The standards are 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 (Task Force). The constitutional provision for a right to a jury trial reflects a fundamental decision about the exercise of official power, but the current nature of most juvenile proceedings grant the judge power that substantially refute the philosophy underlying this constitutional provision. With respect to public trials, juveniles in delinquency proceedings should be permitted to choose whom they wish to have in the courtroom, since public trial is an absolute and fundamental right. The IJA/ABA standards recognize the child as a person with individual rights and assert the right to a jury trial in contested adjudications. In contrast, the Task Force and NAC standards retain the traditional understanding of the juvenile court system and say that a jury trial is not appropriate in a juvenile proceeding. Although all the standards would permit the juvenile to open the proceedings to the public, the IJA/ABA standards place more emphasis on the juvenile's prerogatives and less reliance on the court's discretion. The IJA/ABA and NAC standards place similar emphasis on the press, while the task force is silent on this issue. The history of current legal concepts and court decisions regarding children's criminal legal responsibility and rights are analyzed. Practical problems involved in applying jury trials, public trial, and press access to delinquency proceedings are discussed. It is concluded that the right to a public trial is more important than a right to a jury trial for juveniles. Questions and discussion focus on the feasibility of jury trials and other issues.