Juvenile reform

Delinquency hearings should be open

Members of the state’s Juvenile Justice Task Force will soon start reviewing the current system and recommending changes. One change is obviously necessary: greater public access to juvenile proceedings.

Gov. Tom Wolf announced the formation of the task force in December after his Council on Reform identified the juvenile justice system as needing “significant reform.” The task force, with technical assistance from the Pew Charitable Trusts, will make policy recommendations to the governor by November so that any changes can be included in the 202122 budget.

The need for reform in Pennsylvania’s juvenile justice system has become apparent in recent years, in large part because of scandals involving juvenile detention facilities.

Last year, an investigation by the Philadelphia Inquirer exposed abuses at the Glen Mills Schools in Delaware County. Not only were boys routinely threatened and abused by counselors, but state officials failed to detect and stop the abuses, which reportedly went on for years.

A decade earlier, the so-called “Kids for Cash” scandal rocked the Luzerne County court system. Two judges were convicted for sending thousands of children to for-profit detention centers — often for the most trivial of offenses — in exchange for payments. The state Supreme Court ultimately overturned the adjudications of hundreds of victims and ordered their records expunged.

In the Luzerne County case, the corrupt judges were able to get away with their unconscionable conduct for years in part because the proceedings were not open to the public. Pennsylvania’s juvenile delinquency hearings — where juveniles are accused of a crime — are closed, except in rare situations where the alleged crime is sufficiently serious and both the prosecution and defense agree to an open hearing.

The presence of the press and the public in the courtroom during those juvenile delinquency hearings could have caused the judge to think twice before sending a child to a detention center for something as minor as trespassing on a vacant building. In any event, the sentencing patterns would likely have become apparent — and been exposed — long before hundreds of children were taken from their homes.

One of the goals of the task force should be to reduce the number of youths sent to detention facilities.The U.S. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention reports that the state has one of the highest rates of juvenile incarceration in the country. Yet the proceedings leading to those sentencing decisions are, for the most part, done behind closed doors with little information provided other than the outcome.

A report from the Juvenile Law Center showed that many juveniles were placed in detention programs for minor infractions rather than violent acts.

There is a rightful concern for protecting the privacy of juveniles accused of a crime, but — as recent incidents show — closed hearings don’t necessarily serve their best interests.

A handful of states have already opened their juvenile justice systems to the public, opting to close hearings only after an appeal from either side and a hearing on the request. Pennsylvania would be better served by such a system that presumes juvenile hearings are open, and closes them only for serious considerations and only after all parties have a chance to be heard on the matter.