Ensuring Insurance for Foster Care: Requiring Foster Parents to Obtain Liability Insurance to Cover Harm Done to Foster Children in their Care

This Note proposes that all states should require that foster parents have liability insurance before children are placed in their care. This Note also proposes that the liability insurance needs to cover not just harm to third parties but also harm to the foster children through the negligent acts of the foster parents. This legislation will allow foster children to have standing to bring claims against their foster parents and insurance companies and give them a greater opportunity for recovery. Currently, the policies and statutes governing the policies in place do not cover all types of harm that can occur during the foster parent–child relationship. Certain policies leave children who are harmed by their foster parents’ negligence unable to recover any damages from the people who have harmed them. Because foster parents can be left to defend the actions themselves, they often become judgment proof due to their low income, leaving the children who are harmed with little chance of recovery.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• States need to require foster parents to obtain liability insurance, which covers harm done by the foster children to third parties, harm to the home, and any harm done to the child by the foster parents.

     

Kids are Different: The United States Supreme Court Reforms Youth Sentencing Practices for Youth Prosecuted in the Criminal Justice System

In a series of decisions issued between 2005‐2016, the United States Supreme Court relied on emerging scientific research detailing the developmental differences between children and adults to revamp its juvenile sentencing jurisprudence under the Eighth Amendment. The research established that youth’s developmental immaturity reduces their culpability for their criminal conduct, while also demonstrating their heightened capacity for change and rehabilitation. The Court focused on the most extreme sentences for youth, banning the imposition of the death penalty on youth under the age of eighteen in Roper v. Simmons (2005), and severely limiting the availability of life without parole sentences even for youth convicted of murder, in Graham v Florida (2010) and Miller v Alabama (2012). This article traces the Court’s evolution in reviewing sentences for youth in our justice system, and considers how the Court’s reasoning in these cases may influence further reforms in the justice system’s treatment of youth looking ahead.     

Criminal Violence and Youth in Sweden: A Long-term Perspective

Since the mid-1980s, the Swedish public has become increasingly concerned about juvenile violence. This article confronts the public belief of increasing juvenile violence with systematic criminological data from crime statistics and other sources. Based on police and court statistics, as well as data from victimization studies and cause-of-death statistics, it is concluded that there is good reason to believe that Sweden is currently experiencing an 'enforcement wave' with regard to juvenile violence (particularly in the youngest age brackets), which reinforces the image of dramatic increases in the level of juvenile violence. The reasons why juvenile violence is thought to be on the increase even in the face of a lack of hard empirical evidence are discussed. Four long- and short-term trends are proposed as possible explanations: (i) the well-ordered modern society; (ii) the role of the mass media; (iii) the growth of feminine values; and (iv) the application of an offensive model of crime policy.     

The Juvenile Justice Reform Act of 2018: Updating the Federal Approach to Youth Involved,and At‐Risk of Becoming Involved,in the Juvenile Justice System

On December 21, 2018, the Juvenile Justice Reform Act was signed into law, marking the first update in 16 years to the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, as amended. The reforms reflect much of the knowledge that has been gained through research and science over the past decade and strengthen the Act’s core protections for youth in the juvenile justice system. The changes also expand the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention’s role in research, and technical assistance, and provide for additional oversight for related programs.     

An Ecological Examination of Factors That Impact Well‐Being Among Developmentally‐Disabled Youth in the Juvenile Justice System

Youth with developmental disabilities make up a large proportion of those in the juvenile justice system, and experience various unique and intricate threats to their well‐being. This review examines the complexity of these challenges, exploring the multiple levels of contextual factors that influence youth's well‐being as they experience adjudication. Using an ecological framework, this paper reviews findings on the individual socio‐demographic characteristics, as well as the micro, meso, exo, and macro factors that impact their development and functioning. Specific policy and practice implications are provided to address improving outcomes of youth in this population at each ecological level.     

Identifying Miscarriages of Justice: Why Innocence in the UK is Not the Answer

This article examines two contrasting proposals for the reform of criminal appeals: the government's recent proposal that the guilty should no longer have their convictions quashed on 'technicalities'; and calls by campaigners for the Court of Appeal to consider innocence rather than the 'safety of the conviction,' together with their associated attempts to establish Innocence Projects in the UK. Despite the rhetorical power of 'innocence' as a campaigning tool, it is contended that to import such a standard into the legal system would be retrogressive and counter-productive, both as a safeguard against wrongful convictions and in protecting the integrity of the system. In order to be meaningful, due process protections must apply to all. The government's proposals attack this principle directly; innocence campaigners risk unwittingly assisting their endeavours.     

自媒体时代的刑事司法与民意

相对于传统的自上而下的传播模式,“自媒体”更多地体现出一种传播的对等性,更加注重网民的自主性,表现出个性化、互动性的特征,更易引发刑事司法与民意之间的紧张关系。涉弱势群体的刑事个案更易引发民众的关注、民意的表达更为通畅与开放、民意的表达忽略了案件事实与法律适用本身、民意的真实性有待考证,这是自媒体时代的民意的主要特征。在自媒体环境下,民意推动了刑事诉讼程序的公开、公正进行,有助于刑事司法判决朝着更为公正、合理的方向发展,不理性的民意对部分刑事案件的错判、误判的影响仍然不能忽视,民意对刑事司法的影响呈现出无序性。营造刑事司法与民意互动的良性循环需要注意：建立及时的信息发布、沟通机制,对自媒体进行必要的约束,发挥自媒体对民意的引导、培育功能。构建公平有序的社会制度。     

Preventing Homelessness for System‐Involved Youth

Too many youth and young adults find themselves on the streets, couch‐surfing with friends, in emergency shelters or worse, after exiting the child welfare and juvenile justice systems. In some circumstances, youth have had court hearings until their exit from the legal system, but those hearings have not focused on long‐range plans of youth and emergencies youth may encounter. In other circumstances, there has been little or no planning prior to discharge, especially for young people who leave the juvenile justice system. Courts can and should prevent, alleviate or end youth homelessness for youth who appear before them through strategies that are enumerated in the recently‐passed NCJFCJ resolution. This article expounds on three of these strategies – coordinating transition and re‐entry plans, insisting on effective legal representation of youth, and utilizing sound judicial leadership. It also describes the concurrent efforts of the Coalition for Juvenile Justice and the American Bar Association's Homeless Youth Legal Network to remove legal barriers and improve outcomes for youth and young adults experiencing homelessness.     

Physical and Emotional Well‐Being: Court Performance Measures for Children and Youth in Foster Care

Given that courts have the responsibility to ensure the state is providing proper care to children in its custody, courts need to consider whether those children over whom they have jurisdiction are receiving a quality education and are physically and emotionally healthy. Court well‐being measures were not developed when the safety, permanency, timeliness, and due process measures were established. However, there have been recent efforts to address this void. This article describes the newly developed set of well‐being measures for courts to track success in improving well‐being outcomes in the areas of physical health, mental health, maintaining permanent relationships, transition to adulthood, and enhanced family capacity to provide for their children's needs.     

刑事诉讼制度改革中的“底限正义”——对中国刑事诉讼制度改革理路的质评

我国刑事诉讼法修改在即,但是关于刑事诉讼制度改革我们始终缺乏一种方法论上的指引。“底限正义”理论是一种指导刑事诉讼制度改革的有效方法和策略,它一方面认可人类社会存在着最低限度的正义要求,从而为以法律移植为主要内容的我国刑事诉讼制度改革提供了理论依据;另一方面又承认正义的相对性和多元性,承认法律制度移植的可选择性,从而为我国当前刑事诉讼制度改革提供了微观操作步骤。同时,“底限正义”理论对我国刑事诉讼法学研究的深入拓展也有着重要的借鉴意义。     

论国际刑事法院证据规则的混合模式——以大陆法系和英美法系证据规则比较为视角

国际刑事法院诉讼规则是一种混合模式,证据规则也不例外.而这种混合模式融合了大陆法系证据采纳的宽泛规定和普通法系证据收集、出示和审查中的对抗制因素.这种混合模式有其特定的成因,而大陆法系和普通法系对这一混合模式则存在不同的看法,本文从比较视角对这一问题进行了分析,并指出了其对我国证据立法的启示.     

Juvenile Justice in Pennsylvania: Mission‐Driven; Performance‐ Based; Outcome‐Focused

Since 1995, Pennsylvania's Balanced and Restorative Justice Mission has been the driving force behind Pennsylvania's reform and system improvement efforts. Pennsylvania has made strong and steady progress towards advancing this statutory mission and the related operational goals through policy, practice and programmatic enhancements over these past 20+ plus years. Three key events spurred forth this advancement: the legislative passage of Act 33 in 1995 that statutorily established the goals of Balanced and Restorative Justice (BARJ), the Models for Change Juvenile Justice Reform Initiative–Additional Reform Momentum (2004) and the Juvenile Justice System Enhancement Strategy–Evidence‐based Approach to the Reforms (2010).What follows is the story of how it all unfolded.     

论国际刑事法院证据规则的混合模式——以大陆法系和英美法系证据规则比较为视角

国际刑事法院诉讼规则是一种混合模式,证据规则也不例外。而这种混合模式融合了大陆法系证据采纳的宽泛规定和普通法系证据收集、出示和审查中的对抗制因素。这种混合模式有其特定的成因,而大陆法系和普通法系对这一混合模式则存在不同的看法,本文从比较视角对这一问题进行了分析,并指出了其对我国证据立法的启示。     

Parents’ Perspectives on Family‐centered Care in Juvenile Justice Institutions

Family‐centered care during adolescent detention aims to increase parental participation in an attempt to optimize treatment outcomes. However, little is known about parents’ needs in family‐centered care. To fill this gap, we interviewed 19 purposefully selected parents of detained adolescents using a semi‐structured topic list. Although needs differed between parents, they were generally interested in activities that included spending time with their child. It is important for parents to receive timely information about their child's condition and treatment, detention procedures, and activities in the facility. The outcomes demonstrated that parents expected a two‐way communication based on respect and reliability.     

The blurred vision of Lady Justice for minors with mental disorders: Records of the juvenile court in Belgium

Purpose

This study examined (1) the information present in juvenile court records in Belgium (Flanders) and (2) whether there are differences in information between records that mention a mental disorder and those that do not.

Method

The file study sample included 107 court records, and we used a Pearson's chi-square test and a t-test to analyze the information within those records.

Results

Information in juvenile court records varied considerably. This variability was evident when we compared juvenile court records with and without mention of a mental disorder. Significantly more information about school-related problems, the functioning of the minor, and the occurrence of domestic violence was included in records that mentioned a mental disorder compared with records that did not.

Conclusion

The content of the juvenile court records varied, particularly with regard to the mental health status of the minor in question. We suggest guidelines to standardize the information contained in juvenile court records.     

The Council for the Administration of Criminal Justice and Protection of Juveniles

The Council for the Administration of Criminal Justice and Protection of Juveniles (Raad voor Strafrechtstoepassing en Jeugdbescherming) is an independent advisory, supervisory and judiciary board to the Netherlands Minister of Justice on matters relating to the prison system, the hospital order detention system, the probation system and the youth incarceration system. Members are recruited from a variety of backgrounds, such as magistracy, science, medicine, psychiatry and social work. As a rule, they have a full-time job in society. They are recruited by virtue of their expertise, competence and professional experience in relevant fields. Nowadays, there are about 60 members. The combination of the Council’s three tasks has been criticised. The argument is that the advisory and supervisory tasks of the Council could interfere with the independent and impartial nature of its judicial task. The supposed incompatibility of the three tasks has been one of the arguments of the Minister of Justice in defending his decision to set up an Inspectorate for the whole field of the administration of justice. This Inspectorate would overlap the Council’s supervisory task. So, legislation has been prepared in order to prevent overlap by taking away this task from the Council. The resistance to these plans was an important reason for the Dutch government to ask the Verwey-Jonker Institute to evaluate the performance of the Council. The Council performed very well in this evaluation. Its performance could not, therefore, really be used as an argument for curtailing its tasks. The independent nature of an Inspection Board is open to question, as it is functioning under the responsibility of the Minister of Justice. However, the Minister of Justice has not been convinced by this and other arguments, so there is a big chance that the Council will loose its supervisory task.