A COUPLE SUPER-PROTECTEUR: The A S E and the children judge

This paper is one of the chapters of my book "Child victims, child offenders", published in 1989 by Balland.
It is partially dated, but on the bottom it still sticks to the reality of this Social-judicial dialectics which characterizes our child protection device. I book you with pleasure. As soon as I find a little time book I actualiserai it.
JPR




A COUPLE SUPER-PROTECTEUR: The A S E and the children judge



Social assistance to childhood and the judge for children form a couple funny. Are they married? They live in concubinage? The fact is that despite their separate homes, they are allied for better and for worse. Alliance a 300th anniversary and a quadragénaire.
We remember all of the name of young girl, old girl should I say, of the first: Public Assistance. On me may be objected that it is not, under the civil status, age that I prepared him. This is true. But all those who are interested in his genealogy know that it was designed otherwise called at the time of Saint Vincent de Paul.
Children judge takes his birth certificate of an order of 2 February 1945. Between the two roles are very distinct. At him, offenders, to it, all the others: wards of the State, an temporary collected and children otherwise assisted in their family. Is it as a bogeyman? Compared to it, surely. But from the point of view of the kids and the kids that would, its appearance is a big step forward. Before him, any magistrate sitting in the courts for children created in 1912. If back in time, found that small offenders were, as adults, exposed only repression of the ordinary courts. If he also repressed, the new judge was first protect, re-educating.
The judge of children and Public Assistance household is composed in 1958-1959 by a set of orders. As her gossipy, the judge then receives mandate to protect children in danger, not the only offenders. It is in this time that under cover of the D.D.A.S.S., Public Assistance will take the kindest name of social assistance to childhood. A first facelift for her, a real awakening to life for him.
During the decade that followed, the couple was very prolific. Him, dashing and impulsive, law as Justice, ordered provisional custody in turn arm and the provisional lasted long. She used to govern the world of wards of the State, to offset more than widely the descending number - less poverty produced less abandonments early and final - by also durable temporary collections - eight, ten, twelve years, sometimes more-that the adjective is suggesting.
Consider instead.
From 1960 to 1970, the number of wards of the State falls of 63 500 to 38 700 j ' rounding - but that of the collected temporary passes of 36 000 to 75 000 and that of the kept provisionally (i.e. placed by juvenile judge) rises to 30 800 to 107 400. Either included pupils, about 130 000 children in 1960 to more than 220 000 10 years later.
Protects well, separates and place many thought then social assistance to children and the children judge. They came back. The current number of children fell below what it was in 1960: approximately 110 000 and among them, there are more than 5,000 pupils (21,000 still in 1980). Therefore, the vast majority is not doomed to placement up to the age of majority.
Behind the lifting, a significant change occurred. Public Assistance is dead. The public child welfare service (CCAs, read "laseu") was born with a new blood, these new generations of child inspectors trained (on paper) to the social sciences and modern management. HAS.H.e. has only vocation as his ancestor children; It must now avoid having to welcome them by creating the conditions for a better life at home. It warns that intervenes. The authoritarian withdrawal of child should be exceptional. More importantly it is the only judge. Allow a child with the agreement of the parents, is the ultimate solution when others including the educational aidfe home proved to be too short.
Let us be realistic: his old skin he still clings to the bones. For the view, and notably in the departments with a strong tradition for the children, it remains the public Assistant.
*
This couple life does not go without bickering. The judge has the power to take decisions than.H.e. child does not necessarily endorse. In return, she has the ability to make the secrecy, for example by failing to report facts that he ignores and call its intervention. Thus, he criticized the time it takes to take the cases of child abuse:
-You should have prevent me earlier!
-No, because in the early family was willing to do what is necessary.
Of the two, it is often the most jammed. While it is true that it has the advantage of a kind of paternal power on it, it is no less true that he knows very well, better than him, with the Web Spider that she has woven field what happens in families, in the institutions. In addition, it is she who holds the purse.
Bickering sometimes turn to the dispute of territory - "it's not your children, it is my own" - or the conflict of jurisdiction - "I know them, better than you, I know better what will be good for them". In the worst moments, j. feel like saying "Pay and shut up". and respond "Simply you decide as I hear".
Reassure you. Between them the worst is not often. They are condemned to agree. Even the infidelity of towards, for example when he prefers directly entrusted his children to its own services to the judicial Protection of youth (CPAD), ex-Education supervised, but especially to private associations, eventually be pardoned. It has too much to do to give themselves time to long jealousies. And then these false rivals is it not often by it that he has known? Has t - it not also the certainty that he will he return always both he needed it? It is much more concerned in fact when he uses "trusted persons" which is only to control what they are.
If it is in its furniture to the children's Court, if it has some dependencies to the SFP, it has the property, it has the means to stay or to stay in institutions or in foster families children whose order support; It still holding the Chequebook when it comes to pay a monthly allowance or an emergency to a family in need, to finance a family or educational assistance. He may well promise, it is the one who decides what to release.
He also well admits the double life of his companion. Because it has its own life. It does not preclude having its good works, its children and its families, - those who agree to do what she wants for their offspring-, that she come back to the kitchen to take care of their common children. He wants the service to run its measures. It must never forget.
No, to well think, is not a couple jealous. Likely instead. The main criticism that has.H.e. made to the judge when happens to spread their squabbling in public, it sometimes be as fathers who occasionally claim to decide everything while they are infinitely less present than the mother to their children.
-I told you you deal more; "he has still made a stupidity!"
-If you were more present, this happen better. But, of course, you have too much to do!
It is not in remainder of argument. If it ensured recalled, it would work more in the "feeling" in the Act. As once.
False argument. They must accept is different. They are different. If their territories are close by the effect of mimicry brings those long together, they have many similarities in behaviour, it is not a homosexual couple. Their functions are separate and distinct. One manages the body and the social, the other law. It helps families, in respect of their rights and obligations, ensures it the conditions for the exercise of parental authority. Of course it is not a simple distributor of law: listening, attempts to be a psychologist, is concerned about the conditions of existence of parents and children, but it limits, nourish, transfer or dedicated rights.
The distinction is essential. Children whose deals the couple are not its own. It does not have do anything to impair the natural order of parental authority otherwise than by way of justice. Same volunteers, that is accepted by the parties concerned, the delegations of parental authority must be endorsed by the tribunal, which checks if there is not below suspicious traffic. A fortiori, may the deprivation of some or all of their rights not be imposed on parents by simple administrative decision. By mimicry, it was substantively permeate on it. Since the 1984 Dufoix Act, the right has penetrated has. S E. Parents should give a prior and written agreement on the conditions of social intervention; the opinion of the child must be collected and situations should be regularly reviewed.
On paper, the sharing of roles seems simple. When families accept its intervention, the ESA is without reference to the judge. He intervenes when the family refuses to (or can't) take the necessary measures to put an end to the situation of danger. In reality, the border is more moving.
First she uses him, without his knowledge- but he ignores it really so that sometimes arranges it?-, to overcome any reluctance: "If you do not agree, I send to the judge!.". If the threat is inoperative, it seeks the so that it imposes by order the measure proposed by it and refused by the parents.
For its part, the judge sends children who are brought to it by other means: small offenders, but also of runaways, real or apparent abuse victims, recovered or picked up by the police or the police.
For many people the couple really squabbling. For example, when she asked him to order a measure, ESA would not discuss. But he chipote, it checks, ordering complementary investigations, brief him gives the impression of doubt of it and take too much time. Should it not generally for him to give? No doubt. But sometimes is not agree, not agree at all with the proposal made even if he admits the facts. In short, it is unpredictable, uncertain as all judges.He acquired at the school of the judiciary principles: as a police officer goes directly to the prison with that that it has to stop, without going through the Justice box where it touches a warrant of committal, same family cannot be subject to a coercive measure without control of opportunity!
Conversely, when he entrusted the seed of delinquency, she snorts, she rouspète: "You don't want it here." It is not the type of the House. It is not equipped for! "." It also accuses him of gaspilleer or na pas have confidence when he takes the initiative to give a term open to a private service that it supports physically children. She doesn't like these double-measures.
In one as the other case is sometimes long Parley. Exchange sweet words. Especially on phone permanently. When the case is serious, we give appointments.
More finaude that resigned, ESA eventually almost always leave the last word to the judge. As it is it who manages the shed, it will have the opportunity to then arrange things at his convenience. It may be the menu but it makes the dish, and it has little opportunity to bring its science. It is not its onions. S ' is not content to change canteen giving hand-thrown of the measure. Eventually, it will seize the first incident to him fold his caquet: "you see, I well said you" there to accuse him to take his comfortable with the decisions of the head of the family, not! On the one hand, there, I said, the power to put an end to the measure. On the other hand, and most importantly, it has as much as him the concern of children from their families. His poor head is never that the demonstration of a true disagreement on how best to exercise their common protection on children they have in common. But it is true that she does feel not always him marks of affection that she would expect. In true macho, he really believes that anything is due and plays of his superb. He is magistrate i.e. "officer with special status", it is only official. It is "the" defender of individual liberties and freedoms family, it is the administration of management!
I would add that generally invested this function right out of school, he drawn to be always more young it and is insured, if this couple life displeases him to yield his place to another?
And them, these children, these adolescents, these parents also prefer? None? This should happen even if they do say us not. The two? It has the right to dream! Not rely on what we hear. In the situation where they are, they play one or the other, one against the other. This is, in their difficulties, they spare a range of freedom.
"The Inspector (childhood) is nice, but justice is hard!" Variant "If you do this, I'll say"my"judge!". Similarly of the parents agree with social assistance to childhood because they fear the judge. Others will eventually find the latter to ask him: "Mr. Justice place children at the Aissistance, my wife is sick and me I work." "Refuse me a temporary collection". That all or almost use us or us suffer, more that they love us, it is obvious. Keep, are we in their place! That they need the couple that we are is not emotional bent, but a necessity...
*
Let the shoving where each reaffirmed his - wrong? - character. Between the Aseu and IM-eu, elles are neither more nor more important than in a reasonably stable couple. Much more frequently, it is even not need to talk to understand. As in all old couples where each still has respect for the partner, it is mutually trust. About such or such children, everyone knows that he can count on the other.
So is it with confidence that I had ordered at the request of social assistance to children an educational measure for Pilard family. Five lower - age children, parents of modest without being poor, a little lymph condition often overwhelmed by too many problems arising from a large family. It is almost a family-type. We love his children without major bloodshed or sufficient understanding. Talking much, did not Exchange because it has not learned. As early as kindergarten, the school revealed significant difficulties in language indicative of a real need for educational support.
A long-term work. The educational measure entrusted to the safeguarding of childhood follows its course. Undistinguished. That's all right if I remember the Pilard when the problem of Catherine. Since the age of six months, she lives in a very specialized institution of the Marne, the only of its kind in France. He has agreed to allow it, then bedridden, in the framework of support by the social security.
It is far the Marne when it lives in Yvelines, but the parents see their daughter regularly. This last year, they had the satisfaction of real progress. Catherine can now walk in relying on the ramps which the walls of this House are equipped. But, she has reached the age limit fixed by the regulations, 6 years. But can a little, expected time to find a facility adapted to its needs and that is closer to the home of his parents because it is still not question it may already (re) come home. It is a year for this.
However things rush. Mr. and Mrs. Pilard received a letter from the Institution. The Director explains that he be considered a more prompt return in Yvelines, otherwise their daughter will be transferred to a psychiatric hospital of the Marne. It leaves them finally little choice. Catherine is now redundant. The Board of Education specialized him will impose this hospitalization by pure Manager reflex. There are empty seats in psychiatric hospitals of the Department. As simple as that. The market of childhood has its reasons!
The letter was immediately forwarded to the educator of the backup who inquired and has informed me of the situation. Only response possible: I impose judicairement maintenance of Catherine in the institution or that I entrust the ASE also has the power to oppose the need for the child project of psychiatric hospitalization. Must be in agreement because it will pay in both cases. I have the power to make this decision alone, but if it does not accept it, it may be time to pay the price of day. Or the establishment requesting that retain Catherine time which was initially planned, should not be punished for our own...
With the Inspector of childhood we retained the first solution. A phone call was enough that we fall in agreement. We have to correctly understood, as usual I need only then receive the family for the shape - as it is in agreement - and take the order.
*
A perfect arrangement is sometimes at the limit of the injurious. It can lead to a lack of reciprocal control when the judge merely to take the steps that are required or if it does not ensure the follow-up of its decisions. It is guarantor to the family of what should happen after his intervention. It is his rationale, which makes it an original judge.
Thus the judge who signed almost eyes closed the ordonnanceque sought to Marina, the ASEnce. Lack of time, retreat, or information?
Marina, 8 years, is high from birth by a childminder by reason of the State of the mother during childbirth. Large addict, she was unable to care for her baby and not too knowing what she was doing, she agreed to the temporary collection that still lasts. Therefore no intervention of the judge.
Since Marina never sees his mother, of Portuguese origin, nor his uncles and aunts who as she lived in France. The drug has led the mother in prison where rehabilitation is imposed. Approach to his release, she began by writing or to write to the childminder replied by a postcard: "your daughter is going well, she grows up and goes to school". In a second letter, the mother announces the date of his release and his intention to return to his daughter.
Panic ASE. At the bottom Marina knows not his mother. Of course it has the right for her, but the project threatens the security of Catherine. To impede it, a report is sent to the Prosecutor of the Republic that captures the judge of dependent children for him to transform the administrative temporary collection in a good and solid judicial placement. What it does. The mother is in prison. It is not received by the judge who could extract it for the occasion.
The mother does not include. It appeals and occurs only at the hearing. It could be accompanied by a lawyer, but nobody does the advised him. Awkward it is confused in its explanations, is aggressive, threat not to go see her daughter as requested the social assistant. In short, instead defend his case, it is sinking and thus causes confirmation of placement by the Court. The cycle continues.
Judicial placement was necessary, it is safe. But here the Justice worked as a past administrative service. Social person has seen the mother while he was easy - and for good reason! - find in prison. Should it not have been clarifying the situation of the child earlier? Must specify that Service a large French Department, the letters sent by parents to their children for a long time are not always sent in the same. As to the "good old days" of Public Assistance, they then remain on the record. "Do not traumatize children". Shocking, not!
The judge did not receive the mother of Marina... It endorsed the request as a precaution. That's all. The suite? If there was a chance to establish links between Marina and her mother, to term if not live together, at least to be in a relationship, she has been wasted. This time the child welfare and juvenile judge of agreement on the back of those they protect. This happens to them. Because does not forget that protects the child does not exclude the mother of this protection. It is the law and common sense.
*
Within the couple, a huge disagreement can be more profitable than a too perfect agreement. On parental authority, since we talk about, Act gives children judge the power to arbitrate between the family and society that in some ways represents the ASE. Thus, happens it - it, should he happen to the reject. It is not a record room. It offers. He found. As it may not be reliable at 100% the Court of Cassation recognized the right to challenge its decisions in the Court of appeal to the old companion. Useful law, but sum all rarely used. Evidence that finally this is not too badly between them. In Paris, three or four calls to 4 500 decisions of placement in the past six years.
This is a case of disagreement assumed by the judge within the couple. It dates from 1986. The scene is happening in the North of the France.
Leila is placed. His mother Mrs. Baudis wishes that it be entrusted to his own mother Mrs Alliot who already has three other children. Denial of the child welfare Service. The grandmother is too old. It is already too much to do.

Before the judge, Ms. Baudis recounts that when she made an application for temporary collection it had him sign a consent to the adoption of her daughter. Since then, all his efforts to retrieve Leila and take it with the grandmother were unsuccessful.
J ' but said that ever I had wanted to abandon my child she explains in her poor French.I even sent a recommended. When I wanted to take my daughter was denied me and it forced me to accept a nurse under threat. If I decided not to put in a nurse, she-l' social assistance to childhood - would say you that the small is in danger, and thus it would have its rights on Leila

The grandmother confirms to the judge that never was surrender Leila. "" I assume"appears say, the difficulties of my daughter".

Report of the child welfare Service. The legal status of Leila is not mentioned (a discreet silence that says a lot!). It is not disputed that almost immediately after the admission of the child, the mother sought to resume it. Except to seize the children judge in an instant, his application would have to be satisfied. Without this, and if this that said Ms. Baudis is correct, it y had real assault.
Not only the grandmother is old insists the report, but Mrs Baudis could, as in the past, is to resume his daughter at any time, too little aware of the danger that she made him run. Expected therefore judge it confirms the placement in foster care.
-"There is no indication that the infant is in danger with the grandmother" responds j. in his order which gives satisfaction to Ms. Baudis .c ' is in full consciousness that Mrs Alliot request custody of Leila after obtaining that of elders.
However, he partially integrates the arguments of the social report. Instead of letting Ms Baudis freedom of consent itself to such custody and put an end to when it would like to by simple exercise of the right of parental authority, he directs himself, gives judicial placement form. As long as it did decide not hand-held, Leila can be removed to his grandmother.
*
They are spy, is sometimes copied. Recently, the judge is concerned. He feels the under the influence. Technician - then you could hear it-, it has become political. It is that it has a new man in her life: the President of the General Council.
Probably you have noticed? I have not spoken you far D.A.S.S., foreign service of the State, led by the prefect and overlord of ASE until 1984. It is now largely out of the shot.
With decentralization, the former largest Affairs Branch has shared sanitary and social: the ASE Service fell in anyway by the President of the General Council. as well as maternal and child protection. In short, now he is the true pattern of social action in the direction of the families and the Department.
Somehow he became the father-in-law of judge of the children. The Prefet was once only a distant Chief.It retained some skills. as to be the guardian of the wards of the State.
The President of the General Council have today for his daughter, and by contre-coup for his son-in-law, more jealously paternalistic ways. More is said about its. It is him who finances, which decides on the amount of the annual envelope. And then, say, the, is the suspected to be little aware of the business, therefore not very competent. It was expected that he breaks all at its facility in cockpit of social action: old relate more than children, the roads, it is more visible than the social!
Backbiting? Trial of intent, instead! If we even begin to feel the difference - it would speak of thrill-, disruption and feared by some or expected by others has not yet occurred.
The main failure of the President of the General Council would be that it is much more sensitive to the that will tell you that it was the Prefet and its Director of Health Affairs and social. Particularly not scandals. Talking of my industries and my leisure sites, but not the children of social assistance! It would be bad for my image. A General Council President always navigates between elections. An example. In April 1982 18-month-old Gilles was entrusted to ESA, then State service, by judicial decision. Followed a placement in foster family, the spouses Allain. In the beginning, no problem. The difficulties begin when the boy of the age. His foster have become both too exessifs and too many possessives. By mutual agreement, j. and ESA decided to entrust a private on 29 March 1986 Home Gilles.
The father of the boy and especially the host family to launch a petition against this decision. Emoi in the thatched cottages and the hotel of the Department. FR3, and then the national channels relay. Meanwhile, decentralization occurred. The President of the General Council retreats. Sacrificing a unilaterally informed opinion, he disavows its Service.
Neglecting the folder, it the sum of renew the child in the Allain. The judge is notified immediately. UI ' was the least of things - by the Director of the ESA this because there was a judicial warrant. The Magistrate decides to maintain the position which initially was common. After all the decision depends that of him.
"Whereas the children judge is responsible for the protection of minors in danger;" it fulfills this mission in the independence that the constitution guarantees and taking to only test of its action that the interests of the child.
"In this case, the transfer of custody to Gilles at the Service of social assistance to childhood for the above mentioned reasons is more consistent with the interests of the boy and should put an end to emergency".
Otherwise said, judge rescinds the order of 1981 which entrusted Gilles ASE and is thus provides the means to decide itself and directly that the child remain, at least provisionally, pending find a better orientation in the home where he evolves more positively than in his former family home.
His father may exercise his right of visit on condition that he use it himself, that he makes concession to the Allain. It should be in effect to avoid that the boy is the toy of a new conflict of appropriation.
The President of the General Council has hierarchical authority on "daughter". The decision of the judge was therefore to him just as much as ASE. Probably in he found himself well. At least was there allowed him to return the opinion against his son-in-law! "It's not me, it is the judge". The relationships between them is not sufficiently established to have to assume the antics.
But imagine that the first placement of Gilles is operated without judicial intervention. The judge would not have its word to say except to estimate proprio motu that all this was endangering the child. It could be auto-saisir if the Prosecutor's Office did not take the initiative. Otherwise, ESA would have been forced to make four wishes its President without possibility of appeal to the arbitration of his accomplice, at least officially, because there would have been someone to the judge in the bath.
*
It is time to clarify that the judge is not any of the children's Court. You have pointed out, he at least has a twin brother who has the title of Crown responsible for the Affairs of minors and that forms with his colleague, under the authority of the Prosecutor of the Republic what we call the Prosecutor's Office. It is often very young, as the judge. The Attorney usually assigns to this function the all new fresh magistrates minted school. Justice for minors, minor justice? These young peruvent magistrates ask themselves to be assigned to the prosecution of minors rather than ' in the settlement of cases instruction or traffic accidents.
Its responsibilities are large. All or almost passes by him. It is in his Office that arrive reports established by social services, informations, procedures for police and gendarmerie. It reads, possibly request additional information, sorts, distributes finally in making recommendations taking of requisitions. Is it that children in danger, of child victims? It seizes the children judge. Is it relatively serious delinquency, considers useful to require a warrant if the Statute leaves him to the Faculty? It will always remain him the possibility to describe crime that in statement again simple offence. Why this close-knit to seize the magistrate rather that the judge child. Investigating judges have function easier filing mandate while the I led willingly in small frangin mother hen who always thinks to protect to sanction.
In the Emergency Department, the latter may be conveying to children in danger. He must then inform the public prosecutor. Conversely, missing children judge, the Prosecutor may also in the emergency order of protection measures. A child in danger does not wait. Hence this notable exception in the procedure. So he dépossédera not the judge of the children of the folder. Within ten days, he will be advised and will be entrusted with the management of the case. However he abused sometimes its power by using it for court-circuiter physically present judge.
As in the case of Bordeaux where parents questioned the appropriateness of the operation that doctors wanted to perform on their very young child. Delicate operation: If the child in réchappait, it might remain disabled. A choose parents therefore preferred a fast and natural end rather than intervention debilitating or fatal consequences.
Doubting them, they had asked the judge for children. ""Decide in yourself"answered the magistrate felt that they were better judges than him in the matter." Whatever it is you know that I will not intervene. "I think that you do not neglect your responsibilities". Other magistrates - because the situation is more common that it is not thought - would be intervened in the case. Not he. Knowing his position, the Prosecutor's Office authorized the operation, in his back, violating the spirit and the text of the Act. Epilogue: the baby died after the operation. The parents complained. The child and the complaint have been buried.
Some time later, still in Bordeaux, new case in the same vein: Ms. Trieste giving birth of a premature child and also a few serious defects. Transferred to the hospital, doctors are considering either operate the child, or placed under treatment. Mr. Trieste refuses to give permission to operate. For permission to operate, the treating physician through the ASE captures the public prosecutor which takes the order sought. Three days later, the juvenile judge is seized. He learns the decision of the Prosecutor's Office suspended the exercise of their rights of parental authority to parents: they had not been heard. Of course, they ask that the decision be reported. The judge gives them satisfaction and recalls in its decision that the Attorney had no authority to give such authorization. There was no urgency or absence of the competent juvenile judge. It was only to seize a magistrate.

The suite of this case, at least at the judicial level? Mr. Trieste pleads that he refused to give permission to operate because of contradictory advice he received on the part of many physicians. He also felt that her child is artificially kept alive by the scientific interest that were demonstrating physicians for defects of which the origin and treatment are still poorly known.
The judge inquired:
"It follows from our investigations to the attending physician and a specialist of surgery Neonatorum on the one hand, that defects of the child have no lethal origin, on the other hand, proposed surgical operations were not to maintain articificiellement the child in life"", but to reduce or mitigate these defects, finally the General State of the child which becomes worrying is the consequence of premature birth and birth defects."
Although only after discussion with the judge, parents manifested their intention to get in contact with the doctors at the hospital, the judge gives the authorization to proceed notwithstanding the opposition of the parents, any surgical procedure or treatment to reduce or mitigate the defects brought by the child.
*
Moving forward in the process and the sharing of roles between the two false twins. The judge of the child has a degree of autonomy in the development of its decisions. The Prosecutor's Office checks generally of far away that its decisions are well consistent with public order. It becomes very present when, in cases of delinquency, comes the time of the trial. No need of him hearing of cabinet where cannot be taken that educational measures. The occasion, the judge asked to come, the time to impress his world. However, we have seen, in the precincts of the tribunal for children it fully takes its role as representative of the Crown requires the company, and camped the bogeyman.
It also takes a leading place in civil proceedings - forfeiture, delegation of parental authority, judicial declaration of abandonment - and in criminal proceedings where the authors of abandonment of family, ill-treatment and abuse are judged. Permanence and memory of the Tribunal, the Attorney is often better able to make the synthesis of a family saga, at least in theory, because substitutes "turn" quickly and is more written memory.
Are not going to believe that the children judge suffers as a martyr guardianship of this twin who goes to a few Arias from elder brother donor lessons and threatening
-"I'll call".
-"Go if you dare it." "After all it is your right."
As the couple he formed with the ASE, there are grounds of annoyance. But nothing more. Sometimes he'd like even more present in his cabinet for example. Would this not be the replacement of the "alleged" facts for families and allowing the children judge to remain in its adjudicative role without having to first take the accuser?
Important functions of the Prosecutor's Office, I have said. Frustrating functions also. Priori also well informed of the situations of families as the children judge, the Prosecutor has not made on their fate and it is a certain complex.
Complementary functions. Good collaboration - made frequent informal contacts on the most delicate Affairs, more institutional meetings on the functioning of the Court and its relationship with their external partners - between prosecutors and judges of children depends in good part the quality of the production of the tribunal. Each in respect of the responsibilities of the other.
A good illustration of this collaboration can be found in the chapter "defenceless children". Conversely, the Prosecutor's Office can put children in difficulty judges, annoy a coherent policy in the direction of young offenders, so for young people in difficulty.
*
I return to the couple that the I shape with the ASE and the greatest hardship imposed now on this one by the President of the General Council too sensitive to gossip.
If the son-in-law can afford a Board to his father-in-law of the left hand, it is, in its new responsibilities, to take the time to inquire well before an opinion too passionate and versatile to be always reliable. That allow ESA to correct too partial information including fact press sometimes its cabbage-fat.
On television, we learn that a childminder has to flee with the child entrusted because she and her husband refuse to let him go to the family of adoption was chosen.
A hear the husband only to be questioned, their request was rejected without review. If this is true, the Act of 6 June 1984 would have not been met because it obligation ASE to first hear the host family on the project it might form for the child. What course does not in the foster a right of pre-emption. Childminder is a paid profession, not a promise of adoption. No one has a right to adopt such child
Is it true that their request has not been discussed? The husband said, then, between words, is believed to understand that he and his wife there have been compelled to survey. Understanding in many viewers aware of the context of this case. Opinion only sees and hears that a thing. This family of home was the child, therefore it is inhumane to give in adoption to another family. I zapping of a chain to the other. They invite, both, the minitélistes to take the side of the family home and against the administration. I say "for and against" and not "between" because therefore that the facts are unilaterally presented the result is assured: more than 80% the minitel has maternal assistant Rodrigue to Chimène eyes.
Usually on debate not the fate of a child in public place. But when a party takes responsibility, it is not healthy that the other silent. It wrong or right. Since the view is taken to witness, should inform him completely. I here less incriminates the press that the secrecy that he made our old couple. Because that is a bad habit they share. They believe many do in is quiet; they are wrong. Little by little, they will undermine their credit. Now, after a few high-profile cases, it is acquired, it is sufficient to oppose them for reason.
They are wrong again because in not providing the opinion the essential reflection elements, it reflects not, she reacts.
They are wrong finally because force thus to be interpellér their troops will over take risks. Use a host family, it is heard that can leave a child waiting in a warm same institution; maintain a child in a foster home where there are certainly some problems, but nothing serious directly to the child, it is heard that he should not move permanently a child of a family to another. That cannot be welcomed such options? At the reverse everything everyone can hear that foster chosen for a placement of a few months that can extend in view of the uncertainty that reign around the status of a child, this is not necessarily a good father and a good mother ad vitam eternam for this child? Is why, at the time, it did not make the consequences is now invoked to deny the adoption. the view can be heard the difficulties there are, in particular, to immediately find a family home, and in General to find foster families while the vast majority of contracts for private more remunerative Kaléidoscope nannies. The opinion is adult for entendfe control of investments in family, remuneration of foster families, the uncertainty that weighs a priori the fate will be that of a child, otherwise, to admit it. Do nothing to explain, it takes the risk that she take the party that appears to be the lowest against the evil administration and especially the risk of bringing social workers to be wary of yet host families needed
Would it condemn the family investments that it would not be otherwise. To make policy, it is assume its deficiencies and display its objectives. It is also explain if not convincing, at least avoid RTI errors ' appreciation and more coarse analysis.
Has been verified, I reminded him that the head of the Department is closer its now that he knows that they come out of his pocket while previously it supported only a small part of the budgets he voted. Let's not forget however that it is an average impression. This man has as many faces as there are departments. This is normal. This is the spirit of decentralization. Each adapts his policy to the needs of his place. H is for cheapskates who refuse to create positions of needed magistrates educators who are reluctant to finance investments useful but expensive, who advise their social services refer to j. - thus toward the State - all difficult situations for their measures are carried out. In the latter case, it is also to preserve its image by economy.
Already interested in good housewife that she has always been, the ASE may therefore be extended to discuss more bitterly than in the past the price of the measures ordered by the I. If he entrusts him with children, it will be forced to pay. Itou if he entrusted the child directly to institution authorised by it.
There still good information would avoid the President of the General Council to be stuck between his daughter and son-in-law on the one hand, and the opinion on the other hand. Do not leave that child protection is costly, disproportionately expensive. Of course, it mobilizes means. But the figures are impressive when seen only them and not issues. Behind, there are all these miseries, all these troubles which, on occasion, the opinion is moves suddenly more than numbers. There are results - incidentally guarantees for the future of lower expenditure in another social budget. If the effectiveness of the school is sometimes discussed person is complaining of the price that it costs. The judicial and social child protection would not not more if each knew better what it is, why and how it does. But it is not known, we do learn it spontaneously. We, become or have almost all been students, and parents of students, but not children or parents of children placed. It is important therefore that explained us, examples, what are the d needs these children and their families if it wants the protection of the child to appear for this what was already that it was two hundred years ago: "u n duty Governments, a duty of society"
Let us make no mistake. All expenses compared, the protection of these children who will then make their way in life often costs less to the community that the long schooling of the children of rich. And would not be a law! And our protective torque should be complex because her own children are not naturally doomed to Polytechnic or E.N.A., and not to the school of the judiciary.
In 1984, the legislature stated that access to social assistance to children was a right. Has not still understood it.
*
Permanently, these money problems and these issues to be able to return to the couple. So insidiously undermine their relations. It spoke of divorce or separation of property between them at least.
Time the I dreamed to have its pool. It would build its institutions. He received in legacy with the CPAD, herself heiress of the prison for children, a very extensive legacy. He needed more and better to be his home. He would have his children which he would follow the route and which blend with disabled persons and social cases.
In 1982, the Ministry of Justice, to listen to its judges, claimed its financial autonomy for the means that were necessary for the protection of children. The Ministry of health renaclait. He was preparing to transfer everything to local communities. Above all, on behalf of the freedoms of the families, he claimed that it would be dangerous to implement channels: social security for persons with disabilities, social assistance for the poor and Justice for children in danger and offenders. These are the same children, are the same families said...
In a shared meal Place Vendôme, with Nicole Questiaux and his collaborators and after the bailiff in holding had barked "The guard is served", Robert Badinter heard this speech and renounced the claim of its services.
Today, General advice, successors to the State Department of health, well would the State Department of Justice to support its youth. Not a question of transfer which was received at decentralization, but it would stop fees for tomorrow. "We, it pays for families so that they have problems." "You you préoccuperez marginal and offenders."
The debate is mature. It will soon expire. In the meantime the preparatory work began. Look at the figures.They are informative on the art of social assistance to childhood and the judge to move the baby!
*
The figures speak for themselves commonly said. This form must be used with caution in the social.
First, because the material to capture is of great complexity.
Then because our statistical instrument is infinitely less than reliable. In truth, never was spent effort. Children judge I confess having epic conversations with the Centre de recherche de Vaucresson who wanted absolutely that I fill statistical documents in moments where I évertuais to hold only one, two, see three positions of judges for children on the basis of the interim vacancies. Was - this property to a judge and his clerk to do the work.? The DIY. Do not be surprised after difficulties of interpretation.
It is a pity. On the one hand because it is so difficult to really base a policy otherwise than on the feelings of each and of the other; on the other hand because it is also very difficult to measure the impact of this policy, which is frankly regrettable.
Keep still approximations.: usually the data that we have on the juvenile justice seem less objectionable.
Look far, ells are worrisome for our youth, and for our company, refers.
1977: about 120,000 children followed
1987: 180.000 if it excludes children whose parents are in guardianship
The social situation would be degraded so require especially to mobilize the judicial protection of youth the new name for the SFP?
I do not.
This increase would be even more "summoning the experience level" as it is sometimes said that in the same period the number of young people in the country has remained surprisingly stable. Of course, we are more numerous-56 million on January 6, 1989. but the France ages. We keep our alumni longer and if it took slightly over, the birth rate has stabilized slightly under 780,000 births each year.
Look at by age
1977: children under 6 years 4.771.000
1987: 4.551.000
The 6-13 years: 1977: 5.885.000; 1987: 5.273.000
The 13-16 years
1977: 2.597.000; 1987 :2.608.000
Finally the 13-18 years: 1977: 1.696.000; 1987: 1.720.000
Now let us young people classified by the Ministry of Justice:
1975 : 45.000; 1987 : 22. 865
Decline in juvenile delinquency. In this is a good new new! And are we hiding the!
Why? Perhaps because specialists know that reality must be more complex.
In fact, there are offender, offender. No one can know, here as elsewhere, how many minors were able to commit crimes on a reference period. The number of crimes is itself is unknown. The grey area - talking about black figure - is surely very important. As one of those committed by minors, only God knows the, if it maintains accounting.
The real truth is therefore a beautiful mystery.
Talking about offenders instead of crimes? Need to agree on the words. Each puts what he meant behind the expression. A time (1975) the Minister of the Interior suggested to police-educators to deal with the "pré-délinquants".
Between the time where someone is arrested for a crime and conviction, there may be many things. Including the recognition of innocence. Yes, it happens! More often - in 40-60% of cases-, the Prosecutor's Office did not fit to continue, or even, upstream, the police will not see the usefulness of proceedings against the young it stops. It will just mention the facts on the "Daybook", i.e. on the edge of the Office paper.
Under these conditions can we call offender.? Each definition. For me, is a young minor offender who
(1) is guilty of something prohibited by the Act under the guise of sentence
2 ° has been arrested
3 ° subject to criminal proceedings before the tribunal
4 ° is sentenced for these facts.
I've stolen! 80% of you, according to surveys of auto-confession at the request of the Ministry of Justice, have stolen. We were not as offenders. These figures show that the standard is to have been a thief, and the abnormality of never having taken the property of others without his permission! You read me, I judge. We have you and I managed our registration in life. Can be a parental warning, a reaction of the environment have preserved us major faux pas. This is my case. Being a delinquent, it is another matter. It is to install on a more or less long period in an attitude of violation of the law. Some are even talking about their craft professionals. They are also very status in society.
Young offenders we are talking about will not stop at the first or second misstep. For them, it is even not faux-pas. They remain in this attitude a time more or: long, they are not a stupidity, but the early ilos. Juvenile delinquency, it is a slice of life, a series of acts or omissions...So they are only rarely in the pros. It is known that delinquency peaks around 25 years. After it decreases.
Justice Statistics were difficult to grasp this reality
Several data sets are listed, sometimes confused which makes difficult the decryption. The same young will often be several criminal cases and also a record for the protection of children in danger. In statistics it will then be for five or ten.
Same misleading effect of measures in the same year are taken for minors in the records of delinquency. For example: it is placed under the regime of supervised release, and then a few months later it will be the object of an investment that may fail, so hand-thrown and possibly new placementqui play in a few weeks.
In these cases, there are criminal convictions. The judges, some at least have the habit, a batch of several small business in a same and only record to have to make a decision. Each is his account. The Registrar will have to type only a judgment. The young will have a criminal record registration. Four flights, you make him a wholesale price. Behind the joke what benefit is there to carry 20 mentions of reprimand with the same date on the same criminal record? I spent my time junctions, justified by the order of 2 February 1945 wondering myself preoccupied first with the person, secondarily facts.
It is only fair. Those who would fly ten bikes a coup would only a procedure, while those who commit the same number at retail, spaced dates would suffer as many procedures as bikes. The demonstration would apply to any other tort.
That inference figures we have. ?
First assumption: juvenile delinquency decreased. It is the most favourable. There is surely a little of this. And this decline seait explainable.
Since 1982 a genuine prevention strategy is in place. It is certainly widely perfectible, but it spoke so far without doing anything that we should welcome the effort that has been committed. First operations there "hot anti-été" thus qualified by journalists, that we have widened under the authority of Georgina Dufoix with Justice, the Interior and many partners in public and private including the most famous was Gilbert Trigano. Equivalent period, decreased up to 45% of delinquency and vandalism in some circles it found. All for a modest financial cost. Then came the generalization across the actions developed by the National Council for prevention of delinquency chaired by Gilbert Bonnemaison. This a view Council prematurely melted in 1988 in interdepartmental delegation of cities. The integration of the policy of prevention of delinquency in the framework of life policies is an excellent thing, but for essential, other dimensions should not be overlooked and it is pezutr be gone too quickly without draw all the consequences.
If the effort is any real effort, all rest truly invented to design a true prevention of delinquency and maladjustment. The causes of delinquency were not eradication, if both is that they can be, or even seriously affected. We experimented with yet.
Second hypothesis which would complement the first: a more effective police and gendarmesque. Here again the explanation for plausible that it either is totally demonstrated, nor sufficient to explain our numbers down.
Third hypothesis: floors further classified as they did previously procedures police relating to minors. Either a pure and simple ranking without suite. Either the opening on the basis of the police investigation of a record of protection of children in danger. The increase in cases of educational support in a context of increasing the number of judges for children (234 to 271 in 1987) goes in the direction of this explanation.
If that were the case, could, first, to infer that repressive attempts declined in favour of the idea that indeed young offenders first are victims of the circumstances of their lives. It would be positive. Can be can be also thought that juvenile delinquency is is "DGM" to no longer warrant criminal sanctions. Third, the perspective of the disappearance of the incarceration of minors and traditional anticipation of Justice on any law to intervene, may have deterred the Prosecutor's Office opened criminal, since he can no longer obtain provisional detention. The future will respond to these different questions that complement more they oppose.
The second big feature of these encrypted developments deserves even more serious attention. Let us not forget that at the same time, it increased from 65,000 children in danger to 173.000 and dust. Excuse little. The issue of merit review. Time would be spoiled for minors of 18 years?
One-fifth of the equivalent of a class of age followed by the juvenile courts - while at the same time 450,000 are supported by social assistance to children - it's starting to be done in our level of development.
Tell us: in fact, these figures reflect the transfer accelléré of social protection to the judicial protection. What the figures say, observing the field demonstrates this. Social assistance is more and more pot on his partner. Judges of the children have really sense now to be seized of situations which he did not know in the past. Is this a good thing? This is another debate. This trend will be able to be reinforced with the 1989 Act, which obliges the President of the General Council to inform the Justice more transferring ert as soon as possible on the situations of ill-treatment proved or assumed that he would have to know.
There is a disengagement of local communities for the benefit of the judges that he assumes the social case for national solidarity.
It is paradoxically a notable reversal occurs when one remembers the creeping war between DDASS and courts for children during the 60-70 years. Justice was concerned that social assistance to childhood renaclait to report situations difficult and in any case the was too late. Now he would have rather increased.
As the definition of the child drowns in the more general concept of the child in danger, this is potentially 450,000 children that tomorrow may switch to Justice. Was it was good what wanted? I do not. It was initially intended to guarantee more certainty and rapidity in the mobilization of the justice for children victims of physical abuse and not for any danger.
One wonders what will result from the removal of all these families in courts. Is - the property to them to intervene? Just wait for it than others would not.?
Another milestone was announced. The one where local communities will want to establish as the boundary between their area of intervention and that of Justice, each with its autonomous device, its structures and of course its modes of intervention.
It is important to say here that the cost of most of the judicial measures is supported by social action. It is since the couple. The State Department of health funded measures of State-Ministry of Justice. This system had a double advantage that avoid dies by symptoms: the medical for children with disabilities, the social for families and children in difficulty, the judiciary for children at risk, juvenile delinquents and marginal. Second advantage: one to enable social assistance to children to have a coherent policy of equipment for all populations in difficulties.
With decentralization, we understand that local communities want clarification. However, they have received through General staffing of equipment what finance means must have children's courts. But as time passes, the origin of the money disappears. the departments eventually forget that he was also a financial transfer. From there to divert a portion of these new revenue to other objectives...
Already, many judges of the children reported, some departments are reluctant to make available the means necessary for their operation: teams of educational action at home, means of accommodation.
Then after having transferred situations, communities will request the breakdown of financial bridges, ask the old couple divorce? Need to accept it?. The debate is old, but arises in new terms.
Yesterday Justice wanted to be a great girl and not supported to be under the health Cup. Today, the social wants to break free of a Cannonball. The same reasons should lead to oppose and instead create the conditions for a local consultation between the different public partners (State and local) and private (professional or otherwise) to identify the necessary means in a global consistency for families.
If cases transmitted to the Justice increase in identified proportions, if general advice refuse to follow means that Justice has not yet, it means that the judicial service of the judicial protection of youth degrades.Also, the time of a fundamental reform she may be sounded. That which would be to confine the Justice, in the choice of measures and in control of their execution, without having to manage equipment and services.
In this perspective, it would be necessary to equip it with solid instruments assessment and implementation of its measures less than personal but highly qualified. Not for the "keep" youth; but to decrypt situations and be guarantors of judicial measures. Workers social and other very experienced professionals would be collaborators privileged judge. The administrative authority and the voluntary sector would be them loaded to run the supported under the control of the judge who could at any time revise its situations.
It is not to return to the 19th century, but out of a bastard system where Justice is involved in relying on the Humanities without actually having the means to make itself a good use. The advantage of this solution: it would be in its role of reviewing the exercise of rights and freedoms and in a position to promote new rights.
Behind the reform of acronyms, behind these statistics who betray background motion, the time of the great reform approach. For the moment the opponents-partners are observed. Local communities have just taken their function, the ex-Education monitored awakens from a period exceeded coma.
*
Then, judges children and the child welfare, these two infernal guardians, age they or rajeuniront they together? With respect to age surely. Although they separate on the paper. Their children will link always. But how each ages.?
J., arrived at an age hinge. It staggers under the work and is not always the means to cope. Expected much from him. More that never it must assert itself in its specificity. Make a "bis Dass" to another level of seriousness of the situations. Will allow instead to operate its own field, arbitration between conflicting rights: rights of parents and children, rights of the company and the rights of the family. recognition of new rights for adults and to minors? Should it also remained Manager of services? Should he not simply appreciate the responses that require situations, to order measures and monitoring the implementation to be guarantor to the families with the help of experienced social workers?
It is badly - some do not hesitate to say that monitored Education is in coma exceeded since a few years - and will have to make his new revolution. He hired him recently turning in judicial Protection of children.
Social assistance to childhood, she begins to be tethered at the instigation of the Chairmen of General Councils who will want to make their social policy.
Divorce is never that the sanction of failure. In the case of the couple they form, it produce only two single-parent families. Everyone knows that this is not the ideal. Best is that they remain condemned to agree and if there is disagreement, however, that their tutors help the overcome. This is also what they expect of their father and father-in-law, the President of the General Council, but also of the State