Student abstract from Prof. Mae Quinn's course:

Issues in the Law: Problem-Solving Courts Advocacy Program Seminar

---

Jennifer DeAlejandro

Youth Courts: One Size Does Not Fit All

Youth Courts have existed in some fashion or other for years, but they have only surged in popularity over the past fifteen years. Every state in America now has a youth court and over half of them have enacted youth court legislation. Run mostly by volunteers and local agencies, youth courts are a voluntary and cost-effective alternative to the regular juvenile court process. These courts take a less formal and more collaborative approach towards juvenile delinquency, and have been rapidly gaining popularity from community members, local governments and youths themselves. The intent of this paper is to describe what in fact youth courts are, how they are structured and why they have become so popular. I hope to lay out the successes and failures of youth courts in general, along with my opinion as to how legislators and community activists can implement or improve youth courts in their community. Each state’s attitude toward the composition and regulation of teen courts is different, thus I will concentrate mostly on the state of Tennessee’s Youth Court Program for the sake of brevity and also because I am a resident of Tennessee. Fortunately, Tennessee is a great model to explore due to the fact that the number of programs has recently exploded. Tennessee youth courts have some quite unique features and they are also regulated by legislation.

Part One of this paper discusses the history and background of youth courts. I will describe the fundamental concept of youth courts, including the basic models employed across jurisdictions, the types of offenses that are heard at youth court, and the various sanctions imposed. In Part Two, the intended benefits of youth courts to youth offenders (the respondents), youth volunteers, and to the community are examined. I will also address the various aspects of state legislation that have shaped youth courts, and the advantages and disadvantages of such legislation. Part Three of this paper will then go on to tackle the issues and criticisms posed by youth court stakeholders, including whether they are meaningful or not and whether they are an appropriate alternative for all jurisdictions and youth offenders. Given that youth courts are a fairly recent phenomenon, it is difficult to measure their success and to pinpoint their working parts. However, there are lessons to learn from the creative solutions that other youth courts have implemented. I will conclude in Part Four with my recommendations and ideas for a more improved youth court strategy.

Back to Student Abstracts Home Page