AN OVERVIEW OF THE HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF THE JUVENILE COURT SYSTEM PROVIDES A FOUNDATION FOR DISCUSSION OF BOTH PROBLEMS ATTENDANT TO THE COURTS' JURISDICTION OVER THESE STATUS OFFENDERS AND THE TREND TOWARD ELIMINATION OF THIS JURISDICTION. THE WISDOM OF PLACING NONCRIMINAL MINORS IN THE SAME POSTDETENTION FACILITIES WITH MINORS IN CUSTODY FOR CRIMINAL OFFENSES IS QUESTIONED. PARENTS MISUSE STATUS OFFENSE JURISDICTION TO DIVEST THEMSELVES OF AN UNDESIRABLE OR MISBEHAVING CHILD. IN ADDITION, THERE ARE PRACTICAL PROBLEMS CAUSED IN COURT ADMINISTRATION WHEN OVERCROWDED CALENDARS AND TIME PRESSURES IMPEDE THE ADMINISTRATION OF SWIFT AND SURE JUSTICE FOR BOTH CRIMINAL OFFENDERS AND IMPROPERLY REMANDED STATUS OFFENDERS. MOREOVER, STATUS OFFENSE CASES PRESENT ISSUES THAT ARE PECULIARLY ILL SUITED FOR, AND NOT SERVED BY, LEGAL ANALYSIS AND JUDICIAL FACT-FINDING. PREFERRED METHODS FOR DEALING WITH NONCRIMINAL YOUTH INCLUDE COMMUNITY-BASED YOUTH SERVICES, WHICH PROVIDE FAMILY COUNSELING, CRISIS INTERVENTION, LONG-TERM COUNSELING SERVICES, REFERRALS TO OTHER APPROPRIATE COMMUNITY RESOURCES, AND A FOSTER HOME PROGRAM. THIRD-PARTY INTERVENTION, IN THE FORM OF MEDIATION, ARBITRATION, OR RECONCILIATION, IS PREFERRED TO COURT JURISDICTION. WHEN A CHILD IS NOT AMENABLE TO ALTERNATIVE TREATMENT FORMS, THE JUVENILE COURT CAN, AS A LAST RESORT, REASSERT JURISDICTION OVER THE CHILD BY USING ITS DEPENDENCY JURISDICTION. EXTENSIVE FOOTNOTES ARE INCLUDED.