In the United States, the traditional juvenile court informality and 'parens patriae' practice have been replaced with a due process model which makes the prosecutor rather than the social worker the State's local person in the case. In Britain, unpaid justices of the peace for a specific locality compose a panel believed to be especially suited for work with children. The general trend is toward transferring control of the young from the representatives of 'law and order' to social workers. The British social worker, whose most important contribution is preparation of the social inquiry report, is in a position of authority. This contrasts with the role of American social workers, who are more servants than officers of the juvenile court. The English system is a more positive endorsement of the welfare approach. Scotland's system of children's hearings endorses the child care philosophy to a greater extent. In the 1960's, Scotland replaced juvenile courts with welfare tribunals, called children's panels, staffed by lay people. Both the British and Scottish systems have moved away from the traditional punitive, authoritarian approach and endorse a child care or welfare model. The research suggests that the way of the American juvenile may not be the best way. Fifteen references are provided.