OVERVIEW OF THE TREATMENT VERSUS CUSTODY CONFLICT, THE ESSAY STUDIES THE GAULT DECISION AND ITS QUESTIONING OF INCARCERATION AS A CORRECTIVE DEVICE, THE EXTENT OF JUVENILE COURT JURISDICTION IN SECURING SERVICES AND REHABILITATION OF THE CHILD AND OF A COMMUNITY THREATENED BY DELINQUENT BEHAVIOR, THE NEED TO DEFINE DELINQUENCY IN WAYS THAT ISOLATE THE BEHAVIOR THAT THE COMMUNITY CONSIDERS TO BE DANGEROUS OR INTOLERABLE, THE CURRENT 'STATUS' AND 'CONDITIONAL' OFFENSES, AND A DISCUSSION OF PARENS PATRIAE POWER AND THE FAILURE OF JUVENILE COURTS TO MEET ITS SUBSTANTIVE CONDITIONS. CONCLUDING REMARKS URGE THAT THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AVOID LABELING JUVENILE AS DELINQUENT FOR WHAT WOULD BE NONCONDEMNATORY CONDUCT IN AN ADULT AND SHOWS THAT GAULT HAS PROVIDED THE JUDICIAL BACKDROP FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF MORE EFFECTIVE POLICY IN BOTH JUVENILE AJUDICATION AND CORRECTIONAL FIELDS. DISCUSSION QUESTIONS AND NOTES ARE INCLUDED. (RFC)