skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 62903 Find in a Library
Title: ENDANGERED CHILD IN THE USA (UNITED STATES OF AMERICA) AND IN ENGLAND - A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF JUVENILE JUSTICE STANDARDS
Journal: CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT  Volume:3  Issue:3/4  Dated:SPECIAL ISSUE (1979)  Pages:725-731
Author(s): J G HALL; B H MITCHELL
Corporate Author: Pergamon Press, Inc
United States of America
Date Published: 1979
Page Count: 7
Sponsoring Agency: Pergamon Press, Inc
Elmsford, NY 10523
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: COMPARABLE CIVIL JURISDICTION AND PROCEEDINGS IN JUVENILE COURTS REGARDING CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT ARE EXAMINED AND CRITICALLY COMPARED FOR THE UNITED STATES AND ENGLAND.
Abstract: THE DRAFT OF 'STANDARDS RELATING TO ABUSE AND NEGLECT' BY THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION AND THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION PROVIDES A FRAMEWORK FOR A COMPARISON WITH RELEVANT ENGLISH LAW. THE LAW RELATING TO CHILD ABUSE IN ENGLAND IS NOT CODIFIED IN ONE STATUTE BUT IS FOUND IN A SERIES OF PARLIAMENTARY ENACTMENTS, CULMINATING IN THE CHILDREN AND YOUNG PERSONS ACT 1969 AND THE CHILDREN ACT 1975. THE STATION FRAMEWORK OF THE ENGLISH LAW AND THE STANDARD'S PROPOSALS WITH REGARD TO GROUNDS FOR COURT JURISDICTION ARE SIMILAR. BOTH REQUIRE PROOF OF A SPECIFIC CONDITION AND THE NECESSITY OF A COURT ORDER TO PROTECT THE CHILD IN THE FUTURE. THE MOST STRIKING DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE AMERICAN STANDARD PROVIDES A SPECIFIC DEFINITION OF HARM WHEREAS THE LANGUAGE OF THE ENGLISH STATUTE IS VAGUE. THE STANDARD'S PROPOSALS AND ENGLISH LAW DIFFER MARKEDLY ON THE LENGTH OF TIME A CHILD MAY BE SUBJECT TO TEMPORARY OR INTERIM CARE. ACCORDING TO THE STANDARD, THE COURT MUST MAKE FINAL DISPOSITION OF A CASE WITHIN 28 DAYS; UNDER THE ENGLISH SYSTEM A CHILD CAN BE HELD UP TO 28 DAYS BEFORE THE CHILD OR THE PARENTS CAN BE HEARD. ENGLISH LAW ALSO DIFFERS FROM THE STANDARD IN MAKING NO SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR INVESTIGATIONS IN CARE PROCEEDINGS AND IN HAVING SIMPLER PROCEDURES FOR FILING A COMPLAINT AND PRESENTING EVIDENCE. ENGLISH LAW FURTHER DIFFERS FROM THE STANDARD IN THE FOLLOWING AREAS: (1) DISPOSITIONS BY THE COURT, WITH THE STANDARD PROVIDING MORE ALTERNATIVES TO REMOVAL FROM THE HOME; (2) PERIODIC REVIEWS BY THE COURT, WITH NO STATUTORY REQUIREMENT OF COURT REVIEW IN ENGLAND; AND (3) TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS, WITH THE STANDARD PROPOSING TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS AND ENGLISH LAW NOT ALLOWING THE COURT SUCH POWER. REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED. (RCB)
Index Term(s): Child abuse; Child abuse and neglect hearings; Comparative analysis; England; Laws and Statutes; Standards; United States of America
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=62903

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.