WITHIN THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM, OFFICIAL RHETORIC OF PREVENTION, PROTECTION, AND DIVERSION IS CONTRADICTED BY UNOFFICIAL BUT PERVASIVE ACTIONS THAT ARE REACTIVE, AUTHORITARIAN, AND PUNITIVE. THIS IDEOLOGICAL CONFLICT STEMS FROM THE SOCIAL STRUCTURE OF JUVENILE COURTS AND POLICE JUVENILE DIVISIONS AND THE SOCIAL REFORM MOVEMENTS FROM WHICH THESE ORGANIZATIONS SPRANG. JUDICIAL DECISIONS PERTAINING TO JUVENILE JUSTICE INDICATE THAT THE EARLY JUVENILE COURT REFORM MOVEMENT ACTUALLY WAS A VEILED EFFORT TO EXPEDITE THE PUNISHMENT OF JUVENILE OFFENDERS. THE MANNER IN WHICH THIS WAS ACCOMPLISHED BECAME INCREASINGLY ARBITRARY, EXCESSIVE, ABUSIVE, AND DECEITFUL. BETWEEN 1965 AND 1970, TWO SIGNIFICANT EVENTS ALTERED THE COURSE OF JUVENILE JUSTICE: THE ADVENT OF YOUTH SERVICES BUREAUS (YSB'S)--NONCOURT AGENCIES TO PROVIDE SOCIAL SERVICES TO JUVENILE OFFENDERS, AND U.S. SUPREME COURT-IMPOSED LEGALISTIC REFORMS RECOGNIZING DUE PROCESS RIGHTS OF JUVENILES. THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT THE JUVENILE COURTS AND POLICE HAVE RESPONDED TO THESE REFORMS BY A SORT OF 'HARDENING' ACTION (DISMISSING MORE CASES, BRINGING STIFFER CHARGES, REFERRING MORE YOUNG OFFENDERS TO ADULT COURTS). THE YSB'S APPEAR TO HAVE SERVED PRIMARILY TO BRING MORE JUVENILES UNDER OFFICIAL CONTROL. AS LONG AS THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM ADVOCATES ONE STANCE BUT ASSUMES ANOTHER, IT WILL BE IMPOSSIBLE TO MEASURE THE SYSTEM'S EFFECTIVENESS. PERHAPS YSB'S SHOULD BE USED AS PURELY TREATMENT-BASED ALTERNATIVES TO A PURELY PUNISHMENT-BASED DELINQUENCY PROGRAM IN THE JUVENILE COURTS, WITH POLICE JUVENILE UNITS HANDLING SCREENING AND ASSIGNMENT ON THE BASIS OF STRICT, PERIODICALLY UPDATED CRITERIA. IN THIS WAY, THE BOUNDARIES OF PUNISHMENT AND TREATMENT MIGHT BE ESTABLISHED, AND A RATIONAL BASIS FOR COMBINING THE TWO APPROACHES MIGHT BE FOUND. SUPPORTING DATA AND A LIST OF REFERENCES ARE INCLUDED. (LKM)