THE COURT HELD THAT STATEMENTS MADE TO POLICE AND OTHER NON-JUVENILE PERSONNEL BY JUVENILE OFFENDERS WERE ADMISSIBLE IF THE CHILD IS ADVISED OF HIS MIRANDA RIGHTS, THE ATMOSPHERE OF INTERROGATION IS PATENTLY ADVERSARIAL, THE JUVENILE IS AWARE OF POTENTIAL CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY IN AN ADULT COURT, AND THE STATEMENTS ARE VOLUNTARILY GIVEN. THIS NOTE CITES PERTINENT MISSOURI AND OTHER STATE CASE LAW IN THIS EXAMINATION OF WHETHER THE USE OF A CONFESSION, GIVEN TO POLICE BY A JUVENILE WITHIN THE JUVENILE COURT JURISDICTION, IS VIOLATIVE OF THE PARENS PATRIAE PHILOSOPHY OF THE JUVENILE CODE WHEN USED AS EVIDENCE IN A SUBSEQUENT CRIMINAL PROSECUTION AGAINST THE CHILD. THE AUTHOR MAINTAINS THAT WRIGHT IS BASED UPON COMMON SENSE SINCE IT RECOGNIZES BOTH THE NECESSITY OF EXPEDIENT CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS AND THE NEED TO MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY OF THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM.