142 6 Court and the Legal System—Juvenile ForensicsAdolescents can behave recklessly and deviantly. They can also engage in illicit
conduct. What knowing decision-making capabilities do children exercise when
breaking the law? How does psychology help us determine when youths are or
are not responsible for their (criminal actions)? Is there a definable age of criminal
responsibility?
Juveniles can provide testimonial evidence in a court of law. How does the child's
age impact the admissibility and/or veracity of his/her testimony? Can youths tell the
difference between right and wrong? Do adolescents understand the consequences
of giving sworn testimony in a legal proceeding?
Child custody cases involve a decision about the placement of a youth with a
particular parent or parental surrogate. Typically, judges rely upon the "best interest
of the child" doctrine. What is this standard and how do psychologists interpret it?
How, if at all, does the juvenile court system promote it? To what degree does the
"best interest of the child" standard aid judges in child custody determinations?
Youths who violate the law can be held accountable for their behavior. Are
children who engage in illicit conduct troubled or dangerous? How do the psycho-
logical sciences assist the court system in treating at-risk youths?
The field of juvenile justice and the courtroom process are fraught with diffi-
cult questions about the appropriate and necessary response to individual acts of
adolescent misconduct. The discipline of psychology seeks to provide some worth-
while solutions. As the sections of this chapter demonstrate, there is an important
role for forensic psychologists in the juvenile court arena. As a matter of policy
the entire adjudication process remains largely uncharted by mental health special-
ists. Notwithstanding, therapists, administrators, and advocates in the psychological
community are routinely called upon to help address the problems of at-risk youths
and to divert them, where possible, away from the formal justice system. Sol-
utions to many of the remaining questions in the juvenile forensic arena require
careful and thoughtful research strategies. As the sections of this chapter repeatedly
make clear, this is one viable direction by which psychologists can assist those court
practitioners who work in the field.
DEFINING THE AGE OF CRIMINAL
RESPONSIBILITY
Introduction
There is evidence ... that there may be grounds for concern that the child receives
the worst of both worlds: that he (or site) gets neither the protections accorded to adults
nor the solicitous care and regenerative treatment postulated for children. (383 U.S.. at
556, 1966)The above statement was taken from the United States Supreme Court case of Kent
i'. United States (1966). In this case an intruder entered the apartment of a woman