Document Type


Publication Date



Part II briefly sets out the historical context of juvenile delinquency proceedings before and after the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case In re Gault. Part III discusses the two current approaches to assessing the validity of a juvenile's waiver. Part IV examines three inadequacies with the parent/guardian advisor: (1) the standardless approach with which courts assess their appropriateness; (2) the inadequacy with which adults understand Miranda; and (3) the conflicts of interest that arise in this context. Part V analogizes to the abortion and paternity contexts to support the argument that lawyers should act as primary advisors to juveniles in the interrogation context. Part VI argues that adoption of this Article's proposal will enhance parental autonomy. Finally, Part VII evaluates potential reform efforts and concludes that there is no adequate substitute for consultation with counsel in a pre-interrogation setting.


Originally published by American Criminal Law Review in 2004.