In re Gault and the promise of systemic reform
| Abstract | The right to counsel for juveniles in delinquency cases that the Supreme Court declared in In re Gault can be seen as an effort at systemic reform - a purposeful alteration of the structure, procedure, or resources of a law-administering system that aims to better align the system's operation with the principles or ideals on which it is based. Although the Court articulated the benefits of counsel in terms of individual representation, juvenile defenders are increasingly called upon to expand their role to include broader forms of advocacy aimed at reforming juvenile justice system practice and procedure. The predominant stakeholder collaboration model of systemic reform may seem counter to adversarial defense advocacy in individual representation. However, I argue that the stakeholder model is actually more strategic than it is made to appear. Hence, it provides opportunities for defense advocacy at the systemic level, using three primary approaches: (1) understanding the system from the perspective of the client, (2) analyzing the status quo as an accommodation of competing interests, and (3) listening for the narratives of system officials that legitimate their behavior and place blame for systemic problems elsewhere. Rather than being incongruent with individual advocacy, I use examples from the Annie E. Casey Foundation's Juvenile Detention Alternative Initiative (JDAI) to illustrate that these building blocks of systemic reform are extensions of the same advocacy tools that defenders already employ in their representation of individual clients. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,653 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesDavid DeGrazia (1996). Why the United States Should Adopt a Single-Payer System of Health Care Finance. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 6 (2):145-160.
Ana Marta González (2011). Kant's Philosophy of Education: Between Relational and Systemic Approaches. Journal of Philosophy of Education 45 (3):433-454.
John Alexander (2007). Environmental Sustainability Versus Profit Maximization: Overcoming Systemic Constraints on Implementing Normatively Preferable Alternatives. Journal of Business Ethics 76 (2):155 - 162.
Sorinel A. Oprisan & Ana Oprisan (2006). A Computational Model of Oncogenesis Using the Systemic Approach. Axiomathes 16 (1-2).
R. C. Paton (1992). Towards a Metaphorical Biology. Biology and Philosophy 7 (3):279-294.
F. C. Boogerd, F. J. Bruggeman, Robert C. Richardson, Achim Stephan & H. Westerhoff (2005). Emergence and Its Place in Nature: A Case Study of Biochemical Networks. Synthese 145 (1):131 - 164.
Peggy B. Gill & Amy Stevens Griffith (2004). Examining a Model of Evolutionary Educational Systemic Change Within Existing Societal Systems. World Futures 60 (3):241 – 252.
Michael McCubbin & David Cohen (1999). A Systemic and Value-Based Approach to Strategic Reform of the Mental Health System. Health Care Analysis 7 (1):57-77.
Analytics
Monthly downloads
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
|
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads1 ( #274,556 of 548,984 )Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
