After refusing to review juvenile court decisions for nearly 50 years, in a series of relatively few cases, the Supreme Court has decided that the application of due process is not only desirable but essential in juvenile proceedings. Under the implications of those decisions, the civil foundation of the court, its benevolent philosophy, and the court's ability to provide both rehabilitation and justice have come under attack. The Federal Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 provided for, among other things, the deinstitutionalization of status offenders. This act was a further blow to the authority of the court, which heretofore could mandate 'treatment' by placing status offenders in institutions. Overall, the provision of procedural safeguards has taken precedence over the parens patriae concept under which the court was established. Perhaps what might prove to be the most fatal blow to the juvenile court has been the recent trend in the revision of juvenile codes. Implicit in these new codes is a lack of confidence in the juvenile court's ability to render sociolegal justice. A survey of juvenile laws reveals a trend toward a more punitive model which has lost the parens patriae concept completely. With the new juvenile codes, the burden seems to be on the defendants to prove they can profit from the protections of juvenile court. Because adolescence is a unique period of growth and the adult criminal justice model shows no evidence of being effective in addressing the crime problem, a separate system of justice for juveniles should be retained with some structural and procedural changes, based on a sense of humanity, fairness, and accountability. Twelve references are provided.