Juvenile Justice

Improving a child's access to counsel

November 9, 2011
Michael Hoskins
A proposed draft rule would change waiver procedures in the juvenile justice system.
More

Early intervention for juveniles

June 22, 2011
Michael Hoskins
A new law, along with pilot programs, encourage alternatives to keep kids out of courts.
More

Tug-of-war

October 28, 2009
Michael Hoskins

A last-minute change to a bill during the 2009 special session has stripped judges of their discretion regarding juvenile placements out of state by requiring them to get permission from the Department of Child Services. All three branches are reacting.

More

Teaming up for change

September 2, 2009
Rebecca Berfanger
National, local experts meet in Indiana to discuss juvenile justice.
More

CJ: Most players in appeals acting responsibly

August 26, 2009
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana chief justice said in an order that he would "smack down" judicial overreaching or overspending.
More

Lawyers challenge imbalance of power

March 18, 2009
Michael Hoskins
Budget statute affected juvenile codes and gives the Department of Child Services oversight of judicial decision-making.
More

Counties must pay for juvenile facilities

June 13, 2008
Jennifer Nelson
Indiana counties are responsible to pay a portion of costs to operate juvenile detention facilities.
More

Marion County a model for juvenile detention reforms

May 14, 2008
Michael Hoskins
Detention alternatives, Initial Hearing Court draw national praise.
More

Teens share stories about juvenile justice experience

May 14, 2008
Michael Hoskins
Two Elkhart County teens say it took incarceration to teach them a lesson.
More

What's next for Indiana's juvenile system?

May 14, 2008
Michael Hoskins
Indiana lags in statewide reform, but builds on localized successes.
More

Detaining questions

April 30, 2008
Michael Hoskins
Funding of youth detention, alternatives draws concern.
More

'Out of the court's hands'

April 30, 2008
Michael Hoskins
Lake County teen recognizes she is responsible for future in juvenile system.
More

State slow to achieve juvenile justice reforms

April 30, 2008
Michael Hoskins
Local successes exist; systematic changes lag.
More
Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It's a big fat black mark against the US that they radicalized a lot of these Afghan jihadis in the 80s to fight the soviets and then when they predictably got around to biting the hand that fed them, the US had to invade their homelands, install a bunch of corrupt drug kingpins and kleptocrats, take these guys and torture the hell out of them. Why for example did the US have to sodomize them? Dubya said "they hate us for our freedoms!" Here, try some of that freedom whether you like it or not!!! Now they got even more reasons to hate us-- lets just keep bombing the crap out of their populations, installing more puppet regimes, arming one faction against another, etc etc etc.... the US is becoming a monster. No wonder they hate us. Here's my modest recommendation. How about we follow "Just War" theory in the future. St Augustine had it right. How about we treat these obvious prisoners of war according to the Geneva convention instead of torturing them in sadistic and perverted ways.

  2. As usual, John is "spot-on." The subtle but poignant points he makes are numerous and warrant reflection by mediators and users. Oh but were it so simple.

  3. ACLU. Way to step up against the police state. I see a lot of things from the ACLU I don't like but this one is a gold star in its column.... instead of fighting it the authorities should apologize and back off.

  4. Duncan, It's called the RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION and in the old days people believed it did apply to contracts and employment. Then along came title vii.....that aside, I believe that I am free to work or not work for whomever I like regardless: I don't need a law to tell me I'm free. The day I really am compelled to ignore all the facts of social reality in my associations and I blithely go along with it, I'll be a slave of the state. That day is not today......... in the meantime this proposed bill would probably be violative of 18 usc sec 1981 that prohibits discrimination in contracts... a law violated regularly because who could ever really expect to enforce it along the millions of contracts made in the marketplace daily? Some of these so-called civil rights laws are unenforceable and unjust Utopian Social Engineering. Forcing people to love each other will never work.

  5. I am the father of a sweet little one-year-old named girl, who happens to have Down Syndrome. To anyone who reads this who may be considering the decision to terminate, please know that your child will absolutely light up your life as my daughter has the lives of everyone around her. There is no part of me that condones abortion of a child on the basis that he/she has or might have Down Syndrome. From an intellectual standpoint, however, I question the enforceability of this potential law. As it stands now, the bill reads in relevant part as follows: "A person may not intentionally perform or attempt to perform an abortion . . . if the person knows that the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion solely because the fetus has been diagnosed with Down syndrome or a potential diagnosis of Down syndrome." It includes similarly worded provisions abortion on "any other disability" or based on sex selection. It goes so far as to make the medical provider at least potentially liable for wrongful death. First, how does a medical provider "know" that "the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion SOLELY" because of anything? What if the woman says she just doesn't want the baby - not because of the diagnosis - she just doesn't want him/her? Further, how can the doctor be liable for wrongful death, when a Child Wrongful Death claim belongs to the parents? Is there any circumstance in which the mother's comparative fault will not exceed the doctor's alleged comparative fault, thereby barring the claim? If the State wants to discourage women from aborting their children because of a Down Syndrome diagnosis, I'm all for that. Purporting to ban it with an unenforceable law, however, is not the way to effectuate this policy.

ADVERTISEMENT