THE JUVENILE COURT ALWAYS HAS PERFORMED A VARIETY OF FUNCTIONS, ASSUMED A VARIETY OF ROLES, AND EXPRESSED A WIDE RANGE OF VALUES. OFTEN THESE FUNCTIONS, ROLES, AND VALUES ARE IN CONFLICT. THE BASIC CONFLICT IS THAT BETWEEN THE WELFARE MODEL, WHICH FOCUSES ON THE NEEDS OF THE CHILD, AND THE JUSTICE MODEL, WHICH FOCUSES ON THE OFFENSE. THE TWO MODELS INVOLVE DIFFERENT ASSUMPTIONS, ATTITUDES, PROCEDURES, AND OBJECTIVES. THE CONFLICT THAT RESULTS FROM THESE DIFFERENCES EMERGES AT THE STATUTORY AND OPERATIONAL LEVELS. THE AIMS OF ENGLAND'S CHILDREN AND YOUNG PERSONS ACT OF 1969 ARE CONTRADICTORY, OR AT LEAST IN TENSION, AND THE IDEOLOGIES OF THOSE WHO ENFORCE THE ACT--POLICE, COURTS, SOCIAL WORKERS, ETC.--ARE AT ODDS. IT IS A SITUATION THAT WILL NOT BE RESOLVED BY THE ALLOCATION OF MORE RESOURCES ALONE. ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES ARE BEING TESTED IN OTHER COUNTRIES, EXTENSIVELY SO IN SCOTLAND, WHERE JUVENILE COURTS HAVE BEEN REPLACED BY WELFARE TRIBUNALS STAFFED BY LAY PEOPLE. THE KEY FIGURE IN THE SCOTTISH SYSTEM IS THE REPORTER, WHO DECIDES WHETHER A REFERRED CHILD IS IN NEED OF COMPULSORY CARE. CHILDREN FOUND TO NEED COMPULSORY CARE ARE REFERRED TO THE WELFARE TRIBUNAL, WHICH CONDUCTS A HEARING TO DECIDE WHAT SORT OF TREATMENT THE CHILD WILL RECEIVE. THE CHILD AND THE CHILD'S PARENTS RETAIN THE RIGHT TO TAKE THEIR CASE BEFORE THE COURTS. THE SCOTTISH SYSTEM AND OTHER APPROACHES HAVE THEIR ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES; THERE APPEARS TO BE NO PERFECT SYSTEM. BUT IT DOES SEEM THAT ANY SYSTEM FOR DEALING WITH CHILD OFFENDERS SHOULD ATTEMPT TO INTEGRATE THESE YOUTHS INTO THE COMMUNITY AND TO KEEP THEM OUT OF THE COURTS (OR ANY OTHER FORMAL PROCEEDING) WHENEVER POSSIBLE. ENGLAND MIGHT CONSIDER THE APPOINTMENT OF REPORTERS, LIKE THOSE IN THE SCOTTISH SYSTEM, TO PERFORM THE ASSESSMENT FUNCTION CURRENTLY HANDLED BY POLICE. A LIST OF REFERENCES IS INCLUDED. (LKM)