The proposed standards include those of the Joint Commission of the Institute for Judicial Administration and the American Bar Association (IJA/ABA), the National Advisory Committee for Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (NAC), and the Task Force on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. With few exceptions, the three sets of standards offer parallel recommendations and are based on the positions that juvenile and family court intervention in the lives of families should only be as a last resort and only in exceptional circumstances. However, a problem arises in determining what are exceptional circumstances. For example, the IJA/ABA standards fail to include, as a basis for jurisdiction, some definition of abandonment such as those included in the other sets of standards. The definitions of physical and emotional harm required before a court may exercise its jurisdiction over neglect and abuse also involve potential problems with respect to the effect on the child. The standards all greatly restrict the grounds upon which a juvenile and family court can intervene on the basis of neglect, and the IJA/ABA standards are especially revolutionary in this regard. The NAC standards take the broadest approach of the three. Unless all the standards can be broadened to protect children from both physical and emotional harm, the standards will shift too far the balance between protecting children and protecting parental rights. Nevertheless, the standards make a positive contribution by giving the court statutory power to provide needed services. An alternative which would be preferable to these standards would be the standards of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges Accreditation Committee. A formal rebuttal paper urging the adoption of the IJA/ABA standards and discussion focusing on definition of neglect and court authority to order services are included.