a large proportion of the group for which results were not given also failed to improve. Information as to the proportion of juvenile delinquents who later enter penal institutions is very meager, statistics from Chicago showing that in 1908, 4.5 per cent of the probation cases were in prison. This is a very small number, but again is based on the cases of minor delinquency.1 The claims for probation when it was first instituted were most sanguine. It was insisted that in Denver 95 per cent of the cases resulted favorably, and more recently Winnipeg has made a similar claim. Conservative figures of to-day show that such results are not being achieved, although the possibilities of probation, however, have not been reached. In no American city has the system been perfected, and in some cities the juvenile court hardly accepts the theories of modern psychology but flagrantly disregards the fact that the delinquent child is not a criminal. Neither the juvenile court nor the probation system has accomplished what was claimed for them, but they have proved superior to the methods they supplanted. The problem must be faced in an entirely unbiased manner, and if these institutions can be perfected, we should strive to do so, but if better substitutes can be found, we should not hesitate to use them. 10. Probation and Coöperating Agencies. The effects of probation are profoundly modified by the existence of adequate supplementary agencies, aiming to fill the life of the child with forms of activity which tend to develop his better nature. The success of probation in the parts of Chicago supplied with small parks is an example, while the Chicago Juvenile Protective Association, which constantly watches amusement places, dance halls, and picture shows is another valuable coöperating agency. Attendance officers can do much to make the probation system successful. Settlements and other philanthropic agencies should also be powerful agencies. Although the juvenile court carries on preventive work, its 1 The Survey, February 5, 1910, p. 658. function in this direction is comparatively limited, and it remains for other agencies to develop the constructive work in a community so that delinquency may be prevented. The test of probation is to perform with a maximum of efficiency the task of reforming delinquent children. CHAPTER IV OTHER REFORMATORY AGENCIES 1. Detention Homes. The detention home is a temporary shelter for the child about to be brought into the juvenile court. When the child is arrested he is taken to this home or, in certain cases, allowed his liberty if reasonable assurances are given that he will appear in court at the proper time. The detention homes seldom provide for a large number of children. They take the place of police stations, but must not be connected with them or with jails. Children are usually held here for a short time only, but separate accommodations should be provided for the two sexes, also playrooms, lounging rooms, classrooms for teaching purposes, a library, etc. Detention homes should not be made so attractive, however, that they fail to develop a proper respect for law and order. In the smaller cities, where court convenes but once throughout the week, a child may be detained for a period of six days, and toward the approach of court day the home is often filled with prospective delinquents. In the larger cities, where the court holds its sessions three or more times per week, the day of trial arrives sooner and the problem of the detention home is less acute. After the conclusion of the trial the child is removed from the home and the court's decision is carried out. In a limited number of instances, children are sentenced for a short time to the home, and frequently they are detained, pending their transferal to some institution. 2. Disciplinary Schools. According to the new theory it is the duty of the school to educate the bad boy as well as the good one, but they should not be educated together. The semi-delinquent children form a special group who need particular attention and who must be trained in special classes; otherwise they will hamper the progress of normal children. Furthermore by receiving special care they may be saved from the juvenile court, and therefore the special day school for incorrigible children has arisen. This school varies its curriculum somewhat from the normal and emphasizes manual training and handicraft work in order to hold the interest of the child and keep him busy. New York City has projected five such disciplinary schools, to which children are sent for truancy, theft, insubordination, and immorality. The oldest of these schools claims 55 per cent of cures in seven years. Chicago has four divisions in its regular schools for truants and violators of rules who are not sufficiently grave offenders to be sent to the parental school. When the school authorities find it impossible to retain a child in the regular classes, parents are notified and directed to send the child to the truant school. The first special school of this class in the United States was established in Philadelphia in 1898, and nine such schools are now conducted in that city. The experience here has also demonstrated that a close relation exists between truant and backward children. Most large cities have opened disciplinary schools, usually with good effects; truancy and insubordination have been greatly reduced and a better spirit has developed among the large body of pupils. Transferal to these schools depends on the order of the principal or school superintendent, although in Cincinnati certain juvenile court children also attend. 3. Institutional Care. Institutional care represents the original form of care provided for delinquent children. Most states are equipped with at least one reformatory for youthful offenders, and usually with two, since the sexes cannot well be cared for in the same institution or in the same town. A majority of these institutions are public, but there are a number of private industrial schools, one of which, located in New York, has from 2500 to 3000 inmates, but most private homes are comparatively small. The states differ widely in the proportion of delinquent children cared for in institutions. New York, for example, places an excessive proportion of her delinquent children in institutions and now has three times as many cared for in this way as has any other state. In the Southern states, on the other hand, the number of children in reformatories is low, due largely to the absence of well-developed systems of child care. a. Evolution of Institutional Care. Adequate care of delinquent children cannot be given without the aid of reformatory institutions of various kinds. At each stage of their adolescence children must be subjected to forms of treatment appropriate to their psychological and physiological needs. Probation may be best for one child; institutional care for another. The former, however, has limitations which cannot at present be overcome, hence the reformatory is a necessary supplement. The age of the child often determines the type of institution best fitted to benefit him. The social attitude toward the proper function of an institution for delinquent children has undergone a very interesting change, and is reflected in the names given to such institutions. Originally they were named "Houses of Refuge" - a name which still clings to a number of reform schools throughout the country. The name is a relic of the day when the chief object of institutional care was to provide a means of escape from temptation, but such an object is wholly foreign to the enlightened methods of to-day. The first House of Refuge in the United States was established in New York City in 1825 and the Lyman School in Massachusetts, opened in 1848, was the first reformatory institution placed under the exclusive control of the state.1 As long as venerable notions of human depravity and the full responsibility of children for their delinquencies prevailed, the modern view was quite impossible. The idea of reformation, however, took root, and soon "Reform School" became an appropriate name for these institutions. The method of reform was crude and unscientific because the essential elements of child nature were not understood. Reform meant the complete 1 National Conference of Charities and Correction, 1901, p. 245 ff. |